Bows And Arrows, A Look At Bows Made
For Use With Exceptional Strength

Skip Right To The Table of Exceptional Bows

I have been doing a little looking into the problem of bows and arrows. Specifically, how easily one may obtain a specially made bow that will grant STRENGTH bonuses to hit and to damage. As a game balance consideration, the DM would naturally like to be able to curtail such things, as delivering that kind of damage and at two shots a round and from the safety of distance does tend to make one's character with exceptional strength overly powerful. For the DM to even reach such an opponent with a creature or two, they'd have to either throw a lot more creatures at the group, or throw larger and meaner creatures at the party, and this isn't always fair to certain other party members who would normally have a hard enough time with creatures more comparable in skill and level to themselves. (A DM could always contrive to "cheat," if that is possible, and surprise such a player more than the dice would indicate, but I'd like to stay away from such solutions. Also, there are other ways to reach such a PC, but for the most part I shall confine my analysis to the majority of situations and not worry too much about the exceptions). And when it happens (and it will) that an "elevated" encounter (put in just to reach the archer) happens to first reach a PC of lesser, shall we say toughness, these PCs will have shorter lives.

Now I know it's true that realistically one shouldn't expect the world to be meaner and nastier just because one of your party members has an edge (the real world is not actually like that), but if the DM doesn't compensate, then they are left with too many encounters ending before they get interesting and all the other PCs are left with little else to do but marvel at the bowmen's prowess. Thus, the DM either has to risk the splash over of power catching and killing the weaker PCs, or they will have to try to seriously curtail anyone delivering that kind of damage at a distance until a more mid level game when the other character classes can start to take a fair amount of punishment and not automatically die.

Of course, one way to curtail such things is to expect and enforce the fact that most fighters do not have exceptional strength. This is how the real world does it. Unfortunately, if I had to guess, I'd say that most AD&D warriors do end up having exceptional strength ratings. Just lucky rolling, I guess, or perhaps an agreed upon allowance between the player and the DM, but no matter how it comes to pass, I actually believe the majority of PC warriors do have exceptional strength, despite the odds against it. Thus, if exceptional strength (hence forth ES) bows are easily produced for little money or from relatively easy to obtain materials, most games with ES warriors will have this game balance problem.

As it turns out, historically speaking and taking the lessons from our own history and the real world, bows are rather difficult to use compared to most other weapons. This is where I believe AD&D has made a serious mistake. They did, however, recognize the problem and insisted that it would cost 3 weapon proficiency slots to "specialize" in a bow, but they never said why. The truth is, it should cost everyone 2 weapon proficiency slots just to become proficient in bow, and not just one. This would have three good effects.

Firstly, it is a more accurate depiction of reality.

Secondly, it again helps to mitigate the problem of too many ES warriors with such things.

And Thirdly, one no longer needs a special rule for why it take two extra slots to become specialized in bow. Like all other weapons, specialization would only take one extra slot.

Of course, there are two other important considerations for my world:

First, you may still use only one WP slot to take bow if you wish, but you will have the "familiar" classification and be at half your PC's negative modifiers for non-proficient weapons. A warrior would be (-2/2=-1) -1 to hit, a rogue or priest would be (-3/2=-2) -2 to hit, and a wizard would be (-5/2=-3) -3 to hit. This is an excellent approximation of reality since bows are harder to use in melee than most other weapons, and being -1 to hit or so is not such a bite.

Second, people (adventurers anyway) naturally have a tendency to try to fire into melee using missile weapons. This often necessitates a called shot (at -4) just to avoid your own comrades. This is still true for non-proficient characters, but one will only be at -2 to hit if they used one WP slot for bow (half-normal penalties for familiarity). If a character is proficient with bow (by taking two WP slots) they will not incur any such penalty at all.

Firing into melee then often means just rolling to hit their intended target, and if they succeed, all is well. If they fail, however, a randomly selected nearby target (not counting the original intended target) is selected, they roll to hit that target as if really trying (i.e., they use all their normal bonuses), and if they hit that target's AC, they roll damage to that target. If they miss, the missile passed through the melee and hit no one.

Finally no reasonable argument (that I've ever heard) has persuaded me that being -1 to hit with a bow is unrealistic at all. Many have claimed they have learned bow at camp (or whatever) in a few short days and argued it was easy to hit targets with one proficiency slot, let alone two. I can only tell them these targets are often not moving, hardly ever trying to kill them in return, probably do not have their friends standing right next to them, and in other ways are not very indicative of what is happening in general melee. Furthermore, even if they can hit a moving target with some precision, who is to say this disproves they are at -1 to hit it or wouldn't hit it more often with continued months of practice? Thus, this rule alteration both helps prevent abuse and imbalance of the ES warrior and their bows, and it more readily reflects reality.

I prefer starting out this way since it accurately reflects the real world facts, those being the difficulty of using a bow properly in combat. And again we turn to crossbows (a completely different animal). Crossbows, it turns out, are not more powerful than normal bows (hand held light and heavy crossbows, at any rate), but they do offer three advantages over regular bows (in exchange for a shortcoming or two).

A.) The first is that once cocked and loaded, a crossbow will stay that way without expenditures of energy by the bowmen until it is actually fired. A compound bow (made up of a complex pulley system) partially does this by becoming very easy to pull and hold back AFTER you get to a certain point (the initial pull is NOT easy, if you've never tried this, but once pulled back, it takes only a fraction of the strength to hold it there). However, even a compound bow is not as easy to keep at the ready as a crossbow. You can even set a crossbow down, have lunch, and pick up the loaded weapon later; this is not so with a compound bow. And, of course, AD&D does not even normally have compound bows. I only mention them to compare the two and to make a distinction between a compound bow and a composite bow later on.

B.) Carrying a loaded weapon at the ready (and without getting too tired by keeping it loaded and at the ready) can be incredibly quick. This automatic quickness of the first shot can be very telling in the real world where one's opponent can be felled with a single shot. In the AD&D world, however, where hit points run rampant, a single shot will not do this to most adventuring PCs or NPCs. (If you ever wondered why high hit point PCs can survive and continue to fight well with crossbow bolts or arrows sticking though them, read The Justification Of The Hit Point System). Still, the crossbow's initial speed is not useless in the AD&D system. It can stop a spell caster from completing their spell, and that can save one's very life. And it is so quick that one can normally fire it before the ranks close, and you can start melee battle with an opponent after dropping the crossbow. When one's opponent is already wounded and possibly demoralized, it does give you a decided edge.

C.) Finally the main advantage to a crossbow is that even a relative novice can use it effectively in combat (of course, proficiency helps). Put a thousand farmers in the field and give them crossbows and you have a deadly force right away. The same thousand farmers armed with long bows will not do well at all. This is how much easier it is to use a crossbow, or how much harder it is to use a regular bow in comparison. Too bad standard AD&D didn't take this into account. I, however, will from now on, and I will implement the rule that regular bows (not crossbows) will now take two weapon proficiency slots just to become proficient with them. This is accurate, realistic, and it has the added advantage of not having to fudge a new rule just because the game system realizes how nasty bow specialization can be.

These three main advantages of the crossbow usually more than offset its disadvantages, those being the slower firing rate (one/round or even one/2 rounds) and, of course, it's a much heavier weapon than a normal bow.

Crossbows aside, and with the new, more realistic double weapon proficiency slot for all regular bows, we should have effectively cut down on the unfortunate nature of the ES bow, fewer warriors even taking bow since they a.) will have to spend two slots on it, and b.) will not be able to obtain an ES bow for some time to come (this is probably comparable to how difficult it should be for them to obtain plate mail armor, but unlike armor which does not take a proficiency slot and can always be acquired later, the bow will take two slots and be more difficult to pick up and use "whenever they get to it," and perhaps this will give the player something to seriously consider when generating their warrior).

Alas, though I keep trying to chip away at the ES warrior's use of the ES bow with reasonable and realistic considerations (though we all know my major concern is one of game balance), I can find little justification for keeping it out of the ES warrior's hands other than two. Economic, and encumbrance. Unfortunately, encumbrance is not that big a deal to the ES warrior. Yet, encumbrance should be more than just simply weight. Bulky objects, or difficult to maneuver and handle objects, should add more to one's encumbrance than just the weight of the item. Thus, pole arms, long bows, very long staves (greater than 7 feet), and the like should cost double or triple their weight in encumbrance. This is also a reflection of reality, for it is a major pain in the ass to try to negotiate small places while carrying such items. Even walking though the woods is harder. And, ES bows do not come in at the regular bow weights either; they are much heavier.

It's true that modern materials (even quality spring steel) and other composite materials can make the larger ES bow weigh less than one may normally expect, but these materials are not always available in the AD&D world. I suppose some form of rare or exotic wood (ironwood, pepperwood, whatever wood you may concoct or contrive for your world) may exist, but such things are usually rare and costly in and of themselves and must be quested for. That's always a good thing. Without such materials handy, the ES bows will necessarily weigh considerably more than the normal bows. Oh, not tons more, but even a few pounds can have profound effects after lugging it around for a few days. (Too bad AD&D doesn't properly address fatigue, but we try to live with our simplifications wherever we can for ease of play).

Still, ES bows will begin to weigh more. The higher the Strength rating, the more weight, and since I have also implemented the double or trebling factor for bulky items, it may eventually cost a warrior 9 times or so a bow's normal encumbrance, effectively going from 3 or 4 lbs. in weight and encumbrance to 6 to 12 lbs. in weight and 12 to 36 lbs. in effective encumbrance. Even for an ES warrior, that's got to take a toll.

Now the differences in arrows (flight and sheaf) should also be taken into account. Standard AD&D only allows sheaf arrows to be used with long bows. Presumably this is because the heavier war arrow (sheaf) takes a stronger bow to propel it with sufficient velocity. However, if an ES short bow were available, these would also probably be able to handle the sheaf arrow. And, of course, as the ES bows get stronger and stronger, one may wish (or even be required) to use even heavier arrows to impart more damage (hence the STR to damage bonuses). Such arrows may again weigh more, but not much more and so one can ignore the additional weight as negligible or take 5 arrows to the pound rather than 10.

NOTE: The sheaf arrow may also be required for long bows and ES bows since that much power will shatter a flight arrow, causing it to erupt into splinters before it even fully leaves the bow, and probably damaging the bowman in the process. Thus, one may be forced to use the heavier arrows and not simply wish to use them since they impart more damage.

Thus, to sum up my little analysis, I have prepared a few tables of bows and arrows below. Naturally, your DM may wish to adjust them, but I think these will work well for my world, and this is why I wrote this article. I hope you can find some use in it as well.

This first table deals with bows made for use with exceptional strength while using normally available materials. These bows will add one's normal strength bonuses to hit and to damage, but they tend to be rather heavy weapons. They are not commonly available but must be commissioned from a specialist Bowyer. This will normally mean a large city, and will only cost the PCs the listed price and a month of waiting if the bow is not already handy.

EXCEPTIONAL BOWS FOR EXCEPTIONAL STRENGTH

This next table is similar to the first in many regards, but these bows must be made with exceptional materials. Such materials are not normally available for purchase and must be quested for. Your DM will have these details. The main advantage of these bows is that they weigh less and are therefore less encumbering as well as being more durable. As a rough rule of thumb, it would take triple the damage to break one of these weapons that would normally be required to break a like item from the above table. Also, these items naturally have a +2 to all saving throws, but this is not magic and is only due to the nature of the exceptional material.

The exceptional Long Bow, Short Bow, and Cross Bows mentioned immediately above do NOT impart STRENGTH bonuses, but they are lighter and stronger weapons and can more readily by enchanted. Surprisingly, however, few magic bows also impart STRENGTH bonuses as well as magic ones since they tend to have been made to help out people who have normal strength and dexterity. There are, naturally, always exceptions, and magic bows that impart both strength and magic bonuses to hit and to damage do exist. They are just rare and costly. Magic bows, however, are a different kettle of fish and they are not really dealt with in this article.

Naturally, anyone can use a weapon whose strength rating is less than his or her own, but they may only receive a maximum bonus to hit and to damage similar to the bow's strength rating. For example, Joshua the Mighty (STR=18/94) can use a bow rated at 18/01-50, but will only be able to get a +1/+3 strength bonus instead of his normal +2/+5 bonus. His priestly friend, Marator the Magnificent (STR=18) cannot normally string that bow (but almost. He may be allowed to string it if he can roll his bend bars/lift grates percentage). Characters cannot use bows (or even string them without the bb/lg % roll) that are beyond their own strength rating.

Some of the exceptional-strength bows may require heavier arrows or bolts to impart that sort of damage, while other bows might actually be too strong for lighter arrows. This final table shows which arrows and bolts go with which weapons. None of these missiles are made from exceptional material or are particularly hard to have made or even purchase.

© August of 1999
by
James L.R. Beach
Waterville, MN 56096