Well, how many hands are required to wield a Large, or Huge Bow, if you are medium?
by the rules it seems you can wield a diminutive or colossal bow with two hands, and suffer the penalties to fire it for every size category away from your own. Doesn't make much sense, and just thinking of a large size longbow on a medium size creature is pretty crazy to imagine already.
You have light, one handed, and two handed weapons that have rules for using hands on them. You then have ranged weapons that don't have these hand rules, but will tell you at times details on how many hands you need to use the weapon. So ranged weapons by rules as far as I have ever seen don't have any rules making you have to use more or less hands.
What's interesting about these rules is that lets say you have a small glaive, you can wield it like a one handed weapon, but it'll always be a two handed weapon. You'll retain the reach feature, plus by the rules, you'll do x1.5 strength damage even if you swing it with one hand.
You have the rules, then you have people making rulings on what they consider to be common sense.
|
Yes.
I understand those designations.
Also, you wield a small two-handed weapon, as an one-handed weapon. You don't get x1.5 whilst wielding it in one hand.
This is covered in the inappropriately sized weapon rules.
Now, a bow is not a two-handed weapon, but still requires two hands to use.
Changes in relative size, changes the required hands.
So, a Large Longbow, requires one more hand, than a medium Longbow, for a medium PC.
This makes it unwieldable.
What is weird, is that could mean, a small Longbow could require only one hand.
Now, that makes no sense.
Of course, it doesn't work like that. Even small Longbows require two hands.
Why?
Well, just like guns, and crossbows, you will need a hand to reload.
You "reload" a Longbow, by drawing an arrow, setting it in place, and pulling the string to fire it.
The melee weapon I mentioned is still a "two handed weapon" so it would still get the x1.5. A greatsword no matter what size category is and will always be a two handed weapon, but it might be wielded with more or less effort. If you could clarify as to why it wouldn't, I'd be interested.
The rules for not being able to wield the weapon say if it changes from the three listed categories, then you can't wield the weapon. The longbow isn't in any of the categories, and never changes from the categories.
|
|
Okay:
Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
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.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there was an opposing argument, then I don't see it. Long bow isn't listed in a category of light, one handed, or two handed, an by the rules is never subjected to ever going out of the categories to be unable to wield. You just take all the penalties for whatever size bow, and call it a day.
Contributor
|
It's, um, also possible that a d100 table with an extremely limited amount of space (copy-pasted from the very first PFRPG AP issue, no less) didn't have room to clarify all the details of what they intended it to allow. A table like that isn't really the best place for several lines of clarifying text. :)
I'm 99.9% sure it means you can wield Large weapons without either the -2 penalty or the increase in handedness.
Back in 2nd edition, engineering was the answer to your question. I am imagining a Japanese style longbow that had a grip built into a stem attached to the haft of the bow.
I had forgotten that ranged weapons didn't share the handedness categories. Thanks for reminding me!
A bow isn't listed as a two handed weapon. It's a ranged weapon that says you need a minimal of two hands to use.
It says regardless of size, it requires two hands to use. I think everyone here is forgetting how a bow is named. A shortbow is about 3ft in length, for a medium sized person. This is roughly half the height of the average medium creature, a little higher than half, but roughly. A longbow is about 5ft in length for a medium sized creature. This is roughly the height of the character(which by the way, OP, why not just use a flavored Longbow to be a bit larger than the person instead about their size anyway?), of course this is a little smaller than the average medium character, but is still about their height.
What would the height of a Medium Shortbow be compared to the height of a Small creature? It would be about the same size as a Longbow for a Small creature. What would the Medium Longbow be compared to the height of a Large creature? It would also be about the size of a Large Shortbow. Honestly, a little shorter than what their shortbow would be. This being said, I maybe could see the ability to use a Large Shortbow, but it would be treated as a longbow for the sake of using it as a Medium sized creature.
At this point, you are not getting a damage increase, so is there a real reason to doing this? A Large Longbow would be about twice the height of the standard Medium sized creature. It would be somewhere between 10-12ft tall. A medium sized creature could not draw the bow to get the strength needed to deal damage. I do not mean the character would not have the strength, but the strength of the bow comes from drawing the bow back to a certain distance. This distance on a Large Longbow would be longer than the Medium creature is tall. It is impossible unless you have Mr. Fantastic's powers...
The melee weapon I mentioned is still a "two handed weapon" so it would still get the x1.5. A greatsword no matter what size category is and will always be a two handed weapon, but it might be wielded with more or less effort. If you could clarify as to why it wouldn't, I'd be interested.
The rules for not being able to wield the weapon say if it changes from the three listed categories, then you can't wield the weapon. The longbow isn't in any of the categories, and never changes from the categories.
Sorry I missed this. You are just completely wrong on the Two Handed concept. A one-handed sword wielded with two hands gets x1.5 because you are using two hands. Not because the weapon is two handed, but because you are using two hands. The x1.5 has nothing to do with the weapon category, just the fact that you are applying more effort using two hands on a single weapon as opposed to using one. This is just accepted as a general benefit for all melee 2 handed weapons because you are automatically using it in two hands.
If the weapon requires two hands for a large creature to use, there is simply no way you can use it as a medium one. It may be stated only specific for melee weapons, but the logical extension takes to ranged two handed weapons which by their nature are more bulky to wield than one handed melee.
Logic doesn't get you there.
Proof: Large composite shortbow, STR 12.
That item meets none of your concerns, yet still falls into your "logic" trap.
Sorry I missed this. You are just completely wrong on the Two Handed concept. A one-handed sword wielded with two hands gets x1.5 because you are using two hands. Not because the weapon is two handed, but because you are using two hands. The x1.5 has nothing to do with the weapon category, just the fact that you are applying more effort using two hands on a single weapon as opposed to using one. This is just accepted as a general benefit for all melee 2 handed weapons because you are automatically using it in two hands.The melee weapon I mentioned is still a "two handed weapon" so it would still get the x1.5. A greatsword no matter what size category is and will always be a two handed weapon, but it might be wielded with more or less effort. If you could clarify as to why it wouldn't, I'd be interested.
The rules for not being able to wield the weapon say if it changes from the three listed categories, then you can't wield the weapon. The longbow isn't in any of the categories, and never changes from the categories.
Yeah, HF is getting the STR bonus mixed up with power attack which does automatically grant -1/+3 for two-handed weapons just by virtue of their category.
If the weapon requires two hands for a large creature to use, there is simply no way you can use it as a medium one. It may be stated only specific for melee weapons, but the logical extension takes to ranged two handed weapons which by their nature are more bulky to wield than one handed melee.Logic doesn't get you there.
Proof: Large composite shortbow, STR 12.
That item meets none of your concerns, yet still falls into your "logic" trap.
However, a Large Composite Shortbow is essentially a Composite Longbow according to my comparisons in actual sizes of the bows by ratio.
You need two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size.
The "regardless of size," has been ignored here. This weapon has specific language that overrides the general inappropriately sized weapons rules. You can use this weapon in 2 hands no matter how big it is by RAW. That language doesn't say "when using bows smaller than appropriate for you," it says, "regardless of size."
However, a Large Composite Shortbow is essentially a Composite Longbow according to my comparisons in actual sizes of the bows by ratio.If the weapon requires two hands for a large creature to use, there is simply no way you can use it as a medium one. It may be stated only specific for melee weapons, but the logical extension takes to ranged two handed weapons which by their nature are more bulky to wield than one handed melee.Logic doesn't get you there.
Proof: Large composite shortbow, STR 12.
That item meets none of your concerns, yet still falls into your "logic" trap.
Which is why Lazar's statement is a charade.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the game designers never considered this loophole.
Why am I not surprised.
Getting a clear answer to a question like this requires an individual DM to take a stance. There is no "RAW" answer.
I would just go with the ability as stated, and let the PC use large weapons as if he himself were large.
But it is pointless to look for a RAW answer. There is none.
YMMV.
So the game designers never considered this loophole.
Why am I not surprised.
Getting a clear answer to a question like this requires an individual DM to take a stance. There is no "RAW" answer.I would just go with the ability as stated, and let the PC use large weapons as if he himself were large.
But it is pointless to look for a RAW answer. There is none.
YMMV.
That is the issue, the ability never says this. It only says without penalty. Honestly, if Ranged weapons are not considered in to size change factors, then maybe it is just completely excluded. Maybe there is no way to use a ranged weapon outside your size. Of course, as you said, there is no true RAW answer to this and will come to the DM to decide what they want to allow.
That is the issue, the ability never says this. It only says without penalty. Honestly, if Ranged weapons are not considered in to size change factors, then maybe it is just completely excluded. Maybe there is no way to use a ranged weapon outside your size. Of course, as you said, there is no true RAW answer to this and will come to the DM to decide what they want to allow.So the game designers never considered this loophole.
Why am I not surprised.
Getting a clear answer to a question like this requires an individual DM to take a stance. There is no "RAW" answer.I would just go with the ability as stated, and let the PC use large weapons as if he himself were large.
But it is pointless to look for a RAW answer. There is none.
YMMV.
What the ability says doesn't matter. The entry for the bow itself says I can use it in two hands no matter the size. This ability just removes the inappropriate-size penalty.
We have 3 sets of weapon tables, Simple, Martial, and Exotic. Within each set, we have 4 tables: Light, One-Handed, Two-Handed, and Ranged. 12 tables in all. That's pretty cumbersome. Bad game design. The developers surely knew this. So why did they make 12 tables when they could have made fewer tables?
Why do we even have a Ranged weapon table? Why aren't all thrown ranged weapons just on the Light or One-Handed tables? Why aren't all mechanical ranged weapons just on the 2H weapon tables? That would have reduced the number of tables by 25% which is, generally speaking, better game design.
So why didn't they do this?
Because then people would want to apply 1.5x their STR modifier for using bows with two hands. Because then people would want to Power Attack with bows. Because then rules lawyers would argue that you don't have a free hand to draw and nock an arrow while you need both hands on your bow. Etc. I'm sure there are a bunch of situations where something you can do with a 2H greatsword makes no sense with a 2H longbow, or vice-versa.
So they separated them into extra tables as an extra category of weapons, but then they said "These weapons require two hands to use". (Well, most of them - throwing weapons only take one hand).
RAW or not, clearly the intent of saying that bows require 2H was to make them into 2H weapons without actually categorizing them as such.
Which creates problems. You obviously shouldn't be able to apply 1.5x STR with a 2H bow, but you probably should consider handedness when wielding inappropriately sized bows.
There isn't a clear solution in RAW for this.
But if a GM understands the rules, and the intent, and has any inkling of physics and/or mechanics, then the right solution should present itself. Except in Anime games...
Bad game design.
I love it when self-professed game experts trot out these three words to criticize the work of people obviously less qualified than they are.
If your definition of "bad game design" is language that a Munchkin can twist to their will, you might as well toss on the bonfire not only the bulk of Pathfinder, but that of any other rules-intensive game. Ultimately it has been, it always will be, and it should be the GM's job to put the break on shenannigans, not the rules. Unless you want a game as rigid in execution as a video rpg.
For the love of god would you read stuff before you hit reply?
Bad game design.
I love it when self-professed game experts trot out these three words to criticize the work of people obviously less qualified than they are.
If your definition of "bad game design" is language that a Munchkin can twist to their will, you might as well toss on the bonfire not only the bulk of Pathfinder, but that of any other rules-intensive game. Ultimately it has been, it always will be, and it should be the GM's job to put the break on shenannigans, not the rules. Unless you want a game as rigid in execution as a video rpg.
For the love of god would you read stuff before you hit reply?
LOL.
Totally.
@LazarX: I don't twist rules to my will, munchkinly or otherwise. I don't define bad game design as rules that allow that (although ironclad rules that cannot be twisted are, by definition, better rules).
No, my comment about bad game design is based on the principle that players generally don't like table-heavy rules, avoid them if possible, fewer tables equals better games - a widely accepted principle of game design.
That comment has nothing to do with what I want to do with the rules, or with who can or cannot twist them to their will, nor am I proclaiming myself an expert.
I'm not even criticizing the Paizo devs. I noted a deliberate choice they made to wander into an area of bad game design for a good and necessary reason. They knew what they were doing and decided it was the best way to go. I agree (without re-proclaiming myself an expert).
My comment was simply about conforming to industry norms and observing a justified reason not to.
A bow isn't listed as a two handed weapon. It's a ranged weapon that says you need a minimal of two hands to use.It says regardless of size, it requires two hands to use. I think everyone here is forgetting how a bow is named. A shortbow is about 3ft in length, for a medium sized person. This is roughly half the height of the average medium creature, a little higher than half, but roughly. A longbow is about 5ft in length for a medium sized creature. {. . .}
What would the height of a Medium Shortbow be compared to the height of a Small creature? It would be about the same size as a Longbow for a Small creature. What would the Medium Longbow be compared to the height of a Large creature? It would also be about the size of a Large Shortbow. Honestly, a little shorter than what their shortbow would be. This being said, I maybe could see the ability to use a Large Shortbow, but it would be treated as a longbow for the sake of using it as a Medium sized creature.
In 1st Edition AD&D (and presumably 2nd Edition, but I haven't looked for this in there), you actually didn't have official size categories of weapons, although it was obvious from reading Monster Manual entries that such things must exist for creatures smaller than Small or larger than Medium. Instead, Small characters were just restricted to the smaller subset of weapons made for Medium creatures (Short Sword, Shortbow, etc.). This was harsh on Small characters but mechanically, actually made sense. If you were going to extend this to Pathfinder, you would have the Longbow for each size category be a Shortbow for the next greater size category, and the Shortbow for each size category be a Longbow for the next smaller size category. Something similar could be done for melee weapons. However, D&D 3.x (and later Pathfinder) didn't do it this way -- they probably thought it would confuse people, although it makes perfect sense to me.
{. . .} I do not mean the character would not have the strength, but the strength of the bow comes from drawing the bow back to a certain distance. This distance on a Large Longbow would be longer than the Medium creature is tall. It is impossible unless you have Mr. Fantastic's powers...
Mr. Fantastic's(*) powers might not be too unreasonable for some Tieflings to have -- after all, the Aberrant Sorcerer and Bloodrager Bloodlines grant essentially this. Probably should be something that you upgrade with a feat (or at least a trait), though, rather than just an entry in a d100 table of abilities of which most are much less useful.
(*)This kid that I went to elementary and high school with who introduced me to comics always called him "Stretcho", and now I've got that stuck in my head.
And as I noted before, a technological solution (well, partial solution anyway) exists on Earth (the Yumi), but unfortunately neither version of it got into Pathfinder. Maybe if Paizo releases another Dragon Empires sourcebook and/or a full-fledged Dragon Empires AP . . . .
The thing about the Yumi bow, and even Longbows..., is that it is a stationary, be post up in a single position, and fire type of weapon. If anything, bows of such a large stature were designed as basically human turrets. You gained the power and range for lack of mobility. Usually such weapons were used from the parapets of a wall or in a large formation, behind the infantry or cavalry formations. They are completely illogical for close range combat, and it kind of irks me to see the longbow already bastardized in a way that allows a single person to fire off 6 rounds, plus some if you include AoO's, in a 6 second round. For this reason, I hope Pathfinder never bastardizes something as magnificent as a Yumi.
The Yumi is an ingenious weapon that was designed with elegance and death in mind, and I would prefer it does not get ruined by shooting 6 arrows out of it within 6 seconds. The amount of time to shoot such a bow is quite staggering actually. You can fire it semi-quickly, but you have to first draw your arrow(which is pretty long), notch it to the bow and draw the string back(which involves a process of holding the notched arrow above the head and pushing the bow out, then drawing further back with the arrow, this allows the user to use their maximum arm span for the draw, which takes usually a couple of seconds and a lot of concentration), and then the user must aim, and due to the fact that the arrow was just lowered to their view, they can not aim before this. This is basically a full round action if it is done quickly. I, myself, am a weapon fanatic and collector, I love the art and science of warfare, and would not want to see such a beautiful part of history bastardized...
I, myself, am a weapon fanatic and collector, I love the art and science of warfare, and would not want to see such a beautiful part of history bastardized...
Oh yeah?
Well my Enlarged half-giant Long-Armed gestalt ninja/samurai can totally pwn you with his dire-double-kusari-tetsubo-chucks.
So there.
;)
Seriously though, I hear ya, I feel ya. About 30 or so years ago, I gave up on (this game) being a realistic tactical simulation, or even giving a nod to plausibility.
Kamehameha Wave FTW!!!
The thing about the Yumi bow, and even Longbows..., is that it is a stationary, be post up in a single position, and fire type of weapon. If anything, bows of such a large stature were designed as basically human turrets. You gained the power and range for lack of mobility. Usually such weapons were used from the parapets of a wall or in a large formation, behind the infantry or cavalry formations. They are completely illogical for close range combat, and it kind of irks me to see the longbow already bastardized in a way that allows a single person to fire off 6 rounds, plus some if you include AoO's, in a 6 second round. For this reason, I hope Pathfinder never bastardizes something as magnificent as a Yumi.
The Yumi is an ingenious weapon that was designed with elegance and death in mind, and I would prefer it does not get ruined by shooting 6 arrows out of it within 6 seconds. The amount of time to shoot such a bow is quite staggering actually. You can fire it semi-quickly, but you have to first draw your arrow(which is pretty long), notch it to the bow and draw the string back(which involves a process of holding the notched arrow above the head and pushing the bow out, then drawing further back with the arrow, this allows the user to use their maximum arm span for the draw, which takes usually a couple of seconds and a lot of concentration), and then the user must aim, and due to the fact that the arrow was just lowered to their view, they can not aim before this. This is basically a full round action if it is done quickly. I, myself, am a weapon fanatic and collector, I love the art and science of warfare, and would not want to see such a beautiful part of history bastardized...
Mr. Weapons Expert, what are the chief differences between your yumi and a daikyu and hankyu? These latter two are already in the game system. A yumi sounds to me just like a longbow or daikyu. Please, enlighten me more.
Mr. Weapons Expert, what are the chief differences between your yumi and a daikyu and hankyu? These latter two are already in the game system. A yumi sounds to me just like a longbow or daikyu. Please, enlighten me more.
Weapons Expert? I said I am a weapon fanatic and collector, never an expert... Thanks for having a high opinion about me....?
Anyway, sarcasm aside, I had no clue that Daikyu and Hankyu were already in the game... That kind of depresses me as to how they describe them. The Daikyu is a Yumi, the large form of them and generally what people are referring to when they say Yumi. It is much larger than a longbow and the way it is fired is quite different, so I would never want to say it is 'equivalent to a longbow' as the PRD states. The Hankyu is well enough in the game, it is essentially the shortbow for Japan. It too is considered a Yumi due to its construction, but it not what people are generally talking about when they say the term Yumi. Well, I guess my rant is invalid, and all of you who wanted the Yumi in the game, they already are in the sense you can name your Longbow as something foreign instead...
I meant it seriously and sincerely, not in jest or sarcasm, even though it seems the title was a little off.
For those who don't already know, the mention of the daikyu and hankyu can be found in Ultimate Equipment, under the Eastern Weapon Equivalents section.
Hmm, deja vu or there's another thread floating around on a similar subject. Anyway, lets apply some much needed logic and correction here.
This is actually the source to the second topic that you first chimed in on. I still do not agree that the 'penalties' removed should allow the player to use a large longbow, unless 'oversized limbs' refers to arms that will drag on the ground as you walk. Then maybe, yeah, you would have the capability to draw the Large Longbow back enough to fire it effectively.
Hmm, deja vu or there's another thread floating around on a similar subject. Anyway, lets apply some much needed logic and correction here.
Firstly, just because a ranged weapon doesn't have a handedness category doesn't mean that a fine creature can wield a colossal longbow just so long as it takes the -16 cumulative attack penalty. The principal of a weapon being too big or too small to handle still applies.
Source cite?
My magnificent brain.Source cite?Hmm, deja vu or there's another thread floating around on a similar subject. Anyway, lets apply some much needed logic and correction here.
Firstly, just because a ranged weapon doesn't have a handedness category doesn't mean that a fine creature can wield a colossal longbow just so long as it takes the -16 cumulative attack penalty. The principal of a weapon being too big or too small to handle still applies.
So no rules source to support your assertion? So you acknowledge that your suggestion isn't actually a rule in the game?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To fire a large bow you just need to cast levitate on yourself. Lie back on the air with levitate. Then you place each foot on the grip on either side of where the arrow will lie, grab the sting with both hands (one on either side of the arrows nock) - straighten your legs and use the big muscles of your back as you draw the large arrow up the length of your body - use the levitate to aim your feet towards the target. Like Larry Niven's The Integral Trees. YMMV when attempting to deal with the acceleration your large bow imparts to you when firing the arrow and levitating.
The thing about the Yumi bow, and even Longbows..., is that it is a stationary, be post up in a single position, and fire type of weapon. If anything, bows of such a large stature were designed as basically human turrets. You gained the power and range for lack of mobility. {. . .} I, myself, am a weapon fanatic and collector, I love the art and science of warfare, and would not want to see such a beautiful part of history bastardized...
Supposedly, at least the shorter version (hankyu) and I think even the longer version (daikyu) were used for shooting from horseback. Somebody was using the former in one of the videos I linked earlier. So not totally incompatible with mobility. They sure do look hard to use, though -- hence they should be designated as Exotic Weapons. (And having them trade some firing speed for power, but still being faster to fire than a Crossbow, or at least faster than a Heavy Crossbow, sounds totally fair.)
Mr. Weapons Expert, what are the chief differences between your yumi and a daikyu and hankyu? These latter two are already in the game system. A yumi sounds to me just like a longbow or daikyu. Please, enlighten me more.
For those who don't already know, the mention of the daikyu and hankyu can be found in Ultimate Equipment, under the Eastern Weapon Equivalents section.
Aargh!! They already did what Kaiin Retsu feared most! They just made them into the Eastern equivalent of the Longbow and Shortbow, and not anything special! Somehow I missed this before (probably because I didn't think to look in the weapon entries for the basic bows).
(And by the way, fixed your link.)
Supposedly, at least the shorter version (hankyu) and I think even the longer version (daikyu) were used for shooting from horseback. Somebody was using the former in one of the videos I linked earlier. So not totally incompatible with mobility. They sure do look hard to use, though -- hence they should be designated as Exotic Weapons. (And having them trade some firing speed for power, but still being faster to fire than a Crossbow, or at least faster than a Heavy Crossbow, sounds totally fair.)
The thing about being used on horseback is that everything that was designed in early Japanese warfare was meant for horseback. A little known fact about the worldwide popular ancient warriors called Samurai, is that they started off as mounted archers. The large bow was usable from horseback, and basically made a moving turret. However, if the horse was not perfectly trained to keep its direction, or if the samurai did not have enough room to draw and fire with the horse moving in one direction, it was a useless tactic. The bow takes about 3-4 seconds to take a fast shot that will not be perfectly accurate. I know, with the fact that it is a game and not real life, that they would probably raise this to the same of a normal bow, but it still is sad to see such a beautiful design marred by the want to make things simpler. The designers not even giving it its own actual stats is probably worse than allowing people to shoot 4-6 arrows in 6 seconds.
The thing about the Yumi bow, and even Longbows..., is that it is a stationary, be post up in a single position, and fire type of weapon. If anything, bows of such a large stature were designed as basically human turrets. You gained the power and range for lack of mobility. {. . .} I, myself, am a weapon fanatic and collector, I love the art and science of warfare, and would not want to see such a beautiful part of history bastardized...Supposedly, at least the shorter version (hankyu) and I think even the longer version (daikyu) were used for shooting from horseback. Somebody was using the former in one of the videos I linked earlier. So not totally incompatible with mobility. They sure do look hard to use, though -- hence they should be designated as Exotic Weapons. (And having them trade some firing speed for power, but still being faster to fire than a Crossbow, or at least faster than a Heavy Crossbow, sounds totally fair.)
Mr. Weapons Expert, what are the chief differences between your yumi and a daikyu and hankyu? These latter two are already in the game system. A yumi sounds to me just like a longbow or daikyu. Please, enlighten me more.
For those who don't already know, the mention of the daikyu and hankyu can be found in Ultimate Equipment, under the Eastern Weapon Equivalents section.
Aargh!! They already did what Kaiin Retsu feared most! They just made them into the Eastern equivalent of the Longbow and Shortbow, and not anything special! Somehow I missed this before (probably because I didn't think to look in the weapon entries for the basic bows).
(And by the way, fixed your link.)
Bow weapons don't need anything more special. They're overpowered as it is with all those oodles of stackable options.
To fire a large bow you just need to cast levitate on yourself. Lie back on the air with levitate. Then you place each foot on the grip on either side of where the arrow will lie, grab the sting with both hands (one on either side of the arrows nock) - straighten your legs and use the big muscles of your back as you draw the large arrow up the length of your body - use the levitate to aim your feet towards the target. Like Larry Niven's The Integral Trees. YMMV when attempting to deal with the acceleration your large bow imparts to you when firing the arrow and levitating.
And when you release the string, you are no longer holding the bow. it's not in your hands, and your feet aren't holding it, so you drop it. Automatically.
Better use a weapon cord or some such to keep it nearby or it will be on the ground far below you when you need it next round.
Bow weapons don't need anything more special. They're overpowered as it is with all those oodles of stackable options.
The purpose of exotic Yumi (both versions) instead of them just being Eastern versions of the familiar bows would be to get something different, not necessarily stack on more on top of everything that would be otherwise the same as for the familiar bows. From what Kaiin Retsu said above (and from watching the videos, although that can be a bit deceptive since these are modern sport archers and not Samurai), it sounds like you CAN'T use the Yumi to do everything you could do with the familiar bows.