Another crossbow thread

[knightkrawler]

Sjeng wrote:
I simply use the base rule, so unlimited bolts, unlimited range. I even incorporated a rule stating that you may fire over low furniture, such as tables, tombs, benches, minus one combat die (2 instead of 3), because you can only target the upper body of a monster then, making it harder to hit.

I would think the weapon isn't any weaker, the creature simply has better defense. +1 def, not att

Sjeng's method downgrades possible damage, yours doesn't, which is a matter of taste.

[Big Bene]

An idea just came to my mind - a bit more complicated on the theoretical side, but simple when actually playing:

Why not combine the best of all the concepts above
A quiver holds enough ammo to last for a quest - well normally, it does, but it can be used up, giving an element of suspesion and a reason to plan and buy replacement in time.

- Use special dice for the crossbow (or all ranged weapons) that includes (at least) one side that signals that the ammo is running out. No extra dice rolling needed. As you can't defend with a crossbow or bow very effectively, these dice should have reduced shields or no shields at all.
- Once this side shows up, the quiver holds (e.g.) three remaining bolts, the player gets three bolt-cards and from now on he has to discard one of them whenever using the crossbow. No tracking of the remaining ammo is needed for most of the time, just in the end phase. But by this time, it really counts and can add to both susptension and strategy.
- When the last card is spent, the crossbow cannot be used anymore, unless he has buyed a replacement set of bolts beforehand for, say, 50 gold.

This is even realistic, I think, as a fighter in the heat of the batte normally won't have time to count his ammo all the time, but he will certainly realize when it comes down to, say, three and he has to start being careful.

My

[artisturn]

Some pretty good ideas in this thread.
So far in the games that I am hosting,the crossbow will get used maybe once if at all.

The players in my group are more into the hand to hand combat, I guess they like the thrill of battle.

[cornixt]

I allow unlimited free shots, but the crossbow costs more to buy (400) and it costs an action to reload or switch to another weapon. That makes it much less useful, so it usually only gets a few shots per game.

[cynthialee]

Ammo counts are a good way to encourage tactical use of the cross bow and a way to leach gold from heroes wallets.
Ammo counts are good.

I say give them 12 bolts in a quiver and charge them 75 gold for a refill in-between quests.

[Jafazo]

I've been bothered by the use of the crossbow in my games and I've read the threads on this forum for possible rule changes. There were several good ideas, but I really want to keep my HeroQuest games fairly simple, so any house rules have to fit the nature of the established game rules (i.e. no action points or other new attributes). Here are the problems I've encountered with the crossbow along with my solutions:

1) The hero using the crossbow switches to a sword for adjacent foes: Changing weapons counts as an action. I was thinking about allowing the crossbow to be used against an adjacent foe as this would will minimize the necessity of having switch weapons, but after reading other comments on this forum I think it make sense to leave this restriction in place for the crossbow.
2) Endless supply of crossbow bolts: I believe Daedalus proposed that a supply of 10 bolts should cost 100 gold coins. I think this is a great idea as the hero will need to be prudent about employing the crossbow (like casting spells) and tracking the bolts would be no more burdensome than tracking Body Points or treasure. I don't want to add rules about reusing bolts which I don't think is very feasible anyway. After the last bolt is spent, the hero will have to expend an action changing weapons...and hope this doesn't occur in a room full of monsters!
3) Picking off monsters at the other end of the corridor: The crossbow has an effective range of 10 spaces. This means it can be used at any monster in the same room but a monster in a corridor has to be within range.

I realize that many additional rules could be added to make crossbow usage even more realistic, but I think these will suffice in keeping a somewhat crude medieval weapon from becoming the equivalent of a blaster from Star Wars.

My suggested solution, leave it alone.

Like you discovered, modifying the crossbows performance for classic Hero Quest gameplay just isn't worth it, for a number of reasons. Off your original post, I wasn't sure what the problem was with Crossbows so I'm assuming you just feel they're a bit overpowered, so my response to that...

The Crossbow shouldn't give you a problem unless you start playing Hero Quest on other boards with large scale areas. HQ was designed to be played on the original board only, which is confined to tight areas. The creators 'probably' didn't bother implementing any kind of limited range system because of this. I'm wondering if you've been having Heroes explore areas on other boards, like a dungeons and dragons board. The only place on the HQ board where the Crossbow's No-Range Limit exploitations are noticed is if the shooter is standing at one end of its longest halls and the target on the other. The Crossbow's range has no limit.

If I WERE going to nerf the Crossbow I'd just scribble down on a notepad labelled 'House Rules' something like this...

Ranged Attacks - Unless otherwise noted, all ranged attack weapons and thrown weapons have a maximum reach of 7 squares. Any monster beyond that reach cannot be attacked. To determine if a monster is within reach, count 7 movement squares from the shooter to the target moving in any direction including diagonally, horizontally or vertically.

With this rule, the crossbow will still hit everything on the original HQ board as originally designed. There's no room or hallway on the board within which a monster could move outside the ranged attack weapons reach except where I mentioned before, in the LONGEST halls that outline the board.

[Gold Bearer]

I think the biggest issue is that the longsword and crossbow (and the US halberdier and crossbowman) cost the same, and they just shouldn't. There's no way attacking diagnaolly is as good as attacking at range. The simplist thing to do is either make the longsword cheaper or the crossbow more expensive. At the very least the crossbow should be two handed. I like having limited ammo as well though. I'm using it in my p-b-p game but for a standard game I think arrow counters worth different amounts (1, 5, 10, 25) would work well, so they're not swamped with tokens.

[knightkrawler]

There's no way attacking diagnaolly is as good as attacking at range.

Attacking orthogonally and diagonally adjacent squares with 3 AD is worth more than being able to shoot at range, excluding all the 8 squares around you with 3 AD.
With the longsword you are more versatile when you have been attacked by a monster and can counter-attack. If you have the crossbow, you need the longsword, too, in order to attack in all situations of adjacency or range, with 3 AD.
The thing is, it doesn't matter if you can attack ranged or not, but monsters will engage you in melee and that is when you need the longsword anyway to retain your 3 AD.

Where's the thread that discusses if diagonal squares are included in ranged attacks? In my opinion, they are not, which makes the price relation between longsword and crossbow proportionate enough.

[Gold Bearer]

There's no way attacking diagnaolly is as good as attacking at range.

Attacking orthogonally and diagonally adjacent squares with 3 AD is worth more than being able to shoot at range, excluding all the 8 squares around you with 3 AD.
With the longsword you are more versatile when you have been attacked by a monster and can counter-attack. If you have the crossbow, you need the longsword, too, in order to attack in all situations of adjacency or range, with 3 AD.
The thing is, it doesn't matter if you can attack ranged or not, but monsters will engage you in melee and that is when you need the longsword anyway to retain your 3 AD.

But you can normally just move away and shoot. It's very rare that a longsword is the better option, normally just in corridors when the heroes are guarding the door. In that case the monster can just wait for them so they have to go in.

Where's the thread that discusses if diagonal squares are included in ranged attacks? In my opinion, they are not, which makes the price relation between longsword and crossbow proportionate enough.

Definitely, they didn't make that clear but without that there's a huge difference in usefulness.

[Redav]

An idea just came to my mind - a bit more complicated on the theoretical side, but simple when actually playing:

I do like that, simple yet effective.

I still think I'd have the user track bolt stat. It's not hard and my players are pretty methodical and I'd expect that they'd like to know hard numbers as there will be times when they can't re-equip between quests and keeping a stat introduces ammunition management.

Blackthorn mentioned switching weapons and at the moment, my rules have the following rules relating to this and bows (including crossbows)

Carried Items
Carried and Equipped Items
A character may only equip one single handed weapon and one shield at a time. A torch may be equipped with a shield or single handed weapon. Equipped items are placed in front of your character card. All other items are placed behind your character card. Characters may change equipped weapons once on their turn and only if they haven't used their action. Changing equipped weapons does not constitute an action.

I'm sure it sounds a little fiddly but it's to introduce the situation where you're caught unprepared because I also have an ambush rule;

Additional situations;
If you are attacked while a bow is equipped, you defend with one less combat die. If you receive damage, you may choose to take one body point less but your bow breaks

Hopefully there's moments where the weapon breaks. I might revise that rule to 'if you receive two hits or more, your bow breaks and reduces the damage by one'. Any thoughts?