PDA

View Full Version : What's the use of hand crossbows?



Kaeso
2010-09-21, 10:17 AM
You can see all the core weapons here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#crossbowHand).

The hand crossbow is an exotic weapon and deals a mere 1d4 damage for a medium character. The light crossbow is a simple weapon and deals a whoopin' 1d8 damage for a medium character. Doesn't this make the hand crossbow completely obsolete?

Sure, it's possible to duel wield a hand crossbow, but that means you have to burn a feat for the proficiency, another one for two weapon fighting, take rapid reload and do who knows what to make sure you can reload both crossbows. In the end you've burned at least three feats to do the exact same ammount of damage you'd get with a light crossbow, a weapon everybody (even a monk or a wizard) can use! You'd be better off using exotic weapon prof. for a repeating light crossbow.

Is there anything I'm overlooking? I find it hard to believe that a simple weapon could be so vastly superior to an exotic one.

Greenish
2010-09-21, 10:22 AM
Hand crossbow is easier to conceal, and rogues gain the proficiency for free. Then there are some decent feats for it, such as Hand Crossbow Focus (WF and Rapid Reload in one package, excellent for Crossbow Sniper). The weapon damage shouldn't be one's main source of damage, either.

Though yeah, in the end, it's not worth the feat for EWP, much like most other exotic weapons.

FuryOfMetal
2010-09-21, 10:24 AM
Alot of exotic weapons a just a trap (even though most look cool.) There are a few exotic weapons that give you things you don't get from martial or simple weapons, the best being the spiked chain as it has reach, threatens adjacent squares, can trip, be finessed and 2 handed power attacked with.

In general the other crossbows are superior, but most importantly the hand crossbow looks cooler :smallamused: They have bonuses for being concealed I believe, can indeed be dual wielded and are on the rogueish proficiency lists. This is important as alot of common rogue builds use TWF to get extra sneak attack damage and the ability to get in that extra few dice of sneak attack is great at low levels. Of course once you have your iterave attack then it'd be better to us a bow for ranged sneak attack, or just be up close as it'll save on feats.

But most importantly they're cool :smallamused:

Kaeso
2010-09-21, 10:25 AM
Hand crossbow is easier to conceal, and rogues gain the proficiency for free. Then there are some decent feats for it, such as Hand Crossbow Focus (WF and Rapid Reload in one package, excellent for Crossbow Sniper). The weapon damage shouldn't be one's main source of damage, either.

Though yeah, in the end, it's not worth the feat for EWP, much like most other exotic weapons.

What book is hand crossbow focus from? I can't find it {Scrubbed}

Ruinix
2010-09-21, 10:29 AM
also there is an ubber full skirmish dual hand crossbow precition damage wich can add dex to damage, extend the skirmish to 60', and that u just need a wand of unseen servan and that its.

FMArthur
2010-09-21, 10:31 AM
Lookin' cool. All crossbows suck compared to throwing weapons and are generally more difficult to optimize than bows. If I were to use a crossbow, it would be to TWF hand crossbows. If a character is relying on a weapon's base damage after third level he's a chump, plain and simple. And if you're going for bonus damage dice on attacks, you might as well try to get more attacks (ie fight with a weapon in each hand). Rogues and Ninjas are the obvious users - with Ninjas (by some miracle) actually being better than Rogues for this one particular combat tactic - because they both get easy bonus damage and free proficiency in the weapon.

It's a feat whirlpool, but it can be made to work. What useful thing are you going to do with that one light crossbow that someone TWFing hand crossbows can't do better?

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 10:31 AM
A rogue can hold a hand crossbow in one hand and something else in the other. The damage difference is negligible beyond very low levels.

Ruinix
2010-09-21, 10:39 AM
Lookin' cool. All crossbows suck compared to throwing weapons and are generally more difficult to optimize than bows. If I were to use a crossbow, it would be to TWF hand crossbows. If a character is relying on a weapon's base damage after third level he's a chump, plain and simple. And if you're going for bonus damage dice on attacks, you might as well try to get more attacks (ie fight with a weapon in each hand). Rogues and Ninjas are the obvious users - with Ninjas (by some miracle) actually being better than Rogues for this one particular combat tactic - because they both get easy bonus damage and free proficiency in the weapon.

It's a feat whirlpool, but it can be made to work. What useful thing are you going to do with that one light crossbow that someone TWFing hand crossbows can't do better?


I disagree with the statement of "more dificult to optimize"

-crossbows can add dex to damage, bow don't.
-crossbows had less range than bows, precition damage work on short range.

both need several feats and features for shine

Greenish
2010-09-21, 10:47 AM
What book is hand crossbow focus from? I can't find it {Scrubbed}Drow of the Underdark, I seem to recall.

I disagree with the statement of "more dificult to optimize"

-crossbows can add dex to damage, bow don't.
-crossbows had less range than bows, precition damage work on short range.

both need several feats and features for shineCrossbow Sniper is just 1/2 of Dex mod to damage, and I don't see how having less range is better.

Besides, needing several specific feats from different sources to compete with bows does mean "more difficult to optimize".

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 10:49 AM
I disagree with the statement of "more dificult to optimize"

-crossbows can add dex to damage, bow don't.
-crossbows had less range than bows, precition damage work on short range.

both need several feats and features for shine

...You do know bows can shoot at short range too, right?

Your second point is ridiculous.

Telonius
2010-09-21, 10:51 AM
Is there anything I'm overlooking? I find it hard to believe that a simple weapon could be so vastly superior to an exotic one.

2 for 1 deal on ammunition? Other than that, I got nothing.

EDIT: Not even that, was looking at the repeating version.
EDIT2: Ah, discovered one thing - firing a Light crossbow one-handed gives it a -2. Hand Crossbow doesn't have that penalty. I think this could allow you to reload, fire at full attack bonus, and still get a shield bonus from a Buckler.

lsfreak
2010-09-21, 11:09 AM
It's basically useful because rogues get it for free. Other than that, nothing really. The difference between a shortbow and a hand crossbow isn't much for a ranged rogue; crossbow has the feat tax of Rapid Reload but you get Weapon Focus with it for free thanks to Hand Crossbow Focus. Crossbow Sniper often won't come up, in my experience, because it's a) not a whole lot of extra damage and b) rogues are already feat-starved, so the difference between Crossbow Sniper and composite shortbows is often nonexistent. Hand crossbows have the minor advantage that if you're running around with a Str score below 10, it doesn't hurt your damage.

In most cases, I'd probably just stick with shortbows.

Psyx
2010-09-21, 11:12 AM
Flavour?

Style?

*gasp* Maybe even Roleplaying reasons?

Kaeso
2010-09-21, 11:19 AM
Flavour?

Style?

*gasp* Maybe even Roleplaying reasons?

Why? A crossbow is still a crossbow, and both can be fired from one hand.
It hardly makes a difference unless you're planning to make a detailed sketch of your character, and even then the difference is neglectable.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 11:21 AM
Why? A crossbow is still a crossbow, and both can be fired from one hand.
It hardly makes a difference unless you're planning to make a detailed sketch of your character, and even then the difference is neglectable.

Because hand crossbows being easier to conceal could obviously never motivate a character to use one. Nope, an assassin using a concealable weapon has nothing to do with roleplaying.

Shenanigans
2010-09-21, 11:23 AM
Because hand crossbows being easier to conceal could obviously never motivate a character to use one. Nope, an assassin using a concealable weapon has nothing to do with roleplaying.
Yeah, I think it is mostly a roleplaying thing, even if they have given hand crossbow users some decent feat choices.

Also, hand crossbows are used by Drow to deliver poison into my characters. ;)

Greenish
2010-09-21, 11:25 AM
Because hand crossbows being easier to conceal could obviously never motivate a character to use one. Nope, an assassin using a concealable weapon has nothing to do with roleplaying.Though given that it already pays for the ability with shorter range and lesser damage, I don't see the need for it to be Exotic.

Fax Celestis
2010-09-21, 11:26 AM
-crossbows can add dex to damage, bow don't.
-crossbows had less range than bows, precition damage work on short range.

Composite bows add Str to damage. Crossbows never add a stat to damage without a feat.

Long and shortbows are equally capable of covering closer range than crossbows, and are also capable of using Manyshot (or the Greater version), Rapid Shot, and even just the full-attack action without a feat.

Kaeso
2010-09-21, 11:27 AM
Because hand crossbows being easier to conceal could obviously never motivate a character to use one. Nope, an assassin using a concealable weapon has nothing to do with roleplaying.

Where is it stated that hand crossbows are easier to conceal than light crossbows? The SRD doesn't say anything about it and the PHB only says it's favoured by stealthy characters in the flavour text. Unlike the dagger it doesn't give a bonus on sleight of hand checks.

jmbrown
2010-09-21, 11:30 AM
Where is it stated that hand crossbows are easier to conceal than light crossbows? The SRD doesn't say anything about it and the PHB only says it's favoured by stealthy characters in the flavour text. Unlike the dagger it doesn't give a bonus on sleight of hand checks.

Sleight of hand. You can hide a light weapon or an easily concealed range weapon. I wouldn't call a crossbow an easily concealed ranged weapon.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 11:30 AM
Actually the SRD does have something to say about hand crossbows being easily concealable.

You can hide a small object (including a light weapon or an easily concealed ranged weapon, such as a dart, sling, or hand crossbow) on your body. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/sleightofhand.htm)

Check the skill descriptions next time.

Daggers are easier to conceal than any other weapon, but you can only conceal light weapons to start with...

LibraryOgre
2010-09-21, 11:30 AM
In earlier editions, hand crossbows were primarily a poison delivery device. In 3.x, they work for that and for precision damage delivery.

Plus, they look like pistols.

Shenanigans
2010-09-21, 11:31 AM
Composite bows add Str to damage. Crossbows never add a stat to damage without a feat.

Long and shortbows are equally capable of covering closer range than crossbows, and are also capable of using Manyshot (or the Greater version), Rapid Shot, and even just the full-attack action without a feat.
You're not going to get any argument out of me that regular bows (long, short, composite, even bone) are superior to crossbows in every or nearly every crunch category. However, they sometimes just have a better flavor.

For example, I have a buddy who made a dwarven crossbow sniper. Now he used a heavy, repeating crossbow because it seemed more appropriate for the concept and build (dwarven outcast, spec ops kind of feel)

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 11:31 AM
Flavour?

Style?

*gasp* Maybe even Roleplaying reasons?

There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 11:32 AM
There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

Or people who want weapons they can hide easily.

Although if you want a ranged weapon you can hide easily, use a sling.

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 11:37 AM
Or people who want weapons they can hide easily.


That counts as an effective weapon for your abilities. I didn't just mean raw power.

Fax Celestis
2010-09-21, 11:39 AM
You're not going to get any argument out of me that regular bows (long, short, composite, even bone) are superior to crossbows in every or nearly every crunch category. However, they sometimes just have a better flavor.

For example, I have a buddy who made a dwarven crossbow sniper. Now he used a heavy, repeating crossbow because it seemed more appropriate for the concept and build (dwarven outcast, spec ops kind of feel)

Yeah, I'll give you that. But the person I was responding to was using mechanical points of justification: I felt the need to respond in kind.

Starbuck_II
2010-09-21, 11:41 AM
I disagree with the statement of "more dificult to optimize"

-crossbows can add dex to damage, bow don't.
-crossbows had less range than bows, precition damage work on short range.

both need several feats and features for shine

With Aptitude Weapon (ToB) Composite bows add 1/2 Dex and Str to damage.

FMArthur
2010-09-21, 11:45 AM
With Aptitude Weapon, you can fire splitting arrows/bolts and fire another splitting projectile again every time one threatens a crit and fire again if they confirm their crit. Crossbows have a better threat range than bows, and hand crossbows can be dual-wielded to nearly double the amount of projectiles you shoot, making it less and less likely for your endless volley to lose its momentum.

Aptitude Weapons are silly.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 11:47 AM
Hand crossbows still require a free hand to reload.

valadil
2010-09-21, 12:12 PM
There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

I think this goes back to the argument of whether or not your characters are aware of how the game world functions. If I was playing a stealthy assassin, I'd want a ranged weapon that could be easily hidden, even if it lost some firepower. If you're playing a game where characters don't know about rules mechanics, I think it's reasonable that the assassin would go for the weapon that looks stealthier. In a game where players know exactly what sort of bonus they get, the hand crossbow becomes subpar.

Personally I have little interest in an RPG where the characters know game mechanics, but I'm well aware that there are other valid points of view.

Psyx
2010-09-21, 12:13 PM
There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

*rolleyes*

So every weapon in the book should be balanced, and nobody would ever dream of using anything else for cultural or specific reasons?

Steel pistol crossbows are concealable and can easily be levelled and fired at someone with a minimum of fuss - unlike slings and thrown daggers (both of which are harder to actually use, of course. Whoever thought that a throwing dagger is a simple weapon was...simple). They're great for subtly murdering people, basically.

true_shinken
2010-09-21, 12:22 PM
Aptitude Weapons are silly.
Aptitude weapon abuse is silly. It's obviously not intended to work like this. Taking advantage of an editing mistake? Yeah, that is silly.

Ruinix
2010-09-21, 12:36 PM
Hand crossbows still require a free hand to reload.

wich can be done by a lev 1 spell, and let u fire at dual weild.


-1/2 dex to damage is more than nothing.

-precition damage can be extended to 60' just with crossbows, with bows u r locked at 30'.

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 12:38 PM
As I said in response to Yuki Akuma, if a weapon is easy to hide and your character is stealthy, then it makes sense to pick this weapon because it fits the character's abilities.



So every weapon in the book should be balanced, and nobody would ever dream of using anything else for cultural or specific reasons?


I'm saying that "for roleplaying reasons" is often a completely unrealistic excuse. Characters must have a good reason for choosing a weak weapon or armor - because it's easier to hide or doesn't hinder their movement, because better weapons are not available, because they fight a lot of enemies vulnerable to this particular weapon, because they don't like bladed weapons, and such. "For roleplaying reasons" alone is silly, especially when it implies that roleplaying is the same as using underpowered equipment.



Personally I have little interest in an RPG where the characters know game mechanics, but I'm well aware that there are other valid points of view.

You can tell that a two-handed sword hits stronger than a dagger and a plate mail offers better protection than just chain without knowing the precise rules of your world.

Greenish
2010-09-21, 12:38 PM
wich can be done by a lev 1 spell, and let u fire at dual weild.Mage Hand takes standard action to cast and has the duration of Concentration. I doubt Prestidigitation can exert enough force to do it, and anyhow it can't duplicate existing spells (such as Mage Hand for manipulating objects).

true_shinken
2010-09-21, 12:43 PM
Mage Hand takes standard action to cast and has the duration of Concentration. I doubt Prestidigitation can exert enough force to do it, and anyhow it can't duplicate existing spells (such as Mage Hand for manipulating objects).

Both are level 0 spells. He meant Unseen Servant.

Ruinix
2010-09-21, 12:49 PM
Mage Hand takes standard action to cast and has the duration of Concentration. I doubt Prestidigitation can exert enough force to do it, and anyhow it can't duplicate existing spells (such as Mage Hand for manipulating objects).

i was talking of Unseen Servant. and be done by a wand use, a scroll use or the arcane guy of the party; and the spell can reload both weapons the all full attack.

___


Your second point is ridiculous.


excuse me but that is just an stupid statement.

if u don't ever played a martial range PC then u just don't an idea of what i talking about.

range damage is balanced with mele damage only with full attacks and with precition damage.

if u havent precition damage such as skirmish, suden s., sneack a., or what ever, then u really feel the underpower of range combat.

beside any combat in d&d is taken in melee range, very few encounters are given in mid/long range, an almost the 99% of combat in dungeons are in the precition damage range.

the lesser max range of crossbow isn't a real issue for most D&D encounters.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 12:53 PM
That... doesn't change the fact that a bow can do all that, plus fire more accurately at more extreme ranges to boot.

At all.

I'm not even sure why you think this is an argument.

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 12:53 PM
the lesser max range of crossbow isn't a real issue for most D&D encounters.

It's not an issue, but it's not a benefit either.

ffone
2010-09-21, 12:54 PM
Why my TWF rogue uses hand crossbows:

Before battle (or when moving at the start of battle, since drawing is free during movement), draw one in each hand. Fire each one (preferably as the first two attacks of a two-weapon full attack w/ sneak attack damage), then drop them, since you can't reload while wielding two and she doesn't have Rapid Reload anyway. Then, if you have iterative attacks, draw shuriken to complete the full attack - they're at -4 unless you're a ninja or monk, but even if you don't have Quick Draw they're still free to draw and throw, like arrows. If someone knows a way to do a TWF ranged full attack without any other feats or nonproficiency penalties, let me know! Are there hand repeating crossbows or cheap magic for it?

So they're situational. Better range increment than throwing weapons (sneak attack is up to 30', but most thrown weapons have a range increment of less than that) and rather than reloading, I drop.

Once the char gets richer she could cheese with 300 gp crystals of 'least return' (MiC) to free action draw several in succession. She has them for her main pair of melee weapons, so she never begins battle with those drawn, which is another situational reason to walk around holding two hand crossbows between battles, albeit an obscure one. The same would apply to a Quick Draw character.

Greenish
2010-09-21, 12:57 PM
Both are level 0 spells. He meant Unseen Servant.Ah, right. You'd need 2-3 on later levels, but it'd work.

[Edit]:
Once the char gets richer she could cheese with 300 gp crystals of 'least return' (MiC) to free action draw several in succession.How is using the crystals for their express function "cheese"?

Cogidubnus
2010-09-21, 03:19 PM
There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

I take objection to this. You argue that characters always use the most effective weapons for their abilities - more or less true. But "roleplaying reasons" is a summary of "my character is stealthy and needs weapons he can hide as well as armour that doesn't clink when he moves and doesn't want to get his hands physically dirty". Or "my character thinks hand crossbows look awesome and uses them to impress people". Both are valid reasons to use less-than-superior weapons and come under the category "roleplaying". I'll use shruiken as another example - an assassin might use them simply because they're trademark assassiny and the player feels he ought to. He might not even be aware that shruiken have half the damage potential of a thrown dagger - after all, 0-2 damage is a negligible difference in terms of what you'd observe.

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 04:12 PM
The former is related to the character's abilities, the latter is being confident in your strength enough to choose weapons for style. Also, this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9398258&postcount=35).

snoopy13a
2010-09-21, 04:48 PM
As said before, the biggest advantage of a hand crossbow is that it is easily concealed. This can be very useful in a city campaign if the character wants to carry weapons when entering a town or building where weapons are banned and characters are frisked.

Many items that don't seem useful at first are useful in certain contexts. Additionally, some powerful techniques aren't useful in certain contexts. For example, Overland Flight is a very effective spell when the caster is outside. However, if the caster is in a dungeon where the ceiling is eight feet high, it doesn't grant the same benefits.

Starbuck_II
2010-09-21, 04:50 PM
Aptitude weapon abuse is silly. It's obviously not intended to work like this. Taking advantage of an editing mistake? Yeah, that is silly.

Wait, what do you define as its intent?

Kantolin
2010-09-21, 04:52 PM
You can tell that a two-handed sword hits stronger than a dagger and a plate mail offers better protection than just chain without knowing the precise rules of your world.

I dunno; I've got an entire class full of kids who've never learned to type properly and summarily type with two fingers. It's fairly objectively better to learn to type properly, but they don't care enough to want to put the work into it. Relatedly, they type very slowly and have to spend time hunting for letters (Over the few kids who, in fact, knowish how to type and work at it).

Also! Zorro used a whip. Zorro is awesome. I wanna use a whip.

King Arthur used a [long or bastard] sword and shield. King Arthur is awesome, and it clearly seemed to work for him. I wanna use a [long or bastard] sword and shield. I mean, King Arthur was a hero of the realm and beat a bunch of enemies.

Emulating other people is a very popular (and reasonable) reason to do things like that. This becomes more clear if you think about previous heroes - a heavy flail may be rather objectively better than a greatclub, but Max the Great used a greatclub and he saved the world with it, so there's gotta be something right about it.

My mother was bitten by a scythe. I've had nightmares about being bitten by a scythe ever since. My mom ran away from home when I was 6, I think it's because she turned into a were-scythe. Anyway, no way in heck I'm using a scythe.

Slightly less silly example than that one: My name is Granite /Steelhammer/, I'm going to use a freaking warhammer the way my father, grandfather, and great grandfather did. When I hit adulthood, I joined the militia/army as a hammerdwarf, and have been training to use one since.

And third! There are tons of people, in real life, who argue that X is or isn't better than Y. Many of these people are missing key information, just plain' wrong, xor were always told that X is better and believe that.

For example, 'you hit more often with a dagger than a kukri'. Or, 'You shouldn't use a pick; they're unweildly'. Or, 'Bastard swords are harder to use than a longsword, but are definitely worth the investment as they're significantly better!'

These then get more curious when you factor in other features. The rogue clearly shouldn't use a kukri over a dagger; he's not proficient in them and will miss more often. Does that mean kukri are unweildly?

If two fighters are fighting against enemies, one (Lucky Joe) happens to hit a lot with his dagger while the other (Unlucky Jim) is lucky to roll above 8 with his kukri... from an in-character point of view, kukri look like they suck. Luck, or differences in attack rolls, can /appear/ to make an obvious conclusion over time.

And then bastard swords are, objectively (from an OOC point of view), better than longswords... it's just that there are superior feats to take than 'exotic weapon proficiency'. But ICly, a longsword might be a considered a 'training bastard sword' - I mean, if you /are/ aware that a longsword does 1d8 while a bastard sword does 1d10, then using a longsword seems a little silly.

Or maybe the character is just plain' dumb.
Barbarian: 'Me use greatclub; it bigger'.
Fighter: 'Uh... you'd be much better served using a - '
Barbarian: 'Nono, that small. Me use greatclub; it bigger.' *Leans in, matter-of-factly* 'Dat means it's better.'
Trainer: Saaay, you like 'bigger'? Have you heard of the 'monkey grip' feat?
Barbarian: Me like!
Fighter: ^_^' But you don't have power attack, and it would be a better idea to -
Barbarin: Me like!

I, as a note, am not saying that it's manditory to pick poorer options for good roleplaying. Just that there are quite a few situations where it's reasonable or even logical to do so.

I mean, he could've named himself Granite SteelBastardsword, or Granite SteelKusarigama, or Granite Steeltwohandslargesteelshield. ^_^ Or, for a less silly statement, been named Granite Steelhammer but have decided he doesn't want to use a warhammer the way his family did. But that's not necessarily a better roleplaying concept, so hey.

Hawriel
2010-09-21, 04:53 PM
Why my TWF rogue uses hand crossbows:

Before battle (or when moving at the start of battle, since drawing is free during movement), draw one in each hand. Fire each one (preferably as the first two attacks of a two-weapon full attack w/ sneak attack damage), .

Have you ever seen a crossbow? You do know the bolt sits in a slight groove. The bolts are not stored internaly in a barrel. You dont store crossbows preloaded. A hand crossbow does not sit in a holster. Not to mention damaging the fletching on the bolt. It's not a gun. No one unless they are incompetent keeps their bows draw/strung unless they are about to use them. Because if they do they will worp the bow making it usless. larger crossbows dont have stocks eather. That was added on after the firearm became widly used.

The weapon does not justify an exotic weapon feat requirment.

I had afew characters who have used handcrossbows. This is why.

The ammuniton is smaller. I can carry more.

I can use enchanted/utilitarian bolts. Explosive, poison, flair, unique for scying on, the list goes on.

It's small easer to conceal in large pieces of clothing like a cloak or large pouch.

After loading it can be easily used in one hand.

It doesnt take alot of effort, that is needing strenge or crank, to draw it.

Hague
2010-09-21, 05:07 PM
There are several hand crossbow-only feats. There's a style feat I believe that allows you to wield a rapier and hand crossbow and fire the bow while threatened.

If you get a pair of those auto-loading crossbows (the one's that store up to 100 projectiles and place them after each shot) and another enhancement that ***** the crossbow you can effectively dual-fire the hand crossbow.


EDIT: "winds the crossbow" :P

Heliomance
2010-09-21, 05:10 PM
There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

"I've just got a knack for the hand crossbow, y'know? I tried out the shortbow, didn't like it. It didn't feel right in my hands. But the hand crossbow just works for me."

Tengu_temp
2010-09-21, 05:14 PM
I dunno; I've got an entire class full of kids who've never learned to type properly and summarily type with two fingers. It's fairly objectively better to learn to type properly, but they don't care enough to want to put the work into it. Relatedly, they type very slowly and have to spend time hunting for letters (Over the few kids who, in fact, knowish how to type and work at it).

Their life doesn't depend on it. If you were an adventurer, you'd try to get the weapons and armor that fit your abilities as good as possible, until you're sure that you're good enough to survive even if you show off and use bad, but flashy equipment.


Also! Zorro used a whip. Zorro is awesome. I wanna use a whip.

King Arthur used a [long or bastard] sword and shield. King Arthur is awesome, and it clearly seemed to work for him. I wanna use a [long or bastard] sword and shield. I mean, King Arthur was a hero of the realm and beat a bunch of enemies.

A whip is fitting for Zorro's fighting style and came in handy in a lot of situations. Sword and board is useful sometimes in DND, and is the best fighting style in real life.



If two fighters are fighting against enemies, one (Lucky Joe) happens to hit a lot with his dagger while the other (Unlucky Jim) is lucky to roll above 8 with his kukri... from an in-character point of view, kukri look like they suck. Luck, or differences in attack rolls, can /appear/ to make an obvious conclusion over time.


Hitting and missing is a manner of luck from the player's perspective, but from the character's, it's mostly swordplay. A trained combatant, unless he's dumb like a brick, should be able to realize which weapons he's not proficient in, and what are the rough advantages and disadvantages of the weapons he is proficient in. Kukri doesn't suck, Unlucky Jim sucks, as anyone proficient with both kukri and dagger will be able to tell when having them in his hands.

I'm not saying that characters must not take bad choices in weapons/armor. I'm saying that a character who makes such a choice should have a good reason to do so.


"I've just got a knack for the hand crossbow, y'know? I tried out the shortbow, didn't like it. It didn't feel right in my hands. But the hand crossbow just works for me."

This is a good reason. "I'm a roleplayer, I don't need to use the most powerful weapons available" is not a good reason. It just makes you like you were looking down on people who do use the most powerful weapons.

Fax Celestis
2010-09-21, 05:15 PM
"I've just got a knack for the hand crossbow, y'know? I tried out the shortbow, didn't like it. It didn't feel right in my hands. But the hand crossbow just works for me."

This is not a "roleplaying reason" unless your character is LARPing.

Heliomance
2010-09-21, 05:21 PM
It's not backed up by any mechanics, what else could it be but a roleplaying reason?

Fax Celestis
2010-09-21, 05:27 PM
It's not backed up by any mechanics, what else could it be but a roleplaying reason?

You missed what Tengu said. There is no "In-Character Roleplaying Reason", because your character isn't roleplaying (unless he's LARPing).

WitchSlayer
2010-09-21, 06:33 PM
I use them a lot in 4e, they're awesome looking weapons AND they're simple weapon proficiency.

In 3.x? Not quite as sure, I was going to make a guy with hand crossbows before, just for style.

Orzel
2010-09-21, 07:00 PM
It's the only ranged weapon you can turn sideways for the kill shot.

DM: If you turn it sideways, the bolt will fal...

SHUT UP!

*sidewayz hand crossbow standoff*

Tyndmyr
2010-09-21, 07:11 PM
That... doesn't change the fact that a bow can do all that, plus fire more accurately at more extreme ranges to boot.

At all.

I'm not even sure why you think this is an argument.

Crossbow sniper is a significant balancing factor for rogues. My E6 rogue elected to go crossbow, on the basis that longer sneak attack range was more important than longer overall range. I believe tumbling bolts may also have been a factor.

The biggest advantage of bows is the composite option, but if your strength isn't great, and your dex is? Crossbow all the way.

Hand crossbow for more sneak attacks is a possibility, but at that point, you're combining two feat heavy options, crossbows and twf. And frankly, at that point, if Im gonna dual wield exotic crossbows, I'd go with the ridiculously high damage ones from Races of Stone.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 07:14 PM
The biggest advantage of bows is the composite option, but if your strength isn't great, and your dex is? Crossbow all the way.

No, the biggest advantage of bows is not needing to waste a feat on making full attacks.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-21, 07:16 PM
See also, the automatic crossbow, or any of the various reloading methods. Pretty much every high level crossbow user is going to delve into one of them.

lsfreak
2010-09-21, 07:16 PM
A whip is fitting for Zorro's fighting style and came in handy in a lot of situations. Sword and board is useful sometimes in DND, and is the best fighting style in real life.

Would just like to point out that that's utterly false. Sword-and-board may have been best given a certain place in the world in a certain period of time, but is it no way 'best.' For example, it was replaced, which in my book is damn good evidence it wasn't best.

Fax Celestis
2010-09-21, 07:18 PM
See also, the automatic crossbow, or any of the various reloading methods. Pretty much every high level crossbow user is going to delve into one of them.

Still spending a feat, it's just EWP instead of Quick Reload.

ericgrau
2010-09-21, 07:23 PM
Light crossbows can be TWFed as well as hand crossbows can. Both require a free hand to reload. There is a minor and extremely rare advantage to the hand crossbow in that when holding a non-weapon in your off-hand the light crossbow has a -2 to hit. Otherwise there is absolutely no advantage to the hand crossbow in a hack and slash campaign.

As already mentioned the advantage of the hand crossbow is its ability to be concealed. A light crossbow weighs as much as a longsword and no, I don't care what you rolled, you can't conceal it. Or if you want the RAW for that here you go:

You can hide a small object (including a light weapon or an easily concealed ranged weapon, such as a dart, sling, or hand crossbow) on your body.

You're only losing 2 points of damage on average, which is really nothing for a rogue. Like many other weapons you trade a minor amount of damage for a major utility function. For anyone using that function it's a no brainer (get it). For those not using that function it's also a no brainer (don't get it).

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 07:35 PM
See also, the automatic crossbow, or any of the various reloading methods. Pretty much every high level crossbow user is going to delve into one of them.

And a high level bow user doesn't need to bother wasting resources on quick reloading tricks, because he can do it already.

Also, automatic crossbows have five-bolt clips, and require a full round action to reload the clip. Not exactly the best option for full-attacking more than once per combat.

Edit: And, as Fax said, you're still wasting a feat.

gorfnab
2010-09-21, 07:41 PM
Two Weapon Fighting tree + Lightning Maces + Hand Crossbow Focus + Aptitude Hand Crossbows + Blood in the Water Stance + Disciple of Dispater

Tyndmyr
2010-09-21, 07:43 PM
Tricks such as invisible servants following you around are not terribly resource intensive. I'll grant there's a small investment, but by high levels, it's not going to be significant. It's not generally a concern at low levels, either, since you don't have iteratives yet.

And by the time you pick up a repeating crossbow, you obviously use a heavy repeating crossbow. I don't think there's any reason to use the light one(unless, obviously, dual wielding shenanigans are at play).

That gives you, for the price of two feats and invisible servant wands, 1d10+2+1/2 dex damage, assuming use of tumbling bolts, before sneak attack(at double range) and magical bonuses are considered. For a rogue, that's a pretty decent deal.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-21, 07:46 PM
The Rogue doesn't care if he's doing 1d4 or 1d10 damage with his weapon - most of his damage is in the form of 1d6s from his Sneak Attack.

1d10 damage is only 3 more damage than 1d4, you know.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-21, 07:53 PM
Granted. However, the extra 1/2 dex is likely to be significant. It's a rare rogue that doesn't pack a significant amount of dex. The extra 2 from tumbling bolts ain't great, but hey...it's mundane. And 10g per bolt. There's really no reason not to. And that option isn't available via bow.

Neither is the sniping, which doubles range on sneak attack. Not getting sneak attack damage is a clear problem for the rogue. All high level rogues I've seen abuse some method of getting sneak attack pretty much all the time unless the target is immune(and many work on negating that). The extra sneak attack range is the primary reason to use the crossbow. The extra damage is just a welcome bonus.

Fax Celestis
2010-09-21, 07:55 PM
Real rogues use greater manyshot and a wand of grease or web.

Starbuck_II
2010-09-21, 07:57 PM
Real rogues use greater manyshot and a wand of grease or web.

Web is harder to adjucate so you have 2 surfaces to use it on, but yeah Web is nice if right terrain.

bondpirate
2010-09-21, 10:28 PM
I'm surprised no ones mentioned this, but another benefit all crossbows get over bows is the attachable and separately enchanted bayonet (Complete Scoundrel 109). Yes, you get a -2 to attack only on melee, but for 4gp you gain the ability to AoO a foe in melee range, gain an additional set of enchantments (yes, I know enchantments cost more than 4gp), and at only a move action swap them out for a different bayonet and set of enchantments. The hand crossbow's bayonet is essentially a dagger, while the larger crossbows gain either a short-spear or spear attachment that can be set against a charge. You can also use a crossbow while prone at no penalty (PH 151).

'Rapid Reload' makes loading a light or hand crossbow as a free action. You are allowed one or more free actions as your DM allows (PH 135). So yes, you can twf while rapid reloading hand crossbows on iterative attacks. Awesome. Though if I'm wrong, then you'll probably need the 'Quick Draw' feat to make it work. (edit: quick draw is unnecessary, but you do need to somehow (aka magically) gain a third arm or somehow "store" the weapon as a free action)

With the 'Penetrating Shot' feat you can, as a standard action, stab your enemy then fire a 'penetrating shot' through them to hit another target. I'm not sure, but I think you shouldn't get an AoO against you if you do this since it seems more a secondary event thanks to the stabbing.

Since crossbows draw an AoO when used or reloaded, the feat 'Shot on the Run' is a necessity if you plan to use it in combat since it lets you move before and after an attack.

Lastly, the bolts are an impromptu dagger of its appropriate size which can be drawn as a free action as per ammunition (light improvised weapon, so -4 to attack, 50% chance of being destroyed) that can be enchanted for far less than a regular dagger at early levels, having a few around if your enchanted crossbow or other weapon is sundered can be handy.

While bows are awesome, crossbows are too, as long as you play to their respective strengths and work to minimize their respective weak points. Hoped this helped anyone considering the mechanical benefits of a crossbow.

P.S. Not all classes are proficient with bows and may not have it as an option for their character, or only want a surprise round ranged attack and don't want or care about additional feets. Also, even Heavy Crossbow lovers can have their twf cheese. You just get a -8 to attack to do so, I wouldn't do it, but hey, rule of cool.

P.P.S. Animate a Large Repeating Great Crossbow (Crossbow, Great RoS 153). Do it. A huge repeating crossbow (making a crossbow repeating raises its base cost eight fold and turns it exotic) doing 3d8 dmg, 120' range (which can be augmented with feats and magic) 18-20, x2 critical range and can probably get its own bayonet, multiple enchantments and ammo enchantments all for at least 6k+ gp, thereby leaving your hands free for other endeavors. This is awesome. Do it.:cool:

ffone
2010-09-21, 10:42 PM
Have you ever seen a crossbow? You do know the bolt sits in a slight groove. The bolts are not stored internaly in a barrel. You dont store crossbows preloaded. A hand crossbow does not sit in a holster. Not to mention damaging the fletching on the bolt. It's not a gun. No one unless they are incompetent keeps their bows draw/strung unless they are about to use them. Because if they do they will worp the bow making it usless. larger crossbows dont have stocks eather. That was added on after the firearm became widly used.

Did I say she loads them hours and hours ahead of time? No.

Does she sometimes walk around with them preloaded? Yes.

Yes, I'm aware that it puts wear on the crossbow...but even if the campaign is keeping tack of that level of detail, and-or you're being a genuine enough roleplayer to not try to abuse the fact that it's not, if a PC's wealth is thousands of times the price of non-mw hand crossbows, it just might be worth wearing them out more quickly. (If you have some references on just how long a small xbow can hold a bolt before it affects its performance noticeable, please share, I'd genuinely appreciate it, as I do care about these things.)

ffone
2010-09-21, 10:57 PM
'Rapid Reload' makes loading a light or hand crossbow as a free action. You are allowed one or more free actions as your DM allows (PH 135). So yes, you can twf while rapid reloading hand crossbows on iterative attacks. Awesome.


The issue with TWFing crossbows is not the reload time, it's the lack of a free hand to do the reloading.

If it weren't for that, slings would a way to go; better range increment (although irrelevant w/i 30' for sneak attack), same damage (1d4), and most hand crossbow users won't care much about its better threat range.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-21, 11:02 PM
Slings exist solely for "damn, I spent every last bit of gold on my character, and neglected a real ranged option. Oh well, this is free and weightless, I may as well pack one"

bondpirate
2010-09-21, 11:06 PM
The issue with TWFing crossbows is not the reload time, it's the lack of a free hand to do the reloading.

If it weren't for that, slings would a way to go; better range increment (although irrelevant w/i 30' for sneak attack), same damage (1d4), and most hand crossbow users won't care much about its better threat range.

Yeah, I reread the feat and realized I'm wrong on that front. But, while the 'Quick Draw' feat only allows drawing a weapon as a free action, if it's house ruled that quick draw makes sheathing a free action as well then yes, that's the only way it would work, otherwise it's impossible in core.

Thanks for the spot on that.

Edit: It can work. Only if you get a spell or item which grants a third hand.

Starbuck_II
2010-09-21, 11:08 PM
Slings exist solely for "damn, I spent every last bit of gold on my character, and neglected a real ranged option. Oh well, this is free and weightless, I may as well pack one"

Okay because D&D treats slings as slingshots instead of real life slings. Real slings can beat longbows at distances and shotting speeds.
D&D slings... suck.

Thajocoth
2010-09-22, 12:50 AM
There's no such thing as "roleplaying reasons" IC. The only people who don't use the most effective weapons for their abilities are these who can't afford them, and these who have enough confidence in their skills to purposely choose subpar equipment for style.

No, I've seen someone say "No, I want the crappy rounded looking weapon that deals almost no damage instead of one of the weapons my class is expected to have because I worship a moon goddess." Sometimes people choose subpar things for roleplay reasons.

gdiddy
2010-09-22, 12:56 AM
Some people actually enjoy playing something that is flavor-based. Gasp.

Consequently, I'm never afraid of rolling up a new character.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 02:10 AM
what I never got with the hand crossbow is that it is supposed to be the equalient of the irl weapon "crossbow pistol" right? with 1d4 damage? I think not
but then again, D&D tend to get weapon damage kinda wrong sometimes

ffone
2010-09-22, 02:14 AM
I once found a character sorely wishing she's packed a sling, actually - an archer ranger PC, and a DM who gave us like 6 skeleton battles (DR 5/bludgeoning, and this was low level) in a row.

ffone
2010-09-22, 02:24 AM
Yeah, I reread the feat and realized I'm wrong on that front. But, while the 'Quick Draw' feat only allows drawing a weapon as a free action, if it's house ruled that quick draw makes sheathing a free action as well then yes, that's the only way it would work, otherwise it's impossible in core.

Sheathing doesn't make much of a difference - you can always just free drop them and draw the next one/pair.

(siderant:) the common free-sheath houserule annoys me. Imagine two guys dueling, one fighting normally, the other drawing-and-sheathing his weapon for every attack. Would the latter have the same speed or efficacy? And don't get me started on the OA 3.0 Iaiajutsu Master ("the PrC which outdoes most of the endless wacky homebrew Ultimate Zen Katana Master PrCs out there") )

Greenish
2010-09-22, 02:53 AM
Okay because D&D treats slings as slingshots instead of real life slings. Real slings can beat longbows at distances and shotting speeds.
D&D slings... suck.Well, at lower levels adding your full strength to a weapon with significant range can come in handy.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-22, 03:27 AM
what I never got with the hand crossbow is that it is supposed to be the equalient of the irl weapon "crossbow pistol" right? with 1d4 damage? I think not
but then again, D&D tend to get weapon damage kinda wrong sometimes

Your average person has 2 HP.

Weapon damage doesn't really matter in most cases. An average roll from a hand crossbow will still disable someone.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 03:58 AM
my point is that a crossbow pistol had about the punching power of a small crossbow.
meaning: pretty darn good. good enough to penetrate some armour I would believe, and people with armour tend to have at least 8 hp

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-22, 04:53 AM
my point is that a crossbow pistol had about the punching power of a small crossbow.
meaning: pretty darn good. good enough to penetrate some armour I would believe, and people with armour tend to have at least 8 hp

Nope - at least 3. NPCs don't get max HP at first level, even if they have PC levels.

(Rogues wear armour. Their HD are d6s. Ergo...)

Psyx
2010-09-22, 05:12 AM
I'm saying that "for roleplaying reasons" is often a completely unrealistic excuse. Characters must have a good reason for choosing a weak weapon or armor - because it's easier to hide or doesn't hinder their movement, because better weapons are not available, because they fight a lot of enemies vulnerable to this particular weapon, because they don't like bladed weapons, and such. "For roleplaying reasons" alone is silly, especially when it implies that roleplaying is the same as using underpowered equipment.

So I should always min-max, because it's more realistic?

There's more than one roleplaying reason that 'this is the BEST thing I should have, and I'm always going to have the best thing' (despite not knowing metagame mechanics...).



For example, it was replaced, which in my book is damn good evidence it wasn't best.

Your book is slightly mis-informed perhaps? It was replaced because the armour became sufficiently advanced to require weapons needing two hands to penetrate. The shield continued seeing a lot of use in unarmoured combat: One doesn't use a rapier on its own. Barring perhaps the helmet, the shield is the most ubiquitous armour in our entire history for a reason: It's fantastic. D&D shields are poor. Very poor. Rubbish, in fact.


Slings exist solely for "damn, I spent every last bit of gold on my character, and neglected a real ranged option. Oh well, this is free and weightless, I may as well pack one"

And for delivering acid, holy water, thunderstones or bags of flour...

Tengu_temp
2010-09-22, 08:52 AM
So I should always min-max, because it's more realistic?

There's more than one roleplaying reason that 'this is the BEST thing I should have, and I'm always going to have the best thing' (despite not knowing metagame mechanics...).


Min-maxing is about building characters, I'm talking about equipment. And should your character always pick the items that are the best for him, or what he thinks is best for him? Realistically speaking, if he doesn't have a good reason to do otherwise, yes. Most combatants choose weapons and armor best suited for their abilities, because that way they have the highest chance of survival.

valadil
2010-09-22, 09:20 AM
And should your character always pick the items that are the best for him, or what he thinks is best for him?

I question how well a character can choose the best weapon. If he's comparing hand crossbows and heavy crossbows, both will kill your average commoner in one hit. If that's the metric he's using, maybe he'll say the heavy crossbow is more powerful than it needs to be and that the hand crossbow still does plenty of damage. Why carry something bigger and heavier if the little version is good enough?

Shademan
2010-09-22, 09:26 AM
Nope - at least 3. NPCs don't get max HP at first level, even if they have PC levels.

(Rogues wear armour. Their HD are d6s. Ergo...)

leather can hardly be considered armour

Tengu_temp
2010-09-22, 09:38 AM
I question how well a character can choose the best weapon. If he's comparing hand crossbows and heavy crossbows, both will kill your average commoner in one hit. If that's the metric he's using, maybe he'll say the heavy crossbow is more powerful than it needs to be and that the hand crossbow still does plenty of damage. Why carry something bigger and heavier if the little version is good enough?

Most enemies you face are not level 1 commoners, though, and your character will probably be aware of that.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-22, 09:38 AM
leather can hardly be considered armour

Chain shirts, however, can totally be considered armour.

drakir_nosslin
2010-09-22, 09:45 AM
Min-maxing is about building characters, I'm talking about equipment. And should your character always pick the items that are the best for him, or what he thinks is best for him? Realistically speaking, if he doesn't have a good reason to do otherwise, yes. Most combatants choose weapons and armor best suited for their abilities, because that way they have the highest chance of survival.

Realistically speaking, many of those characters might not have access to or even seen every weapon available to them. Sure, they might have had basic training in pole arms, so when they stumble across a glaive they know the basic moves with it, but they haven't really tried it out in action. And what they think is best for them differs a lot from what is really the optimal choice, especially as adventurers, since most of the time they have no idea of what kind of environment or creatures they'll be up against next.

The environment shapes every character and decides much, with them maybe not even realizing it. When you're out to buy a car, even though you can drive every car out there, do you look at each one? Do you sit down with the stats for each one and compare? No, you probably go for what your friends have told you, or what you have read. You might compare a few of your favorites, look up a few reviews on the internet, but I'm fairly certain that you don't look up every model there is.

Realistically people don't make the optimal choice, because they don't have perfect information.

Farlion
2010-09-22, 09:48 AM
To get back on topic:

I remember a "covered" hand crossbow from somewhere. The point of it being, that you could also fire it upside down (great for rogues with boots of spiderclimbing).

Does anyone know what book this is from or if the covered hand crossbow is just a figment of my imagination?

Cheers,
Farlion

Ruinix
2010-09-22, 09:49 AM
leather can hardly be considered armour

what r u talking about ?

real world leather armor seams very protective to me



http://www.skornictwo.pl/english/jpg/armours/Lamellar_leather_armour.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs13/f/2007/114/3/e/Leather_armour_and_gorget_by_Lluhnij.jpg

http://www.nbz.or.jp/eng/uesugi/armor01.jpg


also .. the female leather armor ....


http://www.heavyleather.com/People/Amber%20Crawford/CastleWall2_smaller.jpg

http://www.heavyleather.com/images/Dsc16208a.jpg

http://www.heavyleather.com/images/Dsc15583a.jpg

http://www.ntoddblog.org/photos/random_pics/keira.jpg

http://mydisguises.com/images/leather-armor-6.jpg

Tengu_temp
2010-09-22, 09:55 AM
Realistically people don't make the optimal choice, because they don't have perfect information.

Which is what I said before. Some characters don't have access to all equipment available, some others choose what they think is best for them, but really isn't.

Farlion
2010-09-22, 09:56 AM
real world leather armor seams very protective to me

and


also .. the female leather armor ....



And what exactly seems protective to you about the female leather armors you postet? =)

Cheers,
Farlion

Ruinix
2010-09-22, 09:59 AM
And what exactly seems protective to you about the female leather armors you postet? =)

Cheers,
Farlion

yeah but those ones wasn't realistics, just for show some skin

Psyx
2010-09-22, 10:01 AM
Min-maxing is about building characters, I'm talking about equipment.

Err... min-maxxing is most certainly not just about the character, but equipment, too. The shining and much cited example of min-maxing years ago was always picking 'longsword' as a weapon in earlier editions because of higher damage and commonality of magical ones on the tables.

Farlion
2010-09-22, 10:15 AM
yeah but those ones wasn't realistics, just for show some skin

Then I'm with you!

Cheers,
Farlion

Fax Celestis
2010-09-22, 10:22 AM
No, I've seen someone say "No, I want the crappy rounded looking weapon that deals almost no damage instead of one of the weapons my class is expected to have because I worship a moon goddess." Sometimes people choose subpar things for roleplay reasons.


Some people actually enjoy playing something that is flavor-based. Gasp.

You have missed the point.

In character, there is no such thing as a "roleplaying reason" unless your character is LARPing (http://xkcd.com/244/). Your character should choose the weapon he feels is the deadliest weapon he is capable of using.

Consider this: if you were presented with the option of taking on a red dragon, right now, and someone said, "Here are two options: an M61 Vulcan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M61_Vulcan) and an M16 assault rifle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle), or a pair of daggers," you would likely think anyone who took the daggers is a loon. Granted, you probably don't have a metric ton of dagger-related feats: someone who does is outside the norm and knows that the dagger is the deadliest weapon he is capable of using due to his extensive, exotic training.

The difference between a long bow and a crossbow is less dramatic than the comparison I've drawn here, but it is still the same difference: one weapon is simply fundamentally better than the other when feats and training are excluded. Your character would know that a long bow can reach distances much further than that of a crossbow, and at better accuracy; he would know that long bows are quicker to reload; he would know that when they strike hard, they strike a lot harder than crossbows do; he would know that short bows are far and away easier to use on horseback.

If your character is using an inferior weapon due to their choice, then they either have a death wish or an ego problem. If your character is using an inferior weapon because you want them to and don't regard that certain weapons are just better than others, then frankly you're not giving your character the full benefits of their Int score.

Drogorn
2010-09-22, 10:37 AM
The vulcan is not practical as a hand weapon. Neither the vulcan nor the assault rifle can be concealed. That leaves us with.....

Fax Celestis
2010-09-22, 10:40 AM
The vulcan is not practical as a hand weapon. Neither the vulcan nor the assault rifle can be concealed.

Why does that matter?

valadil
2010-09-22, 10:43 AM
Most enemies you face are not level 1 commoners, though, and your character will probably be aware of that.

No but for someone just starting up adventuring and planning to do city missions might consider the hand crossbow good enough. For instance if I was playing a common cutpurse who held people up in alleys, the hand crossbow would be all I'd need.

Tengu_temp
2010-09-22, 10:47 AM
No but for someone just starting up adventuring and planning to do city missions might consider the hand crossbow good enough. For instance if I was playing a common cutpurse who held people up in alleys, the hand crossbow would be all I'd need.

Then, as I said before, your character has a good reason to take the hand crossbow: it's cheaper and easier to carry and hide. He's choosing what he considers the best weapon for his situation.

LibraryOgre
2010-09-22, 11:05 AM
Would just like to point out that that's utterly false. Sword-and-board may have been best given a certain place in the world in a certain period of time, but is it no way 'best.' For example, it was replaced, which in my book is damn good evidence it wasn't best.

However, what was it replaced by?

Primarily, it was replaced by firearms, which more or less made armor slowly obsolete. While zweihanders and such were a factor, they were also primarily used against pike formations, rather than personal combat against other heavily armored people; while fechtbuchs show how to fight a single opponent with one (or with a halberd), their use was mostly killing the pikes so the knights with lances, shields, and hand weapons could come in.

Two-weapon fighting mostly came, in the west, after the advent of firearms made armor less popular, and even then, a common version was "blade + protective item", such as sword and buckler, or cloak and dagger.

If you're talking melee combat, with weapons, and have a vested interest in your own health and well-being, a shield is more or less indispensable. There's a reason why most professional warriors have used shields, across multiple continents.

Psyx
2010-09-22, 11:07 AM
In character, there is no such thing as a "roleplaying reason"



*rolleyes*
Was it really worth wasting bandwidth playing semantics over. It was clearly mean to be a roleplaying choice of the player..

As to 'not roleplaying properly because you didn't min-max IC' argument: There is more to everything than statistics (which the character wouldn't know, either).




The difference between a long bow and a crossbow is less dramatic than the comparison I've drawn here, but it is still the same difference: one weapon is simply fundamentally better than the other when feats and training are excluded. Your character would know that a long bow can reach distances much further than that of a crossbow, and at better accuracy; he would know that long bows are quicker to reload; he would know that when they strike hard, they strike a lot harder than crossbows do; he would know that short bows are far and away easier to use on horseback.


...Which is really rather humorously ironic, considering that neither of the cited weapons are 'better' than the other, and that the character must have some very strange ideas about the comparative range, accuracy and power of the two weapons. Maybe someone told him incorrectly, which is why he's not making a very well informed choice... Maybe that happens IC too, and he takes the wrong option because someone told him it can shoot further and more accurately, and does more damage...

wayfare
2010-09-22, 11:10 AM
But they look cool!

It gives your character a very "musketeer" flavor. They are also pretty great because of concealability. I would rule that they are much easier to use in close quarters (you need space to draw any kind of bow).

I think it would be neat if ammunition added to the damage bows inflict.

The standard bolt would reduce the targets AC (being designed to pierce armor).

A leaf-shaped head would add +3 damage.

A blunted arrow would increase damage by 1 size category but inflict non-lethal damage.

etc...

You can base a character on weapon concept. It is possible to have that sort of idea before you slip in persona.

Fax Celestis
2010-09-22, 11:10 AM
*rolleyes*
Was it really worth wasting bandwidth playing semantics over. It was clearly mean to be a roleplaying choice of the player..If it were, I have full faith that a more clear statement would've been used, or a clarification would have arisen by now.


comparative range, accuracy and power of the two weapons

What, they don't have propaganda in Eberron? :smalltongue:

HenryHankovitch
2010-09-22, 11:18 AM
The difference between a long bow and a crossbow is less dramatic than the comparison I've drawn here, but it is still the same difference: one weapon is simply fundamentally better than the other when feats and training are excluded. Your character would know that a long bow can reach distances much further than that of a crossbow, and at better accuracy; he would know that long bows are quicker to reload; he would know that when they strike hard, they strike a lot harder than crossbows do; he would know that short bows are far and away easier to use on horseback.

The funny and relevant note here is that most of the things you have just mentioned are wrong; and across different areas, time periods and martial traditions, all of them are going to be wrong at some point. Except maybe the quicker reload bit. Maybe.

The biggest differences are going to be matters of local culture, craftsmanship, and training; which are only really modeled by feats and proficiencies (though not well).

Additionally, it's a fallacy to assume that characters, in-character, choose what training they receive. A 16-year-old Scandinavian sea-raider in 1050 has had no opportunity to fight with crossbow and pavise, or a halberd, or a Welsh longbow, or a two-handed greatsword. Even if he somehow magically 'knew' that one of these was a more ideal choice for a given tactical situation, he doesn't have some weapon-master back in Fjordistan who can teach him the ways of the Belgian Spiked Chain.

Now, most fictional D&D settings are vastly and unrealistically more cosmopolitan than almost any real-world medieval location; but the point stands, especially if you're trying to apply some veneer of verisimilitude to your character and setting.

Greenish
2010-09-22, 11:21 AM
It gives your character a very "musketeer" flavor.Eh? Musketeers were named after muskets, and the most famous fictional depiction tends to have them duke it out with rapiers. It does have sort of "cloak and dagger" feel to it, but I wouldn't call it "musketeer flavour".

Hand crossbow is a nifty piece of equipment, but it shouldn't be exotic, IMO.

I think it would be neat if ammunition added to the damage bows inflict.There are, incidentally, some sort of mundane bolts which add to damage. I have at best hazy memoriess about them, but "Tumbling Bolt" rings a bell, and I should guess they're from A&EG.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 11:35 AM
what r u talking about ?

real world leather armor seams very protective to me



http://www.skornictwo.pl/english/jpg/armours/Lamellar_leather_armour.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs13/f/2007/114/3/e/Leather_armour_and_gorget_by_Lluhnij.jpg

http://www.nbz.or.jp/eng/uesugi/armor01.jpg


also .. the female leather armor ....


http://www.heavyleather.com/People/Amber%20Crawford/CastleWall2_smaller.jpg

http://www.heavyleather.com/images/Dsc16208a.jpg

http://www.heavyleather.com/images/Dsc15583a.jpg

http://www.ntoddblog.org/photos/random_pics/keira.jpg

http://mydisguises.com/images/leather-armor-6.jpg

leather does not protect against steel weapons. at all.
Unless it is padded, but you might as well use a gambeson for that

Tyndmyr
2010-09-22, 11:42 AM
Leather is only functional armor if it is somehow agumented. Preferably with steel, though hardened leather armor provides some protection as well.

I actually make leather armor. I cut 16oz leather with an xacto knife. It's not terribly difficult. It's widely popular, because it looks cool, and many larps allow it to count as armor, but it's not something I'd wear if I needed to actually stop a blade.

Those leather scales look rather light, btw. I can't imagine that they would stop any weapon that would be a danger to you.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 11:52 AM
adding some leather lames over a mail or a cuit boulli (boiled leather) over said mail would give added protection.
but that pretty much it

Psyx
2010-09-22, 11:57 AM
it's not something I'd wear if I needed to actually stop a blade.

Especially not an Xacto knife...



If it were, I have full faith that a more clear statement would've been used, or a clarification would have arisen by now.

Or we could just assume as a general blanket guideline that anyone who can figure out how a keyboard functions is not under the impression that pretend characters in a game are themselves roleplaying.

Unless they're PCs in Dream Park.

wayfare
2010-09-22, 12:08 PM
Eh? Musketeers were named after muskets, and the most famous fictional depiction tends to have them duke it out with rapiers. It does have sort of "cloak and dagger" feel to it, but I wouldn't call it "musketeer flavour".

Hand crossbow is a nifty piece of equipment, but it shouldn't be exotic, IMO.
There are, incidentally, some sort of mundane bolts which add to damage. I have at best hazy memoriess about them, but "Tumbling Bolt" rings a bell, and I should guess they're from A&EG.

Well, as musketeery as you're going to get in a world w/o gunpowder (as one of my games was set in).

JellyPooga
2010-09-22, 12:12 PM
leather does not protect against steel weapons. at all.
Unless it is padded, but you might as well use a gambeson for that

Ummm...you do realise that leather armour would be padded as a kind of default, don't you? A true 'leather armour' would be made from leather that is at least 5mm-8mm thick and backed by a woolen jack, at the very least. That alone is sufficient to deflect a swing from a sword or club or even an inaccurate thrust. Of course, such a leather armour would not deflect or absorb a solid blow from a pole axe or similar weapon, but even steel plate struggles against such 'tin-openers'. To claim that leather armour cannot protect against steel weapons at all is simple ignorance. I can only assume that when you think "leather armour", you're thinking of a stylish leather jacket, or even "bikers leathers" you have hung in your wardrobe. Leather used for clothing is different to leather used for armour...by comparison, you wouldn't use cast-iron to make plate armour because it's an inappropriate material for the job, even though it's essentially the same material as forged steel.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 12:13 PM
phb leather armour is described as boiled leather armour

Greenish
2010-09-22, 12:16 PM
Well, as musketeery as you're going to get in a world w/o gunpowder (as one of my games was set in).I'd say the heavy crossbows are closer. Muskets weren't small nor easily concealable, nor truly usable with one hand. Hand crossbow is closer to a pistol.

JellyPooga
2010-09-22, 12:17 PM
phb leather armour is described as boiled leather armour

What's that got to do with the price of fish?

The PHB also depicts a warhammer as some kind of lump-hammer instead of the narrow-headed tin opener it should be. So what? Boiled leather can be backed by a padded jack too...

Shademan
2010-09-22, 12:32 PM
the difference is that the warhammer is only portrayed as a lump of iron in the art, while the leather armour is described as such.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-22, 12:32 PM
Ummm...you do realise that leather armour would be padded as a kind of default, don't you? A true 'leather armour' would be made from leather that is at least 5mm-8mm thick and backed by a woolen jack, at the very least. That alone is sufficient to deflect a swing from a sword or club or even an inaccurate thrust.

Er....no. 1 oz of leather = .4 mm. Therefore, 16oz(on the high end of leather armor, much is 9-12) is a mere 6.4 mm. That's pretty thick for leather armor, and it will not deflect any sharp stab of note, and most slashes will happily go through it if it's unhardened. Even if it is, a flanged mace or the like is going to be a real problem.

A woolen undergarment is nice for padding, but is not going to provide protection against more than draw cuts on it's own. If it were under mail or plate, it provides the necessary padding, while the metal stops the edge. I guarantee I can easily penetrate leather armor, even with wool padding underneath and water hardening with a one handed weapon. A simple dagger would be adequate.


Of course, such a leather armour would not deflect or absorb a solid blow from a pole axe or similar weapon, but even steel plate struggles against such 'tin-openers'. To claim that leather armour cannot protect against steel weapons at all is simple ignorance.

To compare leather against steel plate implies you have a lack of experience with actual armor. Plate is known for stopping far more than leather of any type, and


I can only assume that when you think "leather armour", you're thinking of a stylish leather jacket, or even "bikers leathers" you have hung in your wardrobe. Leather used for clothing is different to leather used for armour...by comparison, you wouldn't use cast-iron to make plate armour because it's an inappropriate material for the job, even though it's essentially the same material as forged steel.

It is mainly thicker. Sometimes through layers, but usually through using a thick chunk of hide. Therefore, the additional protection increases linearly, unless you add techniques such as hardening. Leather is great against abrasion, but not so amazing against cuts and stabs.

PS: Cast iron is not really the same material as forged steel. It has different carbon content, and in addition, has a different internal structure. A more appropriate analogy would have been comparing two identical sheets of metal of differing thickness.

Doug Lampert
2010-09-22, 12:47 PM
Nope - at least 3. NPCs don't get max HP at first level, even if they have PC levels.

(Rogues wear armour. Their HD are d6s. Ergo...)

NPCs with PC class levels are supposed to be Elite characters, and Elites DO all get max HP at level 1.

Mind, in a decent sized city this is circa 1% of the population, but they do all get max HP at level 1 if elite, and PC levels are supposed to be given to elites.

valadil
2010-09-22, 12:47 PM
That's pretty thick for leather armor, and it will not deflect any sharp stab of note, and most slashes will happily go through it if it's unhardened. Even if it is, a flanged mace or the like is going to be a real problem.


I think leather armor will work better for turning grazing hits into misses. It won't turn aside a spear, but if you've gotten mostly out of the way the leather will do the rest.

There's a lot more (and better) info in the real weapons and armor thread. I suggest people look there for how actual weapons work instead of reading and validating each others speculation.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 12:59 PM
I dont think leather would help too much in that regard.
not much more than clothes, anyhow
but I have never tested this so... if anyone have a fun youtube vid...?

Tyndmyr
2010-09-22, 01:02 PM
If anyone has a video camera and lives in central maryland, I've got leather armor and weapons aplenty.

For dramatic effect, I suggest placing the armor over melons. It makes failure much more obvious.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 01:09 PM
Aberystwyth, so nooo...
But please, send me PM with the vid when it (hopefully) happens

drakir_nosslin
2010-09-22, 01:50 PM
Which is what I said before. Some characters don't have access to all equipment available, some others choose what they think is best for them, but really isn't.

I guess we were arguing the same point then, but from different perspectives (OOC and IC).

true_shinken
2010-09-22, 02:39 PM
The funny and relevant note here is that most of the things you have just mentioned are wrong; and across different areas, time periods and martial traditions, all of them are going to be wrong at some point. Except maybe the quicker reload bit. Maybe.


You do realize he is talking about a D&D statblock, right?

Forged Fury
2010-09-22, 03:34 PM
For dramatic effect, I suggest placing the armor over melons.
Totally off-topic, but I think this has been the overriding school of fantasty art over the last few decades.

Shademan
2010-09-22, 03:44 PM
Totally off-topic, but I think this has been the overriding school of fantasty art over the last few decades.

you win an internet for that remark

HenryHankovitch
2010-09-22, 04:20 PM
You do realize he is talking about a D&D statblock, right?

That's the point. He's asserting that a character would have in-game knowledge of a weapon's out-of-game statblock, and ought to choose his weapons/training based on that knowledge. And as such, choosing anything but the most powerful weapon in the book, based on some idea of culture/religion/personality, is somehow both unrealistic from an in-game POV as well as being an affront to propergoodfun roleplaying.

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-22, 04:57 PM
Of course a character would have knowledge of the weapon's stat block - the weapon's stat block represents how that weapon works.

Weapons on the Great Wheel are not exactly the same as their historical Earth counterparts. The laws of physics aren't quite the same either. Shock?

Fax Celestis
2010-09-22, 06:00 PM
Of course a character would have knowledge of the weapon's stat block - the weapon's stat block represents how that weapon works.

Weapons on the Great Wheel are not exactly the same as their historical Earth counterparts. The laws of physics aren't quite the same either. Shock?

Exactly. It'd be pretty common knowledge that a greataxe has a bigger potential for damage than a dagger.

Flickerdart
2010-09-22, 06:02 PM
Exactly. It'd be pretty common knowledge that a greataxe has a bigger potential for damage than a dagger.
Someone go build a crossbow that shoots axes. :smalltongue:

true_shinken
2010-09-22, 07:12 PM
That's the point. He's asserting that a character would have in-game knowledge of a weapon's out-of-game statblock, and ought to choose his weapons/training based on that knowledge. And as such, choosing anything but the most powerful weapon in the book, based on some idea of culture/religion/personality, is somehow both unrealistic from an in-game POV as well as being an affront to propergoodfun roleplaying.

Well, you are asserting that a character from a fictional game in a different universe would somehow have knowledge of real world history. So... yeah.

Susano-wo
2010-09-22, 07:23 PM
Of course a character would have knowledge of the weapon's stat block - the weapon's stat block represents how that weapon works.

Weapons on the Great Wheel are not exactly the same as their historical Earth counterparts. The laws of physics aren't quite the same either. Shock?


ANd here is the point where we reach conceptual incommensurability. (http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-15296026/kuhn-changing-concept-incommensurability.html) (Ok, the pro-"character should always take the objectively better weapon" side and I reach it) It all hinges on Dnd rules as model of physics focusing on fun and game balance over accuracy or Dnd rules as descriptions of a particular physics that differs from our own. The default is model for me. And unless we both start from the same standpoint, its impossible to come to a concensus.

If the world of Dnd works, physics wise, like the game rules state, then it is simple and easily predictable, and things like damage and crit rate will be codified (as well as save DC's), and damage is measured by HP.

So you would know that a hand crossbow is puny compared to, so a longbow, since, unlike in RL, one well placed bolt cannot kill most people, but I will have to, round after round, plink away at the target's HP.

Under the model of reality idea, IC the characters know a handcrossbow is deadly. It might not have the penetration of a more powerful weapon, such as a heavy crossbow, but hey, its easier to carry, and all I have to do is aim well. Or hope I don't encounter anyone with too heavy of an armor, or who is good with their shield

true_shinken
2010-09-22, 08:54 PM
Under the model of reality idea, IC the characters know a handcrossbow is deadly.

...and it is deadly.
At low levels, where weapon damage size actually matters, even a single point of damage can be deadly. Most people have a single hit point or two. Being hit with a single bolt might knock you into negatives and from there, you are really close to death.
Also, they are common Rogue weapons. They have Sneak Attack. A Rogue cares not about weapon damage die - they care about getting a sneak attack on, and being easy to conceal, a hand crossbow actually helps that.

...but modeling stuff after reality in a game with fireballs and orcs is silly.

Susano-wo
2010-09-22, 09:18 PM
Nuh-uh. You're confusing realistic with real. Realistic is relative, and refers to how closely something imitates reality in what its depicting. You can have relatively realisitic fireballs (explosive power, converting air to oxygen and igniting it with your mind, etc) and weapons. (not to mention orcs, with are imminently capable of being 100% realisitic)
You can also have HP, because its easier, and keeps things rolling better than trying to roll on approximately 5000 charts to see exactly what happened with that sword thrust that was parried to the left by the opponents dagger.

Grifthin
2010-09-23, 05:29 AM
I thought hand crossbows where the ones you strapped to your wrists - Which are those ?

Yuki Akuma
2010-09-23, 06:17 AM
I thought hand crossbows where the ones you strapped to your wrists - Which are those ?

...Wrist crossbows?

Psyx
2010-09-23, 06:34 AM
You do realize he is talking about a D&D statblock, right?

Characters can't read the stat-blocks to min-max with. They have to go by here-say and experience...

Which led to a fantasy character in a 'Christmas special' style episode I played in, facing down tyranids discovering that w40k laser pistols were far superior to bolt and plasma weapons... just due to a series of dice rolls. For that character; the las-weapon had a far better proverbial stat-block.



Also, they are common Rogue weapons.

Good point. Back in 'the real world', experienced assassins don't go around 'min-maxing' and using .50AE Desert Eagles and .50BMG sniper rifles, just because they have more damage than everything else.

Greenish
2010-09-23, 07:47 AM
So you would know that a hand crossbow is puny compared to, so a longbow, since, unlike in RL, one well placed bolt cannot kill most peopleYes, they can. Normal hand crossbow does up to 8 points of damage (12 with a Tumbling Bolt, which is mundane). Most people have less HP than that, since most people tend to be very low level commoners.

Good point. Back in 'the real world', experienced assassins don't go around 'min-maxing' and using .50AE Desert Eagles and .50BMG sniper rifles, just because they have more damage than everything else.They use the best weapon (for the purpose) that is available to them. Just like D&D characters ought to.

panaikhan
2010-09-23, 07:51 AM
a normal hand crossbow is D4 I think.
Light is D8

Greenish
2010-09-23, 07:53 AM
a normal hand crossbow is D4 I think.Yes. 19-20/x2.

What's a "well-placed bolt" if not a crit? :smallwink:

Shademan
2010-09-23, 08:07 AM
heavy crossbow: d10
light crossbow: d8
crossbow pistol: d6
hand crossbow: d4

sounds fair?

Greenish
2010-09-23, 08:11 AM
heavy crossbow: d10
light crossbow: d8
crossbow pistol: d6
hand crossbow: d4

sounds fair?What's the difference between hand crossbow and crossbow pistol? (Or between crossbow pistol and light crossbow?)

Shademan
2010-09-23, 08:13 AM
I would imagine hand crossbows being much simpler and less effective than the crossbow pistol but the crossbow pistol having shorter range than the light crossbow.

really, I think the developers saw the crossbow pistol, made the handcrossbow, weak as it is, and called it a day.
then they made the dire flail...
but hey, I'm rambling/homebrewing

Greenish
2010-09-23, 08:24 AM
I would imagine hand crossbows being much simpler and less effective than the crossbow pistol but the crossbow pistol having shorter range than the light crossbow.So, in game terms, how'd that work? Would you make hand crossbow a simple weapon, pistol martial? Or both exotic?

What purpose does the hand crossbow fulfill, if pistol crossbow is the same but better?