D&D 3rd ed.

I'm curious if anyone knows how this ruling goes.

According to the rules, light crossbows can be loaded and fired once a
round. Heavy crossbows are once every other round.

But when you get multiple attacks, does that mean you can load and fire
crossbows faster? If you get 2 attacks a round, can you fire that heavy
crossbow once every round? (And at what attack bonus?)

And with the rapid shot Feat, which allows you to fire a second shot off
with a bow at a -2, does that mean you can use it on your heavy crossbow and
fire it (at lower levels) once a round but at the -2 penalty all the time?
Or does it not work on crossbows at all?

Rob, who finally remembered a question and feels y'all here are better to
ask than on the ADND list as GMAST tends to be more mature and
intelligent...

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

Mature and intelligent be damned.

To begin with, I think that I remember that the rapid shot penalty applies
to the first arrow shot as well as the second, (see page 84 -- "The attack
is at your highest base attack bonus, but each attack (the bonus one and the
normal ones) suffers a -2 penalty."

As far as the multiple attacks go, it doesn't seem to be limited to melee,
so a higher level archer would get multiple shots, and then one extra for
rapid shot, if he had it.

Now, the reloading question makes this tricky.  Making multiple attacks is a
single full round action, rather than multiple actions, in a combat round:
so as I read the thing, you would still need to take a full-round action to
reload a heavy crossbow, no matter what level character you were running.
And a move-equivalent action to load a light crossbow.  The number of
attacks is not really a reflection of the number of times you swing a sword
in a combat round, but the number of times you manage to land a blow in the
exchange of blocks and parries, etc.  A character with more attacks is a
better at finding those openings and exploiting them.

A repeating crossbow allows shoot as many times as you have attacks, and I'd
end up allowing rapid shot to allow an additional shot.

So, to answer the question the short way: the only crossbow that would be
able to take advantage of extra attacks or the rapid shot feat would be the
repeating crossbow.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tangent" 
To: 
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 11:51 AM
Subject: GM: D&D 3rd ed.


> I'm curious if anyone knows how this ruling goes.
>
> According to the rules, light crossbows can be loaded and fired once a
> round. Heavy crossbows are once every other round.
>
> But when you get multiple attacks, does that mean you can load and fire
> crossbows faster? If you get 2 attacks a round, can you fire that heavy
> crossbow once every round? (And at what attack bonus?)
>
> And with the rapid shot Feat, which allows you to fire a second shot off
> with a bow at a -2, does that mean you can use it on your heavy crossbow
and
> fire it (at lower levels) once a round but at the -2 penalty all the time?
> Or does it not work on crossbows at all?
>
> Rob, who finally remembered a question and feels y'all here are better to
> ask than on the ADND list as GMAST tends to be more mature and
> intelligent...
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

According to the rules, light crossbows can be loaded and fired once a
round. Heavy crossbows are once every other round.

But when you get multiple attacks, does that mean you can load and fire
crossbows faster? If you get 2 attacks a round, can you fire that heavy
crossbow once every round? (And at what attack bonus?)

And with the rapid shot Feat, which allows you to fire a second shot off
with a bow at a -2, does that mean you can use it on your heavy crossbow and
fire it (at lower levels) once a round but at the -2 penalty all the time?
Or does it not work on crossbows at all?

Rob, who finally remembered a question and feels y'all here are better to
ask than on the ADND list as GMAST tends to be more mature and


I can't find a specific rule to back this up, but I'd say that crossbows are 
unaffected by multiple attacks, Rapid Shot feat, etc.  In other words, it 
takes as long as it takes to crank the winch.  I might allow them for hand 
crossbows, but nothing larger.

Lucifer >:}

--

"The mind is its own place, and in itself
Can make a heav'n of hell, a hell of heav'n" --Milton, Paradise Lost, Bk. 1

Homepage: http://members.aol.com/noctifer/index.html
Lucifer's DJ Webpage: http://members.aol.com/noctifer/private/DJ/index.html
Lucifer's Vampire Webpage: 
http://members.aol.com/noctifer01/private/VampHome/index.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

On 4 Dec 2000, at 12:23, Noctifer@aol.com wrote:

> But when you get multiple attacks, does that mean you can load and fire
> crossbows faster? If you get 2 attacks a round, can you fire that heavy
> crossbow once every round? (And at what attack bonus?)

> I can't find a specific rule to back this up, but I'd say that crossbows are
> unaffected by multiple attacks, Rapid Shot feat, etc.  In other words, it takes
> as long as it takes to crank the winch.  I might allow them for hand crossbows,
> but nothing larger.
> 

I mostly agree with Lucifer on the speed issue, but in a cinematic setting I'd 
allow a rapid fire feat for any crossbow whose strength rating the character 
exceeds, with the house rule that such abuse of the mechanism is more likely 
to break it.  So a character with STR 16 could, using the feat of Rapid Load 
(Crossbow), load and fire a crossbow of STR 15 or less every round.  I'd 
consider doubling the number of attacks again for a crossbow of 1/4 the 
character's STR or less, so with a little hand crossbow of STR4, the STR16 
player could reload and fire 2 shots a round, with a even greater chance of 
damaging the crossbow.



Coyt D. Watters
"The Internet, billions of electrons with nothing better to do."
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

Greetings.

> I mostly agree with Lucifer on the speed issue, but in a cinematic setting I'd
> allow a rapid fire feat for any crossbow whose strength rating the character
> exceeds, with the house rule that such abuse of the mechanism is more likely
> to break it.  So a character with STR 16 could, using the feat of Rapid Load
> (Crossbow), load and fire a crossbow of STR 15 or less every round.  I'd
> consider doubling the number of attacks again for a crossbow of 1/4 the
> character's STR or less, so with a little hand crossbow of STR4, the STR16
> player could reload and fire 2 shots a round, with a even greater chance of
> damaging the crossbow.
> Coyt D. Watters

I don't think it is only a matter of strength, but a matter of dexterity as well.
Imagine this: A fighter with a crossbow rapidfiring it in 6 seconds because he is
very muscular. Looking at the mechanics of an crossbow you need to be quite agile in
order to not loosing control of it. The riks of lossing is very high when you look at
some needing both his hands to load the weapon, aiming, firing, loading it with both
hands, aiming, firing ... This several times in only six seconds?
Furhtermore: if you have to much strength in it you probably break the mechanics.

Shortly said: I think as a crossbow highly depends on its own mechanics and not on
the abilities of a character it is reduced to its intended basic rate of firing,
meaning actual one shot every round or even worse. With the hand crossbow or a rapid
fire crossbow I would make an exception, maybe.

Greetings Fred


----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

On 4 Dec 2000, at 11:51, Tangent wrote:

> Rob, who finally remembered a question and feels y'all here are better to
> ask than on the ADND list as GMAST tends to be more mature and
> intelligent...

Must... resist... temptation to say "That's because we don't pla..."

Never mind, I'll resist.  :}


-- 
Karen J. Cravens (silver@phoenyx.net)
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

> Rob, who finally remembered a question and feels y'all here are better to
> ask than on the ADND list as GMAST tends to be more mature and
> intelligent...

Must... resist... temptation to say "That's because we don't pla..."

Never mind, I'll resist.  :}
---------------------------------

Perhaps, Karen, if we talk about this new gaming system, we might spark
enough conversation going to sustain gaming talk again. GMast has been
quiescent far too long. I miss it. And while the new system might be D&D, it
also has the benefit of fixing some of the errors of the old gaming system.

In addition, TSR/WotC has been... not sure of the term. Basically other game
systems are using the D20 system as well. I know that I look forward to the
White Wolf conversion, as their D10 system has some serious flaws.

Seeing that other gaming systems are starting to look at the D20 system as a
feasible system for their own games, perhaps we should start picking apart
D20 now so that we'll be prepared for future games that are not D&D. :)

--
Karen J. Cravens (silver@phoenyx.net)
----------------------------------------------------------------

Robert A. Howard

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

Tangent wrote:

>Seeing that other gaming systems are starting to look at the D20 system as a
>feasible system for their own games, perhaps we should start picking apart
>D20 now so that we'll be prepared for future games that are not D&D. :)

I'm very intrigued with the Call of Cthulhu conversion WotC are going
to be producing.   Just to see if it's possible to adapt d20 to a
genre which is as just about as far removed from hack-and-slash
dungeon crawls as it's possible to get.

I have glanced through the new Star Wars game without reading it in
detail - superficially it looks very like DnD3 (which is probably a
deliberate ploy to hook munch^h^h^h^h^hDnD-ites)   Anyone here
actually *played* it yet?
--
Tim Hall, http://www.kalyr.com

"It's a fine line between stupid and clever"
 - Spinal Tap
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

From: "Tim Hall" 
> I have glanced through the new Star Wars game without reading it in
> detail - superficially it looks very like DnD3 (which is probably a
> deliberate ploy to hook munch^h^h^h^h^hDnD-ites)   Anyone here
> actually *played* it yet?
>
Nope but conversation on rpg-create did mention that they'd 
introduced rules specifically for Star Wars.  I think hit points
were divided into what your body could handle and what was
there because you're a hero.  

For more informed opinion you could check the rpg-create 
archives on eGroups because I recall the Star Wars rules getting 
pulled into the d20 discussion by people that seem to have looked
at the rules in detail.  Of course for half of thr rpg-create group
the entertainment *is* reading the rules so I can't be sure that 
anyone had actually played them.

Chris Tutty

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

Chris Tutty wrote:

>Nope but conversation on rpg-create did mention that they'd 
>introduced rules specifically for Star Wars.  I think hit points
>were divided into what your body could handle and what was
>there because you're a hero.  

I've read that in reviews; characters have split hit points called
'vitality' and 'wounds'.  It's sounds *exactly* like a DnD house rule
suggested in White Dwarf (anyone remember when it was an RPG mag?)
about 20 years ago.
--
Tim Hall, http://www.kalyr.com

"It's a fine line between stupid and clever"
 - Spinal Tap
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

> From: Tim Hall 
> 
> I've read that in reviews; characters have split hit points called
> 'vitality' and 'wounds'.  It's sounds *exactly* like a DnD house rule
> suggested in White Dwarf (anyone remember when it was an RPG mag?)
> about 20 years ago.

I remember the early days of WD.  Still have a few of them upstairs.
As I recall, it was around issue 80 that they started to do a header.
In this case, however, it was hardly a new concept when WD published
it.  In my experience, plenty of D&Ders had already tinkered with
this idea.

--- Jeff Stehman




----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

Hi All...

I'm not at all familiar with 3e (yet) but I like Coyt Watters' idea of
allowing a "rapid fire" if you exceed the strength requirement of the
weapon.

Crossbows alow weak marksmen to store muscle energy in their bow
mechanically over time with a cranequin.   Hence a slow rate of fire.   If
you have a significantly higher strength you should be allowed to arm it
quickly with a lever - provided the crossbow in question has such a lever
fitted.

I don't think I'd be quite as lax as to say one point of strength over the
raiting is enough, but most crossbows in a lord of the manor's armoury would
be built for STR 10 ordinary drafted infantry to use.   That was the point!
STR 15+ adventurers could well be able to do something more spectacular with
such devices.

Any crossbow you happen to find will probaly only have the arming mechanism
its owner intended to use fitted.   Why pay extra for more than one?

If you have to wind a handle then that's how long it takes and having extra
strength is no use, your rate of fire is standard for the weapon.

If you have to pull a lever and you don't have the strength you can't arm
it, but your rate of fire is that of a light crossbow.

The hand crossbow might well be capable of rapid fire, but since it does
puny damage, who cares?   One can thorw 3 darts or 2 daggers, so allowing
rappid fire with some penaty to hit for lack of aim time is quite
reasonable.

Of course if any of these crossbows are magic then all bets are off!

Rgds,
Michael.

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Star Wars d20

----- Original Message -----  From: "Tim Hall" 
> Chris Tutty wrote:
>
> >Nope but conversation on rpg-create did mention that they'd
> >introduced rules specifically for Star Wars.  I think hit points
> >were divided into what your body could handle and what was
> >there because you're a hero.
>
> I've read that in reviews; characters have split hit points called
> 'vitality' and 'wounds'.  It's sounds *exactly* like a DnD house rule
> suggested in White Dwarf (anyone remember when it was an RPG mag?)
> about 20 years ago.

Sorta, but the VP have other uses too, such as powering Force abilities.
(Anyone going "UH?!?" at that is forgiven.  And I'm going to need a while to
supress the urge to count BODY on damage...)

We also get some other related strangeness...you know the Toughness feat
from DND3?  The one that gives 3 HP each time you take it?  Well, now we
have "Quickness"...which gives 3 Vitality Points.  (Again with the "UH?!?"
Murphy's Rules fans, take note--the better you are at avoiding damage, the
stronger you are in the Force!)  Then we have "Infamy", a feat of dubious
value if ever I've seen one.  (I suppose it's useful in some situations, but
it strikes me more as a "silver lining" thing.)

There are, of course, conversion rules for the old WEG version in the back,
thus providing for the bulk of the old material to still be used some way or
another.  I just wish the info on the background (incl. major characters)
wasn't of such dubious quality--although I can't say if that was
intentional, or just plain sloppiness on the part of the staff.  (Note to
WotC:  When adapting an established setting with a rather strict "canon",
check the facts you publish for accuracy!  The Sun Crusher was NOT a
prototype Death Star!!!)

The original art wasn't bad, though it could (should?) have been better.
I've heard some people complain about some of the fonts and such, but it
doesn't seem that bad to me.  Overall presentation is good quality, I just
wish they'd spent a little more effort on the contents.  Not that it will
stop me from actually giving it a whirl playing it, mind you;  it's just
that it's a little kludgy in spots, and one suspects the creative team
wasn't as familiar with some of the books as they should have been if they
were going to cover them.

   ---Darth Stomper--
Dark Chairman, Stomper Institute for
  Thaumaturgy and Heronism (S.I.T.H)
GURPS fan - GMAST-L Old One (once banished)
Philosopher - Alternate Historian - General Crank
email: bravado@mindspring.com
web: http://www.mindspring.com//~bravado

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

on 12/4/00 12:51 PM, Tangent at Tangent@concentric.net wrote:

> I'm curious if anyone knows how this ruling goes.
> 

You should also remember that WoTC has an email address where you can ask
rules questions like this and get an official ruling.  Of course, if after
due consideration you disagree with the ruling you should do what you think
is best for your game.

I've never sent a rules question to a game publisher for an answer, so I
don't know the normal response time.

Regards,

-- 
Michael W. Shaffer
PGPKey: 0x253E28F3
http://www.geocities.com/pookey_shaffer/pookey.html


----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

D&D 3rd ed.

Tangent wrote:

> I'm curious if anyone knows how this ruling goes.
>
> According to the rules, light crossbows can be loaded and fired once a
> round. Heavy crossbows are once every other round.
>
> But when you get multiple attacks, does that mean you can load and fire
> crossbows faster? If you get 2 attacks a round, can you fire that heavy
> crossbow once every round? (And at what attack bonus?)
>
> And with the rapid shot Feat, which allows you to fire a second shot off
> with a bow at a -2, does that mean you can use it on your heavy crossbow and
> fire it (at lower levels) once a round but at the -2 penalty all the time?
> Or does it not work on crossbows at all?
>
> Rob, who finally remembered a question and feels y'all here are better to
> ask than on the ADND list as GMAST tends to be more mature and
> intelligent...
>
>

My ruling on this would be simple. Crossbows can't make use of multiple attacks,
and neither of the Rapid shot feat.
Loading a crossbow takes an  half action / full action respetively and making
use of multiple attacks or rapid shot requires a full action as well. Thois
can't be combined. Plus something  must balance crossbows being only simple
weapons. Use a repeating CB instead.

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/