Pathfinder Crossbows vs. bows [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

View Full Version : Pathfinder Crossbows vs. bows

Elvensilver

2019-12-08, 02:57 PM

Boci

2019-12-08, 03:09 PM

Crossbows are simple weapons, so it would be expected for them to be worse than bows, much like any comparison between simple and martial weapons with a similar function for combat. Crossbows have a few advantages: you can fire them while prone, you can fire them one handed, but they're pretty niche.

Morty

2019-12-08, 03:13 PM

Bows are pretty much better. Crossbows have a lot of disadvantages in exchange for marginally better damage. They can serve as something for casters to do when they can't or don't want to cast, but if you're playing Pathfinder even that is replaced by cantrips.

upho

2019-12-08, 08:23 PM

The general rule is that archery is simply superior to every other type of ranged combat with manufactured weapons. However, especially for more specialized builds and/or if you move the optimization up a level or two, there are quite a few notable exceptions to that general rule. For example:

5+ levels of Bolt Ace gunslinger combined with the Crossbow Master feat and a MDXB (Minotaur Double Crossbow, see spoiler) can end up reliably shooting up to at least 12 bolts per full attack and thus achieve considerably higher DPR numbers than any other ranged combatant based on a martial class. The trade-off for the doubling of attacks is a measly -2 to attacks. (This can get as crazy as 18 bolts per full attack, but the RAW start getting a bit murky by then.)
To compensate for the lack of full bab, the (fantastic) Eldritch Archer magus is often better off with a pistol than with a bow, at least past the earliest levels. Can also achieve pretty amazing damage numbers if combined with a 3-level dip into Trench fighter for Dex to damage.
Firearms have much higher crit multipliers than bows (and xbows), and are therefore often able to get a lot more use out of Abundant Ammunition + Named Bullet shenanigans.

Minotaur Double Crossbow
Minotaurs have a love of complicated things, and the double crossbow is one of their favorites. This heavy weapon fires a pair of iron-tipped bolts with deadly accuracy. Due to its size and weight, however, non-proficient wielders suffer a –8 penalty on their attack rolls. Even proficient wielders take a –2 penalty on their attack rolls. If the attack is successful, the target takes the listed damage twice, although critical hits and precision based damage are only applied to one of the bolts. Reloading a double crossbow takes 2 standard actions (one for each bolt), although the Rapid Reload feat reduces this to 2 move actions (meaning that it can be accomplished in 1 round).300 gp, 1d8 piercing, 19-20/x2 crits, 100 ft. range, 18 lb.

(And just in case anyone wonders: this is not the same weapon as the garbage known as the double crossbow (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/crossbow-double/) published in the APG (different fluff, different range, different penalties, different feat interaction). Nor was the MDXB ever replaced by the APG garbage or anything else. It's even explicitly still allowed in PFS.)

So, in comparison to bows, it costs you an extra feat and -2 to attack, and gives you free reload Manyshot-style double-bolts with every attack in return, instead of Manyshot's once per full attack.

So yeah, depending on the power level and level range of the game, an xbow (or a gun) can certainly be superior to a bow.

Mystral

2019-12-09, 03:54 AM

So, I just looked at the Ranger combat styles and compared bow and crossbow using rangers.

And it occured to me that a lot of the possible style feats for the crossbow ranger are just to mitigate the disadvantage of the crossbow, ie. loading time. So a character using a crossbow has to take a feat to shoot once per round, while a character using a bow can spend a feat to fire two arrows at the same level…

So, why would anybody who has both profiencies use a crossbow? (if not for roleplaying reasons)
Crossbows are a lot more expensive (same for the ammunition, if that ever matters), take longer to fire, and to compensate, you get like, what? A better crit range?

So, am I missing something?
Or are bows (and the ranger combat style) just plainly better than crossbows?

There's a gunslinger archetype that specialises in crossbow use. If you want to play someone who prefers crossbows and is actually good at it, use that one.

Other than that, crossbows are for people who don't have bow proficiency. That's why they're generally worse. Simple weapons are generally worse than martial weapons, that's part of the system.

Powerdork

2019-12-10, 10:07 AM

Selion

2019-12-10, 11:14 AM

I seem to recall there was a Paizo forums argument about the relative power of crossbows and bows and the existence of subpar options in general, wherein Sean K. Reynolds suggested that you wouldn't expect the same kind of harm from a water balloon as you would from a longbow (https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pvkj&page=3?False-Options-in-Pathfinder#103).

It's unfair comparing crossbows to water balloons
The truce between Longbow and Crossbow is an ancient one, and it's not limited to d&d/pathfinder.
In real life a crossbow is way more powerful than a longbow, being able of piercing trough even fullplate armors and simultaneously being a simple weapon which requires very low training to be used properly. These features changed strategy, they changed war. On the other side bows offered a faster recharge time and and a higher accuracy on the long distances.
When D&D has been developed they gave to crossbows a higher base damage in opposition to lower firing rate to represent this. With D&D 3.0 (or maybe in D&D advanced, i never played that system) two things happened:
1) bows could be crafted with increased damage, adding some or all your strength modifier
2) crossbows became simple weapons.

While 1) had some epic references, such as Ulysses's Bow, which could not be used by anyone but Ulysses because it was extremely hard to stretch, there has been not any feature to give a little juice to poor crossbows. This translates in a game in which PC are superhuman beings, so that a bow could be crafted in such a way that it requires the strength of a bear to be stretched, but IMHO there's not reason to not design a similar crossbow made for super-humans

Nowaday IMHO crossbows don't represent in the game the powerful weapons they are in reality, in a more realistic system they should give some kind of armor piercing bonus in the first increment.
The same thing happens with blunt weapons: they were formidable weapons against armored foes, way more useful than a sword, but in game terms they have become sub-par weapons to use just for roleplaying needs.

Railak

2019-12-10, 11:20 AM

The only other way a crossbow is somewhat better than a bow is if you have low strength, like 11 or lower. Below 10 you take a penalty on damage and possibly attack depending on whether regular or composite.

Zancloufer

2019-12-10, 11:26 AM

Biggest problem with Crossbows is that they do more damage. Unless you use a composite bow. Or want to/can shoot multiple arrows per round. They start loosing hard there. It's mostly the ease of use vs speed and skill. Anything you can do to invest in Crossbows to make them better you can do the same with Bows so it's just a loosing comparison. It's pretty much a higher floor vs a much much lower ceiling.

Also Historically Crossbows CANNOT go though plate armour. The whole myth of Plate armour being easily pierced by Crossbows and muskets is *scrubbed*. Actual Full Plate (which is expensive as ****) if modeled realistically in D&D would straight up offer something like DR 5/- and another DR 10/Blunt or something. Even armour as DR rules don't do them justice.
Tod's Workshop on Youtube did a nice comparison of a 160 pound bow vs Platemail (FYI IIRC that's about equal to a 1000 pound X-Bow). The thing barely dented the first layer.

Morty

2019-12-10, 11:43 AM

Other systems manage to make crossbows at least worthwhile enough to be used without jumping through hoops. It's not exactly rocket science, D&D just has a very bad track record with them.

Powerdork

2019-12-10, 11:57 AM

It's unfair comparing crossbows to water balloons

I should stop presenting silly things without comment, because the silly needs to be closely examined for it to be self-evident that it's silly. Yeah, SKR was definitely being a doofus.

upho

2019-12-10, 03:10 PM

Other than that, crossbows are for people who don't have bow proficiency. That's why they're generally worse. Simple weapons are generally worse than martial weapons, that's part of the system.I wish that was the whole truth. But the sad fact is that the debilitating reload actions and lack of compensating advantages goes not only for the two simple xbows, but also for all the 12+ exotic xbows except the dwarven light pelletbow IIRC. So yeah, all xbow except the aforementioned MDXB are thus still pretty greatly inferior choices of ranged weapons in comparison to bows for any primarily martial PC.

It's an unfortunate artifact inherited from previous editions of D&D for some weird reason I guess, which basically says:
"A weapon should primarily have properties and associated options balanced to other weapons, except for crossbows which should instead have rather poorly simulated RL crossbow properties inferior to other weapons in the game. Because we designers still believe in the old myths about the battle of Agincourt and British archers we heard as kids. And of course, we firmly believe water balloon fighters should be superior to crossbow fighters."
:smallannoyed:

The xbows being underpowered is also kinda verified by the game's own little rules/guideline system for creating new weapons (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipmenT/weapons/#Creating_New_Weapons), which conveniently "forgets" to give load actions a value... And all of the existing xbows except the MDXB are still underpowered according to that system, while the MDXB simply doesn't fit in the system and is rather easily made overpowered (though there are of course plenty of other weapons which don't agree with the system at all).

@ Elvensilver: I recommend adding the autoloader magazine (https://libraryofmetzofitz.fandom.com/wiki/Autoloader_Magazine) wondrous item to the game and ensure its easily accessibly to the PCs, as it offers a considerably cheaper free action load alternative to Crossbow Mastery along with some nifty benefits exclusively for xbows. Or even better: also make it a free action to load any exotic xbow or similar weapon except the MDXB, and perhaps increase those weapons' base damage die size one step. That won't make any of them superior to bows, generally speaking, but at least a few of them could be a bit more interesting for niche builds (with for example Vital Strike).

liquidformat

2019-12-10, 03:38 PM

It's unfair comparing crossbows to water balloons
The truce between Longbow and Crossbow is an ancient one, and it's not limited to d&d/pathfinder.
In real life a crossbow is way more powerful than a longbow, being able of piercing trough even fullplate armors and simultaneously being a simple weapon which requires very low training to be used properly. These features changed strategy, they changed war. On the other side bows offered a faster recharge time and and a higher accuracy on the long distances.
When D&D has been developed they gave to crossbows a higher base damage in opposition to lower firing rate to represent this. With D&D 3.0 (or maybe in D&D advanced, i never played that system) two things happened:
1) bows could be crafted with increased damage, adding some or all your strength modifier
2) crossbows became simple weapons.

While 1) had some epic references, such as Ulysses's Bow, which could not be used by anyone but Ulysses because it was extremely hard to stretch, there has been not any feature to give a little juice to poor crossbows. This translates in a game in which PC are superhuman beings, so that a bow could be crafted in such a way that it requires the strength of a bear to be stretched, but IMHO there's not reason to not design a similar crossbow made for super-humans

Nowaday IMHO crossbows don't represent in the game the powerful weapons they are in reality, in a more realistic system they should give some kind of armor piercing bonus in the first increment.
The same thing happens with blunt weapons: they were formidable weapons against armored foes, way more useful than a sword, but in game terms they have become sub-par weapons to use just for roleplaying needs.
From my understanding actual crossbows were about as good at punching through armor as a longbow the real difference was even though crossbows are expensive they are still much cheaper than training archers also bows tend to have much better range. With that said a regiment of well trained archers was more dangerous than a regiment of crossbowmen. Granted this all falls to the wayside when you start moving away from crossbows and into ballista.

I believe added strength bows has much more to do with the concept and development of composite bow materials than the Greek myths. Taking the mongolian short riding bows compared to the english longbow is a great example of this. The mongolian short riding bows were much smaller than the english long bows and yet more powerful because they are composite. Similarly the reason you don't see a more powerful version of a crossbow is because they are already composite bows to begin with and in order to make them more powerful they start getting much heavier very quickly. So you go from a crossbow made with bone or wood composites to a heavy crossbow with a metal core to a all metal bow ballista for example.

r2d2go

2019-12-10, 04:43 PM

Rynjin

2019-12-10, 05:09 PM

I don't get why people say the optimized crossbow wielder is any less ridiculous than a bow wielder. It is both possible and in some situations optimal to dual wield crossbows by carrying several dozen and whipping out 8+ a round. That makes zero sense and yet provides you the unique niche of a 100+ ft range increment and dual wielding. At low levels crossbows make real world sense, and at high levels they're ridiculous, just like every other thing in the game.

This sounds like a terrible idea. Are you going to shell out for several dozen magical crossbows?

You run into issues with having a -4 to -5 penalty on all your attack rolls and damage as opposed to a bow user at that point. It's...really bad.

r2d2go

2019-12-10, 09:31 PM

This sounds like a terrible idea. Are you going to shell out for several dozen magical crossbows?

You run into issues with having a -4 to -5 penalty on all your attack rolls and damage as opposed to a bow user at that point. It's...really bad.

Have you ever tried it? Double damage is pretty worth it.

You just buy magic crossbow bolts, or Greater Magic Weapon 50 ammunition at once. Bountiful bottle it and it's cheaper than a +5 bow, and you can share with friends - a +5 crossbow bolt is strictly better as an improvised melee weapon than a dagger, by the by. And if you're competent at level 10+ you shouldn't ever be missing except on 1s even with the -2 to hit.

The Random NPC

2019-12-10, 09:32 PM

Rynjin

2019-12-10, 10:15 PM

Have you ever tried it? Double damage is pretty worth it.

You just buy magic crossbow bolts, or Greater Magic Weapon 50 ammunition at once. Bountiful bottle it and it's cheaper than a +5 bow, and you can share with friends - a +5 crossbow bolt is strictly better as an improvised melee weapon than a dagger, by the by. And if you're competent at level 10+ you shouldn't ever be missing except on 1s even with the -2 to hit.

You're not dealing double damage, though. Even jumping through all of those hoops (because getting a Mythic Magic Item is surely practical in the average game...) you're dealing a TINY amount of extra damage, but less consistently...and that's assuming you're comparing two people with 10 Str, which isn't gonna happen. If you assume the bare minimum expected strength for an archer you deal less.

Dual wielding crossbows you're getting, at level 11 (a good general level for comparison) 6 attacks; +9/+9/+4/+4/-1/-1 without factoring in stats and whatnot. That's assuming you've shelled out for Improved and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting. You could eke out 7 with Rapid Shot if you wanted to eat an extra -2 to everything, but that's pretty impractical.

A bow user is getting 4 attacks at +9/+9/+4/-1, but dealing double damage on the first shot (with Manyshot) and has more options for increasing its damage.

Assuming you're using a light crossbow with +5 bolts (ridiculously cost inefficient given each bundle costs the same as a +5 weapon and you use all of them up after let's be generous and say 10 combats because you're going to miss a few shots and be able to retrieve the bolts) you're dealing 6d8+30 damage if all attacks hit; an average of 57 damage.

The average bow user at that level is going to have at least 14 Str (probably 16-18, actually, since I would assume a +2-4 Str/Dex belt to be in play by now) and if all 4 shots hit is dealing 5d8+35; an average of 62 damage. If you assume even a 12 Str the dual wielding crossbow option is only breaking even at 57 damage vs 57 damage...but is down 2 extra Feats for the privilege.

So in a BEST CASE SCENARIO where all attacks hit, you deal less damage. As you miss more attacks (which you will, because your attack bonus is lower) the gap grows wider. The bow user deals double your damage if only one attack hits. It deals 33% more if two attacks hit. It deals 18% more if 4 attacks hit; TL;DR at any stage where you hit the same number of attacks, the bow user wins.

If you're going to shell out 3 Feats for TWFing you're better off being a Bolt Ace and shelling out 2 Feats (technically 4, but you were already going to take Point Blank Shot and Rapid Shot anyway) for Crossbow Mastery instead, averaging out to...still way more damage (assuming 24 Dex you're doing 4d8+48; an average of 75 damage) and an extra Feat to play around with, with more consistent attack rolls.

There is no conceivable scenario where dual wielding crossbows is in any way better than another option, unless you're comparing it to the effectiveness of a Sling or something.

Even in the scenario where it is better (10 Str archer vs dual wielding crossbow user) it only wins by 5 damage at the cost of 3 Feats and needing a hilarious amount of cheese (carrying several dozen weapons in any configuration that they're easily drawn on your person and a Mythic Magic Item, really?) to eke out an infinitesimal advantage over a fighting style that assumes no special optimization.

Like I said, sounds like a terrible idea, even if on paper it looks okay at first glance.

r2d2go

2019-12-10, 11:04 PM

Some builds and some math

Hey, no need to be insulting rude. But, to address the most valid points: Yeah, bountiful bottles aren't going to be allowed in every game, but they're on the SRD and you're not using any of the mythic features so why not? It, or a variant thereof, gets approved for 90% of my games. Plus, Alchemical Allocation is in vanilla pathfinder and does the same thing, bountiful bottles are actually overpriced. Also, yes this is cheese, but it's not even slightly rules questionable, looks like an action movie, and if you didn't care about optimization why are you arguing about the optimization issues of these things?

Anyway, while yeah if you make unoptimized builds then this one trick doesn't magically fix that, take a look at a build I used in real life (edited to be the same level):

Archery "Ranger" 15:
Samsaran Inquisitor (Royal Accuser) 4 Ranger 1 Hinterlander 10
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Endurance, Weapon Focus (Longbow), Manyshot, Quicken Spell, Leadership, Favored Prestige Class (Hinterlander), Deadeye's Blessing, Prestigious Spellcaster
Relevant Stats: 17+2(racial)+3(levels)+4(item) = 26 Wis, 16+4(item) = 20 Str

Traits: (metamagic reducers)

Items: +1 Shocking Frost Flaming Composite Longbow, +4 Str Item, +4 Wis Item, Bountiful Bottle (GMW), permanent Gravity Bow, permanent Enlarge Person

Gets 5 attacks (3 iterative, +1 many shot, +1 rapid shot)

Gets around (11 BAB + 8 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 8 wis -2 rapid shot +5 magic -1 size = +30) to hit

Deals around (10.5 longbow + 10.5 elemental + 8 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot +5 strength + 5 magic) = 40 x5 = 200 damage

Okay, now let's convert to crossbow:

Samsaran Cleric (Crusader) 1, Ranger 1, Fighter (Crossbowman) 5, Hinterlander 8
Feats: Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Improved Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Endurance, Weapon Focus (Longbow), Leadership, Favored Prestige Class (Hinterlander), Quick Draw, (3) TWF chain, Weapon Focus (Crossbow), Weapon Specialization (Crossbow), Improved Critical (Crossbow)

Relevant Stats: 16+2(race)+2(item) = 22 Wis, 17+3(levels)+6(item) = 26 Dex

Items: +6 Dex Item, +2 Wis Item, a bunch of crossbows, permanent Gravity Bow, Permanent Enlarge Person, Bountiful Bottle (GMW), Metamagic Rod Quicken

Gets 7 attacks (6 iterative, + 1 rapid shot)

Gets around (12 BAB + 6 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 8 Dex -2 rapid shot -2 TWF +5 magic +1 crossbowman -1 size +1 weapon focus = +29) to hit

Deals around (13.5 crossbow + 6 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 4 Dex + 5 magic +2 weapon specialization) = 31.5 x7 x1.15 (crit) = 253.575 damage

That's without any combat buffs, which have almost twice the damage benefit for the crossbow user over the bow user.

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 12:11 AM

Hey, no need to be insulting.

No insult intended. Even I didn't realize exactly HOW bad the build was until I started looking deeper into it.

Edit: This is also not meant to be insulting/rude. I have an abrasive writing style/"text tone", but I'm not mad or anything.

But, to address the most valid points: Yeah, bountiful bottles aren't going to be allowed in every game, but they're on the SRD and you're not using any of the mythic features so why not? It, or a variant thereof, gets approved for 90% of my games. Plus, Alchemical Allocation is in vanilla pathfinder and does the same thing, bountiful bottles are actually overpriced. Also, yes this is cheese, but it's not even slightly rules questionable, looks like an action movie, and if you didn't care about optimization why are you arguing about the optimization issues of these things?

Bountiful Bottles DO require Mythic features; it requires a character with Mythic Crafter to create. Alchemical Allocation does not work with Oils, only Potions and Elixirs; it requires you to consume the Potion or Elixir and then spit it back up. It's also unique to the Alchemist list, so only an Alchemist could provide that benefit even if it did work.

Finally, "cheese" and "optimization" are not the same thing. As a general rule of thumb for myself, anything requiring a generous GM's ruling to work isn't a valid OP tactic.

Anyway, while yeah if you make unoptimized builds then this one trick doesn't magically fix that, take a look at a build I used in real life (edited to be the same level):

Archery "Ranger" 15:
Samsaran Inquisitor (Royal Accuser) 4 Ranger 1 Hinterlander 10
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Endurance, Weapon Focus (Longbow), Manyshot, Quicken Spell, Leadership, Favored Prestige Class (Hinterlander), Deadeye's Blessing, Prestigious Spellcaster
Relevant Stats: 17+2(racial)+3(levels)+4(item) = 26 Wis, 16+4(item) = 20 Str

Traits: (metamagic reducers)

Items: +1 Shocking Frost Flaming Composite Longbow, +4 Str Item, +4 Wis Item, Bountiful Bottle (GMW), permanent Gravity Bow, permanent Enlarge Person

Gets 5 attacks (3 iterative, +1 many shot, +1 rapid shot)

Gets around (11 BAB + 8 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 8 wis -2 rapid shot +5 magic -1 size = +30) to hit

Deals around (10.5 longbow + 10.5 elemental + 8 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot +5 strength + 5 magic) = 40 x5 = 200 damage

Okay, now let's convert to crossbow:

Samsaran Cleric (Crusader) 1, Ranger 1, Fighter (Crossbowman) 5, Hinterlander 8
Feats: Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Improved Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Endurance, Weapon Focus (Longbow), Leadership, Favored Prestige Class (Hinterlander), Quick Draw, (3) TWF chain, Weapon Focus (Crossbow), Weapon Specialization (Crossbow), Improved Critical (Crossbow)

Relevant Stats: 16+2(race)+2(item) = 22 Wis, 17+3(levels)+6(item) = 26 Dex

Items: +6 Dex Item, +2 Wis Item, a bunch of crossbows, permanent Gravity Bow, Permanent Enlarge Person, Bountiful Bottle (GMW), Metamagic Rod Quicken

Gets 7 attacks (6 iterative, + 1 rapid shot)

Gets around (12 BAB + 6 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 8 Dex -2 rapid shot -2 TWF +5 magic +1 crossbowman -1 size +1 weapon focus = +29) to hit

Deals around (13.5 crossbow + 6 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 4 Dex + 5 magic +2 weapon specialization) = 31.5 x7 x1.15 (crit) = 253.575 damage

That's without any combat buffs, which have almost twice the damage benefit for the crossbow user over the bow user.

Enlarge person and Gravity Bow do not stack, per this FAQ:

As per the rules on size changes, size changes do not stack, so if you have multiple size changing effects (for instance an effect that increases your size by one step and another that increases your size by two steps), only the largest applies. The same is true of effective size increases (which includes “deal damage as if they were one size category larger than they actually are,” “your damage die type increases by one step,” and similar language). They don’t stack with each other, just take the biggest one. However, you can have one of each and they do work together (for example, enlarge person increasing your actual size to Large and a bashing shield increasing your shield’s effective size by two steps, for a total of 2d6 damage).

Also, you're missing a -6 penalty to attack rolls. Heavy Crossbows have a -4 inherent penalty to attack rolls if fired one-handed and count as TWFing with two one-handed weapons, imparting an extra -4/-4 to all your attacks. In essence your TWFing penalties are -8, not -2.

Nothing in your build allows you to add Dex to damage with your crossbow.

Hinterlander Favored Enemy does not stack with Ranger Favored Enemy; it is its own distinct source of the ability.

This changes the final calcs to:

Longbow: +27 to-hit (no more size penalty to attack rolls) and for damage (7 longbow + 10.5 elemental + 4 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot +4 strength + 5 magic) x 5 =157.5

Crossbow: +22 to-hit (-6 unaccounted for penalties, +1 size reduction) and for damage (9 crossbow + 4 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 5 magic +2 weapon specialization) x 7 = 147

I reeeeeally don't feel like doing DPR calcs for archers right now but it's pretty self-evident that the crossbowman's DPR is exceptionally lower than the archer.

Here's the formula if you want to take a crack at it:

The damage formula is h(d+s)+tchd.

h = Chance to hit, expressed as a percentage
d = Damage per hit. Average damage is assumed.
s = Precision damage per hit (or other damage that isn't multiplied on a crit). Average damage is again assumed.
t = Chance to roll a critical threat, expressed as a percentage.
c = Critical hit bonus damage. x2 = 1, x3 = 2, x4 = 3.

Tiktakkat

2019-12-11, 12:24 AM

If the "realism" factor is going to be invoked, then the problem is not that crossbows fire too slowly, but that bows fire too quickly.

ROF for military grade (150+ lbs.) longbows was expected to be twice that of crossbows.
But players expect machine-gun bows like Crow the Elf in Hawk the Slayer (for us older types) or Legolas in LOTR (for more recent gamers), so that is what designers give them.

That same set up is gratuitously extended to firearms - muskets were expected to have half the ROF of longbows, effectively about equal to that of crossbows. They were also considered simple weapons, just like crossbows. But if that happened, especially with the awesome damage always assigned to muskets, then longbows would be rapidly overshadowed, and they cannot have that.

As a further system grumble, this was all aggravated when they cut the round from 1 minute to 6 seconds. Firing one arrow per second takes the unrealism to 11.

All of which makes the SKR quip, where he later INSISTS that spears were more common weapons that swords only because of expense, and so that is why swords are so much more awesome in the game than spears because cost does not matter to PCs above 1st level, even more absurd. Though that does confirm the simple reality:
Bows are better than crossbows in the game because of designer preference and player expectation.
The only way to get around that is to modify the system.

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 12:42 AM

No insult intended. Even I didn't realize exactly HOW bad the build was until I started looking deeper into it.

Edit: This is also not meant to be insulting/rude. I have an abrasive writing style/"text tone", but I'm not mad or anything.

Bountiful Bottles DO require Mythic features; it requires a character with Mythic Crafter to create. Alchemical Allocation does not work with Oils, only Potions and Elixirs; it requires you to consume the Potion or Elixir and then spit it back up. It's also unique to the Alchemist list, so only an Alchemist could provide that benefit even if it did work.

Finally, "cheese" and "optimization" are not the same thing. As a general rule of thumb for myself, anything requiring a generous GM's ruling to work isn't a valid OP tactic.

Enlarge person and Gravity Bow do not stack, per this FAQ:

Also, you're missing a -6 penalty to attack rolls. Heavy Crossbows have a -4 inherent penalty to attack rolls if fired one-handed and count as TWFing with two one-handed weapons, imparting an extra -4/-4 to all your attacks. In essence your TWFing penalties are -8, not -2.

Nothing in your build allows you to add Dex to damage with your crossbow.

Hinterlander Favored Enemy does not stack with Ranger Favored Enemy; it is its own distinct source of the ability.

This changes the final calcs to:

Longbow: +27 to-hit (no more size penalty to attack rolls) and for damage (7 longbow + 10.5 elemental + 4 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot +4 strength + 5 magic) x 5 =157.5

Crossbow: +22 to-hit (-6 unaccounted for penalties, +1 size reduction) and for damage (9 crossbow + 4 favored enemy + 1 point blank shot + 5 magic +2 weapon specialization) x 7 = 147

I reeeeeally don't feel like doing DPR calcs for archers right now but it's pretty self-evident that the crossbowman's DPR is exceptionally lower than the archer.

Here's the formula if you want to take a crack at it:

Gravity bow and Enlarge Person stack; from your quote, you get one effective size and one actual size increase. Since you're dropping bows, you can use both hands for each shot, though I'll admit that's questionable. I'll also admit to the one handed weapon thing that I forgot. Crossbowman gets half dex to damage at level 3. Hinterlander either is a separate untyped bonus and thus stacks, or stacks directly.

So in terms of damage, we're definitely the same (even if you drop some of it, I intentionally used the same build for each so it subtracts from both, slightly lowering the margin but not by much). In terms of to-hit, the crossbow should probably be lower, but again at that level with actual items you should never miss. Also, this is literally taking a longbow prestige class and build and tweaking it to be a crossbow build - it's meant to demonstrate that just by switching to crossbow (and often without giving anything up) you can increase your damage. If you really want I can make a better build in terms of raw damage, but I think it's evident that at late levels getting 7 shots instead of 5 (or 9 instead of 6) is going to make up for strength to damage.

Edit: Oh, and obviously in classes with more on hits like Rogue and its spinoffs, or with poison, or with other buffs, or with bigger initial size, the rate of fire gets more and more important.

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 01:02 AM

Actually, I just realized crossbowman only gets dex to readied shots. I am now willing to admit that Paizo hates crossbows, but also I am pretty sure I can get top tier dps on a ninja with Greater Sniper Goggles (i.e. better than any similar build, especially bow and throwing builds, at that range). So I guess what I'm saying is I'll admit crossbows aren't always better at high levels, but they definitely can be.

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 01:04 AM

Gravity bow and Enlarge Person stack; from your quote, you get one effective size and one actual size increase. Since you're dropping bows, you can use both hands for each shot, though I'll admit that's questionable. I'll also admit to the one handed weapon thing that I forgot.

Right on that, I goofed.

Crossbowman gets half dex to damage at level 3.

Read the fine print on that: "At 3rd level, when a crossbowman attacks with a crossbow as a readied action, he may add 1/2 his Dexterity bonus (minimum +1) on his damage roll."

Hinterlander either is a separate untyped bonus and thus stacks, or stacks directly.

That's not how that works. It's a similar scenario to adding the same stat as a bonus twice. And PrCs that advance class features explicitly say so.

Edit: Found the FAQ on that, kne wthere was one somewhere.

Channel Energy: If I have this ability from more than one class, do they stack?
No—unless an ability specifically says it stacks with similar abilities (such as an assassin's sneak attack), or adds in some way based on the character's total class levels (such as improved uncanny dodge), the abilities don't stack and you have to use them separately. Therefore, cleric channeling doesn't stack with paladin channeling, necromancer channeling, oracle of life channeling, and so on.

posted July 2011 | back to top

So in terms of damage, we're definitely the same (even if you drop some of it, I intentionally used the same build for each so it subtracts from both, slightly lowering the margin but not by much). In terms of to-hit, the crossbow should probably be lower, but again at that level with actual items you should never miss.

By your build you have a +22 to attack; the base AC you're attacking is an AC 30 (CR 15 average) and scales up for actually challenging foes. So no, you don't never miss.

Also, this is literally taking a longbow prestige class and build and tweaking it to be a crossbow build - it's meant to demonstrate that just by switching to crossbow (and often without giving anything up) you can increase your damage. If you really want I can make a better build in terms of raw damage, but I think it's evident that at late levels getting 7 shots instead of 5 (or 9 instead of 6) is going to make up for strength to damage.

You failed to demonstrate that, however. You swapped things out and it demonstrated that the crossbow specialist, even with favorable tweaks and very generous GM rulings RE: Bottle and being able to carry/draw that many crossbows in the first place (and yes, at a certain point "common sense" does factor in; if your character is hauling around more than about four objects that are 2 feet long and about as wide it raises questions as to wher ethey're putting them that need to be answered) the crossbow variant is significantly weaker.

Edit: Oh, and obviously in classes with more on hits like Rogue and its spinoffs, or with poison, or with other buffs, or with bigger initial size, the rate of fire gets more and more important.

If it comes with a loss of consistency in hitting, no it doesn't. It's why the TWF Rogue build is typically a trap.

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 01:21 AM

Sorry about ninja-ing you, but to address some points:

Edit: Found the FAQ on that

This refers to abilities that scale; however, I'm not suggesting Hinterlander stacks with Ranger in the sense that you add levels to determine your current bonus, or that you are allowed to increase one existing bonus and select a new one, I'm just saying they're two separate untyped sources of +2 damage. Unless you're suggesting they're still the same "source" and thus don't stack?

By your build you have a +22 to attack; the base AC you're attacking is an AC 30 (CR 15 average) and scales up for actually challenging foes. So no, you don't never miss.

I still hit on 8 or higher with my random NPC's wealth - You can easily get +7 to hit (probably significantly more, to address the more challenging foes) off of the extra 150,000 gp or so remaining. And that's assuming all the penalties listed are ruled against my favor.

If it comes with a loss of consistency in hitting, no it doesn't. It's why the TWF Rogue build is typically a trap.

I don't disagree, in the sense that the majority of people build TWF Rogue incorrectly and that's why they hit inconsistently. Underground Chemist is the easiest way to get around this, but Vanishing Trick, a dip into Bolt Ace, or just optimized items usually also works.

Nifty trick I just found for this (though it takes 4 levels in Gunslinger Bolt Ace) - Run Like Hell gives you a grit point when you're at least 100 feet away from your enemies, and you can reactivate every time you have 0 grit. So if you're empty on grit, and you start more than 100 feet away, you can just continuously reactivate and get touch attacks. This requires your range increment to be over 100 feet, but it is.

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 02:00 AM

Sorry about ninja-ing you, but to address some points:

This refers to abilities that scale; however, I'm not suggesting Hinterlander stacks with Ranger in the sense that you add levels to determine your current bonus, or that you are allowed to select two additional enemies and up to one increases your existing bonus. I'm just saying they're two separate untyped sources of +2 damage. Unless you're suggesting they're still the same "source" and thus don't stack?

They are both source "Favored Enemy", yes, just from two different classes. Similarly multiclassing Fighter and Arsenal Chaplain Warpriest would not get you Weapon Training +2.

I still hit on 8 or higher with my random NPC's wealth - You can easily get +7 to hit (probably significantly more, to address the more challenging foes) off of the extra 150,000 gp or so remaining. And that's assuming all the penalties listed are ruled against my favor.

You probably could, but remember also the initial premise of this discussion: that anything you can do, archery can do better.

Past a certain OP level, yes, you can optimize "water balloons" to compete with anything, but it's simply not worth the effort when you can achieve the same or greater results with less effort and have more resources left over to do more fun things. If your options are Option 1.) a one-trick pony that can deal the same or slightly better damage than option 2 or Option 2.) The option that can achieve the same efficacy but increased versatility, why choose Option 1?

As well, archery has more stacking bonuses available to it than crossbow users and at a lesser cost than even those. Anything a crossbow user does to even the gap can be used on the other side to widen it further, as (Bolt Ace excepted) anything that adds to crossbow attack/damage can be applied to bows , but the reverse is not true (for example, Bracers of Archery apply to bows, but not crossbows).

Nifty trick I just found for this (though it takes 4 levels in Gunslinger Bolt Ace) - Run Like Hell gives you a grit point when you're at least 100 feet away from your enemies, and you can reactivate every time you have 0 grit. So if you're empty on grit, and you start more than 100 feet away, you can just continuously reactivate and get touch attacks. This requires your range increment to be over 100 feet, but it is.

This only works once: "While this dare is active, your speed increases by 10 feet, and you retain your Dexterity bonus to your AC while running. You regain 1 grit or panache point the first time you are more than 100 feet away from your closest enemy."

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 02:17 AM

They are both source "Favored Enemy", yes, just from two different classes. Similarly multiclassing Fighter and Arsenal Chaplain Warpriest would not get you Weapon Training +2.

See, I would disagree with that as well. You wouldn't have Weapon Training 2, you would have Weapon Training 1 and Weapon Training 1 - each one is a unique source of +1 attack and damage and thus stacks. I guess it'd be up to the GM, but for comparison, consider say Holy Beast shifter. It explicitly "gains the ranger’s favored enemy class feature, except...". But the ability is titled "Divine Fury", and increments differently from the ranger's ability. Would they stack? I would argue they should, but you could make the same argument that they both are from "favored enemy".

You probably could, but remember also the initial premise of this discussion: that anything you can do, archery can do better.

Past a certain OP level, yes, you can optimize "water balloons" to compete with anything, but it's simply not worth the effort when you can achieve the same or greater results with less effort and have more resources left over to do more fun things. If your options are Option 1.) a one-trick pony that can deal the same or slightly better damage than option 2 or Option 2.) The option that can achieve the same efficacy but increased versatility, why choose Option 1?

As well, archery has more stacking bonuses available to it than crossbow users and at a lesser cost than even those. Anything a crossbow user does to even the gap can be used on the other side to widen it further, as (Bolt Ace excepted) anything that adds to crossbow attack/damage can be applied to bows , but the reverse is not true (for example, Bracers of Archery apply to bows, but not crossbows).

If that's your argument, then I think it is clear it is untrue (even beyond Bolt Ace). Even without having a bunch of loaded crossbows, you can use quick draw (attaching the crossbow to a chain if your DM is stingy) and the full reloading chain to dual wield crossbows. You cannot do so regardless of build with bows. Thus crossbows, while generally worse, are not strictly worse. Basically "anything you can do, archery can do better" just isn't true.

In fact, while I'll admit I went a little too far claiming they were always better, I would argue they are often better, in the nebulous sense of often that means "not half of the time, but enough to matter".

This only works once: "While this dare is active, your speed increases by 10 feet, and you retain your Dexterity bonus to your AC while running. You regain 1 grit or panache point the first time you are more than 100 feet away from your closest enemy."

That's why I mentioned already being at 1 (or 0) grit. "Dares become active when a member of these classes runs out of her respective pool, and become inactive until the character regains points of their respective pool", and so you activate the dare, immediately gain 1 grit, deactivate the dare, spend the grit getting a touch attack, reactivate the dare, etc. The only way this wouldn't work is if there were a restriction on uses per round or day (which are not listed), or "the first time" persists across reactivation, which would mean this works once, ever. Which seems unlikely.

Yahzi Coyote

2019-12-11, 02:32 AM

Hawk the Slayer
:smallbiggrin:

That same set up is gratuitously extended to firearms
The complete lack of a technology level wrecked a lot. There's Renaissance plate and crossbows mixed in with Dark Age studded leather and Ancient scale. And it's all supposed to be balanced somehow, without giving the advanced technologies any edge.

I added Primitive/Wild/Civilized Technology to my game (see Merchants of Prime on DriveThruRPG) to try and address that a bit.

upho

2019-12-11, 02:43 AM

It's unfair comparing crossbows to water balloonsNah, seems perfectly fair to me, considering it was soon proven to SKR that an actual water balloon fighter was indeed superior to a crossbow fighter! (In truth, the balloon fighter laced the water in his ammo with a bit of opium, but IIRC the build did follow RAW and was actually pretty viable.) BTW, this very thread probably also helped build SKR's great fame more than any of his many other fantastically diplomatic and intelligent interactions he had with the customers he loved so dearly, proving beyond any doubt to the player community that he was a true master of the system he wrote for.

The truce between Longbow and Crossbow is an ancient one, and it's not limited to d&d/pathfinder.Dunno, I've read (and played some) other similar fantasy RPG systems which have xbow mechanics considerably more balanced and IMO also having far greater verisimilitude.

In real life a crossbow is way more powerful than a longbow, being able of piercing trough even fullplate armors and simultaneously being a simple weapon which requires very low training to be used properly.Whoa, hold your horses there! This seems to paint a quite different picture than the one presented by what I believe to be some of the greatest experts in the field today. What sources are you basing this on?

For starters, AFAIK a large majority of the most powerful handheld xbows ever created were made in the last 50 years of the medieval age in Europe, which is also when "peak plate" happens and full plate field armor is more prevalent and offers far greater protection against the weaponry of the day than during any other period in known history (much thanks to improved metal refinement and larger scale manufacturing, making more homogeneous higher quality annealed steel raw material more common and in turn armor reliability and heat treatments more effective/viable). And I'm pretty certain a bolt launched by any xbow which can be called "normal" or "typical" for this period would be pretty useless against such armor, as not even a bolt launched by the more common larger windlass spanned variants with heavy steel prods and massive draw weights had a kinetic energy much greater than that of the heaviest war bows (although the xbows would generally be more accurate and reliable of course).

And AFAIK only a rare few still existing extremely large, powerful and expensive xbows from this period - which are still small enough to be used as a primary field weapon - are believed to have been effective also against an enemy in contemporary high quality plate armor. IIRC only replicas of the most powerful composite horn prod xbows specifically have actually been confirmed to give their very heavy bolts more than the approximately 400 joules of kinetic energy needed to reliably disable an enemy in such armor, no doubt because such "siege" or "rampart" crossbows can have both very high draw weights and unusually long power strokes.

Btw, I actually made a similar such very heavy crossbow myself long ago with (lots of) help from a few far more crafting-savvy and medieval-nerdy friends, copying most of the design, proportions and estimated draw weight from a surviving Italian weapon dated to around 1480, but I used a narrower prod in modern spring steel (from an old Volvo truck!) in place of the original's composite horn prod, as copying that would've required crafting skills, finances and especially patience far beyond those I possessed.

My creation started obediently shooting 250 - 300 gram bolts at a speed measured to about 170 fps, making me a very proud dad. But after about 70 launches or so it started making more and more weird whining and creaking protests each time I spanned it for some reason, and when I soon thereafter caught it doing cracks straight in the tiller, I got really scared and told it there would be no more fun with daddy and the bolt bros unless it shut up, got off the cracks and back to shooting the straight and narrow. We haven't been in touch since then, and I've heard rumors that my creation became a victim of black market organ dealers in the SCA many years ago... :smallwink:

That said, I agree that the more extreme and exotic RL weapons are precisely those one should include in a fantasy RPG, especially if they also can have more balanced mechanics without having to sacrifice much verisimilitude. So those rare ultra-powerful RL siege xbows are IMO a rather perfect inspiration for the game's heavy crossbow for the serious user (and not for bearded old dudes in bathrobes and pointy hats). It's sad scores of designers seem to all have missed those RL xbows actually exists, and even more sad that they've insisted on the inconsistent application of simulationism vs balanced/fun mechanics to crossbows as well as many other options with RL counterparts.

Nowaday IMHO crossbows don't represent in the game the powerful weapons they are in reality, in a more realistic system they should give some kind of armor piercing bonus in the first increment.Dunno if I agree this would be more "realistic", but that shouldn't have to matter any more than it does for other weapons anyways. Speaking of, a long-running house rule in my PF games is that most crossbows and guns grant a flat +4 attack bonus against targets within the first range increment, replacing gun attacks vs touch AC.

It's pretty much a higher floor vs a much much lower ceiling.Except this isn't entirely true, because the floor is only higher for non-martial builds, meaning those not primarily relying on the crossbow properties and related options to perform adequately in combat, and the ceiling is actually higher as one specific crossbow is superior to all other ranged weapon (as explained in my previous posts).

Also Historically Crossbows CANNOT go though plate armour. The whole myth of Plate armour being easily pierced by Crossbows and muskets is BS. Actual Full Plate (which is expensive as ****) if modeled realistically in D&D would straight up offer something like DR 5/- and another DR 10/Blunt or something.Do you believe a round of say magnum .45 AP would penetrate such plate armor? If you don't, then I believe you have some very strange ideas about medieval full plate. And if you do, I believe don't really know what the most powerful medieval xbows were capable of. To give you an idea of how wrong these claims are, I suggest you check out for example this vid (https://youtu.be/AA5M0QKXtWU), made by a very serious maker of xbows closely matching surviving medieval ones, using period materials and manufacturing methods. I think you're in for a surprise if you also compare the numbers in the vid with those of modern larger caliber pistols...

Even armour as DR rules don't do them justice.Absolutely agree. But I'm also thankful mwk full plate is highly unrealistic, as a "realistic" version would be vastly superior to all other armors and probably even more of a complete no-brainer for PCs than it was for the wealthiest professional soldiers in RL.

Tod's Workshop on Youtube did a nice comparison of a 160 pound bow vs Platemail (FYI IIRC that's about equal to a 1000 pound X-Bow). The thing barely dented the first layer.If you watch Tod's channel, I believe you should know that "1000 pound" is neither close to the the maximum estimated for surviving medieval examples, nor that it says much about a xbow's actual power. Draw weight is merely one of many factors which affect the kinetic energy of the projectile, which is the actually relevant number in this context.

In addition, in none of his many vids has Tod used a replica of a medieval crossbow as powerful as the most extreme ones which remain largely intact (AFAIK he's never made a xbow based on one those heavy siege xbows, actually). He's also mentioned for example that there exists heavier medieval crossbows which have both higher estimated draw weight (1,600+ lbs) and a considerably longer power stroke than any of his heavy steel prod variants he's showed on his channel. It was btw Tod who recommended the vid I linked to above.

I should stop presenting silly things without comment, because the silly needs to be closely examined for it to be self-evident that it's silly. Yeah, SKR was definitely being a doofus.At least you managed to make me laugh! And at least in my mind SKR has long since leveled up into "pretty harmless but still entertaining doofus"-status. :smalltongue:

Though I must admit I still also find it a bit sad and frustrating to read his posts even now more than six years later...

I believe added strength bows has much more to do with the concept and development of composite bow materials than the Greek myths. Taking the mongolian short riding bows compared to the english longbow is a great example of this.I also believe this to be true.

Similarly the reason you don't see a more powerful version of a crossbow is because they are already composite bows to begin with and in order to make them more powerful they start getting much heavier very quickly. So you go from a crossbow made with bone or wood composites to a heavy crossbow with a metal core to a all metal bow ballista for example.If this is correct, it seems to say more about the designers' lack of knowledge, as virtually all the most powerful portable xbows have massive composite horn prongs, not metal prongs (see for example vid I linked to above). AFAIK the primary reasons for this is that a metal prong was heavier, less energy effective and especially that it couldn't be made reliable enough for people to dare pushing the material's limits, as there was a very real risk of a steel prong suddenly breaking and consequently smacking the wielder in the face with deadly force.

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 02:45 AM

As to not ninja (heh), a simple crossbow build that's better than the equivalent bow build:

Human Ninja 10/Bolt Ace 5
Feats: Quick Draw, Rapid Reload, TWF, Improved TWF, Greater TWF, Rapid Shot, Deadly Aim, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Accomplished Sneak Attacker
Tricks: Vanishing Trick, Combat Trick, Acceleration of Form, Rogue Trick (Combat Trick), Invisible Blade
Spending the Bolt Ace 4 feat on Run Like Hell

Stats: Dex 18+2(race)+2(levels)+6(item) = 28

Key Items: Dex +6, Greater Sniper's Goggles

It's not even about using gimmicks to increase damage and save feats anymore, it's just that an extra three sneak attacks is really significant (4 or 5 at slightly higher level). Gonna ignore the to-hit stuff since you're hitting touch flat footed, so it shouldn't matter at all.

You're dealing 1d8+6d6+29 = 54.5 damage per shot with 8 shots, so something like 436 damage.

Ninja 15 with a bow, even with +9 strength instead of dex (sacrificing init and AC), is:

1d8+8d6+34 x5 = 332.5 damage

I mean you obviously have more feats with the bow, but what are you gonna spend 'em on that gets you an extra 20 damage/shot or 100 damage overall?

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 03:57 AM

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 04:42 AM

Thing is, you don't spend them on getting more damage, that's the whole point. Those builds have the exact same One Round TTK against anything CR 19 or lower, so instead of delving ever deeper into diminishing returns you spend the Feats on literally anything that's not damage. That's the difference between TO and Practical Optimization.

And the bow build comes online faster, which is an important factor; games typically end at around level 16 at the latest (that's when most Adventure Paths end).

This is what I mean by "anything you can do archery can do better". If you achieve the same end with less resources, you have won.

Regardless of that though, I don't think you and I are ever going to see eye to eye on the nebulous floating cloud of crossbows empowered by a Mythic item thing, and I don't see anywhere in your build you could even fit Crossbow Mastery if you wanted to (you're also one Feat over budget as it is; Ninja Trick: Rogue Talent [Combat Trick] is not a valid choice per the text of Rogue Talent, but that's nitpicking), so we're not going to really be able to come to an agreement on that count in the first place.

I guess I can accept that the cheese is cheese, but the ninja build comes online without the 5 levels in Bolt Ace long before you can instantly sweep the entire enemy team in a by-the-book encounter, and who uses by the book encounters at that point anyway?

Similarly, if we're talking utility, take the half caster build I put up earlier, replacing some of the mediocre feats and Crossbowman with Bolt Ace 5 gives obviously superior to-hit (because touch attacks) and damage compared to the bow build.

I can accept that crossbows are feat intensive, and I can accept that they're usually worse, but "anything you can do I can do better"? It's clearly not *strictly* better, and if your argument is "in my experience, the case where crossbow wins never comes up", well, I can't disprove that. In the same sense though, I've seen crossbows used to superior effect in at least one game, and I think overall they're fine (in the sense that everything in Pathfinder is fine; broken in esoteric ways and often utterly incomparable, only reigned in my competent DMs)

upho

2019-12-11, 07:14 AM

Sorry, but I just can't keep myself from crashing your bow vs xbow build discussion. Because you're both being WRONG ON THE INTERNET! :smallfurious:

As to not ninja (heh), a simple crossbow build that's better than the equivalent bow build:Maybe, but I don't really see how this build says anything aside from reiterating the well-known fact that Bolt Ace 5 can be good for martials focusing on ranged damage. And considering there are many archery options to more than compensate for that lack of adding Dex to damage, what other uniquely xbow-related stuff would you say does this build have going for it which an archery build simply can't replicate or do better?

And perhaps more importantly, unless I've simply missed a lot of vital info in the build outline (which is honestly fully possible given my senility and track record), I believe there are some very serious problems with your "ninja bolter".

First, it spends a lot of resources on invisibility options to reliably get SA damage, but pulling old invisibility stunts simply won't fly against easily more than half of CR 15 - 18 opponents (ie the low end of the CR range of enemies which actually matters at 15th level), going by the 256 published ones included in this very nifty compilation (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E2-s8weiulPoBQjdI05LBzOUToyoZIdSsLKxHAvf8F8/edit#gid=3). In fact, nearly half of these creatures even have permanent senses which renders those invisibility related investments utterly worthless, and many of those which don't instead have activated abilities which do the same. In other words, I believe your ninja bolter desperately needs to replace/upgrade their low-level invisibility-based SA method with a high-level counterpart which can actually be expected to work against the opposition, or their average DPR numbers will most likely be considerably smaller than those suggested in the build outline.

Second, the Sharp Shoot deed only gives the ability to target touch AC with the one single attack which the deed activation is a part of. And considering your ninja bolter's shtick is otherwise largely based on making lots of attacks, they'll only be able to target touch AC with a very small minority of the many attacks they're hopefully able to make during an average adventuring day at this level. Which means their average hit chance will typically be pretty terrible and radically reduce their average DPR numbers in a real game, even should their low-level invisibility trick miraculously work against virtually all opponents and add SA damage to every hit. And those numbers won't be much improved by seizing every every opportunity to run like hell to at best regain one measly grit point per round. (I believe the only combo which actually might be able to regain enough grit to allow targeting touch AC with nearly all attacks would involve investing heavily in crit fishing feats and stuff to frequently enable abundant ammunition + named bullet shenanigans, which is most likely going to be way too expensive for a build based on a non-caster even at this level. Not to mention those kinds of shenanigans also come with a very high risk of ending with your GM targeting your own touch AC with thrown attacks in RL, using various painfully hard game paraphernalia as surprisingly damaging ammo...)

Third, your ninja bolter has mainly invested in flat damage boosts, additional attacks and supporting invisibility stuff, but nothing to improve their chances of being able to penetrate the defenses of their opponents or even to target trickier enemies in the first place. Which is a major problem at this level, considering the average CR 15 - 18 enemy has a rather impressive arsenal of especially various magic/supernatural tricks to help them avoid being targeted by ranged weapon attacks and/or give them a good chance to flat-out ignore hits with such attacks. In fact, I don't even see how your ninja-bolter is supposed to effectively overcome even the usual simple stuff like wind wall, mirror image, displacement, invisibility or DR, much less any of the numerous stronger higher level stuff. An archer build will have considerably more resources left to spend on options to help them overcome such issues.

Finally, why do you believe a high-op xbow build is better off wielding a xbow other than the MDXB?

Thing is, you don't spend them on getting more damage, that's the whole point. Those builds have the exact same One Round TTK against anything CR 19 or lower, so instead of delving ever deeper into diminishing returns you spend the Feats on literally anything that's not damage. That's the difference between TO and Practical Optimization.While this is very much true for most melee damage builds, I believe it's far less so for ranged ones as they can often easily switch targets in the middle of a full attack should their initial target go down quickly. And since a ranged build typically has this low risk of wasting their damage potential on pointless overkills, they can also gain a lot from pumping up their DPR numbers way past those needed for reliable one-shots of the highest CR enemies they can be expected to face. This is even more true for those wielding bows or crossbows as the range of those weapon types is basically never an actual limitation in practice.

But yeah, I agree there are typically far better things to spend resources on also for a damage focused range build once "sufficient" one-shot capability has been achieved.

And the bow build comes online faster, which is an important factor; games typically end at around level 16 at the latest (that's when most Adventure Paths end).Xbow builds can of course never compete with archers during the first four levels or so. But by no later than 5th a high-op primarily martial xbow build can already have very significant auto-scaling damage stuff online, having them nearly catching up with an equally high-op primarily martial archer. And likely before 10th, the xbow build has clearly surpassed the archer, both in terms of "ranged single-target damage" combat role performance and in terms of how many resources available to spend on supporting and non-combat stuff. By 16th I simply cannot see how the archer could be made as strong the xbow build, much less actually stronger.

And as you probably realize, the xbow build's superiority is of course further emphasized in a game allowing PoW options.

This is what I mean by "anything you can do archery can do better". If you achieve the same end with less resources, you have won.But you don't if we assume high-op builds, because again, there's simply nothing available to an archer which can keep up with the advantages the MDXB grants in the long run.

Regardless of that though, I don't think you and I are ever going to see eye to eye on the nebulous floating cloud of crossbows empowered by a Mythic item thing,I must say I also find this a highly questionable inclusion in a PO build, to say the least.

and I don't see anywhere in your build you could even fit Crossbow Mastery if you wanted to (you're also one Feat over budget as it is; Ninja Trick: Rogue Talent [Combat Trick] is not a valid choice per the text of Rogue Talent, but that's nitpicking), so we're not going to really be able to come to an agreement on that count in the first place.This, on the other hand, I believe can actually be very easily fixed with a couple of of training weapons. And IMO a couple of such weapons should frankly be considered no-brainer must-haves for any martial build I can think of at this level, especially considering a training gauntlet only has an 8k market price.

Morty

2019-12-11, 08:56 AM

It's honestly a pretty good illustration of 3E D&D in general that a "simple crossbow build" means dual-wielding and rapid-firing them instead of, you know, slowly but reliably sniping.

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 12:27 PM

Maybe, but I don't really see how this build says anything aside from reiterating the well-known fact that Bolt Ace 5 can be good for martials focusing on ranged damage. And considering there are many archery options to more than compensate for that lack of adding Dex to damage, what other uniquely xbow-related stuff would you say does this build have going for it which an archery build simply can't replicate or do better?

It uses Bolt Ace for touch attacks mostly - it's nearly as effective at level 14. And take the 4-5 levels whenever, so really, it's nearly as effective all the time - who misses touch ac?

And perhaps more importantly, unless I've simply missed a lot of vital info in the build outline (which is honestly fully possible given my senility and track record), I believe there are some very serious problems with your "ninja bolter".

First, it spends a lot of resources on invisibility options to reliably get SA damage, but pulling old invisibility stunts simply won't fly against easily more than half of CR 15 - 18 opponents (ie the low end of the CR range of enemies which actually matters at 15th level), going by the 256 published ones included in this very nifty compilation (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E2-s8weiulPoBQjdI05LBzOUToyoZIdSsLKxHAvf8F8/edit#gid=3). In fact, nearly half of these creatures even have permanent senses which renders those invisibility related investments utterly worthless, and many of those which don't instead have activated abilities which do the same. In other words, I believe your ninja bolter desperately needs to replace/upgrade their low-level invisibility-based SA method with a high-level counterpart which can actually be expected to work against the opposition, or their average DPR numbers will most likely be considerably smaller than those suggested in the build outline.

Most of these senses have a range, and the build only functions at beyond most of those ranges (100+ feet).

Second, the Sharp Shoot deed only gives the ability to target touch AC with the one single attack which the deed activation is a part of. And considering your ninja bolter's shtick is otherwise largely based on making lots of attacks, they'll only be able to target touch AC with a very small minority of the many attacks they're hopefully able to make during an average adventuring day at this level. Which means their average hit chance will typically be pretty terrible and radically reduce their average DPR numbers in a real game, even should their low-level invisibility trick miraculously work against virtually all opponents and add SA damage to every hit. And those numbers won't be much improved by seizing every every opportunity to run like hell to at best regain one measly grit point per round. (I believe the only combo which actually might be able to regain enough grit to allow targeting touch AC with nearly all attacks would involve investing heavily in crit fishing feats and stuff to frequently enable abundant ammunition + named bullet shenanigans, which is most likely going to be way too expensive for a build based on a non-caster even at this level. Not to mention those kinds of shenanigans also come with a very high risk of ending with your GM targeting your own touch AC with thrown attacks in RL, using various painfully hard game paraphernalia as surprisingly damaging ammo...)

I've addressed this before, but in case it's a matter of missing the explanation and not disbelief: Sharp Shoot is one attack per grit. If you start at more than 100 ft from your opponent, at 0 grit you can infinitely cycle your grit with the Run Like Hell dare by RAW. And honestly you're spending like 3 feats to slightly increase the range on a gun build, I think most GMs would allow it (though I've started to realize my "most GMs" is not some other "most GMs")

Edit: Oh, and the obvious errata that fixes this and isn't currently present is make Run Like Hell the "first time you move" instead of the "first time you are" over 100 ft away, as it is now. That's another potential complaint I guess, I address a couple in my first explanation.

Third, your ninja bolter has mainly invested in flat damage boosts, additional attacks and supporting invisibility stuff, but nothing to improve their chances of being able to penetrate the defenses of their opponents or even to target trickier enemies in the first place. Which is a major problem at this level, considering the average CR 15 - 18 enemy has a rather impressive arsenal of especially various magic/supernatural tricks to help them avoid being targeted by ranged weapon attacks and/or give them a good chance to flat-out ignore hits with such attacks. In fact, I don't even see how your ninja-bolter is supposed to effectively overcome even the usual simple stuff like wind wall, mirror image, displacement, invisibility or DR, much less any of the numerous stronger higher level stuff. An archer build will have considerably more resources left to spend on options to help them overcome such issues.

They have a lot of money leftover as well - are you suggesting feats are an effective way to overcome most of those? Feats are a permanent investment, IMO its almost always better to pump your basic trick with them and then use scrolls and such for the rest.

Finally, why do you believe a high-op xbow build is better off wielding a xbow other than the MDXB?

Sneak attack, I guess? If you believe in my "carry ten crossbows" cheese you can REALLY get into it by dual wielding Small MDXBs, but it looks like the swift action requirement kinda nixes that otherwise. I mean obviously they're pretty good for vital striking but given Pathfinder's aversion to size stacking I don't think that competes at high levels.

Edit: Also I don't think Named Bullet + Abundant Ammunition works. It pretty explicitly states that it's for things cast "on the same container", and while that doesn't make sense by the legalistic definition of "targets the container that this targets", it absolutely works for the same colloquial sense of "this bag of bullets was expensive" = "the bullets in this bag are expensive". Given that they use the word "cast on" instead of "targets", and the spells listed can target 50 pieces of ammunition, I don't think casting on one bullet in a bag works by RAW, and it certainly isn't RAI.

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 03:31 PM

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 05:21 PM

I'm trying to figure out the appeal of the "MDXB" since the Double Crossbow only EVER gets two attacks worth of damage (and has an unavoidable -4 to attack rolls, to boot); the fastest you can jack its reloads down to is a Move action for both bolts (with Crossbow Mastery).

Vital Strike was mentioned but that seems really questionable.

The minotaur version gets two attacks and only has a -2 to attack rolls. With Crossbow Mastery you get both as a swift action and one as a free action. In some interpretations this lets you get 2 shots a round (reload one free, fire, reload swift, fire, reload one free), and with less generous interpretation still allows 2 shots the first two rounds, then 3/2 in subsequent rounds. Reloading Hands improves this fire rate, arguably by a full shot per round. You get more shots than a bow at all levels and all interpretations, and up to twice as many until BAB 6 (worst interpretation) or BAB 16 (best interpretation), at the cost of -2 to hit and 3 feats.

Vital Strike keeps relevance for quite some time - Getting both it and Furious Finish by level 7, plus Enlarge and Gravity Bow, gets you 6d6 per bolt, maximized to 72 damage per shot. This is competitive with the Startossed Shower build, where even if you're allowed to maximize subsequent hits, the Sphinx Hammer or Totem Spear only gives 6d8 maximized to 48 damage on the initial shot and 24 on subsequent ones, though you can add strength and style bonuses to that. Oh, and it can hit touch with Bolt Ace so it's much more consistent.

Of course, like most Vital Strike builds it scales poorly, but 72 damage per turn is usually acceptable until it upgrades to 108 at level 11, and that small boost probably gets you to level 13.

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 06:12 PM

The minotaur version gets two attacks and only has a -2 to attack rolls. With Crossbow Mastery you get both as a swift action and one as a free action. In some interpretations this lets you get 2 shots a round (reload one free, fire, reload swift, fire, reload one free), and with less generous interpretation still allows 2 shots the first two rounds, then 3/2 in subsequent rounds. Reloading Hands improves this fire rate, arguably by a full shot per round. You get more shots than a bow at all levels and all interpretations, and up to twice as many until BAB 6 (worst interpretation) or BAB 16 (best interpretation), at the cost of -2 to hit and 3 feats.

Can you link this variant? Because the only one I can find is this (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/crossbow-double/), which as near as I can tell is just the same thing with the numbers filed off.

Vital Strike keeps relevance for quite some time - Getting both it and Furious Finish by level 7, plus Enlarge and Gravity Bow, gets you 6d6 per bolt, maximized to 72 damage per shot.

Effectively once per combat, since you're Fatigued for 2 rounds afterward, and it bypasses Fatigue immunity. Mind you it's impressive, and I'd be interested in workshopping a Sniper build using it at some point (you really only need a single level in Barb since you're only doing this once per combat anyway), but hardly reliable in many combats, and questionable as to whether it's worth the EWP.

r2d2go

2019-12-11, 06:43 PM

Can you link this variant? Because the only one I can find is this (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/crossbow-double/), which as near as I can tell is just the same thing with the numbers filed off.

This is what I found linked to in some forums, and also a first page result: http://shadowd20.pbworks.com/w/page/7520819/PRPGequipment_MinotaurDoubleCrossbow

Apparently it's in Classic Monsters Revisited.

Effectively once per combat, since you're Fatigued for 2 rounds afterward, and it bypasses Fatigue immunity. Mind you it's impressive, and I'd be interested in workshopping a Sniper build using it at some point (you really only need a single level in Barb since you're only doing this once per combat anyway), but hardly reliable in many combats, and questionable as to whether it's worth the EWP.

You just need a way to clear Fatigue rather than be immune to it, or arguably the Flawed Scarlet and Green Cabochon, cracked green prism + wayfinder, Heart of the Fields, etc, and you can do it several times a day.

Anyway, reworking my build to be Bolt Ace instead of Crossbowman, losing three feats but dropping weapon focus, improved precise shot and weapon specialization, you actually have 2 more damage than you did before and you get to resolve things as touch attacks. So it's just better than the bow build in every way. So I guess the point that Bolt Ace is necessary to be decent with crossbows is valid, but they're clearly superior with that.

Rynjin

2019-12-11, 06:48 PM

This is what I found linked to in some forums, and also a first page result: http://shadowd20.pbworks.com/w/page/7520819/PRPGequipment_MinotaurDoubleCrossbow

Apparently it's in Classic Monsters Revisited.

Ah, that would explain it; it's 3.5 material.

You just need a way to clear Fatigue rather than be immune to it, or arguably the Flawed Scarlet and Green Cabochon, cracked green prism + wayfinder, Heart of the Fields, etc, and you can do it several times a day.

True enough.

Mechalich

2019-12-11, 07:51 PM

It's honestly a pretty good illustration of 3E D&D in general that a "simple crossbow build" means dual-wielding and rapid-firing them instead of, you know, slowly but reliably sniping.

Well, taking as many attacks as possible is something favored even in the real world. Modern military units favor rapid fire machine guns that spew hundreds or thousands of rounds out per minute over dedicated snipers. Doubly so when you think about the knife-fight close range at which almost all RPG combats take place. Heck, in many science fiction RPGs 'long range' is off the table and somewhere down the hall. In Star Wars SAGA the 'long range' on a heavy weapon such as a garden variety missile launcher is 251-500 squares, which is simply not an operational range in which RPG encounters take place.

Tiktakkat

2019-12-12, 12:05 AM

Well, taking as many attacks as possible is something favored even in the real world. Modern military units favor rapid fire machine guns that spew hundreds or thousands of rounds out per minute over dedicated snipers. Doubly so when you think about the knife-fight close range at which almost all RPG combats take place.

It does not work like that.
Weapons are "favored" for specific tasks.
Snipers are not favored for doing the job of machine guns, and machine guns are not favored for doing the job of snipers.
And neither has a direct enough parallel in fantasy combat outside of magic.

As for spamming attacks, that works in an RPG where results are determined by random die roll.
That does not work the same way in actual hand-hand-combat.
Speed is absolutely relevant, but so are a host of other factors, including but not limited to: reach of the weapon, armor, and terrain.
If you are at knife range, any kind of missile weapon is going to be very unsuitable, to the point of it being irrelevant whether you are using a movie-style machine gun bow or an RPG-style never-loading crossbow.

upho

2019-12-12, 11:12 PM

Most of these senses have a range, and the build only functions at beyond most of those ranges (100+ feet).Yes, but how often do you have 100+ ft. line of sight and line of effect to an enemy in a real game? Not very often IME, as there tends to be stuff in the way and/or things you cannot see through (walls, doors, darkness etc.). And AFAICT, this especially true for your build which doesn't even have darkvision (and will find very difficult/expensive to get even 65+ ft. darkvision).

I've addressed this before, but in case it's a matter of missing the explanation and not disbelief: Sharp Shoot is one attack per grit. If you start at more than 100 ft from your opponent, at 0 grit you can infinitely cycle your grit with the Run Like Hell dare by RAW. And honestly you're spending like 3 feats to slightly increase the range on a gun build, I think most GMs would allow it (though I've started to realize my "most GMs" is not some other "most GMs"):smallconfused: Do you believe Sharp Shoot effectively grants you no action attacks vs touch AC each time you spend a grit?

And if you don't, could you please explain in detail exactly how this is done, with a list of the actions your ninja build takes to get of a full attack during a turn when starting at 0 grit 105 ft. from the enemy?

They have a lot of money leftover as well - are you suggesting feats are an effective way to overcome most of those? Feats are a permanent investment, IMO its almost always better to pump your basic trick with them and then use scrolls and such for the rest.Long story short, to be high-op, I believe you need at minimum action-efficient answers to overcome frequently occurring stuff which negates your specific combat style. In this case, this translates to quite a list, the three most difficult items being:

Can ensure round is started 100'+ from enemy when at 0 grit, while still being able to target enemy with full attack.
Can get SA with each attack in full attack during very large majority of rounds, even against enemies which negates invisibility (such as constant detect magic, true sight, see invisibility or blindsight, lifesense etc.)
Can negate/bypass large majority of frequently occurring defenses against ranged attacks/damage.

Regarding points 2 and 3 (ignoring detection via special senses and bypassing defenses vs ranged), I think a high-op ranged build at this level would have to at least have abilities equivalent to those of the "Roc 'n' Rola Pistola" Warlord Hussar 15th level example build I made for the PoW Hussar guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aGCuMB5Hl67k5Ro72fotb_vjKnbS_jGwo5gwsRxk3dk/edit#heading=h.njqqoqewoavc) (see spoiler below, and end of document outline in the guide to find the full build quickly). And for a build like yours which rely on SA and not being seen, my example build's abilities wouldn't be sufficient to meet point 2, despite it being a lot better at bypassing special senses etc. while using Stealth.

Stealth +37 (+47 for 30 minutes after using dorje of ML 3 chameleon (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/c/chameleon/)) and Stealth Synergy feat (constantly shared with mount while mounted, and temporarily with all allies as standard).
Lurker in Darkness (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/path-of-war/feats/lurker-in-darkness-general/) feat.
Can cast vanish 5/day (1 level sorcerer dip)
Can cast detect magic at will (1 level sorcerer dip)
Continuous see invisibilty.
Continuous blindsight 100'.
Constant Darkvision 100'.
Volley formation (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/path-of-war/classes/martial-class-templates/hussar-template/#TOC-Formations-Ex-) (ranged attacks ignore concealment less than total)
As you can probably tell, these abilities require plenty of rather costly long-term investments on top of magic items.

Sneak attack, I guess? If you believe in my "carry ten crossbows" cheese you can REALLY get into it by dual wielding Small MDXBs, but it looks like the swift action requirement kinda nixes that otherwise. I mean obviously they're pretty good for vital striking but given Pathfinder's aversion to size stacking I don't think that competes at high levels.What swift action? It's a free action to reload a MDXB or any other xbow (except the double crossbow) with Crossbow Mastery. Per RAW that does most definitely mean a Paizo-only build could shoot up to at least 18 bolts per full attack:

2 undersized MDXBs + 16+ bab + TWF chain + tiefling prehensile tail/vestigial arm discovery/equivalent for reloading while TWF-ing + Crossbow Mastery + Rapid Shot + haste/equivalent = 18 bolts from 9 attacks with 9 crit chances, each attack shooting 2 bolts dealing full damage

Just to clear up any doubts regarding the MDXB + Crossbow Mastery interaction, here are the full rules for the MDXB again (from my first post):
Minotaur Double Crossbow
Minotaurs have a love of complicated things, and the double crossbow is one of their favorites. This heavy weapon fires a pair of iron-tipped bolts with deadly accuracy. Due to its size and weight, however, non-proficient wielders suffer a –8 penalty on their attack rolls. Even proficient wielders take a –2 penalty on their attack rolls. If the attack is successful, the target takes the listed damage twice, although critical hits and precision based damage are only applied to one of the bolts. Reloading a double crossbow takes 2 standard actions (one for each bolt), although the Rapid Reload feat reduces this to 2 move actions (meaning that it can be accomplished in 1 round).300 gp, 1d8 piercing, 19-20/x2 crits, 100 ft. range, 18 lb.

(And just in case anyone wonders: this is not the same weapon as the garbage known as the double crossbow (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/crossbow-double/) published in the APG (different fluff, different range, different penalties, different feat interaction). Nor was the MDXB ever replaced by the APG garbage or anything else. It's even explicitly still allowed in PFS.)

So, in comparison to bows, it costs you an extra feat and -2 to attack, and gives you free reload Manyshot-style double-bolts with every attack in return, instead of Manyshot's once per full attack.
And Crossbow Mastery (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/crossbow-mastery-combat/) (with emphasis by me for extra clarity):Crossbow Mastery
You can load crossbows with blinding speed and even fire them in melee with little fear of reprisal.
Prerequisites: Dex (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/ability-scores#TOC-Dexterity-Dex-) 15, Point-Blank Shot (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/point-blank-shot-combat), Rapid Reload (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/rapid-reload-combat), Rapid Shot (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/rapid-shot-combat).
Benefit: The time required for you to reload any type of crossbow is reduced to a free action (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Free-Actions), regardless of the type of crossbow used. You can fire a crossbow as many times in a full attack (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Full-Attack) action as you could attack if you were using a bow. Reloading a crossbow for the type of crossbow you chose when you took Rapid Reload (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/rapid-reload-combat) no longer provokes attacks of opportunity (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Attacks-of-Opportunity).
Special: Starting at 6th level, a ranger (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/ranger) with the archery combat style may select Crossbow Mastery as a combat style feat.

Note that the feat does NOT limit the number of free action reloads you may make in a round or turn to the number of attacks you could make during that period, and likewise it does NOT say "You can fire as many projectiles in a full attack as you could fire if you were using a bow."

TL/DR: Per RAW Crossbow Mastery completely replaces the default reload action rules for the MDXB, reducing all reloads to free actions. Only house rules could change this.

Edit: Also I don't think Named Bullet + Abundant Ammunition works. It pretty explicitly states that it's for things cast "on the same container", and while that doesn't make sense by the legalistic definition of "targets the container that this targets", it absolutely works for the same colloquial sense of "this bag of bullets was expensive" = "the bullets in this bag are expensive". Given that they use the word "cast on" instead of "targets", and the spells listed can target 50 pieces of ammunition, I don't think casting on one bullet in a bag works by RAW, and it certainly isn't RAI.Abundant ammo says:

"If, after casting this spell, you cast a spell that enhances projectiles, such as align weapon (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/align-weapon/) or greater magic weapon (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/m/magic-weapon/), on the same container, all projectiles this spell conjures are affected by that spell."

And since none of the mentioned spells targets "one container", but "weapon/ammo touched" or similar, which also named bullet does, it certainly works per RAW. But yeah, I also believe its almost equally certain this is an unintended rules interaction, hence my warning regarding the high risk of "aggressive" GM reactions unless maybe if you play in a Tippyverse style game or something...

Vital Strike was mentioned but that seems really questionable.Something like a Bolt Ace 5, Urban Barbarian 3, Mutation Warrior fighter 12 with Greater VS, Furious Finish, a monk's robe and Ascetic Strike, using say a +5 furious MDXB with the Versatile (monk weapon group) weapon mod while under the effects of strong jaw and enlarge person, could consistently deal a minimum of 600+ damage with every non-crit Vital Strike hit (in more detail: 2 x [4 (2 x maximized 4d8) + 44] per VS hit). This translates into a 95% chance to kill average Paizo enemies of a CR up to 25 you can target (if not including defenses vs ranged other than AC), with a mere standard action.

Very reliably taking out for example the tarrasque using only a standard action and a 2+ attack roll, from up to more than 200 ft away, is pretty impressive even at 20th IMO, especially for a martial build limited to Paizo options.

Of course, like most Vital Strike builds it scales poorly, but 72 damage per turn is usually acceptable until it upgrades to 108 at level 11, and that small boost probably gets you to level 13.I believe at least high-op VS builds can actually be made to scale very well (see above). But yeah, it's definitely more difficult to get a ranged VS build limited to 1PP material competitive.

Ah, that would explain it; it's 3.5 material.So? The MDXB was always explicitly legal even in PFS, just like a lot of other Paizo material originally made for 3.5.

r2d2go

2019-12-13, 04:08 PM

Ah, the paizo version of MDXB doesn't show up on googling, so I took the one linked. Well, yeah, that certainly makes it better.

As for the build: Sharp shoot clearly states that you "can resolve an attack against touch AC instead of normal AC", emphasis mine. It's used during resolution of an attack, unlike other shots (which I might mention, say what action they use) which say make an attack. It's a free action change to resolution, like a reroll, not a free action attack. I would even argue this use isn't breaking RAI but simply an unexpected interaction - most guns take penalties, sometimes big ones, by 100 feet, and you can already hit touch AC from somewhat closer. This just lets you extend the touch range for a feat, when specifically out of grit, which is pretty reasonable.

Anyway, like I said, you shoot, you drop to 0 grit. Then Run Like Hell activates. Then you get a grit. Repeat. Feel free read the existing argument for further info.

Furthermore I would argue your list of abilities is inefficient. Vanishing for 1 round as a standard action is pretty useless, and your stealth is either irrelevant for a high-op game (even with your 3rd party feats) or overkill for by the book monsters. A Seeking weapon is superior to your miss chance negation, though I'll admit if the DM forces the distinction between negating concealment and negating the miss chance provided by concealment it doesn't work. And your vision is irrelevant at this range.

As for the build's ability to function, it doesn't do well in classic dungeons, though a Shadowform belt and ghost touch weapons, or brilliant energy weapons, fixes that.

So yeah, guns and throwing are better than both bows and crossbows at close range. I already said that. Crossbows are better at long range, which leaves bows the happy medium, which is totally fine.

Lastly at Abundant Ammunition: If you have to change the meaning of any words, that's RAI not RAW. As RAW, you have to enchant the bag itself (as an improvised weapon, or perhaps as a special case presented by the spell), to gain abundant aligned ammunition. But even if you do interpret cast on the bag as cast on the ammunition, clearly ammunition is plural in every instance in the text. So at the very best you're ignoring RAI, ignoring the actually Rules As Written, and instead slightly modifying the words in the rules to make more sense... in exactly the way you want them to.

Which I'll admit is a fair play to make! But most DMs IME would shut it down for obvious abuse reasons unless in a high OP game and you are otherwise too weak.

upho

2019-12-15, 04:40 AM

Ah, the paizo version of MDXB doesn't show up on googling, so I took the one linked. Well, yeah, that certainly makes it better.Yeah, it certainly has more potential than any other projectile weapon in the game, although guns are of course typically superior for most builds which can't afford a high attack bonus or 5 levels of Bolt Ace, but can manage 3+ levels of Trench Fighter and the shorter range.

As for the build: Sharp shoot clearly states that you "can resolve an attack against touch AC instead of normal AC", emphasis mine.Oh, it's just me being senile (see below). :smallredface: Sorry for the confusion; we apparently fully agree how Sharp Shoot works.

Anyway, like I said, you shoot, you drop to 0 grit. Then Run Like Hell activates. Then you get a grit. Repeat. Feel free read the existing argument for further info.For some weird reason, my poor old brain insisted that Run Like Hell required you to move in order to regain grit, despite you actually touching upon this very part in an earlier post. So I was really confused by neither you or Rynjin apparently not seeing any problem with your ninja-bolter's action economy, and of course I looked up all the build options except RLH to find out what I had forgotten which made the combo possible. But when I read your reply I finally understood which piece of the puzzle I was wrong about.

Thank you, I believe it's all crystal clear to me now!

Though I agree RHL most likely wasn't intended to work like as it's actually written, considering the very substantial investments needed to take advantage of the poor wording and the considerable limitations imposed by the minimum distance, I honestly don't see a problem with the combo and would most certainly allow it in my games (although probably not combined with the MDXB).

Furthermore I would argue your list of abilities is inefficient. Vanishing for 1 round as a standard action is pretty useless, and your stealth is either irrelevant for a high-op game (even with your 3rd party feats) or overkill for by the book monsters.Except Rola and her mount Rocky aren't dependent on Stealth in combat, and regardless of whether they start combat hidden or not, their ranged attacks - yes the roc mount also makes them :smallbiggrin: - are tuned to reliably deal about 550 average damage in their opening turn, enough to one-shot one average enemy of CR 24, or two of CR 17. And while the high Stealth bonus (and Vanish) can of course often give an advantage in combat and make it easier/safer to escape one going south, it's first and foremost intended for scouting/spying purposes.

And btw I now see I copied the Rola's Stealth value from my notes which doesn't include her +8 size bonus. So that should be +45/+55, typically more than enough to be safely used outside of combat against opponents of a CR up to about 24 as well. And this is no coincidence, as most of the her abilities were matched against the average/typical abilities of published enemies of up to about CR 18, or to about CR 24 for the boosted versions of a few abilities that are most important for her primary party functions/roles.

What do you mean by "even with your 3rd party feats"? Have you played in games allowing options from DSP's AM and PoW series and believe those options were more powerful than Paizo stuff?

Regardless, there's nothing on that list can't be achieved with only Paizo options.

A Seeking weapon is superior to your miss chance negation,For bypassing say mirror image yes, but it's useless for detecting and pin-pointing a target in the first place, which is of course what Rola's senses are primarily for (she adds seeking to her pistol as a swift action when needed).

though I'll admit if the DM forces the distinction between negating concealment and negating the miss chance provided by concealment it doesn't work.I don't think I understand what you mean by "negating concealment", because the only mechanical result of that I can think of would be so stupidly powerful compared to ignoring the miss chance I can't imagine it's what you're actually referring to.

And your vision is irrelevant at this range.(I assume you're referring to your ninja-bolter's minimum 100'+ RLH range requirement here, not to Rola and the 60' range increment of her pistol.) So? It's certainly not irrelevant for Rola, and if it had been as vital for her to have a vision ranges above 100' as it is for your ninja-bolter, her vision ranges most certainly would've have been 110'+ instead (the range of all her modes of vision can be increased by her mount investing more essence into his Eyes of the Hawkquard (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/veil-list-and-descriptions#toc43) veil which he shares with Rola).

As for the build's ability to function, it doesn't do well in classic dungeons, though a Shadowform belt and ghost touch weapons,or brilliant energy weapons, fixes that.On the off-chance you're actually serious: the belt does nothing, as being incorporeal doesn't help you see or shoot through walls in any way. And even if it did, if you need to spend more than 50% of your WBL at 15th level to make your combat style possible for 10 rounds/day in a majority of combats, I'd say there's something very seriously wrong with your combat style.

Crossbows are better at long range, which leaves bows the happy medium, which is totally fine.What makes xbows better than bows at long range? AFAIK, both work about equally well with the Snap Shot feats, for example. And could you please also define what you mean by "long" and "medium" range?

Lastly at Abundant Ammunition: If you have to change the meaning of any words, that's RAI not RAW. As RAW, you have to enchant the bag itself (as an improvised weapon, or perhaps as a special case presented by the spell), to gain abundant aligned ammunition.I assume the most glaringly obvious and explicit functionality described by the rules text of an option to work. For example, this means that if AA explicitly mentions that it works with say align weapon, then it obviously does, even though the AA rules text also happen to use sloppy wording which makes it technically impossible for AA to work with align weapon. Please feel free to ask around whether people believe the AA RAW says it works with align weapon, and please search the web for discussions about this (of which there surely must be hundreds, right?). But I'd find further debating this an absolutely pointless waste of my time, so if you're going to say I'm wrong on any basis related to this, we should simply agree to disagree and leave it at that.

modifying the words in the rules to make more sense... in exactly the way you want them to.Why do you believe I want the RAW to say what it says?

FYI, I very rarely get to play an actual PC in PF, and I've house ruled the AA+NB interaction in the game I run (and most of those I have run), limiting the NB effect to only the first 1 attack per 4 CL made against the first appropriate creature you hit after casting the spells.

Which I'll admit is a fair play to make! But most DMs IME would shut it down for obvious abuse reasons unless in a high OP game and you are otherwise too weak.
So it appears your DMs agree with me, and you agree that my initial note about precisely this was correct. Great!