Thread: Modern compound bow vs. legendary weapons?

Originally Posted by Zit

I didn't mean that we don't care about range, only that we do not care about knowing it so acurately, within a few meters. As I said, long/normal/short is most of the time far enough. Anyway no archer can tell the distance with 1m acuracy.

True and true. But that doesn't mean that we should treat all composite bows or all long bows as the same.


Regarding the light bow and the 1/2db rule -which I found terrible as well at first- the limited draw is simulated by the basic damage: a Self Bow makes 1d6+1 while a Composite Bow makes 1d8+1. This is the intrinsec power of the average bow. [/quote]

And this is intrinsically wrong. A composite bow is not intrinsically stronger than a self bow, not does a longbow intrinsically shoot further than a composite bow. Nor is a compund bow automatically more powerful than any and all of the above.

THat is where RPGs tend to overcomplicated things and mess them up.

THe damage and range of bows should be based on their pull (draw weight), not on their form. We don't have to work this out tho the last kg of piull either. Something along the lines of rating bows as light, medium, heavy and so on according to wielder's STR would work and be just as easy to implement as the current method, and a lot more realistic. Bows in the rules are given a STR rating and I think we could just sperate the bow type from this to get damage and range stats based on the STR of the bow.

Now, as we both said, there are several sizes and strength for each kind of bow: no two self bows are exactly the same. I presume that the rule assumes that every archer uses the most optimized bow for his size ans strength, and the 1/2 db rule works:

Which would be highly unlikely. Historically archers who had bows of the option pull for their STR crafted thier own bows. Bows pruchased from somebody else were rarely at the optimum STR.


[quote]
a stronger bowman uses a stronger bow and makes the arrow flight faster. The rule is also tailored for human beings. Of course if a giant with 3d6 db draws the string, it should break instead of providing 3d3 db (if he can even properly hold the bow). Except if the self bow was make for him from a big trunk... No rule is perfect and can realy simulate the complexity of real life, but were the rule fails, good sense helps.[/QUOTE


Yes, but there is a lack of good sense in the bow rules as written. For example, technically speaking an actual longbow (welsh warbow) is both a self bow and a composite bow. Yet it is treated as neither. A Japanese Longbow is a composite bow and not a self bow, but the rules make some assumptions about the qualities of self, long and composite bows that are not true. Realstically Longbows are not necessarily the most powerful bows. In fact, the length of the bow has little to do with it's power. A bowyer can get just about any power he wants out of a bow when he crafts it.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Something along the lines of rating bows as light, medium, heavy and so on according to wielder's STR would work and be just as easy to implement as the current method, and a lot more realistic.

Most games do this for crossbows, although there are just as many different types of
crossbows (e.g. material of the bow, material of the bowstring, etc.) as there are ty-
pes of bow, and in my opinion this works perfectly well and avoids a lot of discussions
about more or less irrelevant construction details which do not really influence the per-
formance of the weapon that much.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

In fact, the length of the bow has little to do with it's power. A bowyer can get just about any power he wants out of a bow when he crafts it.

I don't think that is completely true. Different styles of bow make adjustments. A longbow uses length for leverage, while a composite bow or a recurve bow use different materials / shape to gain power without requiring the length of the longbow.

I think you are on the right track though. Bows should be far more customized than most games make them, individually tailored to the user. I really can't use a bow made for my 12 year old son and expect the same kind of performance as one made for me. If anything the type of bow should be a modifier, wood bows being the base, short and long, composite, recurve being modifiers. So a short composite recurve bow may be similar in power to a long wood bow. It is probably getting far to detailed to get into the height of the archer, but strength seems a perfectly reasonable measure, so rate bows that way. Using a bow of different strength should result in a penalty, less damage, less accurate etc. +1 / -1 str probably not that big of a deal, but someone with a 16 strength using a bow made for someone with an 8 strength should be (and might even look funny).

Originally Posted by rust

In my experience it was a bit like artillery methods when it came to longer
ranges: The first arrow usually went too far, the second arrow usually went
too short, and from the third arrow onwards the target was in serious dan-
ger of being hit - until the wind changed ...

In other words, I am willing to believe that Yesüngge hit a target at a distan-
ce of 530 meters, but I am not willing to believe that he did so with his first
arrow. Or his second. Probably not even his third.

This is probably true, leaving out the other 12 shots makes for a much better story.

Luck certainly plays a part too. If you toss a basketball over your shoulder and it goes right through the hoop, you walk away like it was no big deal, you don't try to do it a second time.

Originally Posted by Toadmaster

I don't think that is completely true. Different styles of bow make adjustments. A longbow uses length for leverage, while a composite bow or a recurve bow use different materials / shape to gain power without requiring the length of the longbow.

You can get the same "pull" for a short bow as with a long by making the bow thicker, recurving the tips, reflexing the bow (basically building it so it can bend over backwards) building it out of several materials, and/or backing it with horn (i.e. making it a composite bow). THe advantage of the long bow isn't in greater pull, but in that greater leverage you mentioned. It makes it easier to draw back the bow. A 100 pound longbow is easier to drawback than a 100 pound composite bow-becuase the increase in draw comes on more gradually.

I think you are on the right track though. Bows should be far more customized than most games make them, individually tailored to the user. I really can't use a bow made for my 12 year old son and expect the same kind of performance as one made for me. If anything the type of bow should be a modifier, wood bows being the base, short and long, composite, recurve being modifiers. So a short composite recurve bow may be similar in power to a long wood bow. It is probably getting far to detailed to get into the height of the archer, but strength seems a perfectly reasonable measure, so rate bows that way. Using a bow of different strength should result in a penalty, less damage, less accurate etc. +1 / -1 str probably not that big of a deal, but someone with a 16 strength using a bow made for someone with an 8 strength should be (and might even look funny).

I don't think we need a great deal of variance, but I think we could use one STR/Damage/Range table. I think the basic bows are something like self STR 9, Long STR 11, and Composite STR 13, So it looks simple eoungh to do the progression. Something like 4 points of STR per "Step" in the damage.

STR 5: 1D4+1
STR 9: 1D6+1
STR 13: 1D8+1
STR: 17: 1D10+1

Longbows seem to drop the STR requirements by 2, but might up the DEX requirements (I'll check).

What I did before for another RPG, and which I think would port over is allowing a user to build a bow for a given draw weight (damage), and then getting a default STR, but allowing them to tweak that number a bit with skill. For example, a long bow could reduce the STR required by 2, a recurved bow by 1, compound bow by up to half,and so forth. THese reductions would be "paid for" with negative modfiers tot he crafting rolls, and/or increased cost and manufacturing time (it takes a few extra days to steam and bend the tips of a recurve bow, or double recurve, and some decent engineering skills to make a compound bow).

Originally Posted by Toadmaster

This is probably true, leaving out the other 12 shots makes for a much better story.

Luck certainly plays a part too. If you toss a basketball over your shoulder and it goes right through the hoop, you walk away like it was no big deal, you don't try to do it a second time.

Or kick one in for 75 feet. I saw that once. Once.

Originally Posted by rust

Most games do this for crossbows, although there are just as many different types of
crossbows (e.g. material of the bow, material of the bowstring, etc.) as there are ty-
pes of bow, and in my opinion this works perfectly well and avoids a lot of discussions
about more or less irrelevant construction details which do not really influence the per-
formance of the weapon that much.

Exactly. We rarely get into the incredible wide range of draw weights of crossbows (from 30 foot-pounds, up over 1200 foot-pounds). IMO that is the way to go with all bows.

What I could see would be using the guidelines I posted early and giving crossbows a DEX reduction and higher starting skill (easier to use), and the ability to use a mechanic aid to increase the user's STR. A lever might be worth +4 STR, A crank might be worth +8 or +10.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Yes, but there is a lack of good sense in the bow rules as written. For example, technically speaking an actual longbow (welsh warbow) is both a self bow and a composite bow. Yet it is treated as neither. A Japanese Longbow is a composite bow and not a self bow, but the rules make some assumptions about the qualities of self, long and composite bows that are not true. Realstically Longbows are not necessarily the most powerful bows. In fact, the length of the bow has little to do with it's power. A bowyer can get just about any power he wants out of a bow when he crafts it.

No. The Welsh/English Warbow is NOT composite. It is solely a self-bow; a bow fashioned out of a single piece of wood. Earlier in European History there were laminated Longbows, and the Japanese longbow (the Yumi) was of this type of construction. Based on pictures in Longbow and The Great War Bow, that there may have been some composite long bows in the Islands in the Middle Ages, but these were probably from a different tradition; perhaps a leftover of the Roman occupation.

Composite Bows are generally higher powered for a given size than the self bow. Thus good for horseback use, giving greater range and perhaps penetration to a comparably sized European bow (Short bow, hunting bow, bow).

Composite Bows are generally recurve, as were many prehistoric European longbows.

SDLeary

[QUOTE=SDLeary;47980]No. The Welsh/English Warbow is NOT composite. It is solely a self-bow; a bow fashioned out of a single piece of wood.

Nope. it's a composite bow. A natural composite bow. The wood of the Yew tree forms a natural composite, with the heartwood and sapwood acting the way bone and sinew does on a built & backed composite bow. That's why the English imported Yew, because of those specific properties.

Earlier in European History there were laminated Longbows, and the Japanese longbow (the Yumi) was of this type of construction. Based on pictures in Longbow and The Great War Bow, that there may have been some composite long bows in the Islands in the Middle Ages, but these were probably from a different tradition; perhaps a leftover of the Roman occupation.

Lamination is not the key, it is being constructed of materials with different properties on the inside and outside that resist compression and streching (respectively) allowing the bow to be pulled farther back without breaking.

Composite Bows are generally higher powered for a given size than the self bow. Thus good for horseback use, giving greater range and perhaps penetration to a comparably sized European bow (Short bow, hunting bow, bow).

Yes, because otherwise there is no point in going through the trouble to make them. Compsoite bows are generally harder to make and take longer than simple self bows.

Composite Bows are generally recurve, as were many prehistoric European longbows.

SDLeary

A lot of composite bows, especially horse bows are reflex bows. Reflex bows are built so that they curve "backwards" when unstrung. That increases the amount of weight the bow draws since, even when the bow is not being pulled back it is already under load.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

A lot of composite bows, especially horse bows are reflex bows. Reflex bows are built so that they curve "backwards" when unstrung. That increases the amount of weight the bow draws since, even when the bow is not being pulled back it is already under load.

A nice example of a composite reflex bow in its unstrung state, which probably gives
an impression of the power stored in the bow even without a draw when it is strung:

File:Gak gung.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia