Crossbows Experts (Or, the Quest for Daryl Dixon)


Homebrew and House Rules

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread is a spin off of some of the discussion of crossbows in the absurd rules thread.

The problem: A crossbow-focused martial character like the iconic Harsk has to pay many feats to have the same rate-of-fire as a bow user, and then is behind on damage due to the lack of strength bonuses on bows. Generally speaking, even a crossbow-focused character would do better to just pick up a bow, even with their feats sunk into other weapons.

Some constraints: Bows are martial weapons - They should be better than crossbows. Out goal here shouldn't be to just make crossbows the same as bows but with a 19-20 instead of x3 crit range. We just want the difference to be more like the gap between a mace and a sword.

My proposed answer is twofold:

1) Give a reason to use crossbows
A fighter who decides to focus on a weaker weapon than the longsword usually has a reason: Daggers to be thrown. Rapiers for Weapon Finesse. Scimitars for crit range. Light weapons for TWF.

So we want something a crossbow-wielder can do that a bowman can't.

I propose limiting Snap Shot and related feats to having a loaded crossbow (or firearm, if you're in such a game) in hand. This is a way to recognize that pulling a trigger is faster than pulling and releasing a bow.

That becomes a unique trick that only crossbowmen can pull off, and it is the kind of thing someone might build a character around.

2) Let crossbow users keep up in damage
The simplest and most straightforward way of doing this would be to give crossbows a strength bonus like composite longbows. I have a grander idea.
We get rid of the idea of light/heavy crossbows and instead assign each crossbow a strength rating, and require longer actions to load if you aren't strong enough to pull it. But this doesn't directly apply to damage. Instead, we increase a die size for each strength bonus. A +0 crossbow is a light crossbow: a Str 10 person can load it as a move action and it does 1d8 damage. A Str 9 lower person loads it as a full-round action, because they can't pull it with just their hands (same as they'd take an attack penalty using a composite longbow with too high a Str rating.)
This means your Str 8 wizard will take longer to load. That's fine, since he doesn't normally rely on weapons anyway, and a Str 8 weakling should have a harder time pulling a crossbow. Or he can buy a -1 Str crossbow that deals 1d6 damage.
A +1 Str crossbow is a heavy crossbow: 1d10 damage, but your average joe takes a full-round action to load it. Someone with an above-average strength, though, loads it as easily as the +0 crossbow. And the average damage is the same as a +1 Str Composite Longbow.
A +2 Str crossbow does 1d12.
And so on, though I don't know what dice to sub for 1d14, 1d16, and 1d18.

So why the work to sub dice instead of just flat bonuses? Well, it's kind of fun because it approximates the light/heavy weapons already in the game. But also because of
2a) Make reloading less of a hardship
Someone said that Rapid Reload was sort of a step in the wrong direction: it makes crossbows more like bows instead of letting them excel at being their own thing. They'd rather do things like be a sniper and get maximum effect from single shots. Shoot out kneecaps and that kind of thing.
The trouble is trick shots are the kind of things bows should be able to do too. But increasing the die size makes crossbows synergize better with Vital Strike, which means the 'Shoot and reload' paradigm can be as effective as full-attacking with a bow.

Sovereign Court

Right now, crossbows for wizards are exactly where they should be. For people who only understand simple weapons the rules are fine.

It breaks down for characters that can also use martial weapons. They're moving to bows en-masse. I think therein lies the seed of a solution.

We have a precedent with (among others) the Bastard Sword:

PRD wrote:
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. You can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.

Here's an interesting rule trick: anyone can use the crossbow as a simple weapon. But if you can use it as a martial weapon, you should gain some additional options. Just like an exotic-trained wielder of the bastard sword has more options than the merely martial-trained wielder.

The nice thing about this is that it allows us to shorten the feat chains surrounding shortbows because someone has already "paid" for martial weapon proficiency.

===

Incidentally, the same thing can be homebrewed for the "war sling", which is a sling used with martial weapon proficiency.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Ascalaphus wrote:

Right now, crossbows for wizards are exactly where they should be. For people who only understand simple weapons the rules are fine.

It breaks down for characters that can also use martial weapons. They're moving to bows en-masse. I think therein lies the seed of a solution.

We have a precedent with (among others) the Bastard Sword:

PRD wrote:
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. You can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.

Here's an interesting rule trick: anyone can use the crossbow as a simple weapon. But if you can use it as a martial weapon, you should gain some additional options. Just like an exotic-trained wielder of the bastard sword has more options than the merely martial-trained wielder.

The nice thing about this is that it allows us to shorten the feat chains surrounding shortbows because someone has already "paid" for martial weapon proficiency.

===

Incidentally, the same thing can be homebrewed for the "war sling", which is a sling used with martial weapon proficiency.

One could argue that 'Martial Weapon Proficiency(Crossbow)' in that vein already exists, called Rapid Reload.

Sovereign Court

Yeah. And now just give it for free to anyone with complete martial weapon proficiency?

Eh. I'd rather give crossbows something different than normal bows, rather than trying to get rid of the reload times altogether. I'm fine with crossbows having some reload issues if the bang you get for that buck is worth it. I'm not sure what that bang should be though.

Liberty's Edge

My Crossbow House rules:

1. The Heavy Crossbow requires a Standard Action to reload if used as a Simple Weapon, but may also be used as a Martial Weapon requiring only a Move Action to reload.

2. The Crossbow Mastery Feat is changed as follows: As being able to reload any Crossbow as a Free Action is now available with Rapid Reload alone, this Feat also allows the wielder of a crossbow to double his crossbow’s damage dice (so a Heavy Crossbow does 2d10 damage), this multiplier, unlike most others, is multiplied by other multipliers like Vital Strike (so a character with Vital Strike and a +6 BAB does 4d10 with his crossbow when using both Feats).

3. This isn't just for crossbows, but relevant. The Vital Strike Feat is changed as follows: It automatically improves to x3 at +11 BAB, and x4 at +16 BAB. None of the rest of its Feat Chain exist.

Sadly, nobody has really wanted to play a crossbowman in my games so these remain untested. Maybe they aren't enough, but hey, they're something.

I've also made slings viable by adding a Feat that lets them sub in Dex for Str for damage...but I think that's overkill on a crossbow given the higher damage die.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Ascalaphus wrote:
I'm not sure what that bang should be though.

What do you think of exclusive access to Snap Shot and loads of damage with Vital Strike?

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

How about allowing combining reloading a crossbow with a regular move? Similar to the rules that let you draw a weapon while moving, even though it's normally a move action?

That should allow crossbows to scoot-and-shoot (possibly with Vital Strike, for the feat investment), compared to their bow-using peers who stand-and-deliver-full-attacks.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

I like the idea of scaling the damage dice of the crossbow but requiring increasing Str ratings to fire it properly. I found that a lot of times I was using the mechanics of the Double Crossbow or Minotaur Double Crossbow to do things I wanted the crossbow to just be able to do.

Maybe go with that idea of removing the light/heavy designations and instead use the monk's damage progression scale, starting at 1d6 and then stepping up a category for each point of Strength Rating applied to the Crossobw? It'd make your Greater Vital Strikes for 8d10 (or 16d8 if you had a way to pop the weapon's size category up a notch with an effect like Gravity Bow) fairly impressive, but still not really better than a bow. And if you decided to just go the multiple attacks route and burn feats on Rapid Reload and Crossbow Mastery, you'd be competitive with a bow, but not really better, maintaining the mace/longsword dynamic in a fun and interesting way.

Adding the ability to reload a crossbow as part of a regular move action is also very interesting.

Sovereign Court

I'd rather not take snap shot away from bows. I don't really see any reason why it wouldn't be possible with a drawn bow either.

I like the idea of reloading as you move. That's actually pretty trivial to implement - start by saying that reloading the light crossbow is like drawing a weapon; it can be done for free as part of a move at BAB +1.

We should be brewing more mobile mundane fighting styles anyway. Might as well make this one of them.

So let's focus this whole style on making one standard action shot count for a lot, and don't tempt people with full attack shooting shenanigans.

Also, let's roll the enhancer-feats into one. No separate Rapid Reload for every crossbow type. If you're a crossbow expert you're an expert in all of them.

I'd say that Rapid Crossbow Reload should make reloading a light crossbow into a Swift/Move (user's choice) and a heavy crossbow into a Move action. Combined with the ruling that you can do the reload as part of a move that lets you be mobile with a heavy crossbow while actually enjoying a lot of flexibility in action economy with the light crossbow.

Vital Strike: should definitely be desirable. Since Strength-crossbows just use your strength to wind the thing, not to fire (sophistry!), it could be argued (and ruled!) that the Strength bonus on a made-for-it crossbow DOES work with Vital Strike. If that's a bit too sophistic, instead create high-strength crossbows that actually increase in dice rather than adding static damagage. So a STR-14 light crossbow might do 1d8->1d10->2d6 damage (two steps dice increase, IIRC) and Vital Strike for a nice 4d6 damage.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

If you don't want to tempt people with Full Attack shenanigans, then just get rid of Rapid Reload. You've got one attack - Make the most of it. Two if you start your turn loaded, then reload as your move action and you want to take a Snap Shot or a hasted attack or something.

Sovereign Court

Well, I would want heavy crossbows to be able to fire faster at some point. Not as fast as a light crossbow, but just a bit faster.

Maybe a LC gets you a shot and a move per round, while a HC gets you one super-heavy shot per round?


Where's Admiral Akbar when you need him...


As the guy who proposed the 'Shoot and Reload' alternate paradigm, complete with trick shots and such, I feel I must clarify something; The issue that you bring up, that it feels like something bow users should be able to do as well, I agree with, but I don't feel like that's too much of an issue. If the 'trick shot' feats aren't limited by weapon, but instead by action cost, I think you'll see the problem fix itself. A bow user could pick up the feats, but if they'd be limited to a standard action, they couldn't make use of their true power, in the ability to fire off a huge number of attacks

Actually, I notice, just now, that Called shot rules are in the game. While they're less likely to just put new feats in to complement a completely optional rules system, I feel like this could at least be a homebrew way to support this. Bow users could still make trick-shots (even without spending feats on them), but Crossbow users could be better at them.

Borrowing from the Bastard Sword Idea, I'd be fine with something that let crossbow users with Martial Proficiency reload for a Free (light) or Swift (Heavy) action whenever they make a single attack as part of a full round action. From there, simply adding some feats with effects like "You don't take the -2 penalty from making a called shot beyond 30 ft" or "You gain a Bonus to called shot attempts when made from stealth" or "If you hold your action to make a called shot to the arm or hand as a response to a target making an attack, the target takes double the called shot penalties on the attack roll".

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8

one thing about bows vs. crossbows is that for crossbows - loading and shooting are two separate actions but only one for bows.

To that end, I am thinking of houseruling that firing a crossbow does NOT provoke an AoO.. your just pulling a trigger after all, there is none of the rigamarole of drawing an arrow, nocking it, and drawing it back before firing.

helpful?

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Mistah J wrote:
helpful?

Slightly: It means the only AoO is on reloading, which gives you a bit more tactical control over when it happens. Applying the same 'trigger pull' logic to firearms also does a lot to invigorate the Sword and Pistol archetype (err, the idea, not a game-mechanic archetype).

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Tholomyes wrote:
If the 'trick shot' feats aren't limited by weapon, but instead by action cost, I think you'll see the problem fix itself. A bow user could pick up the feats, but if they'd be limited to a standard action, they couldn't make use of their true power, in the ability to fire off a huge number of attacks

That's an elegant idea, but the trouble with 'bow users won't spend the action' still means bows are better at it - It costs them comparatively more do it, but a character with those feats is still going to be more effective using a bow than a crossbow.

If they are things that can be used together with Vital Strike, though, then the potentially larger die of a crossbow starts getting you somewhere. Can you do a vital strike called shot?


Ross Byers wrote:
If they are things that can be used together with Vital Strike, though, then the potentially larger die of a crossbow starts getting you somewhere. Can you do a vital strike called shot?
The rules aren't particularly clear. With improved Called shot, You can replace an attack from a Full-round action or Standard action that grants multiple attacks with a called shot, but it's a bit awkwardly written, leading myself and others to believe that it was possibly meant to allow it. The two semi official things I've found on it are the freelancer who helped design the mecahnics, who said:
Russ Taylor wrote:
I'd certainly support using vital strike with a standard action called shot. :)
and James Jacobs, who said
James Jacobs wrote:
Try it out in your game, and if it's too over the top, make it so they don't work together. That's what I'd do.

so I'd err on the side of them working together.


Crossbows pack a lot of punch. At least that's the accepted trope about them.

In D&D, "punch" is usually represented by a higher crit multiplier. Interestingly, the crossbow has a higher threat range but a lower critical than the bow. I've seen people upping the crossbow's crit from 19-20/x2 to 20/x4 to give them more oomph. However, that's not what I'm sugggesting here.

Crossbows are also unique weapons insofar as, unlike all other weapons (except perhaps firearms, which have their own quirky rules), the crossbow's "punch power" is independent from the user's STR. As manually triggered, portable and resetable war machines, crossbows could have a STR bonus of their own. After all, the basic arrow trap has a STR of 12-13 (deals 1d8+1 points of damage), and crossbows are not far from "movable arrow traps" in design.

I could see a smaller base die (shorter bow, smaller die; that's always been the logic of D&D) but with a high-ish inherent STR rating.

I don't have a lot of experience with Snap Shot, but exclusivity for crossbows looks good on paper. Not sure about about implications for bow-users vs melee fighters etc however.


1) Restricting snap shot; I don't particularly like this. I feel it unnecessarily nerfs other weak ranged options too; slings and thrown weapons.

2) Strength rating. Yes, YES! This is a great idea. I'd propose setting the strength bonus in intervals of two, each interval increasing base damage by 1d4, and making the base damage 2d4. So you have the standard crossbow for 2d4, Reinforced (+2) Crossbow for 3d4, Reinforced (+4) Crossbow for 4d4 and so on.
The benefit of his is that it increases in a simple manner, rather than by increased dice size (what happens after 1d12? 2d8 would be too strong, 2d6 would be too weak). For small characters, it'd be d3's, for large characters d6's.
The reloading action should be a move action plus another move action per strength modifier you lack, so if you have 12 strength it takes two move actions (roughly similar to a full-round action) to reload a 3d4 crossbow.

This damage progression also makes them in line with the hand crossbow, and it gives a slight damage benefit to using a crossbow rather than a bow even for strong characters with no feats (a 6th level 18str fighter looking for a backup weapon can choose between +6/+1 (1d8+4) and +6 (4d4)).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Having crossbows deal more damage is a great idea. In my opinion, Crossbows should have a very slow rate of fire and a very high damage.

Allowing them to be used with Vital Strike is very cool.


Well, maybe making firing a Crossbow a Free action once a round could work if you're trying to complete the Quest for Darryl.

Shoot a bolt, smash heads with the rest of your attacks. The crossbow is now a melee weapon with the added ability to fire at range for free. =)


An item or modification called Reinforced Stock, akin to Bayonettes for guns, could be created to treat a crossbow as a club or mace in melee.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A bigger problem is that the crossbow's simplicity of use was one of its big advantages. It wasn't simple because it sucked. It was simple because the improved method of firing off the bolt as opposed to curving an arrow around a bow meant you were going into sharpshooting lessons when the archer was still learning to put a volley in "roughly the right tree most of the time". Doesn't help that even the average wizard could just use a trait/talent/racial to just use the bloody bow too anyways. It takes actively choosing to never be good at any kind of combat whatsoever for the bow not to be better by level 2, AND dumping your strength into deep enough single digit integers that later magical equipment won't turn a bow into a better option later either.

Sure, crossbows fire slowly. They're also supposed to laugh through armor and punch deeply into cinderblocks. A truly realistic crossbow (because what's more realistic than dragons, lightsaber-spewing spider mechs and wizards rewriting reality anytime they feel like jerking it) would be ignoring natural/armor AC in the first increments and dumping about thrice as many dice of base damage on the bugger you just shot.

A crossbow realistic within the 'realism' of the setting of Golarion? The term we're looking for is "mass driver".

Sovereign Court

Okay, so summarizing some of the ideas suggested so far:

1) There is no more "light" or "heavy" crossbows; what you might think of as a heavy crossbow is just one that's got a high STR rating. This gets us away from needlessly specialized feats that require specializing in different crossbows. (The hand crossbow remains a separate special pocket-sized weapon that's used for delivering poison, not brute damage. Not relevant here.)

2) Reloading a crossbow is a Move action that provokes. If you have BAB +1 you may load as part of a move (just like drawing weapons). If you have Martial Weapon Proficiency (Crossbow) you may also load as a Swift action. Note that this does pretty much confines you to one shot per turn, with a possible one Snap Shot as AoO if you used both reload options.

3) Crossbows are fired with Standard Attack Actions (allowing Vital Strike) and the occasional Snap Shot.

4) Feats: Snap Shot doesn't require Rapid Shot to learn, but it can only be applied to crossbows (not bows) until you learn Rapid Shot. Yes, this actually accelerates this feat chain a bit. Focused Shot now uses the regular Attack Action instead of its own weird standard action attack; now it works with Vital Strike. If you have Shot on the Run/Parting Shot, you may also reload as part of the movement used in those feats.

5) Damage: a crossbow does 2d4 damage (1d6 if small) with no Strength requirement. You may make it Reinforced, increasing the Strength required to use it. The first reinforcement (R1) requires a Strength modifier of +1 to use correctly. R2 requires +2, and so on. A crossbow with R5 must be Large. A crossbow with R9 must be Huge. (At some point these things become ballistas, after all.)

For each insufficient modifier to your Strength, the number of actions required to load the crossbow increases by 1. If you're under-strength, you cannot use Swift actions to load; they must all be Move actions.

Reinforced crossbows are also heavier. You take the difference between the crossbow's strength and yours as a penalty to hit (if you're too weak) because it's hard to properly hold and aim the crossbow, unless you can rest the crossbow on something (a parapet, or maybe you're prone).

The benefit of reinforcement is additional weapon damage dice: +1d4 per reinforcement level. So a R3 crossbow (requiring Strength 16 to load properly) does 5d4 damage (1d6+3d4 if small). This is weapon damage and therefore subject to the bonus from Vital Strike.

===

I like the general idea, but there are some things I'm not happy about yet:

- That is a LOT of damage at level 1. If a wizard starts combat with a heavily reinforced crossbow loaded...

- Size categories and reinforcement are awkward. Particularly, what to do with small and smaller creatures.

- Not sure how to deal with provoking while reloading.

What I do like:

- Much more freedom to move about. If you don't have Improved Precise Shot yet, you'll be motivated to circle around, to try to get at the enemy from an angle where he doesn't have cover.

What else:

- We should definitely have bayonets and reinforced frames (using it as a club). I would very much like a cross-bayonet!

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

1d4s are too big: It makes reinforced crossbows too obvious an alternative to bows with strenth ratings. Increasing a die step is better, it's closer to the +1 damage a bow would get.
(1d6->1d8->1d10->1d12 are each one average damage apart.)

As I said, though, I don't know what would fill in for 1d14 for a +3 strength bow. (Or a halfling-sized +4 str bow)

Sovereign Court

It's the Small Reinforced bows that vex me most. But I do think we're on the right track here. We're going to make the crossbow the shotgun to the longbow's SMG.

===

Side note. A friend told me tonight that historically, crossbowmen had civilian sidekicks that wound up their crossbows, so they could rotate through several bows at a time to keep up rate of fire.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Ascalaphus wrote:


Here's an interesting rule trick: anyone can use the crossbow as a simple weapon. But if you can use it as a martial weapon, you should gain some additional options. Just like an exotic-trained wielder of the bastard sword has more options than the merely martial-trained wielder.

*snip* This exactly the sort of thing I was thinking about lately. Currently in Pathfinder there's not really a weapon skill floor/ceiling thing going on, besides a few special cases like the Bastard Sword. I'd be all for having different effectiveness with the same weapons depending on how proficient you are.


Ascalaphus wrote:

It's the Small Reinforced bows that vex me most. But I do think we're on the right track here. We're going to make the crossbow the shotgun to the longbow's SMG.

===

Side note. A friend told me tonight that historically, crossbowmen had civilian sidekicks that wound up their crossbows, so they could rotate through several bows at a time to keep up rate of fire.

Except the rules would probably require a move action to take a crossbow from someone.


colemcm wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

It's the Small Reinforced bows that vex me most. But I do think we're on the right track here. We're going to make the crossbow the shotgun to the longbow's SMG.

===

Side note. A friend told me tonight that historically, crossbowmen had civilian sidekicks that wound up their crossbows, so they could rotate through several bows at a time to keep up rate of fire.

Except the rules would probably require a move action to take a crossbow from someone.

If the bow is so heavy it takes three rounds to windlass it to cocked position, I can hide behind an arrow slit with three people winding.

Fire bow A, drop bow A, pick up Bow B. Helper A picks up Bow A, starts to wind it...

I suppose they could also shoot, if the bows were lighter, but... we only have one arrow slit? :)


So the way to make crossbow's not suck is to have a posse? I guess that's one way of doing it. But then they still suck, because you're limited to a standard action. Iterative attacks are out.


Ross Byers wrote:

1d4s are too big: It makes reinforced crossbows too obvious an alternative to bows with strenth ratings. Increasing a die step is better, it's closer to the +1 damage a bow would get.

(1d6->1d8->1d10->1d12 are each one average damage apart.)

As I said, though, I don't know what would fill in for 1d14 for a +3 strength bow. (Or a halfling-sized +4 str bow)

My suggestion was different from Ascaphalus in that I proposed +1d4 per +2 Str requirement, rather than one. That increases damage with 1.25 per str, compared to the 1 per str of bows, which I think is fair, since it isn't as static and reliable (for a str 22 char, optimal xbow/bow would deal 5-20/7-14 damage respectively).

Increased damage dice is as you note problematic in that it tops out at +3, which is very low. In that case I'd prefer just a flat bonus.

Ascaphalus wrote:


- That is a LOT of damage at level 1. If a wizard starts combat with a heavily reinforced crossbow loaded...

If you keep my suggested damage increase, it's not +2.5 per str but +1.25 per str which makes it far less extreme.

And to some degree, I think weight and cost solves that isssue. Make the cost match that of mighty bows; +200 per +1d4 damage. I'm not sure I'm for to-hit penalties with too heavy crossbows (i think full penalty is overkill and partial penalty is too complex), but if a crossbow increased 4lb in weight per increase (the difference between a light and heavy in the book, and I assume the more reinforced the more metal parts too) it'd quite easily put them into encumbrance. It's rare that I see 1st level wizards with heavy crossbows even now, partially because of the weight; they tend to dump Str and like their mobility, so putting 250 gp and eating 12 of your 23 encumbrance limit is a lot, even for a 4d4 weapon (which is only usable once per combat, possibly with a penalty to hit and at bad BAB and does less average damage than the ranger or fighter, much less so than the barbarian).

I still want to keep the option of oversized crossbows available for certain situations; just thought up a cool concept of a dwarven assassin of around 6th level that has about 14 strength, and keeps three crossbows; a hand crossbow for delivering poison, a reinforced +1d4 crossbow for when regular combat is expected (if hired to non-assassination jobs) and a beast of a crossbow that is reinforced +4d4 for acting as a sniper. Sure, it takes seven move actions to reload, but when you deal 12d4 on your vital strike, you might only need one shot...


colemcm wrote:
So the way to make crossbow's not suck is to have a posse? I guess that's one way of doing it. But then they still suck, because you're limited to a standard action. Iterative attacks are out.

That was an example of using a crossbow too heavy for you. Like, having a Str 11 random 1st level warrior with three 4d4 (Str 18) crossbows, and two commoners ready to reload it (each taking 5 move actions, or three rounds)


colemcm wrote:
So the way to make crossbow's not suck is to have a posse? I guess that's one way of doing it. But then they still suck, because you're limited to a standard action. Iterative attacks are out.

As this are houserule I suppose a point could be to have a crossbow without iteratives that do not sucks

Sovereign Court

@Ilja: your dice progressions seems better than mine yeah.

Actually, I find I don't mind the wizard having one really heavy shot in the first round of combat. It's kind of like a spell you can re-prepare in between fights. It might actually give wizards a bit more endurance for extended dungeon crawls at level 1. And I also rather like the mental image of a wizard furiously rewinding a crossbow for two rounds while the zombies shuffle closer.

As for the posse: doesn't strike me as abusive. It might make henchmen and suchlike useful, and give commoner armies a fighting chance. Although you might want good rules for just how much an improved familiar can do for you. (Hmm. Small Earth Elemental familiar has 16 Str; he can rewind crossbows pretty fast.)

Maybe one way to handle oversized crossbows is to require them to be supported somehow - by prone shooting, or some tripod construction maybe. Which brings us to Warhammer style bolt throwers and eventually ballistas.

@Ilja: so how would you want to handle crossbows for Small creatures?

Also, how about crossbows for large creatures? It'd be weird to assume Str 10 as a baseline for giants.

Sovereign Court

I've made a new thread, and there I've posted my attempt at a writeup.


Ross Byers wrote:
This is a way to recognize that pulling a trigger is faster than pulling and releasing a bow.

You sure about that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zGnxeSbb3g

Bows can be VERY quick. (IRL). However, crossbows can strike with more force than a shortbow (already reflected by the rules in the damage amounts) and easier to shoot accurately than bows (reflected by their being simple weapons instead of martial ones).

But they are generally MUCH slower. A heavy crossbow would often have a turn-handle to winch the string back to the trigger, instead of having to pull it. I think reloading being a full-round activity is, at best, already generous. The difference between light crossbows (hand-drawn) and heavy crossbows (winch drawn) is a useful one.

(I like weapons to reflect the reality of usage, rather than be warped to satisfy the idea of game balance).

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8

sgriobhadair wrote:
Ross Byers wrote:
This is a way to recognize that pulling a trigger is faster than pulling and releasing a bow.

You sure about that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zGnxeSbb3g

Bows can be VERY quick. (IRL). However, crossbows can strike with more force than a shortbow (already reflected by the rules in the damage amounts) and easier to shoot accurately than bows (reflected by their being simple weapons instead of martial ones).

But they are generally MUCH slower. A heavy crossbow would often have a turn-handle to winch the string back to the trigger, instead of having to pull it. I think reloading being a full-round activity is, at best, already generous. The difference between light crossbows (hand-drawn) and heavy crossbows (winch drawn) is a useful one.

(I like weapons to reflect the reality of usage, rather than be warped to satisfy the idea of game balance).

yes.. reloading a crossbow can be a long drawn out process with winches and whatnot.. sure.

but firing a crossbow is just a slight squeeze of the trigger with your finger.

which is what you quoted from Ross Byers
..


Mistah J wrote:


yes.. reloading a crossbow can be a long drawn out process with winches and whatnot.. sure.

but firing a crossbow is just a slight squeeze of the trigger with your finger.

which is what you quoted from Ross Byers
..

My first point (via the video) was that drawing and releasing a bow can be almost as quick as squeezing a trigger.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

'Almost' can mean a lot when a guy is rushing you with a sword.

Also, pulling a trigger requires less physical effort, regardless of speed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To gives some love to the crossbow, I created a gunslinger archetype using crossbows (Dext to damage as with Gun Training) and, for the casual fighter, I added a special propriety to crossbows called «steady».

Steady weapons are easier to aim with and benefit more from the feat Deadly Aim (-1 attack, +3 damage). This specificity makes the crossbow a good ranged weapon for characters with low strength bonus, something that can be more efficient than a bow for non-ranged character that don't invest in the ranged feat tree. Flat strength bonus to crossbows mean that they are better weapon than bow at low level, when composite bow are too expensive.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
sgriobhadair wrote:
Mistah J wrote:


yes.. reloading a crossbow can be a long drawn out process with winches and whatnot.. sure.

but firing a crossbow is just a slight squeeze of the trigger with your finger.

which is what you quoted from Ross Byers
..

My first point (via the video) was that drawing and releasing a bow can be almost as quick as squeezing a trigger.

A guy who can pull and release an arrow in that amount of time can much faster twitch his finger slightly backwards.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've been thinking about this on and off for a while. Bows are sort of the TWF option of the ranged world. They attack lots and get value from flat damage adds.

What if we made the crossbow the two-handed weapon of the ranged world? So forget about multiple attacks. A crossbow expert gets 1.5x deadly-aim bonus, and 1.5x stat modifier to damage rolls. Rapid-reload does not affect crossbows. Finally, have the multiplier scale with your bab, so it replaces iterative attacks.

Since strength does not make sense for crossbow damage use wisdom bonus for the bonus damage, to represent greater aim.

Since you are not making iterative attacks, you can't fairly have the same maximum damage as the bowman, so I am thinking that high-level crossbow feats should let you apply status effects of some kind.

I would need to run the numbers os it works out corretly, but this sort of what I am thinking of:

[Deadly aim]
Change to give +3 damage for each -1 taken when using crossbows.

[Crossbow Savant]
Requires: Point Blank Shot, Martial Weapon Proficiency (crossbow)
When making a single crossbow attack as a standard action, full round action, or AoO you add 1.5 your wisdom bonus to your damage roll. At each 5 points of BaB beyond 1, the bonus damage from this feat increases by 0.5.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Crossbows Experts (Or, the Quest for Daryl Dixon) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules