Topic: problem with bows and crossbows

[vieja escuela]

there is a mistake that always surprises me in all books of weapons of Rolemaster, even in the new and much improved combat companion.  if crossbows are historically the most powerful and much easier to use (tham bows)it in the books that do less damage and there is hardly any difference when they start critic has done?
and when a COMBAT TABLE for Shield Bash

[Marc R]

Your last comment seems cut off.

IIRC the Bow is a superior all around weapon, but requires loads of training and physical conditioning, and often a lifetime to master. . .while a crossbow is close to a gun in point and shoot capability.

Bow damage, especially at long ranges, often has most to do with projectile weight, since especially at long range, the projectile is "falling" on the target more than anything. . .hence the longbow's larger projectile doing more damage. (An X-bow firing a longbow arrow would be neigh a seige weapon)

Crossbows at short ranges are indeed really nasty, before wind resistance cuts down the force behind the shot.

Bows consistantly outperformed x-bows in actual use, but armies could field more x-bowmen at a time because they were easier to use and train people on.

A lot of it's arguable, in terms of penetration power and range. . .the only provable point is reloading time.

That help at all?

[Justin]

You have good info on the facts of bows and crossbows, LordMiller. Care to make any comments on comparing their ammo, arrows vs. bolts? I once heard that a heavy crossbow can shoot a bolt through an engine block, but I've never heard such a thing about bow-n-arrows. Also, I am told that you cannot fire an arrow from a crossbow; the force of the crossbow would shred the wooden arrow. This leads me to think that the crossbow would indeed do more damage than a bow, unless it is lessened by easily going through the body making a cleaner wound.
(And I realized my fave show BtVS prayed on the general populace's ignorance in the last 2 epis of 1st season--Buffy loads a crossbow with arrows.)

[Marc R]

IIRC "Bolts" are more like darts, shorter and thicker. And lighter x-bow bolts are made of wood (or fiberglass) like arrows.

I guess, if the bolt was solid steel, and fired from a really heavy x-bow, you could crack an engine block. (I dunno about a through and through). I also dunno about that as a hand carried weapon using medieval tech.

Bows inflict damage via puncture and cut, like a thrown knife, not hydrostatic shock like a bullet. So the larger the weapon, the more damage.

Crossbows are indeed very nasty, especially at short ranges (Hence the table bonuses at shorter ranges)

Then again, used in direct fire bows are pretty nasty too.

Both Longbows and heavy x-bows can puncture plate armor. . .both light x-bows and short bows have problems doing so.

Longbows seem to have superior performace at longer ranges, both in accuracy and in penetration power.

Shrug, it's debatable, as I said. . .if you had dwarven engineers making high steel x-bows with braided cable wire and pulled steel bolts, likely you'd be talking engine block cracking time. . .but using more likely materials the overall seems to indicate longbow superiority. Not an expert, but had it explained to me thus:

Longer arrow makes for a longer pull, making for a longer "push" leaving the bow. (This improves both penetration and accuracy)

The thicker bolt is heavier by length, but usually not overall, since often you have x2 thickness and 1/3 or 1/4 length.

The heavier short pull of the x-bow is compensated for with mechanical advantage. . .so the 3' bow stave is really thick. . .but in the end, the x-bow is a heavy shortbow turned on it's side with a stock and a trigger. . .if you scale up the x-bow to a 6' longbow you end up with a ballistae.

And we are talking a lot of pull here. . .heavy 3' stave x-bows might be 150-200# pull, requiring a winch. . .but often longbows were pretty strong too, talking 120-150# pulls (hence the lifetime of working with them to use them). . .

Something to do with the 2x-3x time the string has to push the arrow seems to more than make up for the lower poundage of the bow pull itself.

I'm sure there's internet site data out there that would explain it better.

Found one:

http://www.thebeckoning.com/medieval/crossbow/cross_l_v_c.html

Appears like the answer is "If it's 1100 AD, longbow is a clear winner on all fronts, if it's 1400 AD, the heavy crossbow wins on all fronts other than rate of fire."

[yammahoper]

The problem in game is the ease of use of a crossbow, particularly at 100' or less.  The point blank bonus of +30 is nice on the attack table, but since training a xbow uses the same mechanic as training any other skill, there seems to be no "ease of use."

Here is a nice sight with basic xbow info and xbow versus bow info;
http://www.thebeckoning.com/medieval/crossbow/crossbow-history.html

So what to do in game?  You could give xbows an innate bonus for superior construction.  However while a xbow could fire great ranges, it will not deliver the same impact, or ease of aiming, that it has at short ranges.

Increasing OB is one way to represent enhanced lethality and so is critical adjustment.  At short ranges, you might want to enhance crits, say point blank by 2, short range by one, medium range by 0 and long range by -1.

The crossbow WAS an unbalancing tool of power back then.  It was prefered for a combination of its power, ease of use and the ability to take it away from the peasent when the war was over (and they could not build one in general themselves).

lynn

[Fenrhyl Wulfson]

The bonus at short range is tremendous. Really.

Start with a skill of 30 or 40, add 30, roll a dice... an average score of 50 will bring you to 120. And there goes another orc !

I played some RMX discovery games and the players always were astounded by the lethality of this weapon at short range compared to melee weapons or the bow. (To be precise : none of them ever played rolemaster before)
For my part I was quite satisfied because it worked like it should have.

[Marc R]

I find the results work out about that way also. . .

Fighting inside the bonus range, crossbows are pretty nasty. . .and thinking on the last epic campign I was in, the tech issue came up.

A group of PCs, varied worlds, sucked into a vortex gate, deposited after a bit of astral wandering in the gameworld (GM was sick of the squabbling over setting and PC ideas that didn't fit, eventually just said "Make anything and hand it to me for approval." and this Deus Ex explained it.)

Late bronze age world.

One PC was from an early reinesance world, with a heavy crossbow.

Skip ahead 5 years of game time. . . .said assassin in velvet had gotten steel production going, and by dissasembling and duplicating his crossbow, had brought the latest, overlapping with gunpowder, masterwork assassin crossbow tech into the world.

So, we lesser folk, natives of the world, in the 2nd generation party, working for the "Order Of Inquiry" he had created, were walking around with +15 High Steel Crossbows, with +10 High Steel Arrows (Using the "Bow and Arrow bonuses stack" option). . .

Game was pseudo post-apocalyptic. . .Out into the wildlands just outside the city, trying to re-establish contact with the next town. . . .

I must say, pinned down in a ravine by rat men with shortbows, the advantage of that +35 bonus on targets in general, and +65 on any ratman that get too close, certainly was a vast and telling advantage. . . .

Which is probably about right for what would happen with equally skilled individuals facing off with shortbows and top of the line 15th century crossbows.

[Justin]

So what to do in game?  You could give xbows an innate bonus for superior construction.  However while a xbow could fire great ranges, it will not deliver the same impact, or ease of aiming, that it has at short ranges.

Sounds like things are already accounted for in the weapon charts and range bonuses, except for:
the ST needed for long bows,
longer training on long bows compared to short bows compared to crossbows,
crossbows probably more rare construction

[markc]

 If you want to change the ease of learning curve you can adjust the rank gain to something higher that it is. Yes you will have a skill with a non- standard progression but it is your game.

MDC

[Marc R]

Or play with the costs, like make x-bow cost 1/2 DP of other missiles (Swords and other melee also hard to master and require physical conditioning, like a bow, while a crossbow is more gun like in ease of use.)

[markc]

 Or even let PC's buy more than 2 ranks in a level, such as 1/2/3 or N+1/rank per level with N starting at 0.

 I think a many such good house rules are out there and they only need to be tested.

MDC

[yammahoper]

Crossbows as everyman equipment.

 

lynn

[Marc R]

There is a certain logic to it. . .you can take an hour to teach someone how to shoot a pistol, shotgun or crossbow, and they are now likely capable of actually using the pistol at bare proficiancy. . .spend an hour teaching someone archery or fencing, and they might be just getting past the point of being more dangerous to themselves than others.

Then again, that +30 bonus is pretty good at simulating that too.

[runequester]

I always saw crossbows in RPG's as a weapon you unload on the enemy before entering melee. Some characters carry throwing axes or knives for the same purpose. Soften them up a bit before you get stuck in.

If the missile manages to stun the enemy or give them a penalty, you will have a far easier time hacking them down

[Arioch]

If you want to change the ease of learning curve you can adjust the rank gain to something higher that it is. Yes you will have a skill with a non- standard progression but it is your game.

MDC

For X-bows, guns and similar we don't count the -15 penalty for untrained skill. So if you have 0 ranks in Xbow you use your Missile Weapons bonus +0 as OB.

[Dark Schneider]

Bows consistantly outperformed x-bows in actual use, but armies could field more x-bowmen at a time because they were easier to use and train people on.

In that case ranks adquired in racial, adolescence (hobby), and TPs could be doubled if used in x-bows. So a lvl 1 soldier could has 8 ranks in x-bow instead 4 in bow, it could be a good reason to use x-bow, and more in armies. See that category ranks are not doubled, only skill ranks.

[markc]

 I think there are a number of ways to do it depending on what system you play and how you play your game. It might be a good Guild Comp. article to write up and give all the options you come up with per system. A little play testing or a little one-two hour combat episode and you could have some good date for the article. Or you could just analise the #'s you get by the mods you make.

MDC

[Warl]

the problem as I see it, in regards with rolemaster, are that the cost to train is the same for both.

I agree that Bows take more training than X-bows do, and that Should be reflected in the Cost of developing the skill If it is not reflected in the results of the skill itself.

[Marc R]

On the flip side, much of that training seems to consist of physical conditioning to draw and hold the pull. The "Training since I was 5" often has to do with building the muscles to use the weapon.

A 3 year old can fire a gun, or a crossbow. It takes a strong person to fire a 100-150# pull longbow.

Perhaps the longbow should have a minimum strength requirement? (Then again, strength is reflected in the OB already.)

[Grinnen Baeritt]

It also takes a strong person to aim and fire a gun/crossbow....relatively speaking they are heavier because of the stock.

My take on this problem is that the current stats for the longbow/crossbows are the stock variety i.e. that anyone of normal/average strength/size can use without extensive training/strength requirements. (There isn't a restriction on who can use a 2-handed sword or a warhammer remember)

Much is mooted about the pull strength of a longbow... 100-150lbs. Yet many more would be of a lesser rating. I use a 80lb bow myself.

Perhaps assuming that bows rated with higher pulls should have penalties applied if there isn't a specific str/training requirement. Say 1/2 ranks... And lets remember that strength is only used to pull the bow to it's optimum, not having that strength means that it simply isn't used at the optimum. Not doing so would inflict a penalty and halving the ranks..is the easiest option.