Exactly What it Says on the Tin. And I know you've probably read a ton of threads like this, but hear me out.
1. Crossbows don't provoke when firing. Simple as that.
Saves a feat and allows non-fighters to get ranged attacks in melee.
2. Crossbows do 1d10/1d12 damage. For light/heavy, respectively.
3. Crossbows get -3 as their range penalty. Simple physics. Most bows were shot in an arc, while crossbow bolts are designed to have a straighter trajectory. That is also why crossbows are simple weapons.
4. Lying prone while firing a crossbow grants +2 to attack, and if sniping with Stealth, reduces the penalty by -10.
There. The crossbow isn't entirely superior to the bow. It is a tool, to be used in certain situations.
For the rabble, the crossbow is fine. People want it to rival the bow when specialized when they complain about it, at least that's my experience.
1: Not sure if this is a significant change or not, if it's just for firing and not firing and reloading. Either way you'd probably need to give the same thing to firearms by the sae logic.
2: Okay. I'd make Mighty Crossbows that allow you to apply Str just as a bow does, with a winch that takes more power to properly wind. Power in this game comes from static modifiers far more than it does from damage die.
3: Weird change to how increments work. Consider throwing daggers. I think it would just make sense to reduce the range increment, not increase the penalty.
4: Probably the most significant change, but it makes more difference for NPCs than PCs. Sniper tactics (in a game in which you might have to plug someone at least 4 times) are about patience, and all the other party members aren't snipers, they'll either be twiddling their thumbs or just charge in. This will probably be used more by DMs that make crossbow sniper ambushes.
My simple fixes would be:
Like the bastard sword which can be used 2handed as a martial weapon, or 1handed as an exotic, the crossbow can be used normally as a simple weapon, but the reload time is reduced by one step if you are martially proficient. This stacks with Rapid Reload (or hell just give it free action reloads already).
One of these two: Either you can make Mighty crossbows as mentioned above to add strength, or you can reload the crossbow without a free hand (just like in videogames!), thus giving the crossbow a solid niche as the TWF ranged weapon.
1: is not unreasonable.
2: Just reskin it to have mighty crossbows. After all, the big difference between light and heavy is the loading time, which is actually the time taken to crank the string back. And a stronger character can pull a heavier load back in the same time, ergo it's a mighty bow. IMC I redefined them as stirrup bows and winch bows, with Str ratings for different damage, but mighty is simpler and not far wrong.
3: don't understand the mechanic and don't agree with the rationale either. The physics for bolts and arrows is essentially the same.
4: prone bonus is OK, but the -10 for stealth is excessive. These things are still big, bulky and not exactly silent or precision-engineered. Maybe -8 for a 1Hxbow and -4 for a Light.
And firearms should be treated much the same for #1 and #4a.
I would add a lot of mechanical tricks to the crossbow, like extra bows, using a windlass, and so on. Ultimately, though, the crossbow was a weapon for the masses. It wasn't more effective than the longbow, far from it. It had, historically, less range and a lower rate of shot. It did slightly more damage, though, and could be used by just about anyone.
It may not be 'fair' for a crossbow to not be as good as a longbow, but that's like complaining that a shortsword doesn't do the same damage as a greatsword. They are different weapons, with different properties, and work in different ways. Fair doesn't come into it. Using Atarlost's logic, shortwords should do 3d6 damage to make up for their lack of strength-and-a-half damage bonus...
I like #1.
So... Still completely inferior to composite longbows?
Eh... I will not enter another crossbow discussion, it hasn't been even a week since the last one.
I just don't see the point of making a crappy option slightly less crappy.
I like the idea of mighty crossbows requiring an extra move action per + you lack.
I like the not provoking AoO idea; for consistency with a number of third party products, you might specify this applies to crossbows fired one-handed.
Rather than bump the damage die, I'd be more inclined to give crossbows a minor advantage with regard to Vital Strike, maybe a half-strength Devasting Strike, so +1 per die to damage when using VS or its improvements.
Crossbows already have a nice edge when prone shooting; it's like +4 AC versus longbows, if you get into a shooting match.
|
Hey West, here is my take on your suggestions.
1. Crossbows don't provoke when firing. Simple as that.
Keep in mind that if you allow this, then n argument could be made that a bowman with a drawn bow should also not provoke.
I actually disagree with this. Both the bowman and crossbowman must take a moment to line up their shot. This is what I think provokes.
2. Crossbows do 1d10/1d12 damage. For light/heavy, respectively.
You could do that. In my game, I gave all crossbows a +1 To Hit and +2 To Damage for the first range increment.
3. Crossbows get -3 as their range penalty. Simple physics. Most bows were shot in an arc, while crossbow bolts are designed to have a straighter trajectory. That is also why crossbows are simple weapons.
A trained crossbowman should be able to handle the arc of a crossbow with as much accuracy as a bowman is able to handle the arc of a bow. I don't see this as necessary for balance.
4. Lying prone while firing a crossbow grants +2 to attack, and if sniping with Stealth, reduces the penalty by -10.
I wouldn't add these. The crossbow already has the benefit of being usable while prone and the character also has a +4 AC vs missiles.
5. I don't see any reason why strength crossbows could not be a thing, but I would also want to limit it when comparing it with a bow; for instance, saying that a character would need a high strength to reload one: 14 +2 per strength damage bonus.
In my game, a player can take an extra round to gain a +2 on his first attack roll with any missile weapon.
Bows have a reputation for being better because of the people who were trained to use them. English longbowmen were trained from an early age. Mongol shortbowman were skilled with both horse and bow. The crossbow was used because it was easy for an unskilled man to learn and use in a relatively short amount of time. On the other hand, a crossbowman could be trained in a relatively short amount of time in order to be effective.
As far as usable differences between the bow and crossbow, I believe the crossbow had a heaftier punch at close range.
RedDog, here are my counters to your counters.
1. It also takes a knight time to judge his swing. Professional fencers don't swing wildly as fast as possible.
4. I feel that crossbows need a niche to become useful. Not a clear choice over the bow, but as a doable option. Stealth seemed appropriate, since it should be much easier to sniper with a X-bow while prone, then a bow while standing.
Perhaps I should simply state that one should receive a bonus to stealth while being prone, or when most of your body is obstructed. After all, all that is be visible of a prone sniper should be his head.
5. I feel that if Str crossbows existed, it would essentially become a clone of the bow. The only difference is that one needs Rapid Reload/Crossbow Mastery, while the other needs Point-Blank Master.
|
|
RedDog, here are my counters to your counters.
1. It also takes a knight time to judge his swing. Professional fencers don't swing wildly as fast as possible.
As far as weapon fighting, at least an attacker has a weapon to attack AND defend with. I did my share of sparing in my younger years (fencing, kendo, knife fighting, wing chun, and muay thai), and while I do not consider my self an expert in hand to hand combat, I do feel I have a legitimate perspective on the difference between using a missile weapon and a melee weapon.
Take it for what it's worth. I am just pointing out that firing a loaded crossbow and firing a drawn bow are not all that different. If you don't want your house rules to follow common sense logic, that's up to you. Obviously, your goal is to empower the crossbow to bring it into balance with the rules as you view it. I am just offering observations and suggestions on what you are suggesting.
On the other hand, I have not done much bow hunting and have never used a crossbow. While I have some familiarity with medieval bows and crossbows from readings, I could be totally in left field as far as how to re-balance them.
Bows have a reputation for being better because of the people who were trained to use them. English longbowmen were trained from an early age. Mongol shortbowman were skilled with both horse and bow. The crossbow was used because it was easy for an unskilled man to learn and use in a relatively short amount of time. On the other hand, a crossbowman could be trained in a relatively short amount of time in order to be effective.
As far as usable differences between the bow and crossbow, I believe the crossbow had a heaftier punch at close range.
Pretty much. When longbowmen met crossbowmen on the field, the result was always the same.
Crossbows and bows both fire in an arc. Both the bolt and the arrow are equally affected by gravity and both fall to the earth at the same velocity.
If one shoots straighter than the other, it is only perceived that way either because the target is closer, so the bolt doesn't have as much time in flight to fall, or the bolt is traveling to the target faster, covering a greater distance forward while falling.
If you think the second is the case, that the speed of a crossbow bolt is so much more than an arrow, that its trajectory appears straight to the naked eye, than is should be doing much more damage.
Isn't that more of a matter of projectile design? Sure they are equally affected by gravity and they both fall to the earth at the same velocity, if we ignore air resistance.
Arrows tend to be longer, differently fletched and differently balanced. That's going to affect their flight path. Perhaps quarrels are designed for short range punch, not long range flight stability. They may destabilize and tumble easier than arrows.
I have no real evidence for this, just saying there is more to consider than initial angle and velocity.
I have seen comparisons done, and the shorter, heavier bolt from a crossbow does inflict more serious wounds and have better penetrating power (slightly) at close range. However, the design makes them less aerodynamic than an arrow, and they actually had a shorter ranger, not a longer one.
Bottom line in encounters was the rate of fire the bow could turn out.
The way a crossbow releases a bolt imparts a large amount of momentum, but it makes the flight less stable, even before accounting for the less aerodynamic crossbow bolts. Crossbows impart more force over fewer draw inches. At close range, they have good stopping power, even if you lack the skill to impart a good arc. But at longer ranges, the wobble of the bolt and the short, heavy ammunition cause the shot to quickly degrade. Arrows fly, bolts get thrown.
RedDog, here are my counters to your counters.
1. It also takes a knight time to judge his swing. Professional fencers don't swing wildly as fast as possible.
As far as weapon fighting, at least an attacker has a weapon to attack AND defend with. I did my share of sparing in my younger years (fencing, kendo, knife fighting, wing chun, and muay thai), and while I do not consider my self an expert in hand to hand combat, I do feel I have a legitimate perspective on the difference between using a missile weapon and a melee weapon.
Oh, err, I fear I may have gave the wrong impression. I am totally fine with anyone being able to fire a drawn bow without provoking. Getting it drawn, on the other hand...
Maybe have bows draw an arrow as a free action that provokes. Moving with a drawn bow reduces your speed by something.
Maybe it's the fact that when aiming you are focusing your attention on something far away and not close by that allows the AoO? Just a point.
|
Crossbow with a Strength Rating
Cost: 100gp per +1 (just like bows)
Benefit: If you have the appropriate Strength modifier, you may take an extra reload action to wind the crossbow tighter, providing your next shot with a damage bonus equal to it's Strength rating.
Special: A heavy crossbow can provide up to a full Strength modifier bonus to damage, a light crossbow up to half a Strength modifier bonus to damage, a hand crossbow cannot provide a Strength modifier bonus to damage.
|
|
Crossbow with a Strength Rating
Cost: 100gp per +1 (just like bows)
Benefit: If you have the appropriate Strength modifier, you may take an extra reload action to wind a light or heavy crossbow tighter, providing your next shot with a damage bonus equal to it's Strength rating.
Special: This option is not available for a hand crossbow, nor any sort of repeating crossbow.