I've seen multiple threads on the topic of deconstructing Hank's Bow ...

[schreier]

In the Animated Series sourcebook ...
Cost: 22,600
Abilities:
+2 Composite Longbow
- Strength adjusts to user
- Works without ammunition, firing 2d6 force "arrows" / works with ammunition like normal
- Illuminates as a torch when drawn without ammunition
- "Ranged Power attack" - reduce to hit and increase damage

A +3 weapon costs 18,000 even
a Composite Longbow with +2 Strength costs 600 base (including masterwork cost)

That leaves a +1 bonus worth of value and an additional 4,000 in "fixed cost" improvements

I have seen mention in Pathfinder that "adjusting Strength to wielder" is a 1,000 fixed cost improvement, and the Bow of the Wintermoon only costs 3,400 .. so the 1,000 seems reasonable

So that leaves 3,000 fixed and +1

The illumination seems clearly linked to the "force" ability. Force as a normal ability that adds to ammunition is a +3 bonus, so no matter what we're talking woefully underpriced probably, but I think it has to be the +1 bonus - unlimited ammo/force arrow. It also increases damage from 1d8 to 2d6, effectively increasing 1 size category. Based on the exact language, it seems to not include the +2 on damage from the enhancement to the weapon, and it does not say it bypasses DR (just hits incorporeal). Both of those seem strange to me, but could potentially mitigate cost.

So .. for +1, you get: unlimited one-size-up force ammunition that sheds light like a torch.

That leaves 3,000 for the "power attack" effect.

Does that make sense? I mean, other than the incredibly undervalued abilities.

I have always wanted to make a crossbow version of Hank's bow - could be a pump action that pumping ***** it. You could do a straight port over of the ability "package" as a whole potentially, but still good to have an idea about how it was made (even if it was made while on heavy narcotics)

You also need to "price it out" for purposes of further enchantments being applied to it. I think you have to treat it as a +3 weapon from that perspective, just because the cost is below a +4.

That is, assuming a DM will: 1. let you have it as is, and 2. let you improve it. In the context of martials, it is great. But even at the above value, it is still incredibly challenging for a non-spellcaster to keep up at higher levels.

[Thunder999]

There's nothing to really indicate the force arrows should be the +1 and ranged power attack the flat cost.

[schreier]

There is nothing to indicate that it should be treated either way, so I am trying to reverse engineer it. That was my first thought, but I am very open to other thoughts.

I need to reverse engineer it for a couple reasons ...

it would potentially allow similar powers to be applied to another item
it would allow me to improve the current bow with additional enchantments


Without knowing the "+" rating of the bow, you cannot add other abilities (such as seeking or splitting)

And like I said, I would love to figure out a way to get a similarly empowered crossbow (even without the variable strength or the power attack - really just the infinite force ammo with "free" reloads)

[Troacctid]

I think you're overcomplicating it. There's nothing to indicate that the properties "break up" into a +1 and a flat cost, and the price doesn't align with a +3 weapon. So, for the purpose of enhancing it, it's just treated like a +2 weapon with a flat +14,000ish property. Upgrading it to a +3 would cost 10,000 gp. Easy.

[schreier]

That is clearly the simplest solution. I can see it under costing the whole thing but that's probably a problem regardless.

Would you allow it to apply to a crossbow? Would it have any expedited reload? Would you lose power attack? Obviously we're getting into something the DM has to decide - just curious what you think. I can imagine a great crossbow doing 2D10 with iterative attacks this way

[Thunder999]

Crossbows are worse than bows, even if you can fix the reload problem, so I see no reason not to allow it.

[schreier]

Crossbows are worse than bows, even if you can fix the reload problem, so I see no reason not to allow it.

Great Crossbow is full round action reload, 2d8 damage, 18-20 critical

So it would become 3d8 (if we move up one category), free reload, 18-20 critical?

[Rynjin]

Since you're using Pathfinder sources already anyway, we already know what a weapon that grants a bonus Feat costs: +1 (Training (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/magic-weapon-special-abilities/training/)).

Deadly Aim (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/deadly-aim-combat/) is the ranged Power Attack Feat in PF, so there's no kludging needed there either. So it's definitely not a flat 3k.

[icefractal]

It is an oddly specific price, isn't it? If it were 25k, I'd just assume they eyeballed it based on utility, but I assume there was some formula involved.

3k for the feat doesn't seem impossible - IIRC, A&EG had a very cheap suggested price for feat-granting items

[Malphegor]

maybe they added a surcharge on every sale of hank’s bow for the licensing rights- Hanna Barberawork the stage after Masterwork, where you add an extra bit of gold on the item’s worth

[Troacctid]

That is clearly the simplest solution. I can see it under costing the whole thing but that's probably a problem regardless.

Would you allow it to apply to a crossbow? Would it have any expedited reload? Would you lose power attack? Obviously we're getting into something the DM has to decide - just curious what you think. I can imagine a great crossbow doing 2D10 with iterative attacks this way
IMO, it's not undercosted, largely because its best abilities (increased damage die and ghost touchiness) preclude the use of any special arrows. That's actually a pretty big minus for an archery build. The Deadly Aim ability is not very powerful at a 1:1 ratio, and while adjusting to the wielder's Str is nice, it's not worth a lot. I am happy pricing the effect at +14,000.

As a general rule, if a specific weapon has elements keying off that type of weapon—in this case setting damage to 2d6 and caring about Str adjustment—I'm not interested in porting it to other weapons. So I would probably not allow Hank's Crossbow.

[Fizban]

In the Animated Series sourcebook ...
Cost: 22,600
Abilities:
+2 Composite Longbow
- Strength adjusts to user
- Works without ammunition, firing 2d6 force "arrows" / works with ammunition like normal
- Illuminates as a torch when drawn without ammunition
- "Ranged Power attack" - reduce to hit and increase damage

Strength adjustment: either shouldn't exist (because those strength rating requirements are important), or should be cheap. 1,000 is fine.
Unlimited ammo: generally seems to be 1-2,000 when it comes up.
2d6 base: ~+2.5 damage, worth a +1 actually.
Hits incorporeal: this is why Ghost Touch costs +1, so. . . yeah. Unless you've gone with one of the other non-scaling ways to get ghost touch as your standard.
Torchlight: this is a standard freebie for any magic weapon (if you can turn it off then it's like 500gp in MiC)
Ranged Power Attack: the big one, a bonus feat except the feat doesn't even exist. It it amazing because it's a feat that doesn't exist? It is terrible because the standard archer build already trades attack bonus for extra arrows and too many penalties makes it all fall apart? Do I count this as inconsequential because I added mundane ammunition with power attack style modifiers for the lulz? Arms and Equipment Guide gives the roughest of rough estimate for feats, saying probably start around at least 10,000 and go up from there.


I would not allow the item as written because it's too snowlfakey and I have no personal investment in it- someone made up a cool snowflake weapon for a cartoon character, someone wrote how they thought it should work in the actual game and slapped a price on it, woo. If I were to accept the abilities as acceptable, I could possibly be persuaded that they might even be more appropriate on a crossbow: As I recall, the bowstring itself is supposed to be energy, which just looks ridiculous (arrows of light are. . . okay, but not as a main dish), but a crossbow that shoots energy bolts and can take less accurate but higher damage shots? That's a laser rifle.


As for your pricing- considering that Ghost Touch is +1, or for those that think it ought not to be then Pathfinder has a bonus feat for +1, yes treating it as a +3 weapon to preserve scaling costs would be appropriate, but I would say this is still a Specific weapon package. It's all tied together in the snowflakey energy bow concept. That said, if str scaling is 1k, and unlimited ammo is 2k, that's 3/4 of what you have left after the +3 weapon. The last 1k could be accounted for by "presuming" the writer valued light at 1k (a continuous Light spell) rather than remembering it's actually free with any magic weapon.

Or the unlimited ammo could be 2k, +50% because it's not a separate quiver (indeed the Efficient Quiver is 1,800gp), or just estimated at a flat 3k. I don't recall any real unlimited ammo in 3.x (plenty in 3rd party though), so it's essentially an undefined ability which could cost anything.

Or if it's upgraded from standard +2 enhancement, that leaves the rest at 14k- and again, 1k for str scaling and (something) for unlimited ammo leaves 10-12k for the bonus feat, which can be found as consistent with the minimum given in AaEG. Though this version is giving away the ghost touch for free as part of the package.

None of the setups really account for the +2.5 damage if you run the 2d6 base with a normal +2 enhancement, but actually running the weapon with some weird split shift would not be worth it I'd say. Either accept that they're getting free damage, or make it deal a normal 1d8. Except for Troacctid's estimation that the special effects don't stack with magic arrows, which could be used to justify the 2d6 base as a "refund," except it's actually more of a "pre"-fund, since you're never forced to buy magic arrows. I tend to ignore magic arrows for day to day the same way I would ignore potions, since even a +2 total arrow is 160gp per shot.

[schreier]

Strength adjustment: either shouldn't exist (because those strength rating requirements are important), or should be cheap. 1,000 is fine.
Unlimited ammo: generally seems to be 1-2,000 when it comes up.
2d6 base: ~+2.5 damage, worth a +1 actually.
Hits incorporeal: this is why Ghost Touch costs +1, so. . . yeah. Unless you've gone with one of the other non-scaling ways to get ghost touch as your standard.
Torchlight: this is a standard freebie for any magic weapon (if you can turn it off then it's like 500gp in MiC)
Ranged Power Attack: the big one, a bonus feat except the feat doesn't even exist. It it amazing because it's a feat that doesn't exist? It is terrible because the standard archer build already trades attack bonus for extra arrows and too many penalties makes it all fall apart? Do I count this as inconsequential because I added mundane ammunition with power attack style modifiers for the lulz? Arms and Equipment Guide gives the roughest of rough estimate for feats, saying probably start around at least 10,000 and go up from there.


I would not allow the item as written because it's too snowlfakey and I have no personal investment in it- someone made up a cool snowflake weapon for a cartoon character, someone wrote how they thought it should work in the actual game and slapped a price on it, woo. If I were to accept the abilities as acceptable, I could possibly be persuaded that they might even be more appropriate on a crossbow: As I recall, the bowstring itself is supposed to be energy, which just looks ridiculous (arrows of light are. . . okay, but not as a main dish), but a crossbow that shoots energy bolts and can take less accurate but higher damage shots? That's a laser rifle.


I definitely agree that it would look better as a crossbow (grabbing the "force energy" that isn't there vs. pumping an action or whatever) ... So I'm thinking +1 for the ghost touch effect, then the rest is a "bulk rate ability package" for the additional 4000 for the "force arrows one size larger infinite ammo with power attack" ability which is a great deal

For the weapon to work with normal arrows/bolts, it has to have a normal string you would think? I can see him pulling back on the string and it charging as opposed to grabbing the air where a string might be

[Feantar]

The illumination seems clearly linked to the "force" ability.

I think the illumination should be free and independent; it just feels like the refluffed version of that DM's guide quote of a percentage of magical weapons shedding light as a torch.