Bow damage

[Milk Drinker]

As an archer and d&d player I would ask the makers of this game if they have lost their mind? Before you create something at least ask a professional instead of making something utterly stupid... I know, this post will affect nothing, thats why the language...

1: bow damage comes from the mechanism of the bow and the strength of a character DOESNT FKIN MATTER so where is the negative bonus coming from? if you can use a bow it will do the same damage even if you are a 5 yo kid
2: composite bows are NOT stronger, they are FASTER, so again, strength and other abilities DOESNT MATTER so why do they add the strength bonus to the shots?
3: where strength matter is the reload of crossbows so a strong character should be able to shoot faster with them, this is why crossbows are better for high strength low dexterity characters
4: agility or dexterity call as you please affects aiming and reloading of bows
5: bow/crossbow damage depends on bow class only and that where it hits
6: bows should add dex modifier to damage and should have feats/skills that add to damage (better aiming at dangerous parts of a body)

at the moment my best archer is the barbarian who should at best swing huge clubs or battle axes and the worst archer is my ranger. what a ♥♥♥♥in stupid idea

other than bows:
1: rapiers (and all of its kind) and daggers ARE AGILE weapons, they MUST NOT NEED AN AGILE MODIFIER! and so they should use dexterity modifier for damage AS DEFAULT

at the moment rouges rangers and their mixed casts are dead in this game because you LITERALLY have to waste all your feats to make them at least working

[Kalamir]

To the OP, Pathfinder: Kingmaker uses rules from the Open Game's Licence of D&D 3.0 that was released in 2000. These are the proper mechanics of the Game, even though they nearly 20 year old rules & well...bad (in my opinion, for archery).

[Shadenuat]

Composite bows do work slightly differently in d20, although not by much. By the rules you should have -2 penalty to it with STR 8 for example, not -1, or something like that since you don't qualify to use the bow. If PK followed rules to the letter finding correct bows would be more viable I guess. But then with all the belts and buffs it wouldn't matter much.

Hell in IE games you couldn't even equip strongest bows since some of them required either 18 or 18/00 STR.

[JODEGAFUN]

Originally posted by Shadenuat:

Composite bows do work slightly differently in d20, although not by much. By the rules you should have -2 penalty to it with STR 8 for example, not -1, or something like that since you don't qualify to use the bow. If PK followed rules to the letter finding correct bows would be more viable I guess. But then with all the belts and buffs it wouldn't matter much.

Hell in IE games you couldn't even equip strongest bows since some of them required either 18 or 18/00 STR.

Same in BG1/BG2, you need high str to be a good archer.

[Sotanaht]

Originally posted by Notabot187:

PnP can go up to 13 with Zen Archer. But, yeah 9 is kinda insane. The guy I'm talking about can put 11 arrows into the air before the first lands.

I don't see how. Zen Archer specifically says that you don't get rapid shot or manyshot with flurry of blows. So you are only going to get 4+3 attacks with flurry, +1 for haste, +1 for ki extra attack. That caps at 9

They DO have the ability to make attacks of opportunity with the bow (at melee range), and with combat reflexes they can make a theoretically unlimited number of AoOs per round.

Of course you shouldn't be getting 9 with anybody else either. 4(bab)+2(rapid/multi)+1(haste)=7

edit: non-unchained monk makes attacks using his monk level as his BAB when doing a Flurry of Blows, so you get 4 base attacks in spite of being a 3/4 BAB class, and non-unchained monk can make an extra attack with ki pool using any weapon that his Flurry of Blows allows, while unchained can only do so with unarmed attacks. That still only brings the total up to 9 attacks, from 7.

[Milk Drinker]

Originally posted by InEffect:

if you knew anything about archery you would know that bows with decent poundage require immense strength. If anything, your dexterity doesn't matter much there, but that's gaming tropes for you. 3.5 doesn't even have the worst representation of archery.
If we were to go all realistic, bows will be utterly useless against armor. And so would be most weapons.

lol, no, it doesn't require immense strength and again wrong, they are VERY GOOD against most armours but you western people think longbows are the top of archery, now, to let you know, longbows are barely better than stickbows, composite recurves are far faster, they can launch an arrow 2-2.5 times the speed of a longbow and can easily penetrate even full plates other than the very late gothic armours or renaissance breastplates. im a physically very weak archer and im using a 72lb composite recurve but I had that bow in the hands of a 14 yo kid too and he was able to perfectly handle it while a 40-60 lb bow is more than enough to kill a buffalo or an elk (let alone a human). I also used a 120lb longbow and while it wasnt simple it was managable even though I never trained with such, after some training it would be doable and knew a hunter guy shooting with a nearly 260lb recurve

stronger bows are only needed to launch bigger, heavier arrows and they were used to "rain down" heavy arrows for stopping power, while they are knocking off targets, they cant penetrate unlike sleek fast arrows launched from recurves that have far less stopping power but much better penetration...

[Shadenuat]

you western people think longbows are the top of archery

location: UK

[InEffect]

Originally posted by milk drinker:

lol, no, it doesn't require immense strength and again wrong, they are VERY GOOD against most armours

LOL. Please don't do your research in hollywood movies. I didn't even read that wall of nonsense further. Although it's a nice troll if that's what you're doing.

[JODEGAFUN]

Originally posted by InEffect:

Originally posted by milk drinker:

lol, no, it doesn't require immense strength and again wrong, they are VERY GOOD against most armours

LOL. Please don't do your research in hollywood movies. I didn't even read that wall of nonsense further. Although it's a nice troll if that's what you're doing.

Indeed the armor piercing of the welsh longbow was not coming from the bow str., it comes from the bodkin arrow which could indeed break an armor (Aqincourt for example the armor piecing was proven, but it cames from the arrow, not the bow itself).

[pexx421]

Genghis khan, I believe, used nothing but an army of 50k horse archers and completely slaughtered the armies of all nations that stood up to him. Including, I believe, the Teutonic Knights. At any rate, yes the guy on YouTube, some Norwegian, can shoot several arrows a second, with accuracy. He readily shoots an arrow flying towards him out of the air. He also jumps, catches a flying arrow, knocks it in his bow, shoots it, and hits a target all before he lands. He theorizes that the majority of medieval archers had similar skills, contrary to our current conception of how they presented on the field. You have to watch his video, it’s amazing. It and other similar videos lead me to believe that medieval warriors had an actual regular skill set that was far beyond what we even consider.

[Sotanaht]

Originally posted by JODEGAFUN:

Originally posted by InEffect:

LOL. Please don't do your research in hollywood movies. I didn't even read that wall of nonsense further. Although it's a nice troll if that's what you're doing.

Indeed the armor piercing of the welsh longbow was not coming from the bow str., it comes from the bodkin arrow which could indeed break an armor (Aqincourt for example the armor piecing was proven, but it cames from the arrow, not the bow itself).

It's a combination of both, and there's no way to increase the force of the arrow without increasing the draw strength of the bow. Recurve and composite bows are all about smaller bows, shorter draws, and different materials, but at the end of it all you still hit conserveration of energy. Energy (strength) in = energy out. Crossbows sort of get around this with gears and cranks, where now the energy in = strength*time.

Originally posted by pexx421:

Genghis khan, I believe, used nothing but an army of 50k horse archers and completely slaughtered the armies of all nations that stood up to him. Including, I believe, the Teutonic Knights. At any rate, yes the guy on YouTube, some Norwegian, can shoot several arrows a second, with accuracy. He readily shoots an arrow flying towards him out of the air. He also jumps, catches a flying arrow, knocks it in his bow, shoots it, and hits a target all before he lands. He theorizes that the majority of medieval archers had similar skills, contrary to our current conception of how they presented on the field. You have to watch his video, it’s amazing. It and other similar videos lead me to believe that medieval warriors had an actual regular skill set that was far beyond what we even consider.

Two things about that youtube guy. One, he does hundreds of takes to get one success, you only see the successes. Grabbing arrows and whatever accuracy tricks he pulls are nowhere near actually viable for combat. Second, he uses an EXTREMELY weak bow. It's basically a toy and would struggle to kill an unarmored person at close range (not that I'd recommend testing that, it's still quite capable of doing so). Even then he often doesn't even fully draw it.

[InEffect]

Originally posted by JODEGAFUN:

Indeed the armor piercing of the welsh longbow was not coming from the bow str., it comes from the bodkin arrow which could indeed break an armor (Aqincourt for example the armor piecing was proven, but it cames from the arrow, not the bow itself).

You know how many casualties between knights were in english/french war? close to 0. Captives? yes. Do your damn research instead of relying on pop culture. No bow can penetrate plate armor even at point blank range. That would only change with firearms.

[Notabot187]

The bodkins used at Agincourt did not penetrate the steel armor of the French knights. It may have found occasional gaps, but was made of much too weak metal to actually penetrate. Even case hardening that design wouldn't work. What they did do is unhorse knights wearing heavy armor in some very sticky mud, and made the men on foot advance with there heads and visors down. Walking through a freshly plowed field in the rain isn't easy. Doing it with heavy armor and restricted breathing would have left the French exhausted.

[Milk Drinker]

Originally posted by Shadenuat:

you western people think longbows are the top of archery

location: UK

lol, did you know people are moving homes? no? now you have learnt it

Originally posted by InEffect:

Originally posted by milk drinker:

lol, no, it doesn't require immense strength and again wrong, they are VERY GOOD against most armours

LOL. Please don't do your research in hollywood movies. I didn't even read that wall of nonsense further. Although it's a nice troll if that's what you're doing.

exactly you are taking your researches from hollywood movies, im an archer myself and tried it myself. the problem is that losers think medieval knights were riding in heavy 1.5mm thick carbon steel armours which is retarded, that was only the case in the late 15th century, prior that even royal full plate armours were very thin and light, they were later shaped especially to deflect arrows (late thick breastplates with the ridge on the middle) which were developed exactly because otherwise arrows COULD penetrate and kill its wearer...

Originally posted by Sotanaht:

It's a combination of both, and there's no way to increase the force of the arrow without increasing the draw strength of the bow. Recurve and composite bows are all about smaller bows, shorter draws, and different materials, but at the end of it all you still hit conserveration of energy. Energy (strength) in = energy out. Crossbows sort of get around this with gears and cranks, where now the energy in = strength*time.

you are so wrong :D its incredible... draw strength has close to zero effect on arrow speed, it has effect on how heavy arrows you can launch, recurve and composite bows are not at all about shorter draws, they have actually longer draws than longbows. energy is not strength * time its speed * weight, so with the same arrow weight the faster bow is the stronger. speed depends on materials and design where recurves excel being 2-2.5x fater than a longbow, some of them, especially the korean ones having extrem overdraw possibilities

the english and welsh used 120-180lb longbows, longbows have a general speed limit around 140 feet per second while recurves, especially composite recurves go up to around 300 fps. this is the speed they can launch an arrow with the right arrow weight... an around 40-50 lb bow can launch a 250-300 grain arrow without much decrease in speed so taking on account an average longbow with 140 fps launching a 300 grain (20 gram) arrow put 2800gfps while a recurve that can do 300 fps will launch the same arrow with 9000gfps, its more than 3 times the energy in the same arrow. Now if you use a higher drawweight bow with these same arrows there would be no change, no matter how high drawweight you have, with the same arrows it would just launch with the same speed and the arrow would have the same energy...

to make up this deficit, you can use heavier arrows but to launch heavier arrows you need heavier drawweight bow (and here is the only point where drawweight matters) BUT heavier arrows have worse penetration, higher air resistance and worse flight characteristics. this is why english longbowmen were not targetshooting but "raining arrows", there the weight of the arrow wasnt a loss but a gain (not the bow accelerated it but the gravity)
sleek light arrows have better penetration and a turk or hun warbow can easily penetrate a medieveal armor, they have far higher speed, less air resistance, better flight characteristics and better penetration values. they are like a shiper riffle versus a shotgun, the longbow being the shotgun

Just for comparison, the longes ever recorded shot with a longbow was less than 400 meters while the turk recurve flight shooters can launch their arrows to as far as a kilometer, its not drawstrength, its design and materials that makes a bow strong or slow

[InEffect]

plate reached 3.5mm at it's thickest points and was shaped in a way the arrow need 1 in a million chance to find purchase to begin with. Plate armors actually became lighter with time as it became hardened steel and steels themselves progressed. Do your damn research sir archer without strength.

[ELVIS]

To the OP: This issue has NOTHING to do with the developers. Those rules are from the Pathfinder pen and paper tabletop RPG, which the Kingmaker CRPG is based on. "Realistic Fantasy" is an oxymoron to begin with. If you don't like the rules, play another game.