One of the benefits of the krav maga (or varient) martial art styles is making ready weapon a free action instead of a simple action. This makes bow use very easy to get a double alpha strike in on your first attack.

You are sneaking in a facility and spot guards, you ready your bow, then duck out to shoot at them, you shoot (simple action) ready the bow (free action) and shoot again (simple action). For a strength 6 character, this would be two 8P attacks. For a troll bow monstrosity, it could be 2 18P attacks.

Anyway, heres another adept build I did, to try to optimize this. Lemme know of critiques or suggestions.

Funny, I had the same discussion this very week with one of my players. The conclusion was that reloading a bow still is a simple action. And you can't shoot the bow without reloading it, no matter how ready it is. Ignore that. I'm kind of confused right now.

What do you consider to be the function of Ready Weapon for bows then, if reloading is not involved in the process?

Well! That makes my question redundant, doesn't it?

Silence!

Wouldn't it be easier to just say that Krav doesn't affect bows because that would be dumb?

Not really. It's not even dump or unrealistic. I forgot the exact numbers, but I once read about english longbow archers in the middle ages, who were able to shoot an insane amount of arrows per minute. And by insane I mean it put a 20th level D&D archer rate of fire to shame.

The problem here is rather the possibility of Troll Archer Madness, but that must be solved diffrently.

We had a lot to consider in building modern and Sixth World martial arts. When you look at a lot of the real-world firearm training of today (including Krav Maga), the bulk of it isn't trick-shooting or Equilibrium-style gun katas, but drawing, arming, and aiming your weapon as quickly, efficiently, and safely as possible...that and the usual tricks like firing practice, speed drills, how to far when prone, etc. We didn't have room for the sniper martial art, more's the pity.

true that, by having the arrows set up beforehand, in the ground, and basically firing them as a kind of artillery, arcing them over the battlefield, hoping to pick someone off sooner or later.

still, the thought of a krav maga trained troll with a bow being able to take down two tbirds in a single action pass (and more in the next if he isnt thored on the spot) is a bit between horrifying and impressive

But again, it's not the archery, it's the Troll/Bow combo that is the root of evil here

true, and the same could be done with a semi auto anti-tank weapon i guess

Actually, Krav Maga really kicks ass for small throwing weapons:

Ready Weapon makes Agility/2 available...

I don't find the build particularly broken. At my own table I would certainly rule that a bonus provided by a fighting style of a military training system that didn't have anything to do with bows... Doesn't apply to bows!
I would however, be willing to let you purchased the style, then spend more time (And Karma) adapting it and altering it for use with bows. Just because a style doesn't exist doesn't mean you cant develop it yourself. Just takes effort. Look at Bruce Lee
Reloading/readying as a free action isn't that hot. You only get 1 free action a pass, man! And I usually use that to move around. So with his power you can do exactly what the adept quickdraw ability does except you can only do it once per turn when you stand very still.
Unless my grasp of the rules is wrong?

SR4, pg 135 under Free Actions
"A character may take a Free Action during his own Action
Phase or at some later point in the Initiative Pass. A character
may not take a Free Action prior to his first Action Phase in the
Initiative Pass."

SR4, pg 136
Run
Running uses a Free Action and inflicts Running movement
modifiers. Running is considered to be any movement
over the character’s Walking Rate (see Movement, p. 138).


By those, you're right that you can't run around while taking your free action that pass to ready weapon, but you can move at the Walking rate and then could run during one of the middle phases. Could also ready weapon on the phase before your next phase and always double shoot the arrows strictly speaking.

That all said, I'm kind of agreeing with others who've said that it's a bit iffy to take a big bonus to archery for a martial arts style that has nothing to do with archery. But then again, would be interesting to make a Combat Archery martial art with ready weapon (archery) as a free action, take aim (archery) as a free action, maybe +1 called shot using archery, and +1 DV archery or some such.

If the troll archer is going to take down a plane with his bow, he might as well do it with style.

There is also the Quickdraw Maneuver in the same book. That would take care of it better too. Who ever aims anyway?

for that second one, you just take 1 level of wildcat

ok, now im getting d&d vibes....

meh. it's not like the character necessarily thinks of themselves as having 1 level of krav maga, 1 level of sioux wildcat, etc. in fact, if making an archer, it's entirely possible the character just considers themselves to know a specialised bow martial art.

Sorta like a prestige class.

meh. flavor is mutable. if you can make the mechanics work for you, (and provided the mechanics are not supposed to be attached to the flavor, which happens more often than it should imo) just modify the flavor to be appropriate.

Sorry to be blunt, but using Krav Maga to cheese out bow shooting is RETARDED. Ready Weapon being a free action is great for guns, since you only need to ready them once. But you only get one free action and two simples per Action Phase. No matter how you slice it, you will get off one arrow per Action Phase using Krav Maga. You can do what the OP suggests, and Ready Weapon before combat, or on a previous Action Phase, but you're still firing one arrow per Action Phase. Just instead of firing 1 in the 1st and 1 in the 2nd, you're firing 2 in the 2nd and 0 in the 1st. It still eats up most of two Action Phases.

Here's a tip people: Quick Draw allows you to ready and attack with a weapon as part of one Simple Action. If you use the Iajutsu maneuver, or the Quick Draw Adept power, you can fire a bow like it was a semi automatic weapon. I don't think we need to have a conversation about whether Krav Maga should be allowed to boost archery. It really doesn't. Sure, it frees up a simple action since you no longer need to spend a simple readying the bow. But that's a pretty flaccid bonus. If you want to be all Legolas style, just use Iajutsu.

Strictly speaking, quick draw can only be done for pistols if one were to take RAW at face value. I've always allowed my TT group to do it for machine pistols as well using the automatics skill, but I don't think you can quick draw a rifle or an arrow. I may be wrong though. I'm not a rule god.

As to Iaijutsu, I believe it says that it allows quickdrawing any weapon which has a reach of 1 or less. Since bows and guns don't have a reach attribute, I wouldn't allow that maneuver to cover quickdrawing for either. Again, I could be wrong, but that's how I've read them.

Everything has a 'Reach attribute', even a trout.

Another issue with quickdraw, once you draw a weapon, Its drawn. Iaijutsu and quickdraw power don't grant ready weapon actions. They make it so you can draw and shoot with one action. Unless you're gonna use your free action to put the weapon away again (to quickdraw it again) then you can't do it again.

Also, the archer would be shooting one arrow, then two arrows, on alternating passes.

Before combat, ready the bow.
Turn 1: simple fire bow, free ready weapon, simple fire bow
Turn 2: free ready bow, simple fire bow, simple as free ready bow
Turn 3: simple fire bow, free ready bow, simple fire bow

Repeat as much as needed.

This argument doesn't have legs. Iajutsu specifically says it works for any "melee weapon, missile weapon, throwing weapon or firearm of Reach 1 or less." No missile weapon actually have a reach stat listed. Nor do any firearms. Are you trying to argue that Iajutsu, though it says it specifically works on firearms and missile weapons, actually doesn't work for those? It contradicts itself implicitly, so we should ignore its explicit language? I call bullshit on that one.

Iajutsu, by its unambiguous language, says you may draw and use a missile weapon. All you have to do for that to make sense for a bow is to look at the arrow as the missile weapon. You draw the arrow, and you use the arrow by shooting it from the bow. And you can't tell me that this doesn't make sense; see Legolas. I know he's a fantasy character, but what he does isn't totally beyond the pale. A skilled person should be able to draw and fire a bow pretty rapidly.




Heh... what made you decide to go with trout?



Ok, you're right about that. It brings back the D&D 2nd ed 3/2 attack pattern that you could get as a level 1 fighter with weapon specialization Still, iajutsu is pretty clear. It says that you can draw and use any missile weapon. If that doesn't mean drawing an arrow and firing a bow, why would they have put in missile weapon? The only advantage from Krav Maga is that you don't make a test to ready weapon, you always succeed. Iajutsu would require a Reaction + Archery test, which you might conceivably fail.

What im wondering is where the 18 damage comes from. A troll with max Strength has a base 9 DV(and this is as max as he can go, with an 18 Strength...he can get it at 17).

A bow does...Str Min +2. That's 11. Now, if they brought back the Ranger-X Bow, that's 13 DV.

There's still 5 more DV to account for. Power Throw i think, like it's title says, only works with thrown weapons...and that's getting capped to 3 even if it didn't.

If you take an assload enough in a martial art, can you add to the Archery DV? Usually those DVs are also capped around 2, if i recall.

I guess im missing part of the combo here...Im coming up with 18 only if the Ranger-X Bow exists, the martial art adds to Archery and Power Throw adds to the DV, which again, i really don't think it does. Which means even with the ranger X bow im getting 15 DV(still impressive, don't get me wrong), without it, 13 DV.

I mean, it's a damaging as hell arrow shot to be sure. But wow that's costly; the points it costs to be a Troll, to max out Strength, to get all the ware AND buy magic AND be an adept, this would be a one-trick pony to END all one-trick ponies. At least the elf pistoleer adept has a few other things, typically.

Strength 15 bow does 15+2=17P damage add into that +1 from explosive arrow and you have a DV of 18.

See, told you I wasn't a rules god. I shouldn't have posted without looking explicitly again and I stand corrected. The text _does_ say that, much as it boggles my mind. Ah well.

Ahh, i read it wrong.

This might sound crazy, as I never, ever, houserule to weaken something...but i think i would here. If anything, why should every other muscle-powered weapon suffer from halving Strength and adding a number when the bow gets to be a fully powered...thing?

I would have to test it out, first, of course..I always say i am VERY wary of changing anything for the weaker, because i don't want to gimp anyone. In fact, it's not the damage code of the bow that bothers me, it's the fact that all other weapons powered by muscle(well, leverage too..and yeah, so the bow has some mechanics in there), aren't treated the same way.

Thinking it over, if a bow did Str. Min/2+2, it wouldn't be THAT bad. A 5 Strength person with a bow, instead of 7P, would do 5P, and that's still a heavy pistol. 7 Strength person wouldn't be doing 9P, but 6P. It seems to only cut it down as it goes up and up...the 9 Strength bow wielder would be hitting for 7 instead of 11. And explosive arrows help that damage. (I would allow Strength to count for full when it comes to range, so that 13 strength person would still get hella big range out of it...and still would be doing 9P, or 10P with an explosive arrow.) Hell, even throwing weapons halve Strength when it comes to damage, but not for range.

I guess im thinking back to SR3-when someone with a Sword(Str+2M), did the same as someone with a bow(Str. Min +2M).

Sorry for the derailment, but i couldn't help but notice the bow gets different treatment. Again, i don't mind a good powerful hit if someone pays for it, and i suppose the drawback comes from hauling a bow around and the fact Archery isn't a common skill, but this is the one single time where i have to say a damage code that high doesn't sit right with me.

Heres the problem. SR4 has weapons and it has ammo. Arrows are not a weapon, they are ammo for a weapon. Iajutsu doesn't say that you can draw ammo and use it, (for example it doesn't let you shoot a panther assault cannon any faster by quickdrawing the shell and loading it), because you can't. Just like you can't quickdraw the arrows, as the arrow is not a weapon.

Well, technically arrows would count as 'missile weapons' to an adept with Missile Mastery. But then again, so would pretty much anything.

I'm wondering that too, at least from a design perspective like "how would they allow that??" But your problem is that bows do Str+2 damage, not str/2 + 2. Which apparently you figured out already



Where do you get that? Did you just make it up? You did? Ok then Arrows are missiles. They are things that are flung at the enemy to hurt the enemy. Those are weapons in my book. Guess what other book? The dictionary. Dictionary.com defines arrows as a type of weapon. Arrows are sharp pointy things that go ka-thunk! into a person. That's a weapon. It doesn't matter that they are fired by a bow; a bow is a weapon, and its ammo is arrows. But here's your logical proposition: Arrows are ammo. Nothing that is ammo is a weapon. Therefore, arrows are not weapons. Your second premise is wrong, so your conclusion is wrong. There is no rule, in the BBB, the dictionary, or anywhere that says ammunition can't be considered a weapon. The wording of the BBB does not support you, the dictionary does not support you. Iajutsu is the final word in SR4 archery, Q.E.D.

Interesting. Dictionary.com doesn't definte a bow as a weapon. Nor does it define a rifle as a weapon. Does that mean you can't quickdraw a rifle with iaijutsu? No. Dictionary.com has no relevance to whether something is considered a weapon or not, the SR4 books do.

I will agree, you can quickdraw an arrow, and throw it at someone with iaijutsu, no problem. Not an arguement at all. But you can't quickdraw an arrow, and fire it out of a bow.
"The character may draw and use a single melee weapon, missile weapon, throwing weapon or firearm of Reach 1 or less with a Simple Action. If attacking with the weapon requires a Complex Action, he may still draw and attack with a Complex Action. He must succeed in an appropriate Weapon Skill + Reaction (3) Test to Quick Draw." Arsenal, 160

So, you can quickdraw your arrow, using throwing + reaction, and throw it just fine. You can quickdraw a bow using archery + reaction and shoot it fine too. You can't quickdraw an arrow to use in a bow that you already have ready. Since Iaijutsu says any single weapon, not a combination of two (arrow and bow) then the iaijutsu doesn't apply to the bow, merely the arrow.

The only reason I used the dictionary is to show that your interpretation of the rules was not supported by anything, not even the common use of the English language. Obviously, bows and rifles are kinds of weapons, whether that word is included in the dictionary. Your rebuttal to that extent is a straw man; I wasn't arguing that only things defined as weapons in the dictionary are weapons, only that if the dictionary calls something a weapon, it probably is. This disproves your argument that arrows are ammunition and cannot be defined as weapons. Your response, that the dictionary does not specifically define many weapons as weapons, is not responsive to anything I was arguing. Ergo, straw man.

Also, just because I feel vindictive: dictionary.com defines a rifle as a firearm. And defines a firearm as a weapon. If A=B, and B=C, then A=C. So you're wrong that a rifle is not defined as a weapon. And on bow, here is a quote from dictionary.com: "A weapon consisting of a curved, flexible strip of material, especially wood, strung taut from end to end and used to launch arrows." So not only were you rebutting a straw man, you were wrong on every point you made.

Here's the language you're missing: Iajutsu says you may drawn and "use" a projectile weapon. What does using a projectile weapon entail? The only way to use a projectile weapon is to load your missile, draw it back, and fire it. If I draw an arrow and use it, that means I shoot it out of a bow. Using an arrow does not mean throwing the arrow. Iajutsu specifically says that it works for missile weapons AND throwing weapons. By your interpretation, it only works for throwing weapons. You are ignoring the RAW for some reason I can't even fathom.

Honestly, this is a common sense thing. Why are you fighting it so hard? The actual text doesn't even support you. Enough, ok?

If an arrow is a weapon in and of itself, then you can use it as one without a bow. That would be either stabbing with it, or throwing it. If you want to it iaijutsu to quickdraw an arrow to make a melee attack, or throw it, thats fine.

A bow is a weapon that fires an arrow. If you want to use iaijutsu to quickdraw a bow, and fire it thats fine too.

What doesn't work in the language is quickdrawing the arrow, yet using the bow. It specifically states a SINGLE weapon. Not two.

You're absolutely wrong. Iajutsu says you can draw and use a projectile weapon. All projectile weapons require you to first draw the ammo, and then use the launcher, be it bow or crossbow, to fire it. ALL OF THEM. Why does iajutsu say you can draw and use a missile weapon? BECAUSE YOU CAN. I don't care how many times you say you can't, you can. Otherwise, the language is meaningless. You're saying "Let's read it so that it's completely nonsensical. When the devs wrote "draw and use a missile weapon," they meant "draw an arrow and chuck it."" Or you're saying that the language means you can draw the bow, and then fire it without actually having to draw the arrow. Either way, your interpretations assume that the devs wanted the rules to work in a useless, nonsensical retardard way. I'm pretty sure that's not what they were trying to do.

I don't care if you agree with me. I am done with this thread. Have a nice time nerfing things based on completely indefensible, unecessary interpretations of unambiguous rules.

Larme, you're substituting words. It's been quoted a few times, but here it is again:
"The character may draw and use a single melee weapon, missile weapon, throwing weapon or firearm of Reach 1 or less with a Simple Action."

Missile, not Projectile. Similar words, but not exactly the same. Missile is a thrown or self-powered projectile. Projectile is something shot (for purposes of definition within the context of SR). So no, it doesn't apply to projectile weapons.

I think we're splitting hairs here. I don't think there should be any problems allowing it to be used for bows. I think saying that missile weapons don't include arrows, because missile weapons are throwing weapons is a wrong way of thinking. Because that would change the reading to
"The character may draw and use a single melee weapon, missile throwing weapon, throwing weapon or firearm of Reach 1 or less with a Simple Action"

Which would be an errata because they said the same thing twice. Since they don't limit firearms, so there's nothing preventing you from pulling out a rocket launcher, or panther assault cannon... I have no problem with them loading an arrow in the bow and firing.

English Longbow rate of fire was high, because they weren't aiming by the way. They just have to arc it over the advancing army and wherever it falls its likely to hit someone. Firing 2 arrows in 3 seconds is easily feasible, 8 arrows, well that's multiple IPs, and outside of our use right now (at least no more than 2 IPs)

I just like to stick with common sense over prospectively fuzzy words.. Of course you can quick draw arrows... Why wouldn't you be able to?
If I wanted to cock-mouth it I could say of course arrows are weapons, they got sharp pointy ends, don't they? Come here and I will show you what arrows are good for after you lose your bow. At least Str/2+1.

And who cares about which martial arts covers what? The Quick draw maneuver is all you need and you got it for sure. Or make an Welsh/Elvin Bowyer Martial art and clearly cover your bases in a rules friendly manner.

Is this a real issue that has to do with a particular GM's ruling or are we just bickering rules at this point?


[Edit] And who cared about troll archers anyway? Didn't you guys here about the Hydraulic Spreader-X Cyberbow?
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=21272 [/Edit]

Exactly what I was going to say. If missile weapon is another word for throwing weapon, they wouldn't have followed it with throwing weapons. Missile weapons clearly refers to projectile weapons, otherwise, what are they?

I've said it time and again: when multiple interpretations are available, choose the NON wacky one. Your interpretation is wacky, because you're reading the text to allow iajutsu for throwing weapons and throwing weapons. That's not what it says, and that's not what the devs were trying to get across. Further evidence is the fact that they used to universal verb "use" to describe what you can do with your quickdraw. Using includes firing a gun, throwing a throwing weapon, slicing with a sword... virtually any way you can attack with a weapon. There is no principled reason why "use" would not include firing an arrow out of a bow. Your interpretation is an arbitrary knee-jerk nerf-batting, and nothing more. Play it how you want, but don't tell us that you're following the RAW. You aren't. You're twisting the RAW to fit your agenda.

And heres the counter arguement. I have a panther assault cannon and iaijutsu. I quickdraw my panther and fire. I also have more ammo for it, I quickdraw my ammo and fire it again. Since you can do it with a bow and arrows by quickdrawing the arrow (because of the missile weapon portion) then you should be able to do the same with a panther cannon and the ammo for it (with the firearm portion).

Nice try, but the reloading process is very different between a bow and an assault canon. Also, ACs usually have more than one shot before you need to reload.

Sorry, but your example fails. What quick draw allows you to do is, instead of taking a Simple Action to Ready Weapon, and then a Simple Action to attack, you do both with one Simple Action. This works for shooting an arrow, because pulling out the arrow, inserting it into the bow, and drawing back the string is a Ready Weapon action. Therefore, quick draw (made applicable by iajutsu) which allows you to combine Ready Weapon with a Simple Action to attack, works for bows.

To load a panther cannon, however, requires a Simple Action to Insert Clip. Quickdraw does not let you combine Insert Clip and an attack. It only combines Ready Weapon with an attack. Anything you try to do that is not Ready Weapon will not be covered by quickdraw. Your reasoning requires us to look only at the language of iajutsu, and ignore the language of quick draw, which is indefensible. In short, your entire position is indefensible, which is evinced by your failure to provide a single adequate defense for it.

I concede the point. While iaijutsu specifically says draw and fire, the action used for drawing is indeed the ready action. Which, in the case of projectile weapons, entails drawing an arrow and firing it. However, krav maga and the like have chance for failure by using your free action to ready a weapon. Iaijutsu has a threshold of 3, and can fail, glitch, and critical glitch while doing so.

You mean no chance for failure, right? I agree completely. Krav Maga isn't useless, it's just not optimal for archery. The whole reason I interjected is that people started talking about "omg, krav maga boosts archery, teh broken, teh nerf!" I just wanted to point out that it's not even the best way to do it...

Honestly, I think fixing the whole STR+2 thing would solve everything that's wrong with bows. Why not STR/2 + 2, or +3? No reason, that's why not, they just decided they wanted trollbows to be silly, like comedy slapstick style

A samurai gunner toting a tiger-striped panther cannon using his blinding ancestral katana drawing techniques to slam rounds into the panther cannon with fierce speed and grim precision?

I could buy that.

I really think that the best way to put a stop to bow abuse is to simply assure they adhere to standard availability rules, considering the bow's strength minimum its 'Rating'. Nothing higher then '6' to start out. And make ultra damaging bows rare to find and expensive as all hell. Seems straightforward to me...

Availability and expense are barriers, but not very high ones. The fact is, it would cost more to buy a panther cannon, which would do less damage, with much more expensive ammunition. And it would be a hell of a lot more illegal. The problem is that a bow doing more damage than an artillery piece just doesn't make any sense. It really doesn't. Not from a system balance perspective, and not from a realism perspective. I think the devs just took their eye off the ball when they were deciding bow DV's.

I dunno...
Its pretty easy to say that after certain levels bows are impossible to manufacture. Cap it at 6 if that helps your suspension of disbelief do it's thing. Is it a problem at your table, or are you just mad because it looks like a dumb rule?

The latter. It's easy enough to fix, of course.

A bow with a strength min over 6 would be crossing in to artillery its self is strength 6 is max for human a English long bow would only be 4-5 so just think how powerful the bow would be for a strenght 10+ troll would be 8foot long 6 inch tick plus monster firing arrows over a foot long I can see that takeong down planes.

First of all, many trolls could probably draw an 8 foot bow. But more importantly, compound bows can have ridiculous power in a much smaller package than a recurve, so a more high tech bow would not be that tall. And with 2070's era nanoforged materials, they could definitely make limbs with more pull than what we have today.

That said, DV 17P is stupid, and I think it's totally justifiable to fix it...