As the title.
Most people who have played PF1E have tried many ranged options, but when it comes to using a ranged weapon consistently, bows are the only weapon I've noticed that are commonly used in the higher levels, and this is largely in part due to how much easier to use and how much more support there is for archers in comparison to other weapons. (Personally, I blame Legolas from Lord of the Rings for fostering this design aspect, but that's beside the point.)
Would Paizo be in the neighborhood of toning down Bow usage, and/or improving the viability of other ranged weapons (such as slings, crossbows, throwing axes, etc.) in PF2? If so, how do you think it should be done?
Dont you need to spend an action to draw a knife to throw?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dont you need to spend an action to draw a knife to throw?
Maybe with the Quick Draw feat, you don't have to spend an action to draw, though IMO, to balance it with bows, either that feat should also be required by bows, or bows should require it's separate feat. Maybe Swift Nocking?
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.
Which is, IMO, silly, and exacerbates the problem behind bows to begin with. When you have to take a feat with one weapon to draw and use it just as quick as another comparable weapon, that weapon is forever weaker to a point that it's nowhere near as good in comparison.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.Which is, IMO, silly, and exacerbates the problem behind bows to begin with. When you have to take a feat with one weapon to draw and use it just as quick as another comparable weapon, that weapon is forever weaker to a point that it's nowhere near as good in comparison.
Crossbows DO take longer to load in real life. Much longer. It's actually unrealistic for them to take only a single action to load, but I'm willing to handwave that for game purposes. Generally the tradeoff is that they are dirt simple to use (hence being simple weapons in game terms that everyone can use without training).
What should be modeled here to improve crossbows a bit is that they should be more accurate. They should also have higher damage due to the higher draw power, especially since you won't get to add Str to it like a proper projectile weapon. Like a rifle you should also be able to lie prone and fire a crossbow without issue; can't do that with a bow.
I would definitely love for slings, javelins, throwing axes etc to be buffed up, too.
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.Which is, IMO, silly, and exacerbates the problem behind bows to begin with. When you have to take a feat with one weapon to draw and use it just as quick as another comparable weapon, that weapon is forever weaker to a point that it's nowhere near as good in comparison.Crossbows DO take longer to load in real life. Much longer. It's actually unrealistic for them to take only a single action to load, but I'm willing to handwave that for game purposes. Generally the tradeoff is that they are dirt simple to use (hence being simple weapons in game terms that everyone can use without training).
What should be modeled here to improve crossbows a bit is that they should be more accurate. They should also have higher damage due to the higher draw power, especially since you won't get to add Str to it like a proper projectile weapon. Like a rifle you should also be able to lie prone and fire a crossbow without issue; can't do that with a bow.
I would definitely love for slings, javelins, throwing axes etc to be buffed up, too.
It already does all of these things. It has higher base damage (but barely, could go up another die step) and can be used while prone for sniping purposes while a Bow can't.
Though maybe I'm not understanding what's going on here, I interpreted your psot as "suggestions".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.Which is, IMO, silly, and exacerbates the problem behind bows to begin with. When you have to take a feat with one weapon to draw and use it just as quick as another comparable weapon, that weapon is forever weaker to a point that it's nowhere near as good in comparison.Crossbows DO take longer to load in real life. Much longer. It's actually unrealistic for them to take only a single action to load, but I'm willing to handwave that for game purposes. Generally the tradeoff is that they are dirt simple to use (hence being simple weapons in game terms that everyone can use without training).
What should be modeled here to improve crossbows a bit is that they should be more accurate. They should also have higher damage due to the higher draw power, especially since you won't get to add Str to it like a proper projectile weapon. Like a rifle you should also be able to lie prone and fire a crossbow without issue; can't do that with a bow.
I would definitely love for slings, javelins, throwing axes etc to be buffed up, too.
While I've never shot a crossbow in my life, I have shot a bow a few times in school. (Spoiler alert, I was a terrible shot.) But even with my bad shooting, it still took me a while to draw an arrow and nock it properly in an attempt to take aim. I can't imagine it being any more difficult than drawing a bolt, placing it on the slot, and then re-cranking the launching mechanism.
So, I think realistically, while a skilled archer might be faster than a skilled crossbowman, the skill ceiling for an archer is much higher than a crossbowman, and as such I think the rules should simulate that a little better.
As someone who has used both, I found the crossbow was far more difficult to load, but seemed to fly truer. The bow was the opposite, while I think it would be slower then a knife or sword it was surprisingly quick but hard to aim. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I used to help newbies set up at archery ranges, why the actual expert would do the formal training.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing about bows is you can't make the kind of Legolas quick shot with a bow weighted for war (aka: str bonus) without being unrealistically strong.
And the thing about crossbows is they could reliably puncture plate where a bow could not (some could, like english longbows with the right kind of arrows, but still not reliably), and PF says a single die step up is good enough to cover that kind of damage difference.
It's not.
So until PF decides it's time to kill the sacred cow of "bows are better than xbows," I imagine we'll be stuck with inferior xbows.
|
The thing about bows is you can't make the kind of Legolas quick shot with a bow weighted for war (aka: str bonus) without being unrealistically strong.
I think that martial characters should be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the rule of cool. We all know that the developers are going to find plenty of other ways to punish them for not choosing to play a spellcaster...let them have that at least.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing about bows is you can't make the kind of Legolas quick shot with a bow weighted for war (aka: str bonus) without being unrealistically strong.I think that martial characters should be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the rule of cool. We all know that the developers are going to find plenty of other ways to punish them for not choosing to play a spellcaster...let them have that at least.
I agree! I just also think that crossbow fans should get some of that "rule of cool" love too (ie: either make crossbows harder to load but SIGNIFICANTLY more damaging [i'm talking one die step up and then add another die on top of it] or make both the damage and attack speeds comparable). ;)
Perhaps reloading can be lumped into ranged weapon proficiencies beyond just trained. So the at you automatically get QuickDraw/rapid reload/crossbow mastery/etc if you are focusing on it. Someone untrained (like the few times I've shot a bow/crossbow) takes a long time to reload aim and fire (I'd say 3 actions to shoot is fair, since mechanically it balances you v. the swordsman who had to draw a weapon, move, ands attack). Training could reduce this greatly, and once you become an expert it should be second nature.
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.Which is, IMO, silly, and exacerbates the problem behind bows to begin with. When you have to take a feat with one weapon to draw and use it just as quick as another comparable weapon, that weapon is forever weaker to a point that it's nowhere near as good in comparison.Crossbows DO take longer to load in real life. Much longer. It's actually unrealistic for them to take only a single action to load, but I'm willing to handwave that for game purposes. Generally the tradeoff is that they are dirt simple to use (hence being simple weapons in game terms that everyone can use without training).
What should be modeled here to improve crossbows a bit is that they should be more accurate. They should also have higher damage due to the higher draw power, especially since you won't get to add Str to it like a proper projectile weapon. Like a rifle you should also be able to lie prone and fire a crossbow without issue; can't do that with a bow.
I would definitely love for slings, javelins, throwing axes etc to be buffed up, too.
In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium here| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My problem with this isn't that bows are better. It's how much better they are. Granted bows also take a lot of feats to really get good at with PF1, but even with archetypes dedicated to crossbows they still couldn't pull even. If a class is built around crossbows they should be closer to someone using a bow, otherwise why even bother with the archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given the amount of training need to use them effectively, Bows (and Slings) should really be Exotic weapons. Having most Crossbows be Simple weapons is fine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thrown weapons in particular are a pain in the .... in OPF.
You ussually need to pay for multiple magic items, with an special property (returning, etc), or add additional magic items using up a slot (blinkbackbelt) just in order to be able to spend more feats to still be inferior to bows (in things like range, or exclusive archery feats like manyshots that put bows ahead)
Given the amount of training need to use them effectively, Bows (and Slings) should really be Exotic weapons. Having most Crossbows be Simple weapons is fine.
I think bows in Martial makes sense, tbh. Exotic should really only be reserved for, well, exotic weapons. Weapons that are rare. Bows are VERY common and, sure, hard to get good at, but a martial character is trained in most of these things, hence the Martial Proficiency(all). They know how to properly use a bow. How good he is at it, however, is determined by how many feats he's willing to put into it through normal level progression.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Realistic considerations aside, it would be nice to make all of the different ranged weapon approaches viable without having to make a huge investment in them.
I.e., I’d like to be able to tell a player who wants to focus on using a crossbow or throwing knives “because it looks cool” to go right ahead, not to have to give them a long speech about how they have to be really careful in how they go about it if they don’t want to end up being hideously ineffective.
Is it confirmed that bows require an action to reload? I've only seen talk of crossbows requiring an action, which is already the case in PF1.Which is, IMO, silly, and exacerbates the problem behind bows to begin with. When you have to take a feat with one weapon to draw and use it just as quick as another comparable weapon, that weapon is forever weaker to a point that it's nowhere near as good in comparison.
Crossbows do require quite a bit of time to load.
The thing about bows is you can't make the kind of Legolas quick shot with a bow weighted for war (aka: str bonus) without being unrealistically strong.
And the thing about crossbows is they could reliably puncture plate where a bow could not (some could, like english longbows with the right kind of arrows, but still not reliably), and PF says a single die step up is good enough to cover that kind of damage difference.
It's not.So until PF decides it's time to kill the sacred cow of "bows are better than xbows," I imagine we'll be stuck with inferior xbows.
Legolas IS super strong, elves are described as quite strong.
I'd like to have arrows take a decent amount of bulk to carry, so archers actually have to worry about not just shooting all the time. I'll admit I'm probably weird on that one, though, and it doesn't really fit with some of my other desires for the system. It looks like Skill Feats may really help melee vs ranged issues.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, from what we are starting to see, Weapon Traits are going to be a big thing in PF2, So I weapons are going to have more going for them than just Damage Dice.
The one example we do have is the Scimitar which has a trait that makes it better for cleaving, and another that lets it do more damage the more times you hit the same target.
Now we don't have a full list of what Weapon Qualities exist but I doubt there will only be melee ones.
So the question is what seperates the different ranged weapons beyond damage, range and reload?
|
Dont you need to spend an action to draw a knife to throw?yes but few options like alchemists bomb one and you are kinda done on i draw multiple knives at same time and if its like starfinder shuriken that means you reload as same action you throw. which again solves the problem while all bows kinda need the second action to reload the weapon.
Actually, shuriken work like this in PF1.
Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't agree. It's not actually that hard to draw and shoot a bow, to load a stone and release it in the right direction, to crank the crossbow back and release a bolt. What's hard is judging ranges, making allowances for the movement of the target, and doing it under stressful conditions. What I'd do if it was my design was allow anyone to use any of those weapons, as long as they were aiming at targets within a range where you wouldn't have to aim above the targets head to avoid the shot dropping short. Then if you want to aim at targets further away, then you'd need proficiency with the weapon. So basic use of the weapon would be fine, but anything more advanced required specific proficiency.Given the amount of training need to use them effectively, Bows (and Slings) should really be Exotic weapons. Having most Crossbows be Simple weapons is fine.
Drawing and shooting the bow isn't that difficult, but shooting accurately with it is. Definitely harder than using a firearm (which is why firearms took over when they still didn't have superior range, rate of fire, or piercing power -- they were easier to train people to use). It takes a LONG time for people to get good with bows or slings.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium here
The little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.
Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.
Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.
Considering that they took Harsk's crossbow away as a primary weapon and now he will be a two-weapon character to better showcase the strengths of the ranger class, I wouldn't have very high hopes.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like each +1 enhancement bonus a weapon gets adds a multiple of the base damage die, so that's at least one way a crossbow will be better than a bow. So that will at least partially close the gap compared to rate of fire.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This post might be biased due to my 'balearic blood', but I think the sling deserve an improvement. It is argued that slings were better than some bows for combat. I don't mind the 1d4 dmg for slings, but I find undeserving the move action for reloading.
To revisit what I said in the sling thread, there are uses for most of the ranged weapons. Crossbows are the ideal weapon for a character without strength or martial weapon proficiency. Slings work best for a character with the former but not the latter. And thrown weapon in PF1 exemplify the switch hitter over a pure ranged character-- having things like weapon focus work at range and melee, or being able to drop something in melee on a the second attack of a full attack and then chuck knives at a target out of reach is sweet.
The issue is how inferior the choices are to someone who wants to use those weapons like you would a longbow, for flavor reasons. Basically what Porridge described. I'm not sure exactly how you fix that while maintaining a distinction between simple and martial weapons, or making the weapons fulfill different roles.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium hereThe little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.
Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.
Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.
Yeah, the draw weight is only one part of the equation along with draw length. The 700+ pound crossbows seem to have similar range and energy to a 150 pound English warbow because of the vast difference in draw length. So I don't think crossbows need to be gimped damage-wise compared to longbows. But making them identical isn't logical either. They were slower. Especially with cranequins and a lesser extent windless spanned bows. So I think it might be better to give them some other advantage that fits with their historical performance, such as being able to be used more accurately. And used more easily (already done with them being simple weapons). Also cranequin and goatsfoot bows are suitable to be used mounted or prone, and there is the trick of having two bows and having a helper span one while you're using the second. I'm imagining a ranger with a particularly bright primate animal companion doing this, or someone with a hireling or the Torchbearer from the Dungeneer's handbook. Maybe have a feat so they can set up a large pavise (tower shield) to be used as cover for the two of them to represent a proper Pavise Holder.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
but in 2ed we dont have the free action thus it takes one action regardless of how it is in 1ed. but thanks for correcting my mistake.Dont you need to spend an action to draw a knife to throw?yes but few options like alchemists bomb one and you are kinda done on i draw multiple knives at same time and if its like starfinder shuriken that means you reload as same action you throw. which again solves the problem while all bows kinda need the second action to reload the weapon.Actually, shuriken work like this in PF1.
Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.
All you have to do is add the line to the rules of:
"When making a ranged attack, you may retrieve a single piece of ammunition in addition to your attack. Some weapons like crossbows and heavy crossbow may require multiple actions to load. Please refer to their descriptions for details."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... easier to build knife thrower then regular bowman ...
THAN, not then ...
Considering that they took Harsk's crossbow away as a primary weapon and now he will be a two-weapon character to better showcase the strengths of the ranger class, I wouldn't have very high hopes.
Sounds about right to me. Sure, the iconics aren't built for optimization, but if that's the case, crossbow is even worse now than it was then.
Maybe throwing weapons can still have hope...
Nail it on the head. I don't like bows, but i love crossbows, and have an affinity for Thrown weapons. The fact that Bows seem to be the only ranged weapon (aside from firearms if theyre allowed) worth caring about is stupid, especially considering in real life, crossbows pretty much entirely overtook bows before firearms were invented.
How about allowing Crossbows and light thrown weapons (like knives and shurikens) to use Dex for damage, ? It would be a good start
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium hereThe little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.
Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.
Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.
I didn't know what that word meant, so I looked it up and watched a video of a guy using one. Going at a decent speed, his rate of fire was about 1/minute. So in PF terms, that's once every ten rounds, and the entire rest of the time you're reloading.
Wow.
That's the kind of weapon you need one or two people to help you reload.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium hereThe little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.
Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.
Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.
I didn't know what that word meant, so I looked it up and watched a video of a guy using one. Going at a decent speed, his rate of fire was about 1/minute. So in PF terms, that's once every ten rounds, and the entire rest of the time you're reloading.
Wow.
That's the kind of weapon you need one or two people to help you reload.
And yet, you will not find videos of someone using a legit english long bow to fire three or four times in six seconds at full draw at a target 90 feet away.
Or a guy doing the same.....with a musket. A muzzle loading musket, no less.
I think if we can suspend our disbelief for those, we can do it for the poor crossbow as well. If you want to make them take longer to reload, that's fine, just make sure it doesn't cripple the weapon to the point of uselessness in most cases.
In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium hereThe little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.
Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.
Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.
I didn't know what that word meant, so I looked it up and watched a video of a guy using one. Going at a decent speed, his rate of fire was about 1/minute. So in PF terms, that's once every ten rounds, and the entire rest of the time you're reloading.
Wow.
That's the kind of weapon you need one or two people to help you reload.
And yet, you will not find videos of someone using a legit english long bow to fire three or four times in six seconds at full draw at a target 90 feet away.
Or a guy doing the same.....with a musket. A muzzle loading musket, no less.
I think if we can suspend our disbelief for those, we can do it for the poor crossbow as well. If you want to make them take longer to reload, that's fine, just make sure it doesn't cripple the weapon to the point of uselessness in most cases.
And be fully accurate, no less. Not only can they be fast, but flawless in execution and actually hitting the intended target.
And be fully accurate, no less. Not only can they be fast, but flawless in execution and actually hitting the intended target.In real life a crossbow should need several rounds to reload, yes, but then it should do something like 6d8, if a longbow does 1d8. English longbow had an estimated 100-150lb pull. There are medieval crossbows that beat 700-900.
That would not be very balanced, so let's use a dose of handwavium hereThe little tiny prods of the crossbow could not impart the same velocity onto a bolt that the long limbs of a longbow could put into an arrow. The draw weights aren't directly comparable. 1 pound of longbow draw is worth many pounds of crossbow draw.
Also those 700 pound crossbows? They're cranequin-drawn. You would be very lucky to reload those once in two encounters' worth of time.
Anyways in Pathfinderies, the crossbow just puts you a feat behind for the light variety.
I didn't know what that word meant, so I looked it up and watched a video of a guy using one. Going at a decent speed, his rate of fire was about 1/minute. So in PF terms, that's once every ten rounds, and the entire rest of the time you're reloading.
Wow.
That's the kind of weapon you need one or two people to help you reload.
And yet, you will not find videos of someone using a legit english long bow to fire three or four times in six seconds at full draw at a target 90 feet away.
Or a guy doing the same.....with a musket. A muzzle loading musket, no less.
I think if we can suspend our disbelief for those, we can do it for the poor crossbow as well. If you want to make them take longer to reload, that's fine, just make sure it doesn't cripple the weapon to the point of uselessness in most cases.
Consistency! What's that?
So I think it might be better to give them some other advantage that fits with their historical performance, such as being able to be used more accurately. And used more easily (already done with them being simple weapons).
Well, for the light crossbow, I feel like it's already cozied itself into that space. Non-martial-weapons peoples like (non-elven) wizzies or clerics or such don't want to pay the martial weapon feat, so would be -4 with a longbow, but +0 with a crossbow. If they have strength penalties, it gets even worse! It works out in practice to be a more accurate and effective weapon, unless you're a (strong) martial or spend feats..
The heavy crossbow is.. kinda a disaster. Although longbow damage doesn't justify giving it more damage (it should actually be d4 based on some of the thingies I saw), we could handwave that up to a higher number for a game-balance reason. Especially since Rapid Reload only changes the full-round reload into um, a move action I think? for d10? Doesn't seem worth it.. t.t
Also cranequin and goatsfoot bows are suitable to be used mounted or prone, and there is the trick of having two bows and having a helper span one while you're using the second. I'm imagining a ranger with a particularly bright primate animal companion doing this, or someone with a hireling or the Torchbearer from the Dungeneer's handbook. Maybe have a feat so they can set up a large pavise (tower shield) to be used as cover for the two of them to represent a proper Pavise Holder.
Ooh.. if you had two helpers and three crossbows, you could fire two each round - they can be fired one-handed (but with a penalty).
How about also make the Shortbow have some advantage over the Longbow? I have a hard-time imagining entire party carrying 5ft+ bows just because they have proficiency in martial weapons. What's the niche of shortbow? Just because Rogues get it? Think it should be more encouraged on builds which aren't focused on archery somehow. Make people work for the advantage of the Longbow over short...
If you try to balance crossbows around a multi-round reload, people will just carry 5 of them into combat...