Hi. I would just like to mention a couple of inconsistences:-
A Falchion is a sword much like a Scimetar except that it is actually shorter, though of the same weight. The were basically the European version of the Scimetar and they evolved into the Cutlass. They are NOT two handed weapons.
Now I say this one as a user of a traditional English Longbow, not the American Flatbow (which I assume is the model for the Longbow in D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder). Yes the basic Longbow was/is not a massively powerful weapon (60lb at 28" draw), but the war bow was/is a different proposition, made in the same fashion, its power was generally about 180lb when drawn to the full 30" and could punch a arrow through up to 8" of solid oak. The power of the Longbow is more to do with how much the weapon was drawn back (approximately an extra 8% per inch) beyond the standard 28", therefore height is as much to do with bow power as strength. The main problem is that they cannot be kept strung for long periods, so I would suggest that any surprise attacks first thing in the morning would result in the Bow not being useable (it would take 2 minutes to string and warm up a bow). A composite bow has no problem with being kept strung.
I hope that this is helpful.
James
Moved to the correct forum.
Hi. I would just like to mention a couple of inconsistences:-
A Falchion is a sword much like a Scimetar except that it is actually shorter, though of the same weight. The were basically the European version of the Scimetar and they evolved into the Cutlass. They are NOT two handed weapons.
The Grossmesser is larger, usable 1H or 2H. Due to the paucity of Medieval sources we can only say that specific terms for weapons were somewhat localized. We don't really know whether a Burgundian would have called the Grossmesser a Falchion.
Now I say this one as a user of a traditional English Longbow, not the American Flatbow (which I assume is the model for the Longbow in D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder). Yes the basic Longbow was/is not a massively powerful weapon (60lb at 28" draw), but the war bow was/is a different proposition, made in the same fashion, its power was generally about 180lb when drawn to the full 30" and could punch a arrow through up to 8" of solid oak. The power of the Longbow is more to do with how much the weapon was drawn back (approximately an extra 8% per inch) beyond the standard 28", therefore height is as much to do with bow power as strength. The main problem is that they cannot be kept strung for long periods, so I would suggest that any surprise attacks first thing in the morning would result in the Bow not being useable (it would take 2 minutes to string and warm up a bow). A composite bow has no problem with being kept strung.
I hope that this is helpful.
James
Armor penetration and range were the primary advantages of the English (Welsh) longbow. This is the primary reason why "Strength bows" are nonsensical. While the longbow arrow could penetrate all but the best plate armor there is no evidence of it dealing worse damage than any other arrow that penetrates lesser armor.
Arrow damage is a slicing "wound track" and all that extra energy is wasted in "through" shots or soaked up in penetration. A spear, for example, does more damage by the size of the head (wider wound track) and weight of the shaft (punching that wider head through flesh).
Against a large creature the longbow may get some extra penetration and more damage, but then the same can be said of lesser bows whose arrows often punch through the flesh.
The other part about Eng. longbows is that is takes years to learn how to bend the bow. It can't be drawn from a static, locked hold the way lesser bows are drawn (or perhaps once or twice before the shoulder of the drawing arm gives out). The muscles of the shoulders have to be aligned differently, and trained to do it. Both arms are initially bent, the one stretching out straight into the hold and the other wrenching back.
The Turks had a longbow of sorts, with similar draw weights. It was made of wood and laminated horn. The recurved design made draw length shorter, starting from a different position with the drawing arm and gradually ramping up the weight of the draw. The end result was a shorter effective draw length and less cumulative force in the draw, equaling less energy in the arrow. The arrows they used were lighter and didn't have the penetration, although their range did match the English longbow (or come close).
This Turkish longbow is what the "composite" bow would be, and there is no way it would add Str bonus. The only way to do that is to increase the size and mass of the arrow, i.e., a javelin or spear, and the bow to go along with it, i.e., a ballista.