John Woo Castles & Crusades

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:56 am

In our C&C Greyhawk game, there is a player who wants to wield a crossbow in each hand for the initial two shots in the first round. Do you think the standard -3/-6 rule should apply to shooting two crossbows in the same melee round? Should two-weapon fighting still apply in this situation? For some reason I have this nagging sensation in the back of my brain that says accurately firing two crossbows in the same round should had even stiffer penalties. I'm not convinced yet, but I'm going to have to come up with a rule by next Thursday's game.

~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:00 am

Here's the thing, the character that wants to wield the two crossbows happens to be pretty good at the crossbow. She has an 18 DEX, one expert crossbow and one magical crossbow +1. Plus, being a 5th level rogue with a further +2 BtH seems like it's going to make this combo ROCKIN'.

~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 6:44 am

Well, you know when we played at Con on the Cob that my dwarf Tubbard Bellyhog (or whatever his name was...) did this exact thing. At that time, it was ruled to use the normal off-hand penalties. Had I been the Castle Keeper, I'd have allowed it, as well, but I may have also imposed the non-proficient penalty for the combination... but, if we break down the math, it's not really that impressive for the rogue.

-3 / 6 base.

Dex is +3 so that cuts it to +0 / -3

Magical / Expert gives +1. That puts to +1 / -2.

BtH takes us to +3 / +0.

Granted, it's two attacks, so low AC foes will take more damage more often not, but at 5th level, many foes will have a 16-20 AC (or they would in my games.) So the odds of hitting, even with two attacks, is pretty crappy... compared to the +6 the rogue could get using one attack. It could get really nasty with a back attack... but, let's ignore that situation for now.

Eventually, the tactic will be very, very good (at high levels when AC tends to become pretty static and higher magical bonuses come into play), so I'd say to go with the non-prof penalty on top, to allow it, but dissuade it.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 6:46 am

Serl covers it better than I would have.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Rigon · Post by **Rigon** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:09 pm

serleran wrote:
Well, you know when we played at Con on the Cob that my dwarf Tubbard Bellyhog (or whatever his name was...) did this exact thing. At that time, it was ruled to use the normal off-hand penalties. Had I been the Castle Keeper, I'd have allowed it, as well, but I may have also imposed the non-proficient penalty for the combination... but, if we break down the math, it's not really that impressive for the rogue.

-3 / 6 base.

Dex is +3 so that cuts it to +0 / -3

Magical / Expert gives +1. That puts to +1 / -2.

BtH takes us to +3 / +0.

Granted, it's two attacks, so low AC foes will take more damage more often not, but at 5th level, many foes will have a 16-20 AC (or they would in my games.) So the odds of hitting, even with two attacks, is pretty crappy... compared to the +6 the rogue could get using one attack. It could get really nasty with a back attack... but, let's ignore that situation for now.

Eventually, the tactic will be very, very good (at high levels when AC tends to become pretty static and higher magical bonuses come into play), so I'd say to go with the non-prof penalty on top, to allow it, but dissuade it.

Yep.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:33 pm

I wouldn't allow it all unless the player can document the manufacture of pistol crossbows, since all medieval crossbows were two-handed.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

seskis281 · Post by **seskis281** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:45 pm

I handle these sorts of wants in two ways now consistently with my house rules -

1st Path - Using SIEGE to make a type of action part of a character "repertoire" - use an appropriate ability score check to even try the action each time to begin - i.e. letting the character start to attempt the move (ok, DEX check at CL I determine to take the 2 shots) - if pass the check, they take the shots at the penalties above. They have to keep doing the SIEGE checks until they've succeeded enough (my call) to say "ok, part of your character repertoire now."

The other thing I am doing is using "adjuncts" at various levels (all classes start at 3rd level, but then advance differently) which allows players to customize a bit (similar to feats but more character specific), so a character might choose this concept as an adjunct.

PS - And having the idea of "hand-held" cross-bows doesn't bother me - anymore than some shooting a magical ball of energy at somone - heh, it is "fantasy" after all
_________________
John "Sir Seskis" Wright

Ilshara: Lands of Exile:
http://johnwright281.tripod.com/

High Squire of the C&C Society
www.cncsociety.org

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:17 pm

The crossbows that the rogue is using is a light crossbow, not even a hand crossbow. Since C&C is not specific on whether or not a light crossbow is one-handed, she uses it one handed, during the John Woo initial attack. It stands to reason that all but the hand crossbow are two-handed, but this is not really the case in this situation because the plan is to only use the 2 attacks during the first round of combat, since reloading would obviously use two-hands. Couple all of this with the rogue's unending ambition to find (and use) magical bolts or more magical crossbows.

Serl - yeah, I remember that dwarf. That is the reason I called this the John Woo C&C thread.
The campaign we are playing in is a city campaign. Even at 5th level, the AC of the opponents has been pretty flat ranging, almost always from 10-16 it seems. Matter of fact I can't even remember 1 opponent who had a very high AC. This makes the two handed situation irritating. Perhaps I'm overreacting.

And make no mistake about it, the rogue tries to make every use of the two crossbows in rear and flanking attacks whenever possible (since rear and flank attacks do not specify close-quarters weapon attacks). Yet another thing that seems irritating.

~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Rigon · Post by **Rigon** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:44 pm

The reason I allowed Serl's dwarf to use two crossbows at the same time was for the fun of it. I was running a single adventure and it was a fun idea. That being said, I think I also ruled that it took a full round to reload both crossbows. So he could fire both in the same round and then would have to spend the next round reloading both and fire in the thrid round or he could reload and fire one in the second round.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Sir Osis of Liver · Post by **Sir Osis of Liver** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:18 pm

Rigon wrote:
The reason I allowed Serl's dwarf to use two crossbows at the same time was for the fun of it. I was running a single adventure and it was a fun idea. That being said, I think I also ruled that it took a full round to reload both crossbows. So he could fire both in the same round and then would have to spend the next round reloading both and fire in the thrid round or he could reload and fire one in the second round.

R-

The reloading becomes an issue. While I like serl's idea of adding the extra penalty, I would also come down on the person by making reloading the two crossbows a full round action, i.e. they're only getting to attack every other round. There's no way anybody, even in a fantasy setting, could fire and reload two light crossbows that quickly.

Go0gleplex · Post by **Go0gleplex** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:16 pm

I'd say more like two rounds to reload the buggers unless they're light crossbows. The larger, heavier crossbows would need a goat's foot or crank to pull the string back while steppingin in the stirrup to keep the bow from snapping back into their face. All of that takes time and considerable effort...
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

Ace of Swords · Post by **Ace of Swords** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:30 pm

Is there law in this city?

guys walking around with 2 crossbows tend to attract law enforcement attention.

For that matter guys walking around with one crossbow will draw attention.

If the idea is so sucessful....

Others will copy it, or try to neutralise it.

I can see villians talking

Mook1 "Hey that one guy always has 2 crossbows , lets try and break one when he storms in."

Mook2 "Good call, also i got 2 crossbows so i will give him a taste of his own medicine."

Mook3 "When he shows up i will run alert the watch that he is carrying war arms in the city so he gets arrested."

my 2 cents any way.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:45 pm

Well the premise is that the crossbows are cocked and loaded. So I think Serl covers it nicely.

However, as someone pointed out, Crossbows are meant to be shot using both hands, so adding a further penalty, on top of the two handed weapon rules, is not uncalled for. In fact I would say is even mandatory.

Which I think is why Serl mentioned also adding the non proficiency penalty, which I think is -4, or at least is -4 in one of the editions of D&D.

So I think all of that will give a sufficient "penalty" to it, along with needing at least one full round to reload light crossbows, and substantially longer for heavy crossbows, that it will not become abusive.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Hrolfgar · Post by **Hrolfgar** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:14 pm

Maybe a Strength or Dexterity check should be made to properly aim the crossbows.

If the check is failed apply an additional penalty.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:27 pm

Ace of Swords wrote:
Is there law in this city?

In the Free City of Greyhawk, particularly in the Old City away from the Procesional, there are certain places that city guard only very reluctantly travel.
~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Sir Osis of Liver · Post by **Sir Osis of Liver** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:38 pm

Something else that needs to be addressed here is what the crossbows are made of. If you're talking about John Woo, I'm guessing that those were made from modern composites that would make them lighter. Medieval-era crossbows were made of wood and steel. There's no reason, in my opinion, why the character shouldn't either have a STR minimum to be able to even try it, or else, as suggested above, require a STR Siege check to be able to do it. Don't roll a 1.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:42 pm

Sir Osis of Liver wrote:
Something else that needs to be addressed here is what the crossbows are made of. If you're talking about John Woo, I'm guessing that those were made from modern composites that would make them lighter. Medieval-era crossbows were made of wood and steel. There's no reason, in my opinion, why the character shouldn't either have a STR minimum to be able to even try it, or else, as suggested above, require a STR Siege check to be able to do it. Don't roll a 1.

Yep. Light crossbows probably weigh around 8 pounds, and heavy close to 12 pounds, it doesn't sound like much, but try holding a 8 lbs dumb bell at arms length, and steady. Not easy.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Sir Osis of Liver · Post by **Sir Osis of Liver** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:45 pm

Treebore wrote:
Yep. Light crossbows probably weigh around 8 pounds, and heavy close to 12 pounds, it doesn't sound like much, but try holding a 8 lbs dumb bell at arms length, and steady. Not easy.

According to the PHB, the numbers are 6 and 9.

I would think that those are somewhat lowball estimates, but not being an expert on Medieval weapon construction, I can't be sure. I wonder if there's a blurb on them in Castellan's guide....

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:25 pm

Sir Osis of Liver wrote:
According to the PHB, the numbers are 6 and 9.

I would think that those are somewhat lowball estimates, but not being an expert on Medieval weapon construction, I can't be sure. I wonder if there's a blurb on them in Castellan's guide....

Probably, plus Wulfgarn has studied real world ancient weapons as well, so maybe he'll chime in. Even so, 6 LBS, again held steady for good aim, will not be easy for lower strengths. I can see a 14 STR and above doing light crossbows easy enough, for one round, and 16+ handling Heavy, for one round, easily enough.

By one round, I mean one round in a row, if they need to hold it steady for more than one round, I can see STR checks becoming necessary even for those STR's, and getting harder each successive round.

I can see Fighters specialized in such weapons being able to ignore such checks for 1 round equal to their level, due to training. IE repeatedly holding crossbows steady at arms length round after round after round to build up the STR in their arms to do so.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:19 am

Instead of calling for a roll prior to allowing an action, one can simplify it and state it is simply impossible without certain preconditions such as Strength minimum of X, Dexterity of Y, and / or a Prime requisite. C&C is about allowing cinematic action, high drama and lots of fantasy... but the Castle Keeper has ultimate control on how to best replicate that, if it is desire. There is, by no means, any given automatic chance of any action being successful... that is the rule, too, since C&C does not care about natural 20so ro natural 1s -- sometimes, regardless of what you have going for you, the outcome is still bad.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:21 am

When this came up in my game, the ruling I made at the time was this:

Two-weapon fighting penalties applied.

While a light crossbow is fireable with one hand, it was designed for two. So, the bulky, clumsy deal of it gave a further penalty of -4 BUT that penalty could be offset as follows:

Strength prime reduced the -4 penalty to -2.

Wisdom prime could shave 2 off the penalty as well. This operates under the assumption that the dude is instinct shooting, not really able to have the time to aim both crossbows.

So, a person with both str and wis prime would eliminate the additional -4 penalty and only operate under the two weapon fighting penalty.

Aneoth of Ironwood · Post by **Aneoth of Ironwood** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:40 pm

Agree with much of what was stated above.

In most cases I would not allow it but if the PC was an expert with the weapon and practiced two separate one-handed crossbow shots, then yes.

Otherwise I would penalize the PCs shots so much that it would not be worth even trying.

IMO it is not the same as using a long sword in each hand or a long sword in one hand and a dagger (or short sword) in the other

A crossbow is a Two-handed weapon, much like a two handed sword, or a HUGE axe, or a HUGE Hammer, and not just because it takes two hands to c.o.c.k. (I was censored , so I added the dots) and re-load it either.

I would certainly allow a PC to use two so-called handheld (TINY) crossbows at once.

I might also (Given the right circumstances) allow firing two crossbows at the same time too.

Even heavy crossbows.... (Not a ballista though)

Have any of you ever fired a crossbow?

I have an Australian light crossbow in my collection and even though I have practiced with it a bit, I am no expert with it and there is no way I could use it one-handed well enough to hit a mountain without some sort of bracing

In other words, I would need to be resting it on a stable structure to help my aim, such as while sitting in a low posture (weapon resting on a knee), low hanging branch of a tree, a TRAINED horses back (on the saddle), a boulder, a windowsill, a low wall, or something similar.

However; I suspect there are some folks who could do it and so (as I said above) I would allow it in the right circumstances.

I would make the penalties severe though.

Go0gleplex · Post by **Go0gleplex** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:00 pm

Aneoth has a point. Without modifying the crossbow, such as adding a pistol-grip type of affair or lengthening the butt to be able to fit under an armpit, it would be next to impossible to hold with one hand to aim it anywhere but the ground without something else holding it up.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

seskis281 · Post by **seskis281** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:16 pm

The idea of "modifying" and creating hand-crossbows for such a thing would be one of the areas where, when a player is saying "I want to do this..." I would make it a quest, where they are going to have to use money and experience, and seek out weapons makers to help - plus the finding of magic perhaps.... so it would take any number of levels and time campaigning to produce resources, contacts, etc. to "customize" weapons this way, but if that's where they want to put their hard-gained treasures.....

Needless to say, I don't like to necessarily be constrained by the historical limitations.... right now the "Aihrdian" ranger likes to pull his crossbow and intimidate "Stop! In the name of justice!" but since he's at an early level it's a straight matter of pulling out his single light crossbow and aiming, and of course reloading is normal at this time. But he has indicated he wants to make more adaptive crossbow weapons later....

I think the individual feel, flavor and "world" environs have to play a part in what you want to allow or not allow.... then just adapt and use the rules with best CK judgement for the individual, the specific game and group.

I, for instance, routinely let my players try to roll a high dex check to be able to switch out melee to ranged weapons, or other items -- real high means they don't forfeit the round for the switch alone, but it's a challenge of course.

_________________
John "Sir Seskis" Wright

Ilshara: Lands of Exile:
http://johnwright281.tripod.com/

High Squire of the C&C Society
www.cncsociety.org

commanderFuron · Post by **commanderFuron** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:18 pm

I don't think you should nerf it just because the player wants to take advantage of the numbers. But I do think using 2 light crossbows would be more difficult than 2 melee weapons. like -6/-6 because it is just as hard to aim and fire in either hand.

If it's like John Woo, it should just miss automatically and blind some one in the process. Then one of the other players should discover they have a twin.

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:28 pm

And from a strictly C&C standpoint, the Castellan's Guide does list the light crossbow as 1 or 2 handed.

Arazmus · Post by **Arazmus** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:53 pm

It would be a might difficult to aim both light crossbows at one human-sized target...even light crossbows are shoulder arms and the limbs on crossbows make having two side-by-side to aim at one target pretty messy. -5/ -10 plus a strength check is not out of line. I just went and grabbed my crossbow (a light unit with a 35# draw that I can belly-c**k {dear god that sounds dirty} ) and it weighs 6 pounds 4 ounces loaded, it's not the weight that makes it difficult to fire accurately one-handed, it's the balance, the weapon is made to fire with even one finger supporting the front grip. Tucking one under each armpit to compensate for this and you cannot draw a bead as you cannot get it to your eye, and this creates paralax view problems.

This all being said, if you want your campaign over the top and fun, don't sweat it, it's a first round of non-surprise combat that the thief can do about 13 points of damage max right?

Also if you go with pistol crossbows a lot of the objections disappear and the damage cap goes way down too.
_________________
I'll tell you what I do like though: a killer, a dyed-in-the-wool killer. Cold blooded, clean, methodical and thorough. ~Zorg

seskis281 · Post by **seskis281** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 6:05 pm

Yes, that's one thing for sure - customization as I described would allow for a lot of cool things - heh, a high level PC might even get two "hand-held" models that he/she pays for magical enhancement to allow for "magical reloading," - something that would cost enormous sums plus likely involve finding a high enough magic user who would also put the PC through a difficult quest to do, but base damage is going to be slighter even then for each....

As I said, it's a matter of character "flavor" they choose to put endeavors into for my games - I routinely trounce any players merely wanting to "buff" their characters into indestructable, badasses.

Plus if one does acquire such things at high levels, my group has seen a Disjunction spell up close and personal before....

_________________
John "Sir Seskis" Wright

Ilshara: Lands of Exile:
http://johnwright281.tripod.com/

High Squire of the C&C Society
www.cncsociety.org

double-c · Post by **double-c** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 6:18 pm

seskis281 wrote:
1st Path - Using SIEGE to make a type of action part of a character "repertoire" - use an appropriate ability score check to even try the action each time to begin - i.e. letting the character start to attempt the move (ok, DEX check at CL I determine to take the 2 shots) - if pass the check, they take the shots at the penalties above. They have to keep doing the SIEGE checks until they've succeeded enough (my call) to say "ok, part of your character repertoire now."

This is brilliant houseruling to show character development!

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon Feb 15, 2010 7:46 pm

double-c wrote:
This is brilliant houseruling to show character development!

Yes, yes it is. Extremely brilliant.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Troll Lord Games

John Woo Castles & Crusades

John Woo Castles & Crusades

Problems...maybe not.