IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Bows?, Is there errata?
Lord Ben
post Mar 17 2008, 02:05 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 600
Joined: 31-August 05
Member No.: 7,659



Is Str+2 damage correct for bows? Any reason they do so much more damage than anything else?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post Mar 17 2008, 02:09 AM
Post #2


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



Nope, no errata. There clearly has to be some limit though. There can't be a strength 99 bow that does DV 101 for instance. It's really just up to the GM to say "sorry, they don't make bows that big" if players are getting out of hand (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Mar 17 2008, 02:13 AM
Post #3


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,963
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



QUOTE (Larme @ Mar 17 2008, 10:09 AM) *
Nope, no errata. There clearly has to be some limit though. There can't be a strength 99 bow that does DV 101 for instance. It's really just up to the GM to say "sorry, they don't make bows that big" if players are getting out of hand (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Yes, there is a limit. If you can pull it, someone can make it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lord Ben
post Mar 17 2008, 02:16 AM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 600
Joined: 31-August 05
Member No.: 7,659



Why str+2 instead of (str/2)+2 like most other weapons?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Straight Razor
post Mar 17 2008, 02:25 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 332
Joined: 19-September 05
From: Nashville, Tn
Member No.: 7,761



str+2 sounds good to me. try shooting a bow at some coffee cans full of sand. an arrow will go threw more that a hand gun.

not to mention the nature of the arrow head. 2" wide razor blades going threw you will do mere damage that a 1/4" wide ball

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lord Ben
post Mar 17 2008, 02:29 AM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 600
Joined: 31-August 05
Member No.: 7,659



Well, I'm talking about game mechanics. Not RL physics.

Anyhow, I've punched holes through the shoulderblades of a bear at 250 yards with a rifle. And I've bounced arrows off shoulder blades at 15 yards. So it's more complex than game mechanics should try to emulate. You can shove a stick through a haybale, but a fired arrow will lodge inside it. That doesn't mean sticks should do strx2.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Straight Razor
post Mar 17 2008, 02:36 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 332
Joined: 19-September 05
From: Nashville, Tn
Member No.: 7,761



Very good points. Arrows do not have the kinetic mass that a bullet dose. I am not familiar with 4th at all. so i can't really comment much on the damage coding for it.
+2M is the 3r code for it, so they most likely just ported it over.
+2 M always sounded good to me. for what it's worth

"And I've bounced arrows off shoulder blades at 15 yards." i bet that was a bad day..
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Slymoon
post Mar 17 2008, 03:43 AM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 201
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 862



Agreed Lord Ben,
I've been on the same argument now and then about it as well. Even as far as to pull in inertia and energy.

basically the way the damage is written is such that a bow pulled by the worlds strongest natural man. ie strength 6 will carry nearly as much energy as a 600 nitro express; roughly 7,500 ft/lbs.
Insanity!

Nevermind that arrow speeds are a result of material reflex speed not draw strength.

Even proven in several old threads.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...=20745&st=0

There are other threads that do it more justice.

My thoughts? are either to cap the damage and/or do the standard str/2 damage rating.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Mar 17 2008, 04:54 AM
Post #9


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,554
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



I just leave it be. Bows don't have autofire, so they won't outdo an HMG loading APDS any time soon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ed_209a
post Mar 17 2008, 12:14 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 938
Joined: 19-February 03
Member No.: 4,128



To me, that is like statting a .22 holdout pistol at 8P, and saying it's OK because it takes 2 hours to reload.

There is a difference between "Won't destroy your game" and "OK".

My case for Str/2+X is that bows are the only muscle powered weapon in the game that do Str+X damage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raizer
post Mar 17 2008, 12:48 PM
Post #11


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 7-July 02
From: NY
Member No.: 2,942



I've houseruled in my campaign that Bows do (STR/2)+3 Damage. This has worked very well and balances the higher strength possibilities.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post Mar 17 2008, 12:50 PM
Post #12


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



Given the way other projectile weapons work, I think that Str+2 was really a mistake. It clearly wasn't a typo because they repeated it in Arsenal and haven't done an errata. But if you have a str 15 bow, it does 17P... Technically, if you shot someone with that, they should EXPLODE. But people can't explode from bow shots. You can be a strong motherfucker, but no matter how strong you are I don't think your arrows can make a mockery out of a high velocity explosive projectile (assault cannon round). Sure, arrows have less penetrative power, but the real money stat in this game is DV. DV10 -5AP requires 35 soak dice to absorb, while DV17 requires 51.

Now, I agree with what's been said earlier -- it's just single shot, so it's not going to totally break the game. The question is: do you want a bow to destroy armored cars or not in your game? If not, I think STR/2+2, or maybe +3 is reasonable. That way a bow fired from a strong person (str6) will have 5-6 DV, which is comparable to a gun, which is pretty reasonable for how much damage a bow can do to you in real life. And a superhuman level bow with strength req 16 would do 10-11P, which is still a hell of a lot. More than most sniper rifles...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
swirler
post Mar 17 2008, 02:43 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 438
Joined: 21-September 07
From: Houston
Member No.: 13,369



many high powered weapons (depending on ammo do not explode but "blow through". I'm not saying this is exactly "it" or whatever but maybe think of it this way. The more 'focused force' behind an arrow, (which is part of the deal with compound bows, is to make the push come through evenly instead of an explosion of thrust which could make it veer wildly) they are moving faster, and being razorsharp they shoot through the body, the way some rifles do. The arrow rips through doing damage as it leaves the body, you now have open entry and exit wounds. I can't remember off hand but do some arrows spin when they fly? I forget.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post Mar 17 2008, 03:32 PM
Post #14


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



Yeah, arrows generally spin with they fly. I think they might also flex longitudinally, but I forget.

Regardless, DV17 just doesn't make sense. An Ex Explosive round from a Barret would make a person's head go "pop!" like a ripe watermelon. You'd be hard pressed to find what was left of their skull. How on gawd's green earth could an arrow do MORE than that? Sure an arrow fired from a trollbow should be able to rip someone open, but using a str/2 mechanic, it totally would. Arrows may do more damage than guns in some cases, less in other cases, but I think "about the same" is about right for game balance purposes. I don't think there's any cogent argument that arrows, from a realism point of view, ought to blow guns out of the water.

Now, I'm the last person to advocate for realism in the rules, but I have my limits. Anti-tank arrows (which don't even have self sharpening depleted uranium tips or anything) is just beyond the pale.

I'm pretty sure I've advocated the opposite position before, saying essentially "It's a worse rate of fire than single shot, so no big deal." I still think that's a relevant point for game balance terms; I'm not trying to say that bows are too powerful or too broken, but on reconsideration they just make me scratch my head and go "wtf?"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
crash2029
post Mar 17 2008, 07:23 PM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 702
Joined: 20-November 06
From: The seemingly unknown area of land between Seattle and Idaho.
Member No.: 9,910



On a similar note I noticed that injection arrows are almost useless. For an injection arrow to "inject" it has to damage. Fine. It also uses the same damage as the bow. Not fine. Most characters who would use injection arrows are some kind of bow specialist, or at least rather good with them. So what good is the injection if the mechanism that it requires to work kills the target in one hit. In my experience most of the useful toxins that one would load into an injection arrow would be wasted if the arrow took the target down before the toxin had a chance to kick in.

And even though I am a big Green Arrow fan I still believe bows are overpowered. Even G.A. cannot fire a regular arrow through the engine of a car. After reading as many G.A. books as I have I think str/2+2 or str/2+3 is an appropriate damage code. I realize comics are not the most realistic source for weapon baselines but neither is Shadowrun. If your troll REALLY wants to take out cars with his bow have him fire specially made tungsten arrows or explosive arrows or something.

Just my 0.02 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Slymoon
post Mar 17 2008, 07:35 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 201
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 862



QUOTE (Ed_209a @ Mar 17 2008, 06:14 AM) *
To me, that is like statting a .22 holdout pistol at 8P, and saying it's OK because it takes 2 hours to reload.

There is a difference between "Won't destroy your game" and "OK".

My case for Str/2+X is that bows are the only muscle powered weapon in the game that do Str+X damage.



Exactly.

As I have said before, in old SR everything was base strength as the power. Moving to SR4 every strength based weapon underwent the str/2 mechanic Except the bow. Odd doncha' think.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Mar 17 2008, 08:31 PM
Post #17


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,554
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



If you're having issues with the concept of the arrows blowing out tanks, just link arrow cost to bow strength. 200 nuyen for a self-sharpening depleted whateverium arrow should be entertaining. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

In all honesty, if I'd ever had a bow cause an actual problem in-game, I'd be looking at modifying them. But when you compare the point and ability cost of making a bowman with damage output in the ranges people are worrying about to the point and ability cost of, say, teaching someone to use an AV Rocket Launcher, it's never really been an issue.

Bows aren't really "muscle powered" the same way that a melee weapon is. They're spring powered, and that spring is loaded up by applying muscle to it. When you start figuring in compound bows with pulleys, materials science in 2070, and all that other good stuff, arguing that it should use the same curve as a thrown knife for figuring out how much damage it does seems a bit off.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nightwalker450
post Mar 17 2008, 08:45 PM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 698
Joined: 26-October 06
From: Iowa, United States
Member No.: 9,720



QUOTE (Shrike30 @ Mar 17 2008, 03:31 PM) *
Bows aren't really "muscle powered" the same way that a melee weapon is. They're spring powered, and that spring is loaded up by applying muscle to it. When you start figuring in compound bows with pulleys, materials science in 2070, and all that other good stuff, arguing that it should use the same curve as a thrown knife for figuring out how much damage it does seems a bit off.


You beat me to this, but I was going to mention that as well. The bow is a machine more than a sword or dagger. There's alot more power coming out of it than has to be put into it, everything on a sword or club is just the power you put into it (+/- effects of gravity/wind resistance). A bow is springs and pullies and tension which help to control the force put into it. Then there is the point of force a sword or club spreads out the damage over the length of the weapon, and arrow focuses it all into the point.

For that point (focused power), I'd see bows better off doing STR DV with -2 AP, they're still just as likely to puncture vehicles, but they are (slightly) less likely to blow up on impact. Reduces the dice necessary to resist the damage by 4.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post Mar 17 2008, 09:05 PM
Post #19


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



QUOTE (Shrike30 @ Mar 17 2008, 03:31 PM) *
In all honesty, if I'd ever had a bow cause an actual problem in-game, I'd be looking at modifying them. But when you compare the point and ability cost of making a bowman with damage output in the ranges people are worrying about to the point and ability cost of, say, teaching someone to use an AV Rocket Launcher, it's never really been an issue.


That's a good point. IMHO though, nobody is ever going to bother with a bow unless they're an uber strong character planning to weild a rating 12+ bow. So the minute anyone starts looking at bows is the minute the problem will crop up. I submit that it is highly highly unlikely that someone with normal strength will decide to make bows their primary weapon (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

QUOTE
Bows aren't really "muscle powered" the same way that a melee weapon is. They're spring powered, and that spring is loaded up by applying muscle to it. When you start figuring in compound bows with pulleys, materials science in 2070, and all that other good stuff, arguing that it should use the same curve as a thrown knife for figuring out how much damage it does seems a bit off.


I think you're right, insofar as justifying why bows are not str/2. Though I think it's kinda dumb how a compound bow has the same str:damage ratio as a traditional wooden bow. The compound is definitely much more of a machine than a longbow, it requires less arm strength for more punch. Regardless, I am not someone who thinks rule symmetry is important. Some people seem to follow the non sequitur that if one thing works like x, so should another related thing. That is sometimes true, but it really doesn't follow that just because melee and throwing weapons are str/2, so are bows.

The only reason why bows should do STR/2 IMO is because it would bring their power more in line with what's sane.

If you keep them as STR+X, I would simply limit the rating. There is a point where you can't get limbs that are both strong enough and flexible enough to provide the power you want but still be bendable enough to draw back. There is also an issue with a string that is strong enough, yet thin enough to allow a smooth pullback and release. And the wheels... there's probably a thing with them too >.> I would just set the rating at a limit of 10. That would leave bows very powerful, but not quite as nuts. My justification would be that the materials do not exist to create a bow with a higher rating.

I like the STR/2 + 3 idea better though. It feels less like bullshit (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Slymoon
post Mar 17 2008, 09:33 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 201
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 862



True, you are not actually pushing the arrow. You are infact flexing a material whos reflex action/ speed launches the arrow. That material reflex speed is what causes the velocity or the arrow, that with the grain weight of the arrow = energy. Now the strength of the pull affects the weight that can be pushed, not the speed.

I just ran a calculation based on an assumption the the PJSS Elephant rifle is roughly equal to the current: 900 grain, 600 Nitro Express pushing 7,700 ft, lbs of energy.

Based on modern materials and velocities in order to equal the energy of the above piece you would have to launch a 38,538 grain arrow (roughly 5.5 lbs) at 300 ft per second. A 8500% increase in arrow weight from the below 'standard' arrow.

Considering that modern hunting arrows are around 450 grains roughly 0.064 lbs you can see the insane weight difference.

If you want to throw future tech in there and say they have managed to create a material that increases reflex speed by 50% (over fiberglass/ carbon fiber i believe, though I could be wrong). Launching missles at 450 feet per second. The arrow would still run about 17,127 grains (roughly 2.45 lbs) each or 3800% increase in arrow weight.


Now the numbers can obviously prove what is required, velocity and mass of the projectile. Again however this is a relatively slow projectile it will not cause the massive damage of a high velocity bullet.

As I posted in another thread, a 30 lb bow will launch an arrow clean through a deer. 70 lbs will just push it through with more energy left. Or rather allows for less perfect releases to perform since they have more 'spare' energy to lose.


Quick thread if you want to crunch numbers yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_energy




EDIT:
Forgot to add, the PJSS is 9dv? A natural human can reach 8DV with a bow. 9DV if you give him a uber super duper strength attribute.

That isnt counting the races that are stronger naturally, dont forget the Orc or Dwarf as well as the troll.
And If I could find the energy conversion for 17DV you can imagine the weight of the arrow...roughly 17/9=1.88x5.5 lbs = 10.34 lb projectile... yup, 2 sacks of sugar.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GryMor
post Mar 17 2008, 10:15 PM
Post #21


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 91
Joined: 24-September 07
Member No.: 13,404



Well, we have been referring to our Troll Archer Adept's 'Arrows' as meter long shafts of sharpened steel... Say 1cm radius, and a mid density steel (8 gm/cm^3), gives 2.5kg...

Gah, why can't you use SI units like a sane person.... I guess I'll work out target energy and required material properties later, though, something is telling me that you may be wrong on required material properties, as it should be possible to arrange the pulleys as a velocity multiplier.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Slymoon
post Mar 17 2008, 10:23 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 201
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 862



QUOTE (crash2029 @ Mar 17 2008, 01:23 PM) *
And even though I am a big Green Arrow fan I still believe bows are overpowered. Even G.A. cannot fire a regular arrow through the engine of a car. After reading as many G.A. books as I have I think str/2+2 or str/2+3 is an appropriate damage code. I realize comics are not the most realistic source for weapon baselines but neither is Shadowrun. If your troll REALLY wants to take out cars with his bow have him fire specially made tungsten arrows or explosive arrows or something.

Just my 0.02 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)



I had a G.A. thought, if this bit-o-logic works like I originally thought.
Given G.A. can fashion an arrow that has zero drag and wind resistance but manages to dump all its energy onto your body at one time. All of it at the same time... all over the front side of you.

Give G.A. can pull and fire a 17DV bow (G.A. is a strong troll in this case I suppose).

Based on those numbers I gave above, the 10.34 lb arrow flying at 300 fps would dump 14,476 ft-lbs of energy on you. Lets say you are *roughly* 6'x2' of surface on one side. thats 12 sq.ft.

If the above is all true, then you would experience 1,206 lbs of force per each frontal square foot you were hit. I am not quite sure what that would do exactly, but I imagine it would be similiar to either a Permenant Turn to Goo spell or a Gallagher watermelon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Slymoon
post Mar 17 2008, 10:26 PM
Post #23


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 201
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 862



QUOTE (GryMor @ Mar 17 2008, 04:15 PM) *
Well, we have been referring to our Troll Archer Adept's 'Arrows' as meter long shafts of sharpened steel... Say 1cm radius, and a mid density stell (8 gm/cm^3), gives 2.5kg...

Gah, why can't you use SI units like a sane person.... I guess I'll work out target energy and required material properties later, though, something is telling me that you may be wrong on required material properties, as it should be possible to arrange the pulleys as a velocity multiplier.



heheh SI!

I'm an Architect, in the USA its all about Foot and Inches or Decimal Feet! Though I did have the option to take my exams in SI. I don't think I could get the hang of a 3' door being 914.4 mm. o_O

It could be regarding the velocity multiplier, but alas until we actually have someone in the bow manufacture/ engineering industry we may never know exactly what really makes sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rasumichin
post Mar 17 2008, 10:49 PM
Post #24


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,300
Joined: 6-February 08
From: Cologne, Germany
Member No.: 15,648



QUOTE (Lord Ben @ Mar 17 2008, 03:05 AM) *
Any reason they do so much more damage than anything else?


Rambo 3.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lord Ben
post Mar 17 2008, 10:58 PM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 600
Joined: 31-August 05
Member No.: 7,659



QUOTE (Rasumichin @ Mar 17 2008, 05:49 PM) *
Rambo 3.


Awesome, good enough for me!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st July 2014 - 07:27 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.