Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

As Hyway said, BFRPG is a gamist game, so realistic explanations are not needed and even can make things confusing.

Having the arrows and bolts listed under the weapons helps in not using an extra table just for ammunition. So I just take it as a gamist product of unifying weapons and ammo in a single table.

I'm use to the "one arrow fits'em all" style while others prefer the "one arrow per bow" style.

In fact, before I gave my first response to this thread I had to check the game because I remembered it using the same arrow for both bows (and the same damage die)

Hywaywolf wrote:Gaming rules aren't real life so...

Wait... HUH? What the h3ll are you trying to tell me? Now I've gotta go re-think my entire perspective on life, time and space! Curse you Hyway! Curse you and that short-armed, pony-riding, brownie-spawned archer you call a side-kick! Not real life? BAH!

Dimirag wrote:As Hyway said, BFRPG is a gamist game, so realistic explanations are not needed and even can make things confusing.

Ah, but they are needed because the made-up explanation is confusing as half-orc lineage descriptions! Again, I'm not putting down the rules or suggesting any changes to them at all. They are sound, even by real-life standards, but not for the reasons we're discussing.

Dimirag wrote:In fact, before I gave my first response to this thread I had to check the game because I remembered it using the same arrow for both bows (and the same damage die)

Yes, me too, although it immediately clicked why the gnome archer in my party was doing less damage than the human archer. However, what I'm trying to point out is not a change to the rules, but rather a different way of explaining them, because there's a flaw in the reasoning of saying "shortbow" arrows are, well, shorter...

Hywaywolf wrote:To get the full pull you need a certain length arrow.

False. You need a certain length arm.... (And a sufficiently flexible bow.)

If that were not so, then you'd need a rule to limit Shortbows to races with shorter arms, halflings, dwarves, gnomes and human/elven children. I find no limitation on bows like that in the RAW, so your explanation cannot stand. RAW allows a human to shoot a shortbow, even though his arms are twice as long as those of the halfling.

Hywaywolf wrote:There are two types of bows in BFRPG (normal bows and crossbows) and and two sizes for each.

Yes, and that makes sense. The relevant difference in "size" relates to the strength of the weapon, though the heavier or larger of the two will in most cases be the stronger weapon, differences in materials and construction/design could make that not necessarily the case.

A heavy crossbow and a longbow have the capacity to shoot bolts and arrows constructed of heavier materials which will have the effect of more damage down range. Like a .50 cal sniper rifle - it shoots that bullet hotter and faster and it weighs more.

A light crossbow and shortbow are more maneuverable and easy to wield, are generally of lighter construction and simply don't have the "Ooomph!" to get a heavier bolt or arrow as far downrange or get it there as quickly... meaning less damage.

Hywaywolf wrote:Shortbow arrows are too short to get full pull on a longbow. You could get full pull on a shortbow with a longbow arrow but it wouldn't do any more damage than a shortbow arrow.

No. Shortbow arrows are too light to do any extra damage when shot from a longbow. The latter part is true, a longer arrow [heavier] could be shot from the shortbow, and it wouldn't do the same damage as it would if shot from a longbow. That's because it's just not as strong as the longbow.

Arrow length is obviously a factor as I pointed out in my last post, but for explaining the rules as written, arrow length should be ignored and bow strength should be the emphasis.

I see how this can be confusing, by looking at the chart in the Core Rules, it is most obviously interpreted as you've said, but it's a bit deceptive as arrow length isn't the factor, arrow weight is the difference between the damage of the two bows. (As well as crossbows whose bolts would normally be nearly equal in length, though different in diameter and heft...)

Again, the Rules as Written are sound. Shorter bows deliver less damage than longer bows. The lighter arrows shot by a shortbow do a certain amount of damage at range, and even though a heavier arrow could be fired from it, the decrease in velocity would negate the extra damage gained from weight. So shooting a "longbow arrow" from a shortbow does no extra damage in game terms. Likewise, shooting the lighter "shortbow arrows" from a longbow wouldn't gain a measurable increase in damage.

~~~~

Ok, I really hate to be "that guy" and nitpick, but going back to the original concerns in this post by Rommmmmm, I think the explanation of shorter arrows versus longer arrows is flawed. It might invoke a very humorous game situation to have a long-armed elf trying to shoot a short arrow (penalty anyone?) but there is really no need for a "one-size arrow" houserule nor a bunch of bow variations. It's already all there! The rules as written stand up well, IF they are explained correctly!

And, Hywaywolf and Dimirag, I apologize for bringing up the *gasp* "R" word that ends in "eality". I'm not a frequent poster here and sort of forgot how incendiary language like that can be sometimes. j/k You guys are awesome, and timely and I appreciate all the work this community puts into rapid answers to newbie questions. I'll now go back to my own little world where the line between gaming rules and the real world is very blurred and gelatinous. (dang it, I said it again!)

ok. Lets make this simple. this is by the book rules.

A bow has a point where you reach full pull. You can't get infinite pull simply by using longer arrows. At some point the height of the bow is going to max out how much you can bend the bow. The assumption in BFRPG, B/X or any rules light game with simple equipment lists is that any character of normal strength and of human/elf height can pull a longbow to full pull using his hands and arms alone (halfling holding longbow with feet being one exception ). You can see that by the fact there are no rules that give additional damage for high strength or for larger than human characters. So having an arrow longer than the full pull does you no good. Having an arrow shorter than what is needed for full pull will actually give you less damage.

A longbow is nearly twice as long as a short bow.

Ok, given the preceding, your human PC and his human pal find a shortbow and a longbow as well as a stack of arrows. The stack has two sizes of arrows mixed in randomly in equal amounts. Both arrows are made of the same material but one size is longer than the other. Will you guys each just grab half of the arrows in mixed sizes or will you divide them out so that the longer arrow goes with the longer bow.

If you divide them out then you are now looking at a stack of shortbow arrows and a stack of longbow arrows. So now whoever fires the longbow will do d8 points of damage and the shortbow will do d6.

If you don't divide them by sizes then then the shortbow guy will do d6 every time and the longbow will do d6 or d8 depending on the length of the arrow he pulls from his quiver.

No need for apologies, nobody got flamed up for bringing up reality into the game. I just prefer to give gamist anwsers as the game is a gamist one and left any reality into each GM's hand or just point it in the shortest way possible.

true dat demi. I have no problem with how someone else plays the game or how they see it. What I like about BFRPG rules is that they are simple. The complexity of the game comes from the imagination of the players and DM. Even within the rules it would be easy to provide a bow with a greater pull thus requiring longer arms or greater strength by just calling it a +1 bow. It doesn't have to be magical to have a bonus. Quality of material and workmanship can also provide a bonus.

I do want to make one more comment about the bows. A short bow isn't just a miniature version of a longbow. A longbow is a straight piece of wood that is pulled into a curve when an archer pulls back on the string. A shortbow is a recurve bow that is a bitch to string but has a lot of the energy already stored in the bow before the string is even pulled back. People don't just use a shortbow because they have T-Rex arms. They use it when they are in close quarters. A longbow would be a bitch to use in a tight cave tunnel or in heavy brush. Or even from horseback at full gallop. You don't really notice that in a game because most DMs ignore the fact that it is over 6' long. So pretty hard to shoot while sitting on a tree branch

Worth mentioning here that a medieval longbow took years of practice to master. The BF core rules do not directly specify this, but in my games, only pure fighters and a few fighting subclasses like rangers can use this weapon. Scouts, thieves, and other fighting sub-classes cannot use one, regardless of their size.

A side note: I saw quite a few 'real' war bows in Papua New Guinea that were only about a foot long, and the cane arrows were about 8 inches. Some of the guys I knew said they had used them at close quarters in clan fights in the bush (say, from 20 feet away), and then run away from the fight. They weren't relying on the arrow to do the damage. They were relying on the infection to kill their enemy, weeks later.

That's realism, I guess.

Hywaywolf wrote: The complexity of the game comes from the imagination of the players and DM. Even within the rules it would be easy to provide a bow with a greater pull thus requiring longer arms or greater strength by just calling it a +1 bow. It doesn't have to be magical to have a bonus. Quality of material and workmanship can also provide a bonus.

I remember (might be a wrong memory though) that the old systems like 1e use to have bows listed as compound longbow or compound shortbow also. If I remember (might be a houserule) it was listed as a bow that allowed the user to apply their strength modifier to the damage. This allowed a fighter with Stre 18 (+3) chose to use a shortbow (1d6) or a compound shortbow (1d6+3). It would be the same for the longbow also.

Now all that could be just me mixing up a houserule with the actual rules since I haven't played or read 1e in about 15 to 20 yrs.

You remember well, composite bows allows its user to add his STR bonus, but IIRC each bow has a specific bonus and only a character with said bonus or higher can use that specific bow with the bonus capped to the bow's value.

Dimirag wrote:You remember well, composite bows allows its user to add his STR bonus, but IIRC each bow has a specific bonus and only a character with said bonus or higher can use that specific bow with the bonus capped to the bow's value.

Composite. I knew it was compo something. Yeah the modifier or higher was something I forgot but now you mentioned it, I remember.

Thought about adding that option into a game. Just make the cost of the bow multiplied by the strength modifier x10 which would mean a composite bow +3 would cost bow price x30. I want to say a friend of mine back then applied it to crossbows also but that memory eludes me. I know it would shift the damage balance but by the time they could afford it they would probably need the extra damage. This could be a simple option to keep magical weapons on the low end.

If the character has the STR, money, time and can find somebody that can make the bow for him... then why not? I don't see any problem with applying the composite rule to crossbows either.