Actually it's an excellent idea. The reason it does not add that extra damage is very simple:
* With Vital Strike you sacrifice multiple attacks for one more powerful main attack.
* If Vital Strike multiplied all damage, you would have a choice between:
Standard Action, {damage x2} at {attack bonus}, or
Full round action, {damage x1} at {attack bonus} followed by {damage x1} at {attack bonus -5}.
Crits and precision damage.
This is a no-brainer, everyone would use Vital Strike all the time, which is why it only multiplies the dice (and hence the more you depend on the dice the better it is). However, if you combine it with the suggestions for the higher damage crossbow, you get a decent damage output that is comparable to the longbow even if it does not exceed it on a full attack - and most monk players will tell you that one very heavy single hit at full attack bonus is more effective at least half of the time than a mass of attacks at less damage individually and less chance to hit. The accumulated damage of the successful hits might be more, but once you factor in DR and hardness and other details, that one hit can actually be more effective.
Only we've proven mathematically that it's not equal to longbows, and if you knew anything about monks in PF you're better off trying to trip or use a combat maneuver when you can't flurry because of how much less damage you do.
Now we've covered a lot of ideas for making heavy crossbows "not suck" - what are yours?
Either ignore the "only one attack per round" and just let them reload as quickly as bows - be it through feat, magical enchantment, or it just starts that way - or allow crossbows to vital strike and gain all the bonuses of the subsequent shots they would've gotten. Furthermore bows can take Manyshot either through taking the feat itself or through a mechanical/magical upgrade.
As for light xbow = short bow with a feat (the equal of a simple weapon moving to martial), You really only have to say...strength bonus. And then it all falls down.
As for pulling the string, you don't use your arms at all on the string...you hook that string to the hook on your belt, step on the front stirrup, and use weight and your leg and back muscles to pull the string back (or the xbow forwards, really). Completely possible to get hundreds of pounds of pull that way (leg press lifts more then military press, etc).
I think if you give xbows the Vital Strike line as a gift to anyone with Focus with them, you pretty much solve their viability problem. They'll always be a one-shot weapon, but that's okay. They'll be an AWESOME one-shot weapon.
==Aelryinth
Crits and precision damage.Actually it's an excellent idea. The reason it does not add that extra damage is very simple:
* With Vital Strike you sacrifice multiple attacks for one more powerful main attack.
* If Vital Strike multiplied all damage, you would have a choice between:
Standard Action, {damage x2} at {attack bonus}, or
Full round action, {damage x1} at {attack bonus} followed by {damage x1} at {attack bonus -5}.
The chances of a critical are small enough that it has no real effect - with the iterative negative penalties on your chances to confirm a threat after the first shot it's really not going to make a difference. By precision damage, I take it you mean sneak attack, which only applies to one class.
This is a no-brainer, everyone would use Vital Strike all the time, which is why it only multiplies the dice (and hence the more you depend on the dice the better it is). However, if you combine it with the suggestions for the higher damage crossbow, you get a decent damage output that is comparable to the longbow even if it does not exceed it on a full attack - and most monk players will tell you that one very heavy single hit at full attack bonus is more effective at least half of the time than a mass of attacks at less damage individually and less chance to hit. The accumulated damage of the successful hits might be more, but once you factor in DR and hardness and other details, that one hit can actually be more effective.Only we've proven mathematically that it's not equal to longbows, and if you knew anything about monks in PF you're better off trying to trip or use a combat maneuver when you can't flurry because of how much less damage you do.
ProfPotts has also demonstrated how without any changes at all the heavy crossbow can be better than the bow in certain circumstances, and how tactics can make a big difference.
Now we've covered a lot of ideas for making heavy crossbows "not suck" - what are yours?Either ignore the "only one attack per round" and just let them reload as quickly as bows - be it through feat, magical enchantment, or it just starts that way - or allow crossbows to vital strike and gain all the bonuses of the subsequent shots they would've gotten. Furthermore bows can take Manyshot either through taking the feat itself or through a mechanical/magical upgrade.
We've already made proposals for all of these:
Rate of fire - magical upgrade, mechanical upgrade (Repeating)Manyshot - mechanical upgrade (no feat required).
Rapidshot - mechanical upgrade (no feat required).
Further, you can make the Vital Strike work by upping the base damage dice of the crossbow rather than by breaking Vital Strike, which we've also suggested.
The one that no-one has suggested is letting crossbows as basic load as fast as bows, because it's pretty silly to anyone with a sense of reality. That aside, do crossbows still suck, given the possibilities proposed?
The chances of a critical are small enough that it has no real effect - with the iterative negative penalties on your chances to confirm a threat after the first shot it's really not going to make a difference. By precision damage, I take it you mean sneak attack, which only applies to one class.
Yeah, no, you yourself have been touting the crossbow's higher crit rate as being super de duper important. You can't backtrack on that now.
ProfPotts has also demonstrated how without any changes at all the heavy crossbow can be better than the bow in certain circumstances, and how tactics can make a big difference....
Nope. ProfPotts made up numbers, and they were pretty terrible ones too, because he completely ignored bonus damage and static modifiers - the second being the most important thing to doing damage in the game.
Let's try using real numbers.
Oh no, the monster has DR10! And these archers are really bad at the game and don't have cold iron or silvered arrows/bolts for the sake of this stupid argument! Since we're using vital strike, we're at least level 6. The crossbow guy shoots once with his awesome 2d10+8 with an extra 1d6 ice damage and does 12-13 damage on average. Wuhoh!
The fighter shoots four times with his itsy bitsy 1d8+11 (16 strength at level 6? That's being conservative) and another 1d6 ice damage and does 36 points of damage. Hey wait, that's way more then what the crossbow guy did...! AND he has three shots that he can hit critically to the one.
Huh. Funny how, when you don't completely ignore the benefits to a bow, they miraculously get better!
But let's say there's a good chance to miss. Well, rapid fire gives -2, so we'll go ahead and say that second iteritive attack misses. Now the fighter is only doing...27 damage, which is twice the crossbow. Well ok, this enemy is really hard to hit, so no rapid fire either. Good thing Manyshot doesn't have any penalty at all. Now he's only doing...18. Which is still more then the crossbow. Keep in mind, right now, both weapons have equal chance to hit. And it doesn't matter because, while a single shot from the bow is weaker to the one big shot from the crossbow, static modifiers are so much more important then weapon damage.
I just gave the worst case scenario to the bowmen. He's still easily outdamaging the crossbowman. None of these bring into play the better chances of critting you have with more attacks.
Just for the sake of it, let's pretend the fighters aren't idiots and have cold iron/silvered/whatever arrows and bolts.
Crossbow is doing 22-23 damage. The bow - still in the worst case, only two shots go through because wow I'm missing a lot, scenario - does 38 damage.
No. It doesn't work out.
For reference sake, the difference between a greatsword and a greatclub is 2 damage and 1 crit range. The crit range could potentially be a big deal in later levels. The two damage? Not so much.
Taken at face value, yes, the heavy crossbow does more damage then the longbow. But it's a difference of one point. Heavy crossbow is 1d10. Longbow is 1d8. There's one point of difference between them. Once you have a strength of twelve, they're equal. Strength of fourteen, bow is more damaging, but who cares, it's only one point of damage. Extra attack? Now there's a big difference. Three extra attacks? Now there's a huge difference.
As for the suggested mechanical benefits, it's late and I'll read 'em tomorrow. That said, screw realism. Crossbows can reload just as fast as bows. The game is not and has never been realistic. I refuse to believe it absolutely MUST be based in realism for - and only for - the sake of bow superiority.
The chances of a critical are small enough that it has no real effect - with the iterative negative penalties on your chances to confirm a threat after the first shot it's really not going to make a difference. By precision damage, I take it you mean sneak attack, which only applies to one class.Yeah, no, you yourself have been touting the crossbow's higher crit rate as being super de duper important. You can't backtrack on that now.
I'm not backtracking, this is discussing Vital Strike in general and why it doesn't work that way, not crossbows vs bows. You are not significantly more likely to get much more out of critical hits with iterative attacks than with a single full bonus attack unless you have a huge threat range.
If this was the one Vital Strike with a heavy crossbow vs multiple shots with a longbow, then the crossbow would be ahead of the game because of the greater threat range, especially if you had the Improved Critical feat.
*details snipped*
Yes, I do take your point. But if you combine this with some other ideas, you actually do get a decent weapon. What if you used a multi-shot arbolest (say a 2d6 damage based one with two extra grooves) instead of the heavy crossbow? I'm not talking about using the suggestions in isolation here. A Vital Strike shot with such a weapon with the Frost enhancement would do 8d6 + 8 + 3d6 cold and you score 46.5 average damage.
As for the suggested mechanical benefits, it's late and I'll read 'em tomorrow. That said, screw realism. Crossbows can reload just as fast as bows. The game is not and has never been realistic. I refuse to believe it absolutely MUST be based in realism for - and only for - the sake of bow superiority.
You cannot physically wind back a windlass as fast as you can draw a bow. Crossbows in D&D are already getting a bigger boost in realistic rate of fire than bows do. You may not want realism anywhere near your games, and that's your prerogative, but the Pathfinder basis is that for non-magical stuff reality should at least get a look-in, so don't expect others to adopt your ideas. If you want a high rate-of-fire heavy crossbow, rule a repeating crossbow is a simple weapon and can carry a larger magazine of bolts (or can be reloaded faster with Rapid Reload), and problem solved.
|
Premise: a statistical analysis of the comparative damage of a heavy crossbow Fighter (Will) and a composite longbow Fighter (Rob) firing single, high accuracy, high damage shots. When available each will take and apply the various Vital Shot Feats.
Ability scores: since Rob requires at least a Strength bonus of +2 to even have a chance of competing on a shot-by-shot damage basis with Will, but Will’s Strength score has zero effect on his weapon’s damage, we’ll allow that Will has an attack bonus one greater than Rob. This is based on the two characters being built using the Standard Fantasy purchase method: Rob spends 5 points on Strength (to get 14) and 10 points on Dexterity (to get 16); Will gains 2 points by lowering his Strength to 8, and spends 17 points to gain a Dexterity of 18. Both put their racial Ability Score bonus into Dexterity, resulting in Rob having a Dexterity of 18 and Will having a Dexterity of 20. We presume they’re designed as reasonably playable characters, so don’t nerf their other stats just to boost Rob’s Dexterity. Note that since they both have a pre-racial adjustment limit of 18 on any Ability Score, using a chargen method which allows more points to spend on Ability Scores favours Rob (since he can close the Dexterity gap), as does a willingness to nerf all Rob’s other stats. But, in general, it seems reasonable to allow Will that +1 more attack bonus that Rob, based on Ability Scores.
Method: since the game’s attack roll is based on a d20 we’ll look at 20 rounds (2 minutes) of combat, or 20 shots each. We’ll further assume that over those 20 rounds each character rolls every possible die result exactly once. Other than there different weapons, and their different Ability Scores due to their choices of weapons, we’ll assume all other things are equal. Thus we’ll not include any other bonuses to attack or damage, as these are accessible equally to both characters. Accuracy-wise Will will always be +1 better than Rob, and damage-wise the only bonus we’ll include is Rob’s Strength bonus, since it’s the only such bonus not accessible to Will. However, see notes on ‘Extra Damage’ below. We’ll assume that both manage to confirm any critical threats but see ‘Confirming Criticals’ below. Lastly, we’ll assume a mid-range AC target for their level (this could float with the same basic results) – so with +1 accuracy Will is, over the course of the 20 shots, going to score 1 more hit than Rob is (a target which both only miss on a natural 1, or both only hit on a natural 20, would eliminate this advantage for Will). Thus we’ll say that Rob misses 9 shots, scores 10 normal hits, and 1 critical hit; while Will misses 8 shots, scores 10 normal hits, and 2 critical hits. We’ll take the mean average damage for each hit and critical hit.
Results:
Levels 1 to 5:
Rob rolls 1d8+2 for 6.5 damage on each hit, and roll 3d8+6 for 19.5 damage on his critical for a total of 84.5 damage.
Will rolls 1d10 for 5.5 damage on each hit, and rolls 2d10 for 11 damage on each critical for a total of 77 damage.
Rob is clearly dishing out superior damage.
Levels 6 to 10 (using Vital Strike):
Rob rolls 2d8+2 for 11 damage on a hit, and rolls 4d8+6 for 24 damage on his critical for a total of 134 damage.
Will rolls 2d10 for 11 damage on each hit, and rolls 3d10 for 16.5 damage on each critical for a total of 143 damage.
Will is clearly dishing out superior damage.
Levels 11 to 15 (using Improved Vital Strike):
Rob rolls 3d8+2 for 15.5 damage on a hit, and rolls 5d8+6 for 28.5 damage on his critical for a total of 183.5 damage.
Will rolls 3d10 for 16.5 damage on each hit, and rolls 4d10 for 22 damage on each critical for a total of 209 damage.
Will is clearly dishing out superior damage.
Levels 16+ (using Greater Vital Strike):
Rob rolls 4d8+2 for 20 damage on a hit, and rolls 6d8+6 for 33 damage on his critical for a total of 233 damage.
Will rolls 4d10 for 22 damage on each hit, and rolls 5d10 for 27.5 damage on each critical for a total of 275 damage.
Will is clearly dishing out superior damage.
Notes:
Extra Damage: since for the die results 19 and 20 Rob scores 1 hit and 1 x3 Critical (for a total of extra damage x4), whilst Will scores 2 x2 Criticals (for a total of extra damage x4) we’ve ignore the effects of extra damage which is multiplied on a critical, and since both have the same access to the same extra damage, we’ve ignored extra damage which isn’t multiplied on Criticals as well. However, in actuality, since Will gets an extra hit more than Rob in each series of 20 shots, any extra damage benefits Will’s comparative score by whatever the damage amount is. I.e. Will gets more benefit than Rob out of any extra damage.
Confirming Criticals: we’ve assumed that both always confirm critical threats, but in actuality, since Will is +1 more accurate than Rob, over the course of 20 critical threats he actually confirms 1 more than Rob – in a series of 20 shots this amounts to a fractional bonus to Will’s score, but the longer the series continues, the greater comparative benefit Will gets from his higher threat confirmation rate.
Ability Score Increases: we’ve presumed that every time Will increases his Dexterity score, Rob does likewise. If Rob instead increases his Strength score, he gains 1 damage per hit and 3 damage per critical for every comparative hit he loses, while the comparative extra hit for Will grants him whatever his damage per hit average is for that level range. This most benefits Rob against lower AC targets (the more times each hit over the 20 shots, the more the average damage for each hit has an influence on their total scores), and harms him against higher AC targets; it also most benefits him at lower levels (when Will’s average damage per hit is lower) and harms him at higher levels.
Magic and Mitigation: we’ve assumed that Rob and Will have equal access to equal value magic items and resources. However, the fact that Rob’s weapon relies on two Ability Scores compared to Will’s single Ability score benefits Rob when campaign maximums start to be hit. I.e. once both Rob and Will have a +5 Dexterity bonus item / magical effect, and resources left over, Rob can start to magically improve his Strength, while Will needs to look to other effects to help him. In all but high magic campaigns this will only be a factor at high level (when Rob is otherwise playing catch-up to Will’s superior damage anyway).
Improved Critical Feat: when Rob and Will hit level 8 and both take the Improved Critical Feat it gives a comparative boost to Will’s total damage. Will now scores 4 Criticals to Rob’s 2. At level 8 to 11 Rob gets an extra 24 damage to Will’s extra 33 (compared with the results above), a comparative gain of 9 damage for Will. At levels 12 to 15 Rob gains 28.5 and Will gains 44, and at level 16+ Rob gains 33 and Will gains 55. Improving Rob’s Strength helps to mitigate this difference, but (except at campaign maximum magic levels) compromises his Dexterity and therefore hit rate and critical confirmation chances as discussed above.
Critical Feats: once the boys start taking the various Critical Feats, Will gains twice the benefit from them, due to the higher critical threat range of his weapon.
Rapid Fire Results: if Rob, instead of using Vital Strike, uses his full multiple attacks, including Rapid Shot and Multishot...
Levels 1 to 5 (Rapid Shot):
Rob gets two series to Will’s one, each with 8 hits (3 hits less than Will) and 1 critical.
Rob rolls 1d8+2 for 6.5 damage on each hit, and roll 3d8+6 for 19.5 damage on his critical for a total of 71.5 damage per series and an overall total of 143. This blows Will’s 77 damage away.
Levels 6 to 10 (2 Base Attacks plus Rapid Shot and Manyshot):
Rob gets one series with 8 hits and one critical and an extra 9 hits from Manyshot, one series with 8 hits and one critical, and one series with 3 hits and one critical.
Rob rolls 1d8+2 for 6.5 damage on each hit, and roll 3d8+6 for 19.5 damage on his critical for a total of 130 + 71.5 + 39 damage per series and an overall total of 240.5. This beats Will’s 143.
Levels 11 to 15 (3 Base Attacks plus Rapid Shot and Manyshot):
Rob gets one series with 8 hits and one critical and an extra 9 hits from Manyshot, one series with 8 hits and one critical, one series with 3 hits and one critical, and one series with just a critical (his lowest BAB attacks are only hitting on a natural 20).
Rob rolls 1d8+2 for 6.5 damage on each hit, and roll 3d8+6 for 19.5 damage on his critical for a total of 130 + 71.5 + 39 + 19.5 damage per series and an overall total of 260. This beats Will’s 209.
Level 16+ (4 Base Attacks plus Rapid Shot and Manyshot):
Rob gets one series with 8 hits and one critical and an extra 9 hits from Manyshot, one series with 8 hits and one critical, one series with 3 hits and one critical, and two series with just a critical (his lowest 2 BAB attacks are only hitting on a natural 20).
Rob rolls 1d8+2 for 6.5 damage on each hit, and roll 3d8+6 for 19.5 damage on his critical for a total of 130 + 71.5 + 39 + 19.5 +19.5 damage per series and an overall total of 279.5. This beats Will’s 275.
Clearly Rob is better off using as many attacks as he can and leaving the Vital Strikes to Will.
However, the higher the opponent’s AC the worse comparative result Rob gets. At an AC level where Rob is hitting on a roll of 20 exactly (as opposed to hitting only because of the ‘a 20 always hits’ rule) he’s scoring the critical damage for each of his series (i.e. per each shot), plus per hit damage (for his Manyshot Feat) at level 6+. At the same AC Will is getting 2 criticals and 2 normal hits (because he’s +3 more accurate than Rob when Rob is using Rapid Shot).
Results:
Level 1 to 5: Rob 39 damage, Will 33 damage
Level 6 to 10: Rob 65, Will 55
Level 11 to 15: Rob 84.5, Will 77
Level 16+: Rob 104, Will 99
Rob stills scores better, but the difference is less Vs higher AC opponents (and more Vs lower AC opponents).
Apart from AC, the other usual ‘threshold’ in combat is Damage Reduction. Damage reduction effectively drops the damage of an average hit and a critical hit in the results above by its value. When Rob and Will are both using Vital Strike, DR actually tends to benefit Rob greatly (from higher or the same average damage and higher critical damage) at levels 1 to 10; and somewhat less (from higher critical damage, but lower average damage) at levels 11+. However, if Rob uses his ‘rapid fire’, DR drops him completely out of the running at level 6+.
Ideally, Rob would take the Vital Strike Feats as well as Rapid Shot and Manyshot: we’ve already assumed that Will has taken the Rapid Reload (Heavy Crossbow) Feat so Rob’s only 1 Feat down and can tailor his combat approach to suit.
Conclusions: overall, Rob is a more damaging opponent as long as he fights smart and tailors his approach to the combat at hand, but Will’s average damage starts to catch up at higher levels. Will’s saving grace is his increased chance at criticals when they qualify for the Critical Feats, although for many this won’t be enough to make his character build as attractive as Rob’s. Rob’s higher Strength also gives him much more utility in melee combat, when needed, whilst Will’s +1 comparative Dexterity bonus only slightly increases his utility with Dexterity-based skills (although he will, over the course of receiving an average 20 attacks get hit once less than Rob due to his 1 higher AC – armour limits notwithstanding). Will’s ability to fire and load from prone (and thus claim greater cover bonuses), and his extra range give him a boost in long-range fighting (castle sieges, ship-to-ship combat, fighting flying opponents, outdoors ambushes, etc.) but his limited mobility, and inability to reload whilst threatened without provoking an AoO most hamper him in short-range skirmishes (which are often the meat of most standard adventures).
Last thoughts: if Will is permitted to use a large sized heavy crossbow doing a base 2d8 damage at only -2 to attack he ends up with 8 hits and 2 criticals per series and his results become a whopping:
Level 1 to 5: 108, Level 6 to 10: 198, Level 11 to 15: 288, Level 16+: 378
If, on the other hand, using a large heavy crossbow gives him a -6 to attack he ends up with 4 hits and 2 criticals per series for disappointing results of:
Level 1 to 5: 72, Level 6 to 10: 126, Level 11 to 15: 180, Level 16+: 234
So if the DM rules he can use a large one (oo-er!) at only -2 he is death on a stick, if not, then he’s better off looking at a large light crossbow (if allowed this would be 2d6 damage at -2 to attack when used two-handed, plus he could get full speed attacks – clearly the most superior of all ranged weapon options!).
Phew!
Feel free to check the maths!
|
|
Nope. ProfPotts made up numbers, and they were pretty terrible ones too, because he completely ignored bonus damage and static modifiers - the second being the most important thing to doing damage in the game.
Actually they don't matter for any more than shifting the threshold where big damage trumps little damage... and that threshold was the point I was trying to make. Hopefully my long-winded essay in my post above (sorry for posting two in a row...) explains all that better - and I think you'll like the 'bowman wins' conclusion too... although I still stand by the concept that 'not optimal' doesn't equal 'not viable' or indeed 'suckage'.
Peace all. :)
What happens if you factor in Deadly Aim?
Also if you factor in things like enchanted ammunition and weapons?
The problem with these is that they inflict additional damage per hit. However, Will should be able to afford more expensive ammunition because he doesn't use as much of it as Rob.
Certainly Will scores better against the very high AC targets ... As a standard 'monstermark' I would assume target they have a 100% chance of hitting with their highest attack bonus and then calculate from there.
Also, there are static bonuses: Weapon Specialisation, Weapon Training etc. These favour the multiple attacks.
|
|
Also if you factor in things like enchanted ammunition and weapons?
The problem with these is that they inflict additional damage per hit.
Also, there are static bonuses: Weapon Specialisation, Weapon Training etc. These favour the multiple attacks.
Not so much as they just move the threshold you're looking at, the overall effect (in terms of trend) is the same, 'cos they both get the same access to the same bonuses. It took me long enough to write that thing with generic examples... ;)
Edit: oh, and Deadly Aim (being precision-based damage not multiplied by the Vital Strike Feats) has a little effect when they're both using single shot attacks (Will gets an extra hit over Rob still, so he gets the Deadly Aim bonus one additional time), and reduces the number of hits but increases the damage per hit for the rapid fire mode - it doesn't really change the trend expressed.
The things to look at are thresholds (AC and DR) and caps (at the 'only a natural 1 misses' levels and the 'only a natural 20 hits' level), but in the end, the trends are the same (and most adventuring is always gonna' hit some mid-point between the caps in any case. They're mostly important for giving the rapid fire mode bowman a net gain on criticals, 'cos of the '20 always hits' rule, (although in reality many of those, needing a 20 to hit or confirm will end up as mere 'hits') - if the rules allowed you to keep making attacks at -5 to hit down into the negatives, they'd bump the bowman's score up and up, 'cos of that one rule. If that rule was ignored, the low bonus multiple attacks rapidly become pretty pointless. The bowman, basically, wins 'cos a 20 is always good, but a 1 isn't anything particularly bad. Eliminating the 1/20 rules, or making a 1 bad, both kipper the rapid fire mode bowman - in the first instance 'cos his low bonus attacks are worthless, in the second 'cos they're actually dangerous (a law of diminishing returns thing).
Also if you factor in things like enchanted ammunition and weapons?
The problem with these is that they inflict additional damage per hit.
Also, there are static bonuses: Weapon Specialisation, Weapon Training etc. These favour the multiple attacks.Not so much as they just move the threshold you're looking at, the overall effect (in terms of trend) is the same, 'cos they both get the same access to the same bonuses. It took me long enough to write that thing with generic examples... ;)
This is exactly where your math falls apart.
The numbers I used were exact. They added in weapon enchantments, Deadly Aim, PBS, and weapon specialization(s).
Those are important. Those are very important. Those are what allows fighters to do as much damage as they do.
Let's use your example again. At level 6-10 you have the bow doing 2d8+2, but that's not accurate at all. At 6 they'd be doing 1d8+3 (strength bonus) +1 (item bonus) +1d6 (elemental enhancement) +2 (weapon spec) +1 (PBS) +4 (deadly aim).
End result? 1d8+1d6+11 or, on average, 19 damage per shot.
The crossbow in comparison is doing 2d10+1d6+8, for 22 damage on its one big shot. So the crossbow wins, right?
Manyshot. Manyshot has no penalty. The bow is now at 38. Seems like those extra damage modifiers played a pretty important role!
This is assuming that all other attacks would miss, which is not very likely. And an extra attack gives a much higher chance of critting then otherwise. Assuming we aren't using rapid shot because we are apparently fighting the biggest AC monster in existance (which is astonishingly unlikely seeing has that +1 from your dexterity to attack is pennies compared to all the other bonuses you get to your attack bonus), the bow has a much higher chance per round of critting as well with those three attacks that he gets for free.
Static modifiers make up the vast majority of damage in the game, not dice rolls. You can't ignore them. Well you can, but then your math is wrong.
And just to point out, if I did miss any modifiers, and the more modifiers that are gained as the fighter levels up - those all favor the bow even more. Every extra attack the bow has multiplies those static bonuses, and there's no way for Vital Strike to keep up.
OK, here's a compilation of everything we've discussed that I think is fairly reasonable.
I'm going to go crunch some numbers - watch this space.
Edit: OK, here are some numbers based off my suggestions above:
Will and Rob again.
Both are 6th level fighters (4 bonus feats, 8 in total) with 18 dex and 16 str.
Rob: Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Deadly Aim, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (great longbow), Weapon Focus (composite great longbow), Weapon Specialisation (composite great longbow), Vital Strike.
Weapon: Rob has a +1 shocking mighty (+3) composite great longbow.
Attacks: base of +12, but Rob likes to open with a Manyshot and Rapid Shot using Deadly Aim, so he attacks at +8 (2 arrows)/+8/+3 inflicting 1d10+11+1d6 with each arrow (if all hit, average 80 points of damage).
Will: Point Blank Shot, Deadly Aim, Shoot From The Hip, Pinpoint Targeting, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (heavy repeating crossbow), Weapon Focus (arbolest), Weapon Specialisation (arbolest), Vital Strike.
Weapon: Will has gone to town; he has a +1 Speedloading 3-grooved mighty arbolest. Speedloading is increased to a move action reload because it is a three-grooved weapon.
Attacks: base of +12, but Will shoots a Vital Strike from his triple-shot arbolest using Deadly Aim.
Attack: +10 to hit with 3 bolts for 4d8+8, and 2d8+8 x2 (average 60 points of damage if this hits, I am assuming Vital Strike only applies to one bolt).
Now on the face of it machine-gun Rob is well ahead of the game, but if we assume a target which has AC 20, then Rob’s +8 has a 45% chance of hitting, and his +3 has a 20% chance of hitting, while Will’s +10 has a 55% chance of hitting.
So Rob now averages 31 points of damage vs the target, and Will inflicts an average of 33 points of damage.
Prof, would you say my maths are good there?
|
|
This is exactly where your math falls apart...
I'm obviously not explaining what I'm trying to demonstrate very well here, so sorry about that.
I'm talking about the statistical trends, not any specific example as such. You could give both weapons a +bazillion bonus to damage and all it'd do would be to move the threshold where one starts to trump the other by a bazillion.
I'll give it another shot at explaining what that means:
If a target always takes full damage from an attack, then the sum total of (number of attacks which hit) x (damage per attack) is the only important thing. This is what you're talking about, and I fully understand (and agree) with what you're saying, in those circumstances.
If a target only takes damage over a certain threshold (due to, say, Damage Reduction or Hardness or some other effect) then the maths is altered to be the sum total of (number of attacks which hit) x (damage per attack which exceeds the threshold) which counts. This is an important difference.
Example: a million attacks hitting and doing 1pt of damage each do one million points of damage. A million attacks hitting something with a damage threshold of 1 (i.e. Damage Reduction of 1) do zero damage. While a weapon which launches a million attacks at 1 pt of damage is far superior to one which launches 1 attack for 2 pts of damage in most circumstances, the weapon which does only 2 pts of damage is infinitely superior when facing something with a damage threshold of 1.
In a single shot situation, once a character reaches the level where he or she qualifies for the Vital Strike Feats, the heavy crossbow trumps the composite longbow (+2 Strength rating) every time. The higher the level the character gets, the more the crossbow trumps the bow in that situation. That's a simple fact. The only thing which mitigates the bow's declining comparative performance is a higher Strength rating, and that has to get pretty big to make up the difference at higher levels.
The heavy crossbow gains more from the Vital Strike Feats than any other basic ranged weapon, because those Feats multiple the base die, and the heavy crossbow has the largest.
The heavy crossbow also gains more from Improved Critical than the bow, just the same as any high threat range weapon gains more than any low threat range weapon.
Trying to get back to the point of the thread: the heavy crossbow can be statistically demonstrated to 'not suck' - as long as you remember to not bring a crossbow to a bow fight, and vice versa. Meaning, of course, that the best weapon to choose varies by situation: facing hordes of 'squishies' then a bow is best, facing something hard or impossible to damage with a bow shot, then a crossbow is best. The exact point where the switch-over in optimal utility occurs will vary based on the numbers you plug in, but it will always happen.
Playing a single weapon Fighter is always going to be a sub-optimal stylistic choice - you do it because you like how the character feels, the roleplay elements. There's no one weapon in the game which is best in every situation - which is how it should be. Most Fighters should, in fact, be carrying and using a variety of weapons - it's what the Class is good at. If you're a ranged Fighter, then nearly all your Feats - barring Rapid Shot, Multishot, Rapid Reload, and those 'pick one weapon' Feats - will apply to both your composite longbow and your heavy crossbow (and your thrown dagger and your blowpipe, etc.). Some, such as Vital Strike, will apply to all your weapons (and any non-primary spell user who doesn't take the Vital Strike Feats when they qualify for them kinda' deserves to be smacked down by the first big DR monster who comes their way IMHO). So carry both, and use the best one for the situations you find yourself in.
(On an unrelated side note, any Fighter who needs magic items to hurt the bad guys is, IMHO, an addict and needs help... ;) ).
Prof, would you say my maths are good there?
Maths is good for the examples you give, yes. (Not sure I'd allow half that stuff in my game personally, but the maths looks right! ;) ).
This has probably already been said, but you could use the Vital Strike feat to deal more damage with a heavy crossbow as a standard action.
Also for your viewing pleasure, I give you the Arbalest here:
(I don't know how to make a hyperlink...)
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/houseRules/theArbalestMasterOfTheCrossbow&page=1#0
Don't match Martial Weapon prof as a 'cost' for a feat. Any character that is going to use the Crossbow for high dmg potential is going to have martial weapon prof by default...meaning, with NO feat cost. The same thus goes for bow.
So the bowman doesn't have to spend one of his feats...he'll either take a fighter/ranger etc level. The crossbowman MUST burn a feat to make xbow viable...it's uneven.
==Aelryinth
I'm obviously not explaining what I'm trying to demonstrate very well here, so sorry about that.
Forgive me, but I'm going to be cutting down to just three points here.
If a target only takes damage over a certain threshold (due to, say, Damage Reduction or Hardness or some other effect) then the maths is altered to be the sum total of (number of attacks which hit) x (damage per attack which exceeds the threshold) which counts. This is an important difference.
The problem is, firing any ranged weapon at something with hardness is an excercise in bizarritude (I attack the castle with my crossbow!), DR over ten is fairly rare, and clearing through DR should be relatively easy for any archer type who can carry mixed arrows, save for DR/Bludgeoning.
Example: a million attacks hitting and doing 1pt of damage each do one million points of damage. A million attacks hitting something with a damage threshold of 1 (i.e. Damage Reduction of 1) do zero damage. While a weapon which launches a million attacks at 1 pt of damage is far superior to one which launches 1 attack for 2 pts of damage in most circumstances, the weapon which does only 2 pts of damage is infinitely superior when facing something with a damage threshold of 1.
In a single shot situation, once a character reaches the level where he or she qualifies for the Vital Strike Feats, the heavy crossbow trumps the composite longbow (+2 Strength rating) every time. The higher the level the character gets, the more the crossbow trumps the bow in that situation. That's a simple fact. The only thing which mitigates the bow's declining comparative performance is a higher Strength rating, and that has to get pretty big to make up the difference at higher levels.
The problem is, this is an exceptionally rare situation where you'd only be making a single shot. Yes, the crossbow is better at making a single shot. But when would you be making just one shot, other then when you're using a crossbow? You're making an example for the crossbow to shine, but that example doesn't actually happen in the game.
(On an unrelated side note, any Fighter who needs magic items to hurt the bad guys is, IMHO, an addict and needs help... ;) ).
Then you play a different game or drastically alter how yours works. Fighters require more magical items and requires them more then any other type of character. I agree that it sucks that it's that way, but that's the way the game is. A level 20 fighter without any magical equipment is a speedbump.
Dabbler - afraid I'm not on my home computer, so no downloading anything :<
Another issue that I noted in the will v rob "contest" was what if Rob gets a STR boost?
Let's bring his rating from 14 to 18 or even 20. Now were seeing a lot different numbers
and that's off the purchase of a single magic item so he can keep his
DEX on track. The composite bow begins to murder.
Another issue that I noted in the will v rob "contest" was what if Rob gets a STR boost?
Let's bring his rating from 14 to 18 or even 20. Now were seeing a lot different numbers
and that's off the purchase of a single magic item so he can keep his
DEX on track. The composite bow begins to murder.
Not so much, really. The strength is adding some, yes, but not a huge amount:
For example:Now let’s bunk them up to 12th level fighters, both now have 20 dex and 16 str, and 14 feats:
Rob: Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Deadly Aim, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (great longbow), Weapon Focus (composite great longbow), Weapon Specialisation (composite great longbow), Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, Precise Shot, far Shot, Improved Precise Shot, Greater Weapon Focus (composite great longbow), Greater Weapon Specialisation (composite great longbow).
Weapon: Rob has a +1 Frost Shocking Seeking Distance mighty (+3) composite great longbow. He has a good supply of +1 bane arrows.
To hit: +12 BAB, +2 WF, +2 WT, +5 Dex, -3 DA, -2 MS, +1 Wpn, +3 ammo = +20
Attack: +20 (2 shots)/+20/+15/+10
Damage: 1d10+8 DA +3 Str +4 WS +2 WT +4 Wpn/Ammo +2d6 En +2d6 bane = 1d10+4d6+21 = 40.5 per shot (average)
Will: Point Blank Shot, Deadly Aim, Shoot From The Hip, Pinpoint Targeting, Rapid Reload, Weapon Focus (arbolest), Weapon Specialisation (arbolest), Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, Precise Shot, Far Shot, Improved Precise Shot, Greater Weapon Focus (arbolest), Greater Weapon Specialisation (arbolest).
Weapon: Will has gone to town; he has a +1 Speedloading Flaming Shocking Seeking 3-grooved mighty arbolest. Speedloading is increased to a move action reload because it is a three-grooved weapon. He has a good supply of +1 bane bolts.
To hit: +12 BAB, +2 WF, +2 WT, +5 Dex, -3 DA, +1 Wpn, +3 Ammo = +22
Attack: +22 (3 shots + Improved Vital Strike)
Damage: 2d8+8 DA +4 WS +2 WT +4 Wpn/Ammo +2d6 En +2d6 bane = 2d8+4d6+18 = 41 per shot (average) and 59 with the shot with Vital Strike.
Both get attacked by a horrid Adult Green Dragon (CR12, AC27), load up their dragonbane arrows and bolts and both let fly:
Rob has a 70% chance to hit with three of his arrows, a 45% chance with one and a 20% chance with the last. Hence (0.7 x 40.5 x 3) + (0.45 x 40.5) + (0.2 x 40.5) = 111.375 average damage.
Will has an 80% chance to hit with his Improved Vital Strike of awesomeness. Hence 0.8 x (41 +41 +59) = 112.8 average damage.
It’s clear that while it is true that Rob’s extra attacks will scale up with level, their lower chances to hit mean they contribute less, while Will’s Vital Strike feat tree is not adding as much damage on paper, his greater chances to hit mean that he is keeping pace with Rob for the cost of a slightly more expensive weapon. Even without the Speedloading feature, with Rapid Reload he can have his crossbow ready in two move actions, meaning he can match Rob’s firepower for the first two rounds at least.
Now if we increase Rob's strength to 20, he gets to add a further +2 damage per hit, and against the dragon that's an extra 5.5 on average, to increase his average to 116.875 damage - not a game breaker! However, this means that Will can get a single item that boosts his Dexterity. So what? Well, so his chance to hit increases further, a +4 to Dexterity item puts him up to 90% chance to hit the dragon, to make him do 129.9 on average.
In fact, Rob is best off increasing his Dexterity first, then worrying about his strength! +2 to dexterity modifier = +10% to hit = +10% damage, so when your damage passes 20, you are best off increasing dexterity.
At level 20, when both can afford a belt of physical perfection, then it will make a difference ... of 10-20 points of damage, maybe, out of hundreds ...
That's grand, but if Rob had half a brain he would be buying Bulls Strength potions and maintaining his hit.
This wasn't an attempt to undermine the crossbow but to merely show
that the c. longbow has ways of improving that vastly outweigh those
of the crossbow. The crossbow simply doesn't scale as well
which is what we all are trying to address.
I'm still on the fence about the arbolest with multiple grooves to fire.
vs a composite longbow. Not sold on the fact all classes will get manyshot
essentially for free.
The problem with people bringing up Vital Strike is that Vital Strike is bad. Vital Strike doesn't in any way compare to multiple attacks. Until Vital Strike also adds in bonus damage that you would've received normally, it's a terrible idea.
A question.. do you mean vital strike is bad generally speaking, or for the sake of the current discussion?
|
|
The problem is, firing any ranged weapon at something with hardness is an excercise in bizarritude (I attack the castle with my crossbow!)
Since all objects have a Hardness rating, it doesn't have to be castles you're attacking. Hear that guy lurking on the other side of your door as you rest in the local tavern? Crossbow bolt through the door and into his head... And ranged attacks don't need any Sunder rules to target and break stuff - it's just harder to hit smaller stuff. Ranged Vs objects has great utility.
DR over ten is fairly rare, and clearing through DR should be relatively easy for any archer type who can carry mixed arrows, save for DR/Bludgeoning.
I think this is a case of YMMV: in some campaigns DR will be rare, in others, not so much.
The problem is, this is an exceptionally rare situation where you'd only be making a single shot.
Again, I feel YMMV based on campaign style and group likes and dislikes.
Yes, the crossbow is better at making a single shot.
Thanks! :)
But when would you be making just one shot, other then when you're using a crossbow? You're making an example for the crossbow to shine, but that example doesn't actually happen in the game.
It may not happen in your game, but I'd humbly disagree that it doesn't happen in the game. If my campaign is about a group of monster hunters, for example, then both DR and the single Vital Strikes needed to overcome it is going to come up all the time. If my game is a military campaign with night raids, sniper ambushes and castle sieges, again, it'll come up a lot. As always, there's lots of ways to play the game - one of the reasons I love it.
Then you play a different game or drastically alter how yours works. Fighters require more magical items and requires them more then any other type of character. I agree that it sucks that it's that way, but that's the way the game is. A level 20 fighter without any magical equipment is a speedbump.
Well, I play Pathfinder, not D&D - and the whole 'magic items are required' is very much an artifact of D&D. The 'wealth by level' chart is a set of guidelines rather than a Class ability - a privilage rather than a right if you like. The wording goes, 'it is assumed...' not 'it is required...'. There's even a range of possibilities presented ('usual' 'low fantasy' 'high fantasy'). One of the things I love about Pathfinder is that it has - with Feats like Vital Strike and other such features - managed to move away from the bad old days when certain creatures couldn't be hit at all except with weapons with certain levels of magical plus: a Fighter could be level 20 and useless (your 'speedbump' if you like) if the dragon he was fighting snapped his +5 longsword (all magic weapons were longswords back then...). This led to the weird situation where published scenarios, in order to be 'winnable', always had the magical swords needed to kill the big bad lying around the big bad's lair. Of course, since PCs tended to play through more than one adventure, they soon started tripping over magical weapons. Owning the one magic sword needed to slay a dragon is epic, owning a score of them is pathetic. Anyway, DR was designed to overcome his rather hideous flaw in the system, and Pathfinder has gone a stage further. Now a level 20 Fighter can slay that dragon with his normal, unmagical, sword - through his own skill, bravery, and sheer heroism. Magic makes it easier, but lack of magic no longer makes it impossible.
That's grand, but if Rob had half a brain he would be buying Bulls Strength potions and maintaining his hit.
Interesting. So is he carrying a composite bow designed for his boosted Strength (and taking a -2 to hit whenever he's not had his 'fix') or his normal Strength (meaning his boosted Strength has zero effect on his composite bow rated for his normal Strength) or is he carrying a selection of the things to cover all his possible Strength totals (all, no doubt, equally magically enchanted since the bowmen seem to like that stuff)? The composite bows are the only weapons in the game which are both influenced by your character's Strength, but are not influenced by any temporary adjustments to that Strength.
I agreed in my 'long post' that magical Strength boosts help Rob's stats in the comparison, but that needs to be long-term Strength boosts. Thankfully Pathfinder has made an effort to stop 'double-dipping' and has unified magical effects so (unless you're into the realms of player designed weirdness) physical boosts are 'belts' and mental boosts are 'headbands'. For 4,000 gp you can get a +2 boost to one physical Ability Score, for 16,000 gp you can get a +4, for 36,000 you can get a +6. To boost two physical Ability Scores at the same time the costs skyrocket: 10,000 for +2, 40,000 for +4, and 90,000 for +6.
So, if Rob wants to boost his Strength and Dexterity by +4 each, Will can boost his Dexterity by +6 - Rob gains +2 on his damage averages, but Will gains an extra hit and confirmed critical over the course of 20 shots.
I'm not trying to imply it doesn't make a difference, it clearly does, it's just that it mostly starts to count in Rob's favour when they start reaching campaign limits (i.e. when Will has his +6 Dexterity belt he can't get any more magical Dexterity, 'cos that's the set limit, whilst Rob can, as both their bank balances rise, eventually splash out for that +6 to Strength and Dexterity belt (Will can too, it just doesn't help his weapon of choice)). If we go by the (apparantly much-loved) 'character wealth by level' table (which, joking aside, is actually quite possible if, say, you were chargening a group of high level characters for a game) Rob needs to be level 14 to buy his +6 to two Ability Scores belt (as he can't invest more than half his cash in any one item). And then how does he buy his uber-kewl magic bow? And what's Will been spending his cash on? Easy living? Heck (since we seem to be looking at a world with an 'unlimited' magical market place here), for a couple of thousand gp he can buy a heavy crossbow with a Permanent Animate Object spell cast on it (700 gp for a CL 14 Permanency + 15,000 gp for the material component + 660 gp for the Animate Objects = 16,360 which animates 11 of the things, he only wants one = 1,488 gp plus change). Let the silliness abound! No, magic has an effect, and you can argue specifics back and forth 'till you're blue in the face, but until the campaign caps are being hit it all evens out as long as we maintain the assumption that both characters have the same access to the same resources.
Another concept to consider in the debate between crossbows vs. bows: I'd really favor treating crossbows as something untrained folks could more easily use on the fly. Perhaps less penalties?
Historically, this was one of the reasons why the Catholic church outlawed them (well, taking down rather expensive nobles and knights with a weapon any lowly peasant could point and shoot did upset the order a bit).
The main problem with Vital strike is that it's another "feat patch" solution to a basic problem to the system as a whole.
Iterative attacks are woven into BAB as a basic premise of the game. The problem that has emerged with this feature is that it makes combat have a very static flow, with mechanical incentives to not move much.
Three iterations in we get a patch to this problem with the vital strike feat chain, to help balance out this tendency for combat to remain unmoving. It's the best solution for Pathfinder simply because they want to retain backwards compatibility.
However, if you wanted to get away from that then you could go the way that Star Wars Saga did, and make the iterative attacks feats that can be purchased by the character.
If you had that kind of system then it would help make a more even balance between the trade off of remaining still to do a lot of potential attacks and damage, or forgo some of that potential offensive punch to be able to move and deliver a single deadly blow.
Unfortunately, Vital Strike is three feats, which from my estimation is too much compared to iterative attacks. They could have done a better job of simply having it be a single feat that scales. That way the investment to counter balance iterative attacks would be closer.
My point is that is wrong to see it as a "fix" to static full attack. It isn't.
VS is a way to add damage to a standard action attack. A standard action is something you perform before or after a move, and this is absolutely not trivial, tactically speaking.
Moreover, you can prepare a standard action. Just to, say, add + 3d8 (bow) to the Pit Fiend concentration check. Again, not trivial.
I agree completely to the scaling thing (Great Cleave suffers it, too).
That's grand, but if Rob had half a brain he would be buying Bulls Strength potions and maintaining his hit.
This wasn't an attempt to undermine the crossbow but to merely show
that the c. longbow has ways of improving that vastly outweigh those
of the crossbow. The crossbow simply doesn't scale as well
which is what we all are trying to address.I'm still on the fence about the arbolest with multiple grooves to fire.
vs a composite longbow. Not sold on the fact all classes will get manyshot
essentially for free.
The point of all this number crunching is to demonstrate that:
(1) The strength increase on the bow is not that big a deal if your damage from the arbolest is high enough. It's a bonus, not a be-all and end-all.(2) Any method Rob uses to boost his strength is limited. Quaffing potions of bull's strength gives him only an extra 5% damage. the damages are still comparable.
(3) the iterative attacks of the bow are not actually that important, after the first three arrows from Manyshot and Rapid Shot, not a lot else makes a significant contribution.
The whole point of the multi-shot crossbow is that it doesn't take any special skill to use one - indeed, this is the crossbow's big advantage. the downside is the reload time. Even with the Speedload feature, it takes a move action. Without it, it would take a full round action and a move action, or two move actions with Rapid Reload. It's slow, but it can be just about made effective - it can just about keep up with the archer, at a pinch.
I cannot comment on Dabbler's post as, again, I cannot download anything and thus do not have access to his crossbow changes :p
Vital Strike is a feat patch, because standard actions aren't what you're taking as an archer. Moving and then attacking is important if you need to move, yes. Archers are archers. They can in most cases stand in the back and pling pling pling. Even if they DO end up in melee, one five foot step later and pling pling pling.
As for the whole "only half the classes can use longbows," shortbows. Composite shortbows. Now who can't use them? Clerics, druids, wizards, and sorcerers - the three four that won't be using them anyways.
It may not happen in your game, but I'd humbly disagree that it doesn't happen in the game. If my campaign is about a group of monster hunters, for example, then both DR and the single Vital Strikes needed to overcome it is going to come up all the time. If my game is a military campaign with night raids, sniper ambushes and castle sieges, again, it'll come up a lot. As always, there's lots of ways to play the game - one of the reasons I love it.
You don't understand - DR is a non-issue to archers because ammo is cheap. Ammo is crazy cheap. Archers should always have arrows of cold iron and silvered/mithril with them at all times. Military campaign the bow becomes even more potent - now it can hit more then one enemy per round, compared to the crossbow! Hell, that's the bow's primary function! Night raid? Why is the crossbow better here, because it kills people less fast so it's less suspicious? That's not a benefit. Sniper ambush? Again, what's the benefit to Vital Strike? Castle siege? See: military campaign.
Well, I play Pathfinder, not D&D - and the whole 'magic items are required' is very much an artifact of D&D. The 'wealth by level' chart is a set of guidelines rather than a Class ability - a privilage rather than a right if you like. The wording goes, 'it is assumed...' not 'it is required...'. There's even a range of possibilities presented ('usual' 'low fantasy' 'high fantasy'). One of the things I love about Pathfinder is that it has - with Feats like Vital Strike and other such features - managed to move away from the bad old days when certain creatures couldn't be hit at all except with weapons with certain levels of magical plus: a Fighter could be level 20 and useless (your 'speedbump' if you like) if the dragon he was fighting snapped his +5 longsword (all magic weapons were longswords back then...). This led to the weird situation where published scenarios, in order to be 'winnable', always had the magical swords needed to kill the big bad lying around the big bad's lair. Of course, since PCs tended to play through more than one adventure, they soon started tripping over magical weapons. Owning the one magic sword needed to slay a dragon is epic, owning a score of them is pathetic. Anyway, DR was designed to overcome his rather hideous flaw in the system, and Pathfinder has gone a stage further. Now a level 20 Fighter can slay that dragon with his normal, unmagical, sword - through his own skill, bravery, and sheer heroism. Magic makes it easier, but lack of magic no longer makes it impossible.
No, it's required.
Level 20 fighter cannot kill jack crap without magic items. A dragon? An ancient red dragon is CR 19 - lower then you. Even with Bravery your will is 11. Unless you roll a 16 or higher, guess what? You're done. Frightful Presence. Oh wait, you took a feat! Now you only need a 13 or higher. Still not good odds. Also, no fire resistance. You're dead. The dragon turns the floor into lava and you're dead. But somehow you survive! Oh wait, it's attacking. What's your non-magical AC? Oh, at best, it's 24. The dragon's BAB is 25. Better hope it rolls a 1. But you still survive, somehow! Now you can run forward and attack - wait, sorry, DR 15/magic. Magic items would REALLY come in handy. Only you don't run forward and attack, because you don't have a rod of cancellation, so you just smash into the Wall of Force. And you can't see it because it's invisible and you have no magic items. And it's flying. And it has displacement.
But at the very, very least, you can hit it. With your attack bonus of 33. It's AC is 38. You can hit it. If it doesn't do any of that above, you can strike it down.
It casts shield. You now miss almost half the time you attack it.
Level 20 fighter cannot kill jack crap without magic items.
Do I really have to re-do FighterMan without any magic at all to stop these moronic posts? Yes, in fact, "Level 20 fighter" can indeed kill things without magic items. Without ANY magic whatsoever, FighterMan has a +32 to hit for 1d8+10 damage (and the dragon's DR is reduced to 5/magic) and a +16 Will vs Fear with a reroll (75% chance to succeed). It'd certainly be more difficult than with items (FighterMan easily wins that fight), but it can be done. And a fighter with no wealth is NOT CR 20, he's CR 19.
Level 20 fighter cannot kill jack crap without magic items.Do I really have to re-do FighterMan without any magic at all to stop these moronic posts? Yes, in fact, "Level 20 fighter" can indeed kill things without magic items. Without ANY magic whatsoever, FighterMan has a +32 to hit for 1d8+10 damage (and the dragon's DR is reduced to 5/magic) and a +16 Will vs Fear with a reroll (75% chance to succeed). It'd certainly be more difficult than with items (FighterMan easily wins that fight), but it can be done. And a fighter with no wealth is NOT CR 20, he's CR 19.
You haven't answered any of the concerns I brought up.
No resistance to fire
No means of getting through Wall of Force
No means of seeing invisible targets
Pathetic AC
BAB means you hit slightly more then half the time with your most powerful attack assuming none of your feats lower your attack bonus.
1d8+10? Good, you'll only take a billion rounds to kill the dragon.
I think the thing that both ProfCirno and Zurai are ignoring is that a CR 19 Fighter does not equate to APL 19, which is the mechanic used to determine encounter challenge. The CR system wasn't created to determine head-to-head evaluations.
Zo
They can in most cases stand in the back and pling pling pling. Even if they DO end up in melee, one five foot step later and pling pling pling.
You continue to ignore my question and my consideration.. but I think I nailed the point, seeing what you wrote here*.
An enemy with reach is enough to mess up your "five foot step - pling pling pling".
A corner when hunting down an enemy could be enough too. The game can bring up situations that do not allow full attacks..
* I have not the intention of be snarky here.. if seems so, I apologize.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot comment on Dabbler's post as, again, I cannot download anything and thus do not have access to his crossbow changes :p
Arbolest added to list of crossbows doing base 2d6 damage.
Great longbow added to list of bows doing base 1d10 damage as an exotic weapon.
Crossbow, hand: The hand crossbow is an intricately made small crossbow that is spanned by hand. It can be aimed and shot one-handed (in fact it is designed to do so) but both hands are required to reload. Reloading a hand crossbow is a move action that can provoke attacks of opportunity.
Crossbow, repeating hand: The repeating hand crossbow uses a lever and a box of five bolts to span, load and shoot the crossbow, effectively making the reloading a free action. It requires both hands to use. Changing a box of bolts is a sull round action that can provoke attacks of opportunity, or a move action if you have the Rapid Reload feat.
Crossbow, light: The light crossbow is spanned by hand, although some designs have a stirrup to assist this. Reloading a light crossbow is a move action that can provoke attacks of opportunity, but is a free action that does not provoke if the character has the Rapid Reload feat. A light crossbow can be shot in one hand at a –2 penalty, but requires both hands to reload.
Crossbow, light repeating: Like the repeating hand crossbow, this weapon is spanned by a lever and magazine system that requires both hands to use but effectively making the reloading a free action. Changing to a new box of bolts is a full-round action that can provoke an attack of opportunity, or a move action if you have the Rapid Reload feat.
Crossbow, heavy: The heavy crossbow is a large weapon that is spanned by using a lever or ‘goatsfoot’. Shooting a heavy crossbow can be done in one hand, but this inflicts a –4 penalty to hit. Reloading a heavy crossbow is a full-round action that provokes an attack of opportunity, or a move action if you have the Rapid Reload feat.
Crossbow, heavy repeating: While shooting this weapon is simple, operating the very stiff lever requires intense practice to master, making this an exotic weapon. Changing to a new box of bolts is a full-round action that can provoke an attack of opportunity, or a move action if you have the Rapid Reload feat.
Arbolest: This incredibly powerful crossbow has to be loaded with a windlass or winch system, and reloading is a full round action that can provoke an attack of opportunity, or a move action if you have the Rapid Reload feat. However it’s range and power are second to none.
Great longbow: The ‘English Longbow’ of legend, these bows had astonishing draw strengths that required long and intensive training, making them exotic weapons. They otherwise behave as standard longbows or composite longbows.
Pimp my Crossbow
The mechanical nature of the crossbow makes it slow loading, and restricts it from using some of the fancier tricks that archers can use. However, that same restriction can be made into an advantage, as a crossbow can have any number of mechanical tricks added to it by a skilled and imaginative craftsman. To add any of these features requires a masterwork weapon as the base, and the craftsman requires both Craft (weapons) and Knowledge (engineering) to make these amendments.
Extra Bow: Effectively, this is constructing one crossbow under another, although they share the same handle and mechanism. They can be of different types, although only one (the upper) can be a repeating crossbow. In combat the wielder can switch between the two as a free action. Cost and weight: Equal to the second crossbow (must be masterwork). An extra bow has to be reloaded and shot separately to the first bow. It can be enchanted and must be enchanted separately to the main bow.
Extra Grooves: Additional grooves are added to the crossbow to allow it to shoot additional bolts with the same shot, just as the feat Manyshot does. Up to two extra grooves can be added to a crossbow. Each increases the cost by 100 gp and the weight by ½ lb. Reloading the extra grooves on a crossbow increases the reload time by one step (free action to move action, move action to full round etc).
Massive: This modification can be made to an arbolest (when you apply it to smaller crossbows they simply increase in type), and increases the base damage from 2d6 to 2d8. Unless you have a strength of at least 16 the weapon takes an extra round to reload. Cost is 200 gp to make this amendment, and weight increases by 4 lbs.
Crossbows can also have some unique magic enhancements added to them:
Autoloading: your crossbow reloads itself after you shoot it without provoking an attack of opportunity.
Minor conjuration, CL 5th, Craft Magic Arms and Armour, unseen servent, Price: +500 gp.
Speedloading: your crossbow reloads itself as a free action whenever you shoot it.
Moderate conjuration, transformation; CL 7th, Craft Magic Arms and Armour, unseen servant, haste, Price: +1 bonus.
Box of Endless Bolts
Aura: Moderate conjuration; CL 9th.
Slot: -; Price 1000gp; Weight 1lb.
Description
This appears to be a normal box of bolts for a standard repeating crossbow. However, when loading the box with bolts it will be found that up to 1000 bolts can be stored in the box. Until it is down to it’s last five, it will always appear to be full.
Construction
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armour, secret chest; Cost 500 gp.
Ammunition
There are a variety of forms of ammunition that can be used by both crossbows and bows quite apart from the ‘standard’ arrows and bolts. Some are detailed here, costs are for 10 bolts or 20 arrows:
Bodkin: This long, needlepoint was designed to fly far and pierce armour. Bodkin points gain a +2 bonus to hit, but a –1 penalty to damage. Cost = 2gp.
Heavy Quarrels: These are only available as crossbow bolts; they have a very large, heavy head that unbalances the projectile, halving the range. Damage is increased by one die type (1d10 goes to 2d6, 2d6 goes to 2d8, 2d8 to 2d10). Heavy quarrels cannot fit in the magazine of a repeating crossbow. Cost = 5gp.
Sailcutter: These inverted-crescent shaped heads were originally used against ships to slash sails and cut rigging. Damage is reduced by one type of dice (d6 to d4, d8 to d6, d10 to d8, 2d6 to 1d10) and is slashing damage. Sailcuter heads cannot fit in the magazine of a repeating crossbow. Cost = 3gp.
Swallowtail: Swallowtails were made for arrows, but could work as well on crossbow bolts. They have two long, trailing barbs that widen the wound on entry (or break off if they impact strong armour). Against a target with no metal or other rigid armour they increase the threat range by 1 and inflict +1 damage. Swallowtail heads cannot fit in the magazine of a repeating crossbow. Cost = 2gp.
Pimp my Crossbowman
There are some feats that apply only to crossbows.
Pinpoint Targeting
You can place an aimed shot very accurately, scoring extra damage.
Prerequisite: Proficiency with crossbow or firearm, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, BAB +4.
Benefit: if you have taken a move action or longer to take careful aim at a target, you double the number of damage dice that you roll for your damage, should you hit. Hence if you would normally roll 1d8, you instead roll 2d8. This bonus damage stacks with (but is not multiplied by) that gained from Vital Strike.
Shoot From The Hip
You are skilled enough with your crossbow or firearm to be able to aim and fire extremely rapidly.
Prerequisite: Proficiency with crossbow, Point Blank Shot, BAB +4.
Benefit: if you have a spanned and loaded crossbow in your hands you may take a shot as an immediate action at a –4 penalty to hit. Because it is am immediate action it may be taken out of initiative sequence and even in the midst of moving.
New Rules
There are some combat actions you can take with a crossbow that you cannot take with a bow. These are summarised below:
Take Careful Aim: this action has to be taken with a spanned and loaded crossbow or firearm. By spending time to take aim, they can gain a bonus to hit. The bonus depends on how they aim and for how long, and if they have something to brace their crossbow on such as a wall, stand, or by lying prone.
Move action: +1 to hit.
Move action, braced: +3 to hit.
Full round action: +2 to hit
Full round action, braced: +4 to hit
When taking careful aim, a character provokes attacks of opportunity and loses their dexterity bonus to AC.
Snapshot: rather than taking aim you can shoot your crossbow as a move action rather than a standard action or part of a full-round action, as long as it is spanned and loaded. Taking a snapshot applies a –2 to hit penalty.
You don't understand - DR is a non-issue to archers because ammo is cheap. Ammo is crazy cheap. Archers should always have arrows of cold iron and silvered/mithril with them at all times. Military campaign the bow becomes even more potent - now it can hit more then one enemy per round, compared to the crossbow! Hell, that's the bow's primary function! Night raid? Why is the crossbow better here, because it kills people less fast so it's less suspicious? That's not a benefit. Sniper ambush? Again, what's the benefit to Vital Strike? Castle siege? See: military campaign.
Sniper shot: Crossbow has a better range and damage, and can be shot from a prone or cover position easier. Combined with Vital Strike and sneak attack that can be a big plus.
Castle siege: if you are the defender, you often have a large refugee population fleeing to the castle for protection. These are not trained fighters, they are usually commoners and experts. A crossbow is a weapon they can use easily and from safety - you just arm them all with a light crossbow and use them to man the loopholes around the castle where they have complete cover. If you are the attacker you can relegate suppressing fire to conscript crossbowmen - you are not looking to kill many defenders so much as make them keep their heads down so they don't interfere with what you are really doing. Give them heavy crossbows and pavises so they can stay safe and maintain a slow but steady bombardment - the slow rate of fire is in your favour as it wastes less ammunition.
Conscript army: if you need to raise a large number of troops in a short period of time, you are going to end up with a lot of unskilled soldiers. Crossbows are great weapons to arm them with because it keeps them largely out of harm's way (they won't have great morale) and it is a weapon they can use. Line them up behind your spear/pikemen to shoot over their shoulders at an oncoming charge and they can break up a formation quite well.
Don't get me wrong, nobody uses crossbowmen when they can get longbowmen, but very few armies are full of skilled professionals which is what you need to use longbows (warriors, basically). What Edward I realised when he made a law that archery had to be practised every week was that it took extensive training to make a good archer, and that is how the English army always fielded large numbers of longbowmen while the levies of other European armies used crossbowmen. What actually happened was the missile troops on both sides became professional soldiers because it beat being a peasant, but that's how it started.
|
|
Level 20 fighter cannot kill jack crap without magic items. A dragon? An ancient red dragon is CR 19 - lower then you...
So glad you picked this example, as it's a great one to illustrate exactly why Vital Strike and single shots are important.
In your bumper list of ways to die via dragon (assuming, of course, you choose to use no tactics) you missed an important one:
Antimagic Field
The dragon also has an Intelligence of 20, so she's smart enough to use it.
The field only has a 10ft radius from the dragon, but that doesn't matter much to our magic item addicted bowman, 'cos anything entering the field has its magic negated. Magic arrows? Worthless. Magic bow? Worthless - it transfers its bonuses to the arrow, which then get negated when the arrow enters the field. About all our bowman gets bonuses from is that belt which pumps his physical stats.
The dragon has DR 15/magic, as you correctly point out. Since our bowman thinks single shots and the related Feats are worthless, he keeps firing his volleys of arrows, hoping for a miracle (except that's a spell in this game, so still not much help to him...;) ). To have any chance of doing any damage at all on a normal hit he needs a +8 to damage. To have a 50% chance of doing a single point of damage on average per hit he needs +11 damage. He's got Greater Weapon Specialization and Weapon Training maxed for his bow, so he gets a respectable +8, and we'll give him a minimum +2 from Strength ('cos why else use a composite bow) for a +10 total. He can add +1 for Point Blank Shot if he really thinks being point blank against a dragon is a good idea... Otherwise he's gonna' need to nerf his accuracy with Deadly Aim, giving him the +12 damage he desperately needs, but suffering a -6 to hit (or, put another way, reducing his hit chance by 30%). For argument's sake, let's say he's got that +6 Strength belt of owning infinite magic items: that gives him +13 damage, +14 at point blank range, and up to +26 if he goes with Deadly Aim. He can hurt the dragon but, on average, is doing little without using Deadly Aim. The dragon is AC 38, the bowman's got maybe +36 to attack(BAB 20, +9 from magically enhanced Dex, +4 from Weapon Training, +2 from greater weapon focus, +1 from a masterwork bow), which is good, but nerfs to a mere +30 with Deadly Aim. His Rapid Shot nerfs that again to +28. He's got a 55% chance to hit with his primary shot, 30% with his second, and just the base 5% for the rest. The same chances apply to confirm any Criticals, so that's not too likely to happen.
On the other hand...
If he just took a single Greater Vital Strike shot he'd have 95% chance to hit or confirm a Critical and would be doing, on a non-critical hit, 4d8+13 (or +14 at point blank) damage, an average of 31/32 minus the dragon's DR = 16/17 per shot, with Deadly Aim this would be a 65% hit chance for 28/29 per shot. With rapid fire tactics and Deadly Aim he does 1d8+25/26, an average of 29.5/30.5 minus the dragon's DR = 14.5/15.5 per shot... but he's not hitting as much and without Deadly Aim this would be 1d8+13/14 for an average of 17.5/18.5 minus DR = 2.5/3.5 per shot. What's more, by rapid firing he can't move... cover is your friend against dragons...
So: single shot tactics = good stuff.
Of course, if magic is required to have any chance of beating this dragon, then I guess it (and any creature like it who has access to an Antimagic Field spell) is completely unbeatable. Weird they'd even put it in the book, huh? ;) )
Wait: IIRC, DR X/Magic is negated in the AMF..
Well... no one is pretending that the crossbow is on equal terms with a longbow. You're trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, a crossbow isn't going to get the rate of fire of a trained bowman. There's a program on the History channel where every week they have trained marksman trying to duplicate history's famous shots... last week they did a special on the english longbow and one of the simulations was speed shooting. There's no physical way to make a crossbow as fast as what I saw on the telly.Don't match Martial Weapon prof as a 'cost' for a feat. Any character that is going to use the Crossbow for high dmg potential is going to have martial weapon prof by default...meaning, with NO feat cost. The same thus goes for bow.
So the bowman doesn't have to spend one of his feats...he'll either take a fighter/ranger etc level. The crossbowman MUST burn a feat to make xbow viable...it's uneven.
==Aelryinth
Yes, that is the crossbow's drawback. The advantage it had was ease of use and hitting power regardless of the user's physical strength, advantages that were capitalised on by the musket in later centuries. However, the mechanical nature of the crossbow should make some other options possible, which is what I tried to do; they may never have been used historically, but they are plausible and they make the crossbow a more attractive weapon for the adventurer.
|
|
Wait: IIRC, DR X/Magic is negated in the AMF..
Ooh, interesting... and a really good point too.
I guess it depends on if you see the 10ft emanation 'centred on you' coming 'from the caster' or being 'centred on the caster's square on the battle grid'. I'd presume the former, if for no other reason than the dragon is Gargantuan, so if it were the latter she'd only hit herself with the field and no-one else - which makes it a bit silly to have that spell on her default spell list. If it emanates from the caster, then she doesn't get hit with it (although she still couldn't use, for example, her Su Breath Weapon through it, but that's no big loss considering the benefits).
Also, the Bestiary doesn't seem to list whether a dragon's DR is Ex or Su, since DR can be either: I always assumed it was 'cos the dragon was physically tough, and therefore Ex, but I could be wrong - dragons have plenty of both (if anyone has a reference for an official answer that'd be great!).
Crossbows are, by and large, a Wizard's side-arm. Heavy crossbow included; odds are a Wizard has no intention of shooting twice, and only plans to shoot even once in very rare circumstances, so it works well enough towards that end. Though I prefer a bag of tricks so'st I can throw small animals into the fray.
Which is stupid how many wizards in fantasy use a crossbow?? Worst 3e rule ever.
Can you name one...
I'd much rather take crossbows off the list, and give the wizards a standard action wizardly powerful usable at will.
Crossbows are, by and large, a Wizard's side-arm. Heavy crossbow included; odds are a Wizard has no intention of shooting twice, and only plans to shoot even once in very rare circumstances, so it works well enough towards that end. Though I prefer a bag of tricks so'st I can throw small animals into the fray.Which is stupid how many wizards in fantasy use a crossbow?? Worst 3e rule ever.
Can you name one...
I'd much rather take crossbows off the list, and give the wizards a standard action wizardly powerful usable at will.
Actually, there are very few crossbows in fantasy literature, at all.
It's an effective weapon for a low-level wizard or cleric, because it gives a class that has no real reason to use a bow an effective missile weapon at a level at which they would need it. That said, you can build a Robin Hood with Pathfinder, but William Tell (at leas, an effective William Tell) is harder. Hence the suggested additions.
You haven't answered any of the concerns I brought up.
Yes, actually, I did. You just chose to lie and say I didn't. I addressed both to-hit and Will save directly, and frankly the rest of what you list there is chump change.
No resistance to fireSo what?
No means of getting through Wall of ForceWhat, are we both rooted to the spot and neither is allowed to move? The dragon can't do anything behind a wall of force either. This is misdirection.
No means of seeing invisible targetsOther than, of course, a Perception check.
Pathetic ACDoesn't matter, since it seems your dragon won't advance to melee range, given that you have him cowering behind a wall of force.
BAB means you hit slightly more then half the time with your most powerful attack assuming none of your feats lower your attack bonus.
False. The CR19 red dragon has a 38 AC. MagiclessFighterMan has a +32 to hit. He has a 75% chance to hit with his most powerful attack (2d8+20 on the first attack roll thanks to Manyshot).
And even if he does use feats that lower his attack bonus, they still increase his damage per round, so that's more misdirection.
1d8+10? Good, you'll only take a billion rounds to kill the dragon.
Per attack. Not counting Manyshot.
The dragon has DR 15/magic, as you correctly point out.
Not against a Fighter, he doesn't. Greater Penetrating Strike.
|
|
Not against a Fighter, he doesn't. Greater Penetrating Strike.
Excellent point. That actually makes the rapid fire mode of attack much more viable as well - much less of a need or incentive to use the Deadly Aim if you have this one. So, about 26 damage per shot with Vital Strike and 12.5 per shot with a rapid fire attack (beyond point blank and no Deadly Aim on either). And no magic beyond a stat-boosting belt. Nice.
Not against a Fighter, he doesn't. Greater Penetrating Strike.Excellent point. That actually makes the rapid fire mode of attack much more viable as well - much less of a need or incentive to use the Deadly Aim if you have this one. So, about 26 damage per shot with Vital Strike and 12.5 per shot with a rapid fire attack (beyond point blank and no Deadly Aim on either). And no magic beyond a stat-boosting belt. Nice.
The dmg comparison with a 'grooved' xbow is off, because such a thing doesn't exist in the game.
Also, Stat booster items are among the 'core' magicks that are NOT increased in price by being secondary on anything. (resistance bonuses are another, as are deflection bonuses from rings/prot). Why? Because they are essential to all characters as they level for the balance of the game. It's part of the MICompendium. Other effects, yes, Stat bonuses, no.
so the gold comparison is off. And won't be a problem til 10th+ level, anyways. the fact is that increasing his strength is a great way for an archer to up his DOT (and btw, Bull's strength is +4 to Str, which is +2 to dmg, which is 10% of 20, not 5%, which is on a par with +2 to hit), and archers DO get off full attacks all the time, because they take pains to get into positions where they can do so...and the party fights (if they are smart) to let them do so.
The crossbow remains a tool of the low level and the unskilled. On a Per Shot basis, it should do more dmg then a bow. As a weapon on the battlefield, it lags behind and should do so because of the type of weapon it is. The only way it should outdamage a bow is on the massive one shot/sniper rule. DOT should always be in favor of the bow.
Vital Strike is one feat masquerading as 3 to increase DOT. I simply propose the Superior Unarmed Strike variant, where you basically get a size increase every 6 levels, and apply it to all weapons. That means big dmg melee weapons are doing big base dmg at high levels, and so will xbows. Bows, with lower base DOT, will lag behind. Attacks will make bows better then Xbows, but xbows will rule the one shot arena.
==Aelryinth
The dmg comparison with a 'grooved' xbow is off, because such a thing doesn't exist in the game.
That's one of the points of this thread, to come up with proposals that make the crossbow 'not suck', and this was one of them. With a crossbow, you can (in theory) get Manyshot without the feat with just a little mechanical chicanery.