Speaking of Archers [gaming]

[the_gneech]

Hey, people in my gaming group! Particularly camstone and jamesbarrett...

I just noticed for the first time that technically, you're not allowed to use a Longbow from horseback. I don't know if we've ever used that rule (I'm thinking of Jaer particularly), because I can't remember if Jaer's ever actually tried to do archery from horseback or if he's just dismounted at the beginning of every fight.

So do we stick with the rule-as-written or houserule it away? Theoretically, the D&D longbow is supposed to refer to the really long English-style longbow -- the typical 5' bow that Robin Hood et al. use is actually a shortbow. But shortbows only do d6, which is kinda depressing, and I've been thinking of the longbow as the 5' type, and the shortbow as the really small ones like ninja or halflings might use. So I'm willing to go either way, but I'd like to know your feelings on the subject.

(It also affects Celedras, as I'd have to shift his longbow-focused feats to shortbow-focused, but that's a relatively minor thing.)

What do you guys think? Maybe the English style longbow should be "True Longbow" and do d10 or something like that?

-The Gneech

Comments

[jamesbarrett.livejournal.com]

I'd go with the English style longbow being a "true longbow" and doing d10. I've always thought of the bow Robin Hood had as a longbow too. Legolas in that icon of yours is much what I think of when I think Longbow and he could use his from horseback, couldn't he? -Frisk

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

Yup, he could -- but by the rules he was using a shortbow.

Assuming everybody else is okay with it, we'll go with the "true longbow" idea then. (I'll work up stats and put 'em into the player notes for Saturday's game.)

It's sorta like the "-4 for shooting into melee also negates cover" thing -- since that's how we've been playing anyway, might as well make it an official "house rule."

-The Gneech

[sirfox.livejournal.com]

The reason being, a bow close to 6' long... when you pull the string, bits of HORSE are just going to be in its way... Physically, though, you could do it by standing in the stirrups.. a simple Ride check might be enough. DC 10 while the horse is still, 15 if moving, 20 at a gallop?

it's showier.

Impresses the rubes.

i don't even want to THINK about what a squad of mounted archers, standing in their stirrups as they bear down on some enemies, would do to enemy morale. I get a mental image of an orc, peering out from between shoddy pallisades, pointing and elbowing his friend. "oh, we're fucked."

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

With "Ride of the Valkyries" playing at full blast, ne? ;)

Believe me, I have no problem with the English longbow being unusable from horseback. Those suckers are hugemongous and take a weight lifter to draw. But I always thought of the self bows I used in college as "longbows" at 5', which is where the confusion comes from. And my (admittedly limited) riding experience suggests that those would be usable from horseback ... at least as usable as plate armor and a lance, anyhow! ;)

-The Gneech

[hossblacksilver.livejournal.com]

It would explain why mounted archers had less range than their foot counterparts, though stability while shooting would be another reason. But then again, archers (light cavalry) tended to be the fastest moving forces on the battle field, operating with a hit-and-run method. Though that shortened effective range made them vulnerable to their foot counterparts (which in turn where vulnerable to mounted heavy cavalry, who could close with their formations and smash them.)

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

It's tough to be accurate while your own body is moving, much less while sitting on the back of a running animal! :)

-The Gneech

[laurie-robey.livejournal.com]

For game purposes, I'd agree that you call the big one the "True Longbow" and make it do d10. That makes more sense to me anyway. I'd think those humongous bows could do that much damage. I always thought of the shortbow being the little Valentine's Day cherubim-style bow, ittie-bittie. The bows that human/elf characters use that aren't the "true longbows" are the ones I think of when I hear "longbow;" they just aren't gigantic like the ones you're talking about.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

All righty then! :)

-TG

[willowanderer.livejournal.com]

I would, if I amy like to point outthe japanese long bow which is even longer, and yet (so I hear)they managed to use them on horseback sometimes.

but heck YeAH! a greater longbow should do morethan a d6 those things could punch through platemail in the hands of a properly trained archer.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

My samurai-lore is rusty, but IIRC you're referring to the yumi (yuma?), which is a funky lopsided longbow where most of the curve is up in the air. In D&D terms, that would be an Exotic weapon, I'm sure. :)

-The Gneech

[willowanderer.livejournal.com]

-all- of my D&D lore is rusty, I'm afraid. *makes a face* but yeah, I think that's what I'm thinking of.
Silly me, I was all thinking about actualy usingthe weapons, not D&D Rules.
I've been told that messes me up before.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

Well, there's no reason why the two should be incompatible! ;) But in the faux-medieval-European context of most D&D games, knowing how to properly use a yumi would definitely require special training. :)

-The Gneech

[willowanderer.livejournal.com]

fair enough. Personaly, I feel that it requires specail training anywhere.
Butthen I feel good weponshipe always does.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

Okay, how about "unconventional" training? ;)

-TG

[willowanderer.livejournal.com]

as you like. I'm not argueing with that.

[mg4h.livejournal.com]

I've got a great yumi-from-horseback pic for you - found an entire site of them. Check out this picture (http://pictures.nicolas.delerue.org/japan/20030406_nihari/dcp_4211.html) to see how the shooting works from horseback. The rest of the pics are pretty stunning as well.

I have some friends who do Japanese archery. They're scarily good with it ;)

[mg4h.livejournal.com]

Some real-world experience, if you want.

I've actually used a couple of different bows from "horseback" - this was for a competition, and the person running it made a frame for the middle of the horse, then stuck onto that a saddle, and some bits for the front and back. We had to shoot from that using a crossbow, a recurve (shorter) and a longbow.

In all cases, it was more difficult to aim because your stance wasn't static. Instead of having your feet comfortably set on the ground, you had to hold onto the saddle with your legs, just like a real horse. None of us were used to that, so it made for some interesting shots ;)

As for keeping the bows out of the horse's way - the crossbow was easiest, but reloading that sucker on horseback was painful. Either you'd have to stop a real horse to use a foot stirrup (or have a DC25+ or so to survive reloading with one foot out of the saddle) or you'd have to push against your stomach, and while it's doable, after a while that HURTS, even with reinforced leather for a brace.

The recurve, not surprisingly, was a bit easier than the longbow. The actual arc of the string wasn't as important as you'd think, because the biggest problem was keeping the bottom point of the longbow from getting tangled up in your foot, or the horse. The main thing it showed was the horse archers of the Mongolian hordes had it right - short, smaller horses, with short, powerful bows equals a deadly army.

And I've always thought the smaller bow equals less damage rule is stupid. I have a "smaller" bow - it's a recurve, it's 40 pounds, but in gaming terms it would be considered lighter than a fiberglass "longbow" which is only 25 pounds.

Whichever way you want to run the house rule, make sure if your longbow really is almost the height of the person (traditional size) that the arc you can shoot off of the horse is smaller than if it's a shorter bow. Aside from that - the rules are simplified versions of reality. If you want your bow to be d10, make it d10 :) Just make sure it's more difficult to shoot from horseback, because it really is.

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

Well, there are allowances for the material it's made of and whatnot -- a composite shortbow with a +2 Str modifier will do as much damage if not more on average than a standard longbow.

Knights and warhorses trained so that the rider guided the horse with his legs, as I understand it -- so I imagine they're used to it. The standard D&D rule about firing from horseback is -4 to hit if the horse makes a full move, and -8 if making a full run action. So the penalties for bucking around on the back of a horse are pretty steep! (The Mounted Archery feat halves these penalties.)

As I understand it, the English longbow (the looooong longbow, I mean) was not really a skirmish weapon, it was basically artillery -- ranks of guys would stand way in the back and send a hail of arrows to the far side of the field.

Thinking about it last night, I was thinking perhaps that instead of d10 damage, the "true longbow" should stick with d8 but have a higher critical threat range -- and that you would lose your Dex bonus to AC when firing it 'cause you have to stand still and draw it back so far.

Speaking of all this, I haven't done any archery in a long time -- I miss it!

-The Gneech

[mg4h.livejournal.com]

The traditional English longbow should be as tall as the archer is, unstrung. So, yes, a *wee* bit large for horseback. However, technically anything that is not a recurve is called a longbow in modern terms, and modern folk wrote the D&D manual, so I'm still not sure which definition they were thinking of - does the description in the manual specify, since I don't have it here at work?

Also, the traditional English longbow was anywhere from 70-150 pounds - which is why it could punch through plate armor. That much force is more than enough, forget the strength bonus that D&D tries to add ;) They would start out in front and soften up the enenmy, until they got too close for volleys to be safe - once the sides mixed, archers were pretty useless. Then again, by then they'd probably used all their arrows, so the ended up the cleanup crew - coup d'etat'ing any downed enemy soldiers they could get their hands on.

You could always have three weapons - d6, d8 and d10, and just keep the last one as some sort of rifle-equivalent. Longer distance, more damage, harder to handle while running around, if not nigh-impossible.

It is, as they say, your game ;)

[the-gneech.livejournal.com]

All it says is:

Longbow
You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size. A longbow is too unwieldy to use while you are mounted. If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when you use a longbow. If you have a bonus for high Strength, you can apply it to damage rolls when you use a composite longbow (see below) but not a regular longbow.

The "too unwieldy to use while you are mounted" is what suggests to me that they're thinking of the Enblish longbow.

-The Gneech