Damage Modifier on Ranged Weapons

[blitz]

IMHO I think that any damage that exceeds the bows maximum damage, also counts against the bows AP/HP. Thus, a couple critical hits from a short bow by someone with a 1d4 STR modifier, has a really good chance of breaking their bow. So go ahead and add your strength, but beware the consequences.

 

[Deleriad]

IMHO I think that any damage that exceeds the bows maximum damage, also counts against the bows AP/HP. Thus, a couple critical hits from a short bow by someone with a 1d4 STR modifier, has a really good chance of breaking their bow. So go ahead and add your strength, but beware the consequences.

Except that a bow would break before it fired in that case. In RQ damage comes from a mix of:
* kinetic energy (i.e. how hard it hits) (damage modifier and STR limits)
* the design of the weapon - i.e. how good it is at turning kinetic energy into damage (weapon stats)
* user skill - can you maximise the effectiveness of the weapon (critical chance)
* luck - whether a blow happens to severe a major artery or not. (the roll of the damage dice)
That's already a lot of complexity and I'm not sure it needs any more.

 

[Halfbat]

IMHO I think that any damage that exceeds the bows maximum damage, also counts against the bows AP/HP. Thus, a couple critical hits from a short bow by someone with a 1d4 STR modifier, has a really good chance of breaking their bow. So go ahead and add your strength, but beware the consequences.

Bows don't quite work like that. Sure, a giant _drawing_ a bow, not shooting with it, could break it by drawing it back too far. Anyone, for example, can draw a training bow (equivalent to a short bow, say) and shoot an arrow a short distance (for low damage). At exactly the same draw length, though, few people could draw a bow approaching a war bow's power (equivalent to a long bow). It's only larger creatures who could overdraw it, really, and even then they'd need longer arrows....

 

[elgrin]

The same holds true for arrows. A broad head and armor piercing head will hit with the same energy, but the damage will be very different. Again, it has to do with how the energy is applied to the target.

Of course the old real estate adage stands true as well: Location, Location, Location. A half inch whole in the heart is bad ju-ju no matter at what velocity it was created. But that is really a side note.

Which brings me to my point that bow stats already take STR into account. Bigger more powerful bows require more STR and do more damage.

Short Bow, STR 9, 1d8
Nomad Bow, STR 11, 1d10
Long Bow, STR 13, 2d8
Dragonewt Bow, STR 17, 2d10+2 (from Monsters)

So it seems the bow stats include the STR required to use them. In the case of the Dragonewt bow an average Warrior Dragonewt has a 1d6 damage bonus and only needs to be slightly above average to have a 1d8 damage bonus on top of that. Why would they ever close to melee range?

So following the established pattern for bows a Giant Bow would look something like:

Really Big Short Bow: STR 30, 2d12+2 (and that seems low compared to the bows listed above) and the Giant still gets 2d12 in a damage bonus. Ouch.

The RAW actually work well as is for humans, but once you start getting into slightly bigger than human creatures (Dragonewts for example) they become unbalanced, and the bigger/stronger the shooter the more unbalanced they become.

I like capping the damage bonus at 1d2 or 1d4, saying that you can only push a Bow so far past it's 'normal' potential. Otherwise a Giant could still apply a 1d12 bonus to a bow that in reality would break.

I agree the problem seems to be associated with bows and the unbalancing nature of the system as the SIZ of the creature moves up from the 'normal'. Rurik has answered my instinctual reaction by moving the damage into a bigger bow. This seems to sensibly reflect what I feel is the correct result, unfortunately it means we have to look at a new set of bows as the opposition gets larger. My proposition is that by allowing the damage to rise as a function of the SIZ of the character, the effect is actually of accomodating the increased hitting power of the larger type of Bow that a larger species would carry.
Please don't think I do not appreciate the arguments to the contrary, they all have a whole lot of sense and knowledge incorporated into them, but if humans can hava a short- and long-bow, why cannot (as usual an extreme example) giants. This would lead us into two sorts of bow for larger creatures. I simply think it is easier to consider that the damage bonus added the standard bow reflects this variation in the size of the type of weapon, which a naturally larger and stronger species would construct for themselves, rather than defining different bows for different SIZ/STR species (would bows then need max STR limits?).
This is certainly an interesting and enlightening argument for me - I'm learning loads!

elgrin

 

[RosenMcStern]

rather than defining different bows for different SIZ/STR species

But we already have this, since Dragonewts and Grotarons already use bows with different stats!

I'll post my suggestions on the subject later. This thread does contain valuable info, though, I agree with you.

 

[blitz]

Bows don't quite work like that.

Right, bows don't break and crack, or strings breaking after constently being pulled to its maximum draw. Next you'll tell me that firearms don't need parts fixed, or replaced after constant use either.

 

[Halfbat]

Bows don't quite work like that.

Right, bows don't break and crack, or strings breaking after constently being pulled to its maximum draw. Next you'll tell me that firearms don't need parts fixed, or replaced after constant use either.

Calm down - I'm not sure that sarcasm will help. You might well have misread the post.

"Thus, a couple critical hits from a short bow by someone with a 1d4 STR modifier" won't crack a bow: critical hits won't come from the drawing but from aiming properly. The point of the above posts is that if a bow built for a human is drawn to a giants maximum draw it will break almost instantly. But if the giant draws the same bow to the designed draw it won't make any difference what his strength modifier is and it won't make any difference to the length of time the bow operates.

 

[blitz]

critical hits won't come from the drawing but from aiming properly

Actually it would be both, skill to pull off a good shot, and pulling the weapon to its full draw to get the maximum damage available from it.

The point of the above posts is that if a bow built for a human is drawn to a giants maximum draw it will break almost instantly.

No doubt.

But if the giant draws the same bow to the designed draw it won't make any difference what his strength modifier is and it won't make any difference to the length of time the bow operates.

So what do you do when the giant decides to pull it past its designed draw? Does the weapon break, or is this more like putting excess force on something that is not designed for it? Like using the excess force vs. weapons AP/HP. Then it may make sense for a particularly strong archer to purchase a bow that can handle this force a little better, one with a higher AP/HP.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I tried posting this at the end of last wee, but the Internet ate it, and I haven't had time to re-type it til now

Bows already have a "Minimum Strength" - this is what prevents the Newtling from firing the Giant's "tree trunk" bow. What I'd propose is to also give a bow a "Maximium strength" - Someone who is stronger than this can use the bow, but they get no additional benefit from doing so - The Great Troll firing the "Standard" human bow will not be able to fire arrows with any more force than the human archer. Having done that, I'd then allow bows to add a damage bonus up to this Maximium str rating (This may require the revision of bow damage - I haven't actually looked at the specifics)


You can then allow Heroes / PC's to make bows with a "non-standard" rating to enable them to leverage exceptional strength. The general principle would be that you maintain the difference between the Min and Max Strength ratings, so that a Powerful Bow that allows an exceptionally strong hero to gain the maximum strength bonus is not usable by teh weak and puny who may come across it.

Under normal circumstances, and using a bow with which they are familiar, the only downside of using a bow whose Max Strength is below your own strength is that you don't get the full damage bonus. Where the difference is great, and the archer does not have time to get used to the bow then there should be a chance of damaging the bow by over-drawing it (Nostalgia suggests 5% per point of difference) - This can be mitigated by the character choosing how much STR to use when drawing the bow.

 

[Quire]

I tried posting this at the end of last wee,

When you gotta go, you gotta go.

- Q

 

[badside bill]

I have never played with damagemodifier applied to bows before, but i have the half damage modifier to the thrown weapons.

well, but one thing i wonder a bit about is, do anyone play with pulled blows on those missileweapons or what. what strikes me is that if the damage is mainly linked to the users damagemodifier, pulled blows with a longbow wouldn`t seem to be that far from possible...or am i wrong?

 

[homerjsinnott]

Surely what is missing from this dicussion is game balance, bow damage of 2d8 (why use anything else?) seems just stupid when compaired with any other weapon. Anything beyond that is D&Dland. ie it need a good kicking.

 

[Rasta]

Surely what is missing from this dicussion is game balance, bow damage of 2d8 (why use anything else?)

I completly agree with homeboy. I don't allow dm to bows for that exact reason. Everyone and their mothers will have longbows.

I do like the idea that was posted about only allowing a max damage of the particular weapon. Shortbow can't do more than 8 for ex.

I agree that the STR of bows has already been factored in with the damage.