Did my GM just make the reinforced stock feature useless?

[BigRed42]

I recently had a bewildering discussion with my GM that ultimately ended in argument. I'm not trying to go into every detail but I haven't seen this brought up before anywhere so I figured I'd ask her.

Does using reinforced stock on a loaded crossbow unload the bold in the crossbow?

As far as I can tell I don't think it does as all the rules I can find on the reinforced stock and crossbows don't mention anything about loosing a loaded bolt. From what I can gather if it was the case wouldn't it makes the reinforced stock feature useless?

From what I gather there isn't any way a loaded crossbow in Pathfinder 2e gets unloaded without firing or being damaged/destroyed.

This new rule came up in conversation arbitrarily after I had repeatedly used the reinforced stock as I understood it written for several sessions over the course of a year.

So is the bolt supposed to fall out during use or did my GM just mistake his understanding of crossbows as the in-game rules for crossbows?

[Dr. Frank Funkelstein]

There is no rule about it.
In my opinion, using "realism" in a high fantasy game can be a slippery slope, and i wonder how this issue even came up.
Crossbows have a reputation for being on the weak side, and

On the other hand, there is not much to gain for you, the GM issues the ruling and that's it.

Maybe you can look at Combination Weapons to indicate that the usage of a melee/ranged combination is intended by the game.

[NorrKnekten]

As written, Attached weapons are separate from whatever they are attached to, but while wielding one you are also wielding the other.

Using the Stock does not change anything about the weapon it is attached to as that would be outlined in the rules otherwise. Same as with a bayonet on a musket.

[Ryangwy]

Not only is that not indicated anywhere in the rule, the critical fusion trait implies that hitting with a melee weapon does not discharge any linked ranged weapon, or else the trait does not work (it allows you to optionally discharge the ranged weapon on a crit for added effect)

[Finoan]

Dr. Frank Funkelstein wrote:

In my opinion, using "realism" in a high fantasy game can be a slippery slope,

Agreed. 'But Realism' is my most disliked type of rules lawyering.

Dr. Frank Funkelstein wrote:

and i wonder how this issue even came up.

My personal suspicion is GMs still traumatized by PF1 and thinking that they have to nerf anything that the players come up with in order to not have the players optimize all of the challenge out of the game.

[pauljathome]

Finoan wrote:

My personal suspicion is GMs still traumatized by PF1 and thinking that they have to nerf anything that the players come up with in order to not have the players optimize all of the challenge out of the game.

Maybe. But nearly all of us have an issue or two where the unreality of the rules REALLY bugs us and we are at least tempted to make a ruling.

[Finoan]

pauljathome wrote:

Maybe. But nearly all of us have an issue or two where the unreality of the rules REALLY bugs us and we are at least tempted to make a ruling.

Yeah. Understandable. There are more than a few places in the rules where I know that the rules don't match up with reality very well. There are also more than a few places in the rules where I look at them and think that the rules aren't very good or functional and that they need fixed.

The problem comes in cases like this one where 'reality' is the only reason to make that ruling. There are no rules even suggesting that this is the intended way of running things. It cripples the game balance regarding this weapon. It prevents interactions with other items. But trying to convince the GM that any of that is important is likely a lost cause. Because the GM can't reconcile the game mechanics with the envisioned action of bludgeoning someone with a crossbow and having the bolt stay loaded in its proper slot.

[Castilliano]

You're attacking w/ the bolt side up, hence it doesn't fall out. Duh.

For realsies, while technically there's still a use for the stock after you've fired, your GM's overstepping. The campaign's going to be a long slog if he calls out this when Halfling warriors in full plate will be jumping over elephants sans magic. And oh boy he won't like the reloading rate of Golarion muskets. Or Lightning Swap. Or...you get the picture.

It's costly enough the stock needs separate Runes. Grr.

[moosher12]

Realistically, it should take 3-15 actions to reload a crossbow in the first place, so... Yeah.

It's easy to say there is a little metal or wooden flat to keep the bolt in place if it was an issue. Otherwise, as many like to say, not a simulationist game.