>bow doesn't scale with STR >crossbows have no stat

File: youwhat.gif (2MB, 488x291px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 488x291px

>>383363940
>Bow scales with Dex / Agi

>>383363940
Can you explain why the former is a problem? The latter, I get, but the former is the one I'm confused about.

>>383364225
Drawing a bow, especially a large one, is a very physically demanding task, as is winding up a crossbow.

>dual-wielding
>you get to attack TWICE!

>actual dual-wielding
>you still attack with the weapon in your main hand, the other weapon acts as a guard

>>383365285
But make it scale with Str is stupid, since bows reach their elasticity very easy.

>>383364225
Bows actually require quite a bit of upper body strength and the stiffness or strength of it's draw correlates to how much energy it imparts to the arrow. When you draw a bow you aren't just pulling the string, you're bending the limbs.

Same goes for crossbows incidentally, but they have a latch to hold their string in place and due to their design can include cranks or hooks which allow for even stiffer limbs which means even more energy.

Bows should gain additional "damage", up to a cap based on their material and construction, based in your strength owing to the fact it allows you to store and commit more energy to the device. In fact this goes for any medieval ranged weapon, they were all muscle powered. And while good hand eye coordination is important for accuracy, it has no impact on energy imparted or release - aka damage. In ancient cultures, back in say the classical era or even earlier, the greatest myths and hero's usually wielded bows of exceptional strength that lesser men couldn't even draw (Hercules, Lu Bu, Gilgamesh, Odysseus, etc)

In D&D certain ranged weapons had the mighty property to reflect this which allowed you to apply strain ranged weapon damage (which was otherwise usually flat based on type)

It's only in modern fiction that bows got associated with sneaky stealthy dexfags or women. I'm not sure where it started - Legolas is described as having arms like treetrunks in the books even if he is a fccboi in the movies, and that Katniss Bitch came around well after the meme started.

File: 450-800x445.jpg (54KB, 800x445px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 800x445px

>>383363940
This is how OP thinks archers train to be more effective shooters

File: 1403643565995.gif (988KB, 350x181px) Image search: [Google]

988KB, 350x181px

>>383366739
This is bait, surely?

>>383366371
Which is why dual wielding is retarded and no one actually did it. Better to use a shield instead.

>>383365285
Yeah but you can't shoot an arrow harder like you can swing a sword harder past a certain point
Should really just be str minimum requirements for both weapons

>>383363940
Mount and Blade Warband

>>383367158
YOu can shoot an arrow with a higher amount of velocity from pulling the string back further than weaker men.

>>383363940
>bow doesn't scale with STR

STR only affects range. DEX/AGI is needed for accuracy which means hitting critical areas which leads to dealing more damage.

>>383367158
>>383366918
>>383366739
>>383365285
Also you have to remember that after you pull it, you need to keep it drawn, and that requires quite alot of force as well.

>>383365285
Using a 120-pound draw bow is a physically demanding task for a *modern* human. In centuries past, when natural selection hadn't yet been completely overridden by technology, the average human was orders of magnitude more fit than modern humans, because you had to earn the right just to survive. This is what happens when you project modern elements of humanity into past eras.

>>383367158
You can pull a string back farther, you can use heavier poundage bows, you can fire more arrows without tiring out

>>383367315
But there also a limit where pulling more will snap the bow.

>>383367469
That's why you use a heavier bow

The stronger you are the heavier your bow can be

>>383367315
But there's not a great window that scales with strength
Below a point you shouldn't even be able to use it because you can't pull the string to the point where arrows fly further than 5 meters
But if you reached that point, there's not much pulling left to reach optimal draw
>>383367398
Not really, proficient archers will essentially offload the work to their body structure, which means that keeping it drawn is exponentially less difficult than the pulling itself
>>383367458
Well yes, bigger/less flexible bows would require higher minimum requiremenets of course

>>383367469
OP could also be referring to fantasy bows, or bows of legend where there is a greater distance between minimum and maximum draw distance.

>>383367450
>the average human was orders of magnitude more fit than modern humans, because you had to earn the right just to survive.

The average human was a malnourished dirt farmer with six different diseases. The idea that we're less healthy or fit today is ludicrous. Even Knights, professional soldiers who basically fought and ate and that was their fucking job had no idea about proper athletic training or nutrition

Your average /fit/izen - well ok not average because most of /fit/ is not fit - is better off than your average medieval warrior.

>>383367606
>But there's not a great window that scales with strength
Below a point you shouldn't even be able to use it because you can't pull the string to the point where arrows fly further than 5 meters
But if you reached that point, there's not much pulling left to reach optimal draw

By this argument there is also a cap that applies to DEX surely? There is only so accurate one can be in the stabbing of a man in the heart, or the dodging of arrows- I hate to use this argument but, "it's videogames" and by their nature they often have to have ludicrous caps on skills such as DEX/STR not in keeping with real life. Enjoying this discussion though anon.

>>383366918
Hitting someone in foot is not gonna deal as much damage as hitting someone in the eye though.

>>383367450
How many centuries are we talking about here? Because since the beginning of society, there are plenty of people that wouldn't be fit and plenty more that couldn't draw a bow.

>>383366371
Real dualwielding is just being stuck with having to use another blade as a really shitty shield

>>383367889
applying reality to vidya would make DEX irrelevant.

>>383363940
>game requires you to put points into a secondary stat that doesn't give you attack power so you can wield better weapons and equips
>it's better to use the equips that don't require stats

Even little girls in jap tournaments can shot from the bows fine

>>383363940
You've never used a bow have you?

A bow with twice the stiffness would store double elastic energy. Drawing the same bow twice as far would store four times more elastic energy. STR would matter a lot until the maximum drawing distance I guess.

>>383368249
>You've never used a bow have you?

It really should be something like this:

>fixed STR requirement
>secondary STAM requirement
>slight bonus to accuracy and range with more STR
>faster firing speed with more STAM

>>383367450
>the average human was orders of magnitude more fit than modern humans

Haha yeah being a malnourished faggot who died at 30 sure made you fitter than modern humans

>>383368249
Bow was actually really dependant on user's STR, that's why it was so easily replaced by guns in 16 century.

>>383368384
>>383368423
I can see how these two could correlate easily with each other. Any malnourished fool can use a gun.

>>383363940
>>bow doesn't scale with STR

It shouldn't scale with STR. Any given bow has a set draw weight. It is dependent on the physical characteristics of the limbs of the bow. There should be a minimum strength requirement to draw the bow to the full length it is supposed to be drawn. If you are below STR, then there should be damage and accuracy penalties.

A crossbow needs a minimum strength level reload it. If you are below strength then you cannot use the crossbow at all. It cannot scale for the same reason as a bow. The limbs are at a set level of power due to the physical limits of the limb length and draw weight.

>>383367021
>This is how OP thinks archers train to be more effective shooters

War archers train by replacing the bow they use to train with another bow of increasingly heavier draw weight. You can't just pick up a 80-100 lb war bow and use it. You'll injure yourself.

>>383367315
>YOu can shoot an arrow with a higher amount of velocity from pulling the string back further than weaker men.

You can't do that. Every single bow is designed to be drawn all the way before the arrow is loosed. It doesn't matter if you are the strongest man in the world. You pull the fletching to your cheek and that is as far as it goes.

The power is all in the draw weight of the bow. How thick the limbs are, how bendy they are and how long they are. You can either draw the full weight of the bow or you cannot. STR is a minimum requirement of using any particular bow. If you want more power, you need to get a new bow with a higher draw weight.

>>383368296
>>383368423
All Bows have a draw weight. You can only draw an arrow so far back on a bow before you run out of arrow shaft. Handing someone a bow under the draw weight they can consistently pull back won't make the arrow go any farther or faster.

>>383368196
>Even little girls in jap tournaments can shot from the bows fine

They don't use war bows. A bow for war is more powerful than a bow for target shooting. A target shooter isn't concerned about penetrating maille or plate armour.

>>383363940
>RPG made to actually be fun for normal people isn't a completely accurate HEMA simulation

I know, right! Why even bother making a game if you're not going to put in the option to switch between 16 different sword guards!

>>383363940
Its this meme again

While every bow should have a minimum str requirement to wield, there's no reason why bows should scale with str. Assuming the min str req allows you to pull the full draw, there's no benefit to having additional str above that.

Scaling with dex/agility makes sense as it simulates you being able to shoot more accurately and target weak spots.

File: 1455112538433.jpg (338KB, 1058x1497px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1058x1497px

You guys seem to forget that while crossbows do need strength to reload, it doesn't need as much strength as a war bow would need. It's the reason why crossbows were given to drawn peasants, since they had the upper body strength to reload it, and shooting it is braindead enough that even a trained monkey could do it. And since they could easily punch through even plate, they were hugely OP. Hell, one pope even tried to ban them, since it killed armoured nobles easily, which meant less support and money for the church.

>>383363940
AD&D did strength requirements for bows. This is just another casualty of games, especially RPGs, being dumbed down since they went mainstream.

>>383369306
I think the big difference is that you need actual, repetitive training to build up the exact muscles , strengthen the bones, and learn the perfect posture to be able to draw a fat bow repeatedly over the course of a battle. It's why these English longbowmen were such a prized possession, they've been having mandatory training since childhood
Meanwhile cranking a crossbow just requires generic strength you could have acquired from working on a farm. While the device itself was still valuable, and you could get gud at fast and accurate firing as demonstrated by the genoese xbowmen, you can just give the thing to a peasant and he'll be moderately successful

Wouldn't realistically bow scaling hit a early str soft scaling for damage but reduce stamina usage / lower low stamina debuffs as well as increasing fire rate. Dex would probably increase accuracy, damage for hitting a weaker spot and crit chance if there's no luck.
Honestly it seems like str is only really gonna matter when you hit the stat req so you aren't fumbling around like a dumbass with the bow.

>>383369306
>drawn peasants
No.
>And since they could easily punch through even plate,
No.
>Hell, one pope even tried to ban them
No.
>since it killed armoured nobles easily, which meant less support and money for the church
No.

>>383370060
Excellent post anon
Sure helped the discussion along and will be remembered as a valuable addition to the thread

>>383369578
>It's why these English longbowmen were such a prized possession
No, they weren't
Longbow is garbage, nd only worked against frenchmen, but literally everything works against frenchmen
When they tried it on the germanic niggers, shortbows proved to be better

>>383370768
It's almost like you don't need a giant fuckoff armorpenetrating bows when fighting niggers in woods
Longbowmen were the lords of the battlefield