Bows vs Crossbows, Archers vs Fighters, melee vs ranged, questions answered
nptitim
Member Posts: 111
I decided to do a little experiment with the black pits to contrast the usefulness of some classes and weapons. The point was to see if there were noticeable differences between crossbows and long bows; the Archer kit vs a fighter specializing in bows; two-handed swords vs halberds, and who kills more, hand to hand fighters vs ranged weapons. I'll give a quick summary and then if you want the details read on.
In short crossbows suck ass and can't hold their own to bows. There doesn't appear to be a big difference between the Archer Kit and Fighters, my fighters were slightly better at lower levels and the archer kit gained strength at higher levels. There doesn't appear to be a big difference halberds and two-handed swords. Hand to hand fighters kill more than ranged weapon specialists in my experience (although they die more often as well).
The details: I created a party of 6 members as follows:
1 half orc beserker using a 2 handed sword
1 half orc beserker using a halberd
They had the same stats which were 19 str, 18 dex, 19 con
1 elf archer specializing in long bows
1 elf archer specializing in crossbows
1 elf fighter specializing in long bows
1 elf fighter specializing in crossbows
They had the same stats which which were 18/01-49 str, 19 dex, 17 con
We went through the black pits, everyone used the same equipment. I upgraded to +1 weapons/arrows when appropriate and then +2 after that. Of note is there is no +2 crossbow in the Pits although I think there is a good crossbow in the game but I seriously doubt it would offset the crappiness of crossbows in general.
I didn't buff or pimp anybody out, all fighters wore splint mail and then on round 10 I upgraded the melee fighters to full plate. No magic defenses and potions were used only if I failed in a fight the first time which happened 2 times I think. I started upgrading arrows for the archers when possible and also upgrading bolts although it is worth noting that the options aren't exactly the same for bows and crossbows in that respect.
Every 2 rounds of the Pits I keep track of the %'s of kills, here is a chart that outlines how it went
2-handed sword/Halberd/Archer Bow/Archer Xbow/Fighter Bow/Fighter XBow
Rd 2___41%________11% ______11%_______5%__________17%_________11%
Rd 4___25%________12% ______16%_______12%_________22%_________9%
Rd 6___26%________17% ______17%_______9%__________19%_________9%
Rd 8___23%________17% ______17%_______7%__________19%_________13%
Rd 10__21%________22% ______17%_______9%__________18%_________10%
Rd 12__22%________21% ______20%_______9%__________17%_________9%
Rd 14__22%________24% ______19%_______10%_________15%_________8%
I think the 2 handed sword was so skewed in the first part because that was my first player and the initial guys are so wimpy he just killed most of them right off. There was 1 round where I had to have all the bowmen use maces instead to take out the flesh golems.
As a side note this party was surprisingly effective, they handled the Pits just as well as 3 fighter, mage, mage/thief, cleric party I created and I had to use a lot more buffs to get through for that party
I think the melee fighters would have been even more dominant if I had dumped more money on them, I was spending most of the gold on arrows and such and I was more focused on the ranged attack for this go round. With some buffs the melee fighters become tough to beat.
So that was my experience, thought I would share in case anybody had similar questions as I did.
In short crossbows suck ass and can't hold their own to bows. There doesn't appear to be a big difference between the Archer Kit and Fighters, my fighters were slightly better at lower levels and the archer kit gained strength at higher levels. There doesn't appear to be a big difference halberds and two-handed swords. Hand to hand fighters kill more than ranged weapon specialists in my experience (although they die more often as well).
The details: I created a party of 6 members as follows:
1 half orc beserker using a 2 handed sword
1 half orc beserker using a halberd
They had the same stats which were 19 str, 18 dex, 19 con
1 elf archer specializing in long bows
1 elf archer specializing in crossbows
1 elf fighter specializing in long bows
1 elf fighter specializing in crossbows
They had the same stats which which were 18/01-49 str, 19 dex, 17 con
We went through the black pits, everyone used the same equipment. I upgraded to +1 weapons/arrows when appropriate and then +2 after that. Of note is there is no +2 crossbow in the Pits although I think there is a good crossbow in the game but I seriously doubt it would offset the crappiness of crossbows in general.
I didn't buff or pimp anybody out, all fighters wore splint mail and then on round 10 I upgraded the melee fighters to full plate. No magic defenses and potions were used only if I failed in a fight the first time which happened 2 times I think. I started upgrading arrows for the archers when possible and also upgrading bolts although it is worth noting that the options aren't exactly the same for bows and crossbows in that respect.
Every 2 rounds of the Pits I keep track of the %'s of kills, here is a chart that outlines how it went
2-handed sword/Halberd/Archer Bow/Archer Xbow/Fighter Bow/Fighter XBow
Rd 2___41%________11% ______11%_______5%__________17%_________11%
Rd 4___25%________12% ______16%_______12%_________22%_________9%
Rd 6___26%________17% ______17%_______9%__________19%_________9%
Rd 8___23%________17% ______17%_______7%__________19%_________13%
Rd 10__21%________22% ______17%_______9%__________18%_________10%
Rd 12__22%________21% ______20%_______9%__________17%_________9%
Rd 14__22%________24% ______19%_______10%_________15%_________8%
I think the 2 handed sword was so skewed in the first part because that was my first player and the initial guys are so wimpy he just killed most of them right off. There was 1 round where I had to have all the bowmen use maces instead to take out the flesh golems.
As a side note this party was surprisingly effective, they handled the Pits just as well as 3 fighter, mage, mage/thief, cleric party I created and I had to use a lot more buffs to get through for that party
I think the melee fighters would have been even more dominant if I had dumped more money on them, I was spending most of the gold on arrows and such and I was more focused on the ranged attack for this go round. With some buffs the melee fighters become tough to beat.
So that was my experience, thought I would share in case anybody had similar questions as I did.
5
Comments
Halberds have a 1 speed advantage at equal enhancement (9 vs 10 base), and the best halberd while strong (and when it's bug is fixed) is restricted to only a single attack. There's also more readily available 2hd swords through out the saga as well. Also Halberds deal piercing, while 2hd swords deal slashing. Piercing resistance/immunity is the most common after missile resistance, while slashing resistance tends to be much less common.
An archer is better, because an Archer can potentially GM in Bows/X-bows just like a fighter can, and gets a rather substantial to hit/damage bonus on top of that. The fighter will hit 9 a little sooner then the archer will (50k xp sooner) but it's ultimately moot since everything else is identical.
The bow always had a rate of fire advantage. And when the English Longbow arrived on the scene, it had just has much piercing power as a crossbow. Although it did require a lifetime of training and a more muscular build to use effectively.
Most games I played in, added a house rule allowing for mages and thieves to use crossbow precisely because it was designed as an idiot proof weapon.
But appropriately, in the hands of a trained fighter, a bow is a vastly better weapon.
Also, range. Slings actually had an effective range between shortbows and longbows.
Then there's space, although this isn't really modeled in D&D (that I'm aware). With shortbows you needed to be at least kneeling, preferably standing. Longbows required you to be standing. Crossbows could be fired from pretty much any position, including prone. Slings required not only standing, but also a fair amount of room in front of them, behind them and to a side in order to swing it.
Cost is handled fairly accurately; slings are dirt cheap and easy to make, with river stone ammo only being a little harder to get.
And damage. This depends on the ammo; we'll start with relatively smooth and round river stones. As ranged bludgeoning weapons, they're fairly unique, and in good hands they can both penetrate flesh and crush bones on impact. They can be compared favorably with bows, really.
As time advanced, though, more resourceful nations started creating biconical lead bullets. With the same size, 8+ times the density, a more regular shape and a tip, they were capable of far greater range, accuracy and damage. They also spun around the tip like a rifled bullet, which also helped.
And penetration (though this also isn't really modeled in D&D). Probably it's greatest failing other than ease of use, it's massive contact area meant it couldn't really do much against armor. The biconical lead bullets did far better than river stones, but still weren't that great.
As a final note, I'd like to mention that the sling is really a launcher; although river stones and lead bullets were the most common uses, it can and has been used for a wide variety of ammunition, including grenades.
Here's a link for reading on it (my primary, but not only, source of knowledge on slings)
http://www.chrisharrison.net/index.php/Research/Sling
Well-researched!
More detailed and accurate historical gaming is also an interest of mine. Have you checked out Matrix Games? They have some much more detailed ancient and medieval titles. And those can do the sorts of things D&D was never meant for. (Like mass combat and small distinctions between a variety of weapon and troop types).
X-Bows: 1d8 (+1 light, +2 Heavy) RoF: 1 light, 1/2 Heavy (yes it takes 2 rounds per shot)
Biting (poisons)
Polymorph (polymorphs)
Lightning (4d4, single target)
Paralytic (1d10 instead of 1d8, and stuns)
Bows: 1d6 (+0 short, +0 long, +1 composite) RoF: 2 all
Detonation (6d6 fireball AoE)
Biting (poisons)
Fire (1d2 fire)
Ice (1d2 cold)
Acid (1d3 acid)
Dispelling (dispels)
Piercing (+6 piercing damage)
lvl 1 Archer vs lvl 1 fighter, result = Identical stats and weapon picks for all levels, Same
Lvl 3 Archer vs lvl 3 fighter, result = Archer by +1 hit/+1 damage
lvl 6 Archer vs lvl 6 fighter, result = Archer by +2 hit/+2 damage
lvl 9 Archer vs lvl 9 fighter, result = Archer by +3 hit/+3 damage
This result continues to escalate till the xp cap.
34 Archer vs lvl 40 fighter, result = Archer by +9 hit/+9 damage
And yeah...ever played Stronghold Crusader and assaulted the enemy's keep with 800+ slingers?...yeah...it's about as fun to watch as it sounds.
Of course D&D implementation is not historically accurate... Halberd was relatively easier to produce, and train than zweihanders and was quite effective against cavalry troops... Whereas zweihander was much more expensive to produce and train but quite effective in melee against heavily armoured infantry... Many people think zweihander was used to swing and slash but it's actually far from the truth... The medieval armor, especially plate armor was too thick for even zweihander to damage the opponent... So zweihanders was actually used like polearm with one hand on the blade (actually zweihander frequently had grip in the middle of the blade) where each combatant was trying to outwit another through series of faint and manoeuvring, even using feet to take the opponent's balance off or trap opponent using their own arms and weapon and look for vulnerable spots in the armor like armpit or neck. It was kinda like mix between wrestling and UFC.
Like crossbow, bows and sling there is not much historical basis for various weapons and their stats in D&D let alone BG... But hey it's just game...
No matter how eloquent the theory, one must at some point look at the results
But yeah, on the whole, Longbows are much better.
And if you give Kivan a composite bow and the gaunts that give you +2 with ranged attacks, he will totally dominate. At level 6 he has something like a THACO of 6 and 5/3 rounds and +2 to base damage. So he hits everything multiple times per round.
You are fighting as a team, and your actions (get the archer to ping the mage so he can't get his spell off while the two-hander bull rushes his minions) can also skew the results.
Looking at the damage dealt per attack may be inaccurate as well as the two handed sword can over kill the target. (wasted damage)
A more accurate way to determine if there is a difference between long bows and cross bows and the different kits is to load up a multiplayer game with one Dummy PC with a set amount of HP (50) and AC (0 perferably with no modifiers and a helmet). Go into feedback (under options) and set your pause to after each round.
Attack your dummy PC and see how many rounds it takes to kill him with each weapon. Repeat a couple of times (to weed out luck) and see which one fairs better. You can then replace the the Dummy NPC with different armor or sheilds or even spell buffs to see, which weapons work better in different scenarios.
If one of your characters is a mage that casts a spell that reduces the HP of all enemies in the area to 1, and the other character is a fighter specialized in darts, you might find that the dart thrower has almost 100% of the kills. But that doesn't mean the dart thrower is more powerful.
I get what you're saying about the possibility that the calculations might be glitched, but your stats don't tell us anything at all about those calculations. It's just anecdotal information.
Assuming the math doesn't lie, what I'm saying is that the answers to the bows/crossbows/archers/fighters/melee/ranged questions SHOULD be a matter of running the numbers. Best case scenario of character/equipment X versus character/equipment Y. Best average damage of character/equipment X versus character/equipment Y. Other mitigating factors.
For example... Bows are better than Crossbows, but does that still hold true for the Light Crossbow of Speed that grants an extra attack per round? Compare it to either the Composite Long Bow+1 (3 damage/2 thac0), or the Long Bow of Marksmanship (2 damage/3 thac0), which are the best bows in the game.
How many attacks per round?
What sort of damage potential per attack?
What sort of damage potential per round?
What's going to do the most damage most often?
Those are the questions. If the thread is "...questions ANSWERED," then those are the questions for which we need to find answers.
Kivan and Longbow ROCKS the house.
But the Light Crossbow of speed is a fantastic weapon, especially with Bolts of Lightning.
Once you reach BG2 the arguement is more grey, Shortbows largely beat Longbows & Crossbows can be fantastic (Archer + Whirlwind). I've played through an Archer that switched between both, which worked like a charm.
But um yeah, bows in BG1 = good/old news.
That's why slashers tend to have the best damage/speed ratio.
And they are the best 2handed melee weapons (blunt damage ftw)
The default bows are mostly better than crossbows, but in BG1 it's hard to beat the Crossbow of Speed, with it's extra attack, and the Heavy Crossbow of Accuracy with +5 THAC0 is hard to miss with (great for a Bard to get the odd shot off with, can then resume singing without losing the song bonus)
Another factor is that currently in BG2 neither magic bows or magic arrows get the +x modifier for damage (only to hit), whereas magic crossbows get the +x damage (but not magic bolts). *Both* slings and bullets get the +x damage modifier. This may change with BG2EE, of course.
Also in BG2, or at least the later stages, the problem is with bows in general is finding magic ammo with a high enough +x to damage enemies immune to, say, +2 weapons. This is why the Gesen shortbow is one of the best ranged weapons in BG2, as it counts as a +4 weapon (unlimited ammo).
Shortbow does 1d6 damage - 2 APR
Longbow does 1d6 damage (but gets +1THAC0) - 2 APR
Composite bow does 1d6+2 damage (also gets +1THAC0) - 2 APR
Light Crossbow does 1d8 damage - 1 APR
Heavy Crossbow does 1d8+2 damage - 1 APR (not 1/2 APR as @ZanathKariashi said, unless I'm missing something?)
For magic ammo, you can get at least the 2 unlimited +1 things easily. Still it doesn't make sense why the best armor/weapon-smith in Athkatla can't even improve a simple quiver or case o' plenty...^^ (but BG-tweaks can and it does only make sense!)