More because I have a nearly masochistic itch...
I've been looking at the Double Crossbow, and trying to figure out why on earth anyone would ever try and use it, and to see if there can be anything done to salvage it.
Question 1
The Non Proficiency Penalty is doubled because of its "size and weight", which is about twice what a Heavy Crossbow is. If the weapon is made out of Darkwood, would the NPF be reduced back to the 'normal' rates for an Exotic Weapon Proficiency?
Question 2:
If I were mad enough to take Vital Strike feat chain, and try to use them on the Double Crossbow, would I get double the damage out of both shots, or just one?
As near as I can tell, this is a corner case - the Double Crossbow is the only weapon that gets "two shots" out of one "standard attack" action. Manyshot on the Archery feat chain specifically uses a Full Attack action.
Given how sucktastic the Double Crossbow is (Feat to drop the penalty from -8 to -4, doesn't add Strength bonus to damage, requires two additional feats to be able to fire the weapon every turn and still no iterative attacks...), I'm not certain that allowing the Vital Strike chain of feats to apply to both bolts is game breaking.
Crossbow Fighter, Deadly Stroke.
|
Also, Torchlight 2 (due out march-may this year, and featuring multiplayer - yes!), well, one of the four announced classes dual-wields crossbows. I have no idea how it works, either, but considering it's Torchlight, there is potential for awesome.
EDIT: wow, that reads like a shameless plug. The double crossbow isn't even the same thing as using two crossbows. I apologize for the shilling.
No, this thing is the weapon I'm talking about.
Does Vital Strike double the output of both shots, or just the first one that hits?
If the double crossbow is made out of something like Darkwood, would it reduce the crazy Non-Proficiency Penalty to -4 from -8?
Is there any reason anyone would take that contraption? :) Is there something I'm missing here? :)
|
Crossbow Fighter, Deadly Stroke.+1 This weapon seems designed specifically for this fighter variant. Note the fighter crossbowman benefits the most from using readied actions which are standard actions. This weapon is designed for a type of sniper feat tree, not the gatling bow style which is more common.
A bow that requires a -4 to hit (if you're proficient) dosent scream sniper to me. Maybe its the whole "lack of accuracy" thing. I think of a sniper as excellent marksman, not "lucky to hit".
If the double crossbow is made out of something like Darkwood, would it reduce the crazy Non-Proficiency Penalty to -4 from -8?
No. :p
Hmm
Double Heavy Crossbow - 300 GP base, does 2d8 damage, but at -8 to hit. 18 lbs. Each shot burns 0.2 GP in ammo. A feat will drop this to -4 to hit.
Large Heavy Crossbow - 100 GP base, does 2d8 damage, but at -2 to hit for being an oversized weapon. 16 lbs. Doesn't cost a feat.
Admittedly, you're now carrying something that looks like a medieval 'compensation gun'. On the other hand, I can picture an inquisitor saying "Go ahead. Make my day." while pointing it at some lowlife. :)
Double Heavy Crossbow - 300 GP base, does 2d8 damage, but at -8 to hit. 18 lbs. Each shot burns 0.2 GP in ammo. A feat will drop this to -4 to hit.
Each shot does 2d8+(2*modifiers) damage. For example, if you're using a +5 double crossbow and firing +1 flaming bolts while using Deadly Aim with 18 BAB, you get 2d8+34 plus 2d6 fire per shot.
Large Heavy Crossbow - 100 GP base, does 2d8 damage, but at -2 to hit for being an oversized weapon. 16 lbs. Doesn't cost a feat.
Cannot be used. You can't wield a two-handed weapon that is sized larger than your size.
Double Heavy Crossbow - 300 GP base, does 2d8 damage, but at -8 to hit. 18 lbs. Each shot burns 0.2 GP in ammo. A feat will drop this to -4 to hit.
Large Heavy Crossbow - 100 GP base, does 2d8 damage, but at -2 to hit for being an oversized weapon. 16 lbs. Doesn't cost a feat.
Note that a heavy crossbow normally requires two hands. If you are going to weild a large one, you need to effectively wield it as large 1 handed weapon, which gives a -4 to hit (assuming that your GM agrees that that is
At first level, I'm not certain which is better. However, if you start adding enhancements to the bow, the double crossbow is clearly better.
+1 Flaming Shocking Double Heavy Crossbow. 18600 gp, does 2d8+4d6+2 damage with -3 to hit (with one feat).
+1 Flaming Shocking Large Heavy Crossbow. 18400 gp, does 2d8+2d6+1 damage with -3 to hit.
An extra 2d6+1 damage for the cost of one feat seems like a great deal. (Compare that with Weapon Specialization). It will get even better as you advance and add more enhancements to the bow.
Weapons Specialization, deadly aim, bardic performance, greater magic weapon, deadshot and greater deadshot will also be twice as effective with the double crossbow.
Since you are not taking iterative attacks, the penalty to hit matters less than it normally would. It converts the "hits almost always" to "hits a lot of the time".
Compared with a large heavy crossbow, the double heavy crossbow is a definite win.
Compared with a bow, it is still inferior. To fire every round, you need four feats (including the useless rapid shot) or six levels of ranger (to take crossbow mastery without the rapid shot prereq).
With a two feats (point blank and rapid shot), you can shoot a bow twice at first level, doing 1d8 per shot and only taking a -2 on your roll. (You have to make two attack rolls, but that actually means you are more consistent, and do the same average damage in the long run). You can also add precision and critical damage to each attack. You gain the bows enhancements on both shots and eventually get even more attacks (from both haste-like effects and iteratives). The only downside is that you need a full round action rather than a standard (but you can reload as a free action instead of a move action.)
However, most of the reason that the double crossbow is worse than is bow is that all crossbows are worse than bows.
In addition to the darkwood for the wooden pieces, use Mithral for the metal pieces. That would definately count for 1/2 weight.
Cannot be used. You can't wield a two-handed weapon that is sized larger than your size.
You draw a heavy crossbow back by turning a small winch. Normally, operating a heavy crossbow requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a heavy crossbow with one hand at a –4 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a heavy crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two one-handed weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.
This states that a crossbow can be used one handed - it does not require two hands to use, only to reload.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
The SRD states that a bow requires two hands to use, and you cannot use a bow for a creature larger than yourself.
A heavy crossbow can be shot (used) one handed. It is treated as a one-handed weapon when used for two-weapon attacks. It requires two hands to reload. A large heavy crossbow requires two hands to shoot.
It looks like using a Heavy Crossbow (Large) is legal, using the normal rules for using a weapon that's too large for you: -2 to shoot, can't be shot one handed.
Which gives you a weapon that fires every other turn, does 2d8 damage, and shoots at -2. Until you burn two feats (or get creative with spells), it is worse than firing a light crossbow over two turns.
Benefit: Make one attack roll. If the attack hits, the target takes damage from both bolts. Critical hits, sneak attack damage, and other precision-based damage only apply to the first bolt."
Vital Strike (Combat)You make a single attack that deals significantly more damage than normal.
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage. Roll the weapon’s damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together before adding bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), precision-based damage, and other damage bonuses. These extra weapon damage dice are not multiplied on a critical hit, but are added to the total.
Critical hits, Sneak attack damage, and other precision-based damage only applies to the first bolt.
Vital Strike damage is none of those three types of damage.
|
Inappropriately sized weapons: ... If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
So the question becomes whether the designation of a heavy crossbow is a one-handed weapon that requires two hands to reload, or a two-handed weapon that has a special quality allowing it to be fired with one hand at a penalty.
Personally, I believe it's a two-handed weapon that possesses a special quality. But because the entry isn't explicit as to which category it falls into, it must be a dm call until we get word on it.
Now, if you argue that the weapon falls into both size categories, then while one category works, the other one specifically excludes it. And since one green light and one red light means red light, it goes nowhere.
It looks like using a Heavy Crossbow (Large) is legal, using the normal rules for using a weapon that's too large for you: -2 to shoot, can't be shot one handed.
Which gives you a weapon that fires every other turn, does 2d8 damage, and shoots at -2.
No, it doesn't. At the absolute best you get a 2d8 at -6 to hit you can fire exactly once and can never reload, and that's clearly reaching to try to break the rules as intended with extremely nebulous interpretations of the rules as written.
I'd modify the rules:
If you have crossbow mastery, you can use the double crossbow to use Manyshot. in this case, you can shoot two arrows at once for the first attack in the round, and for the rest of the round, you get one for each attack. At the end of the turn, you end up with both slots reloaded, so you can start the next round with manyshot again.
Regular reloading of both slots still takes a move action, so there's no way of getting more than one doubleshot per round.
I'd also ignore the -4 to attacks part (though the -8 non-proficiency penalty would stay if you try to use doubleshot)
And vital strike would only apply to one arrow. I'd do it like this, anyway, but this situation definitely calls for it.
I don't actually see it as a problem.
1) Game balance wise, I'm better off firing light crossbows unless I can get something like Gravity Bow.
2) There's real world historical precedence - crossbows beyond the 'stirrup and pull' model used arming winches to pull the strings back.
3) There's even Paizo published material having Medium sized characters using Large crossbows, and saying the crossbow takes a full round action to reload. It's in the "Rescue Arael" encounter in Council of Thieves, though the bow IS listed as "mounted to the roof of the prisoner wagon".
By way of comparison, it looks like someone can legally use a Bastard Sword (Large) in one hand for a -2 to hit and do 2d8+STR damage. Every round. sure, it costs an EWP feat. On the other hand, one of the Iconics does it.
The crossbow trick costs four feats (Point Blank Shot, Rapid Reload, Rapid Shot, Crossbow Mastery) because Crossbow Mastery requires Rapid Shot as a pre-req.
No, it doesn't. At the absolute best you get a 2d8 at -6 to hit you can fire exactly once and can never reload, and that's clearly reaching to try to break the rules as intended with extremely nebulous interpretations of the rules as written.It looks like using a Heavy Crossbow (Large) is legal, using the normal rules for using a weapon that's too large for you: -2 to shoot, can't be shot one handed.
Which gives you a weapon that fires every other turn, does 2d8 damage, and shoots at -2.
Reloading doesn't seem to equal wielding/using, as seen by the whole "reload with a light shield" debate.
And I don't know if that's breaking the rules as intended. I simply don't think it's a big deal. It's something right in-between a heavy crossbow and a ballista (maybe like a manuballista? I'm not good with these things but whatever). The rules might not have been directly intended to allow it, but I don't think they directly intended to disallow it either. It's not overly powerful, it isn't THAT stupid.
Heavy crossbow - 1d10. 2h, 1h with penalty, full round reload.
Large heavy crossbow/manuballista - 2d8. 2h with penalty -6, full round reload.
Ballista - 3d8. 2h with -4 penalty, stationary only, two full rounds reload.
Assume that being stationary lessens the penalty with 2 or 4 and it seems like a perfect fit.
|
Sorry for the thread resurrect, but I've been having similar thoughts on 'what's the point of a double crossbow' myself...
Seems to me that the notion of "precision damage" might be in the same category as "iterative attack,"—a useful game term that for whatever reason is never defined. And since it's not defined, you see the word precision pop up as descriptive text.
Precision damage is, basically, extra damage caused by placing a blow in a precise spot where the damage is more damaging than a simple blow. That's basically the same thing that's going on with a sneak attack or a duelist's precise strike, and it's also what's going on with a critical hit.
Weapon Specialization doesn't care about precision; neither do things like Power Attack or even a ranger's favored enemy ability, since these abilities simply increase the damage done by something EVERY TIME you hit. There's no flavor text associated with these attacks that specifically say you're specifically trying to stab someone in a heart. I suppose you could make a case, theme-wise, that the favored enemy damage should count, but in the rules as written it does not.
So basically—as far as I read it, precision damage is a handy way of summarizing "extra damage from critical hits, extra damage from sneak attacks, and extra damage from a duelist's precise strike ability."
Vital Strike's problem isn't really the mention of precision damage, but it's over-explanation of what it does. All it does is let you roll the actual dice you roll for the weapon's value twice. Other dice or modifiers you might add to that base weapon damage is not increased.
In the end, since "precision" is not a specific quantified rules element, whenever it appears you shouldn't attach rules assumptions to it. It's just a word; we could have used any other word in its place that's a synonym, like "preciseness" or "accuracy."
The problem with the double crossbow and Vital Strike doesn't seem to so much come from 'is it or isn't it precision damage', but whether the ability to fire an extra bolt at the same time is a 'weapon ability' (disallowed in the included multiplied damage by Vital Strike, rather than disallowed because of the double crossbow's restrictions) or not. The listed damage for a double crossbow is just 1d8, not 2d8, which (combined with James's explaination of Vital Strike) implies that the extra bolt is a 'weapon ability' (albeit a mundane rather than a magical one), which would mean using a double crossbow with Vital Strike inflicts a mere 1d8(base) + 1d8(Vital Strike) + 1d8(second bolt) = 3d8 damage.
On reloading, it appears that with Crossbow Mastery you can reload any crossbow as a Free action but that as a specific exception you can reload two bolts in a double crossbow only as a Move action. This suggests that you could fire two (ready loaded) bolts as your first attack, then load and fire single bolts up to your full iterative attacks, but not load and fire two bolts for any of those extra attacks. Illogical? Sure... but the concept of reloading a crossbow as a free action jumped the shark and nuked the fridge anyway, and it seems this is what the RAW would let you get away with.
With the hefty -4 to attack for even the most proficient user the double crossbow still seems somewhat pointless. I guess if you were planing on using Vital Strike every round anyway then you're trading 4 attack bonus for an extra 1d8 damage (average 4.5), but with stuff like Deadly Aim giving a base -1/+2 attack/damage tradeoff this doesn't seem like a particularly good deal.
I guess the idea is that it's similar to firing two light crossbows at the same time which, with Two Weapon Fighting, would also be -4 to attack (two light weapons with a built-in -2 extra). Of course two light crossbows could each (potentially) benefit from critical hits, sneak attacks, and precision damage, whereas the double crossbow specifically can't. On the other hand, a two-crossbow attack can't use Vital Strike at all, whereas a double crossbow can. Hmmm... I'm still not convinced it's a good choice for anyone.
Let's see, comparing the double crossbow with two light crossbows...
With a single attack roll the double crossbow benefits more from True Strike.
It would seem, at first glance, to benefit more from any magical effect cast on a weapon (as you only have to cast it once, instead of on two crossbows), and seems a cheaper option to enchant (being one thing not two)... but if the extra bolt is always just +1d8 damage, then how true is that? With any effect based on upping the attack roll it does well (magical plus to attack), but any effect based on damage (magical plus to damage) it suffers. It'll always be cheaper than enchanting two weapons though...
I can see it as one of the few 'logical' ways to stack the magical elemental damage bonuses on a weapon - say flaming on one bolt and frost on the other (the other obvious one being a multi-headed flail with flaming, frost, and shocking each on different spiked balls) - although RAW you can stack 'em anyway, even if it is cheesy as old stilton...
You can fire as an attack action, and reload as a move action, compared with the Two Weapon Fighting light crossbows firing as a full-attack action and reloading through a 'putting 'em down and picking 'em up' dance routine...
Hmmmm again... I guess I can see some benefits, but I'm far from convinced that it's actually useful for anything more than interestingly flavoured fluff...
In fact I feel it as a very good and diverse option, a good exotic weapon and a blessing for crossbow lovers.
