Crossbow--2 handed or can use a shield?

[Kurgan]

There are videos online (youtube) showing people stringing, cocking and even firing (and yes, hitting their target) real crossbows one-handed (yes, pistol crossbows or modern ones that have special modifications, but that's the point, illustrations aside, the game doesn't define what model of crossbow they found or purchased meaning it has certain limitations that aren't spoken of in the rulebook). So it's possible, just saying.

When I'm watching James Bond and I see him one-shot some bad guy at long range with a pistol I could snort and say that's "impossible" but the fact is there are (a small number) of shooters in the world who could make such a shot, and so I can suspend disbelief and say maybe he's just one of those... who is just "that damn good." I don't have to slap a "magic" label on it to excuse it, more often than one might think.

If you want to nerf something to make the game harder, you can do it, based on the idea that such things are rare.

But people who think something can't be done just because it's difficult or unusual, no... there are people who can put a suit of armor on without another person to assist them. There are people who can throw knives and hit a far off target, etc. In HeroQuest you're playing as HEROES who are presumed to be exceptional individuals in their time, so I would tend to give them a wide latitude. But I can make an arbitrary decision the other way easily enough. Cannons exist in the world of HeroQuest (see BattleMasters) but I disallow them. Why? Because I didn't design the quest with them in mind, so it would tend to make it too easy for the side with the cannon... that's all. But it might be hilarious as a one off, or inspiration for a new adventure...

[Kurgan]

Out of interest, where do you stand on the combination of staff and shield or short bow and shield?

The only reason I would forbid the BattleAxe or Staff + Shield combination is because the game rules say that, really no other reason. Because "in real life" we know battle axes were used in combination with shields (and long weapons like polearms not necessarily like quarterstaves) were used with all sorts of shields. Crossbows were fired from behind shields (granted, usually it was planted in the ground or leaned up against something rather than being held in the hand since pistol crossbows were pretty late and by then shields were much more rare in favor of better armor if I recall correctly).

For the sake of HeroQuest I would say a Spear or Staff or Battle Axe doesn't get combined with the Shield in sense that I'm not forcing the person to drop it (and pick it up the next turn) but I am saying if they for example said they were equipping it and attacked with it, then they can only switch at the beginning of their next turn. So if they get attacked in between they don't get to use the shield. If they defended with the shield they are holding the shield... but I guess that means I'm allowing them to then switch to the battle axe again (putting away the shield) and they can't defend with the shield this round. Each round they are deciding which one they have.

I'm far less strict with all other types of armor and weapons. So if they have a longsword and a shortsword I'm not bother to ask them except right before they roll. When the Ice Gremlin comes by to steal their weapon, it can't steal the weapon out of their hand or the shield from their grasp, so THEN it matters to know what they have claimed they are holding.

So I'd just be conscious of that.

As for the Shortbow, I am choosing to treat those and Longbows or warbows like actual two handed weapons, because I figure you can cock a crossbow and then hang onto it, because it does take two hands to fire the bow.

And yes maybe I'm breaking my own rule here, because I recently watched a video of a guy with one hand stringing and firing a specially modified bow (not crossbow) with his teeth for one of those talent search tv shows. When you introduce me to your one-armed, strong jawed character, we'll discuss it, otherwise...

This made me think of a discussion I recently had on the discord about porters. Perhaps there are invisible porters that carry all the extra stuff and are just implied to be there ("Oswald the overladen"). I guess when you get captured, so do they... (or they run off in fear, never to be seen again when you die or something).

I guess nothing will ever be perfect, I want to retain the simplicity and ease of the game without bogging it down in fiddly minutia more at home in an RPG like CyberPunk which I find harder to play at this stage in my gaming career (while those who have played such games for years probably prefer it most of the time).

Shortbows and longbows are addons, while the crossbow, battleaxe and shield have always been part of the basic game, so I have less nostalgia for them and feel freer to change them without worrying it's really going to change the gameplay in some radical way.

The "game balance" we talked about earlier I think has to do with the fact that they made these restrictions in the first place, to nerf some of the equipment to force a strategic choice on the part of the hero players. You could just take them away and make it a more linear path of progress.. you just spend more gold and you get stronger and harder to damage, period. You could impose some rule, firing Oswald and make it so you can only carry two weapons or something (or maybe force them to carry only one, I mean why not?). The whole "switching mechanic" thing we only talk about because we know there are players who will try to "CHEAT" making the rule irrelevant by saying they are switching to shield every time they defend and switching to battle axe/staff every time they want to attack with those weapons, so we're trying to stop that.

I think just asking them to decide each round what they're holding before the action required is a simpler way in most circumstances than saying they have to use an action, or waste a turn, or are just forced to drop the object (and picking it back up again automatically makes them drop the other thing... but there you still are allowing them to switch on the fly so it doesn't really change anything, you're right there).

[Bareheaded Warrior]

If you want to nerf something to make the game harder, you can do it, based on the idea that such things are rare.

I guess nothing will ever be perfect, I want to retain the simplicity and ease of the game without bogging it down in fiddly minutia more at home in an RPG like CyberPunk which I find harder to play at this stage in my gaming career (while those who have played such games for years probably prefer it most of the time).

I'm not trying to nerf anything to make the game harder just remove some of the issues and lack of internal consistency from the game that make it more complicated, so I think we are aligned here.

There are videos online (youtube) showing people stringing, cocking and even firing (and yes, hitting their target) real crossbows one-handed (yes, pistol crossbows or modern ones that have special modifications, but that's the point, illustrations aside, the game doesn't define what model of crossbow they found or purchased meaning it has certain limitations that aren't spoken of in the rulebook). So it's possible, just saying.

As for the Shortbow, I am choosing to treat those and Longbows or warbows like actual two handed weapons, because I figure you can cock a crossbow and then hang onto it, because it does take two hands to fire the bow.

And yes maybe I'm breaking my own rule here, because I recently watched a video of a guy with one hand stringing and firing a specially modified bow (not crossbow) with his teeth for one of those talent search tv shows. When you introduce me to your one-armed, strong jawed character, we'll discuss it, otherwise...

Yes that would be a great example of a lack of "internal consistency", allowing Crossbows to be used in one hand and with a shield but not short bows, and giving the reason that using a crossbow with one hand is possible (according to YouTube) but then disallowing the same for Short bows even though that is possible (according to YouTube)!

That said, personally I'm leaning towards continuing to allow the combination of Crossbow and Shield (not talking about weapon switching here, I'm talking about using both the crossbow and shield at the same time) because crossbows range from lighter, pistol style all the way through to heavier ones (and beyond) and I would assume that our dungeon occupants would be equipped with the lighter, pistol style end of this spectrum so that they would get all the relevant advantages of speed and ease of use but the disadvantage of not being able to penetrate armour at 200 yards wouldn't matter as in a dungeon you never get the chance to see a target beyond about 50 yards. So many "fixing" this issue is as simple as changing the "Crossbow" to "Crossbow Pistol".

The only reason I would forbid the BattleAxe or Staff + Shield combination is because the game rules say that, really no other reason.

If the game rules contradict themselves that I don't accept that.

Because "in real life" we know battle axes were used in combination with shields (and long weapons like polearms not necessarily like quarterstaves) were used with all sorts of shields. Crossbows were fired from behind shields (granted, usually it was planted in the ground or leaned up against something rather than being held in the hand since pistol crossbows were pretty late and by then shields were much more rare in favor of better armor if I recall correctly).

There is a whole range of weapons covered within the category "battle axe", HeroQuest choosing to forbidden the combination of this weapon with the shield implies to me that we are talking about something more akin to a Dane Axe, that needs both hands to operate effectively, as the weirdly named "hand axe" would cover francisca style axes that can be wielded in one hand and thrown.

Some weapon and shield combinations work in unit formation on a battlefield because your shield, protects the person to your left, but not yourself, also shield walls, screens or stakes walls planted in front of archers and similar, for me this is all battlefield stuff which HQ isn't so I ignore it.

Shortbows and longbows are addons, while the crossbow, battleaxe and shield have always been part of the basic game, so I have less nostalgia for them and feel freer to change them without worrying it's really going to change the gameplay in some radical way.

I consider Short bows to be canon as they are included in Against the Ogre Horde, but I agree, no shield for them.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I guess, for me, in a futile attempt to bring this endless debate to a close (I was going to write "bring this debate to a close", but I just couldn't even type such blatant lie!) I would propose the following as acceptable to me...

Note: The "both hands" label that I have used is just my shorthand for "You may not use a shield when using the ..." which is the relevant point here

Staff
Weapon, Basic, Diagonal, Both Hands, 1AD
The Staff allows you to roll one combat dice in attack.
Cost 50 gold coins.

Battle axe
Weapon, Standard, Both Hands, 4AD
The Battle axe allows you to roll four combat dice in attack.
Cost 400 gold coins.

Short bow
Weapon, Missile, Both Hands, 2AD
The Short bow allows you to roll two combat dice in attack.
Cost 150 gold coins.

Crossbow
Weapon, Missile, Both Hands, 3AD
The Crossbow allows you to roll three combat dice in attack.
Cost 350 gold coins.

Crossbow Pistol
Weapon, Missile, 3AD
The Crossbow Pistol allows you to roll three combat dice in attack.
Cost 500 gold coins.

Repeater Crossbow
Weapon, Missile, Both Hands, 2AD
The Repeater Crossbow allows you to roll two combat dice in attack and enables you to shoot twice as a single action against the same or different targets.
Cost 500 gold coins.

[dragon5145]

Some interesting points in this thread, which made me notice another small difference between NA and EU editions. In the EU edition as seen on Ye Olde Inn only the battleaxe has a restriction of not being able to use the shield. At BH I like the distinctions in the above post, just find it curious that the "Both HANDS" versions of the crossbow and the pistol crossbow both have 3 AD while the repeater bow only has 2 AD (presumably as a balance for making 2 attacks very understandable). I can see with proper materials and draw weight the smaller and lighter pistol crossbow could be said to have 3 AD, you could then justify the larger heavier and presumably higher draw weight "Both Hands" crossbow could be given 4 AD. With this there is a 4 AD weapon of both the close and ranged variety and they would both share the restriction of not using with a shield. If the idea of a 4 AD ranged weapon seems unbalanced then I would make the pistol version 2 AD like the repeater, keeping the price well above the short bow since it has the shield use advantage.

And while videos do show one handed use of crossbow so the heroes could potentially accomplish this feat. The heroes as potentially experts in their field I find it highly suspect that in a extremely dangerous situation such as a dungeon, they would use their equipment in any thing other than the most efficient and effective way; and loading and firing a medieval crossbow of any size one handed is definitely not that. And so as heroes could pull this off, maybe the question should be would they especially in a hostile situation.

[Kurgan]

One thing frequently complained about by "insider" types commenting on fantasy films or historical movies with regard to archery is the practice of characters seemingly holding people at "arrowpoint" for long periods of time (like holding someone at gunpoint). In reality especially the bigger bows would tire people out and make this an impractical and unrealistic practice, they say (even if stronger characters could potentially do it longer).

But what about a crossbow? Granted, I'm not sure if they have a "safety" on this or it's on a hair trigger, but why wouldn't a character basically keep a crossbow cocked and ready to fire with them even when not immediately in combat? Thus they're just pointing to aim. Someone with more knowledge can tell me why that's not a viable option.

"Ready to fire sir," and Oswald the Overladen (having set down his massive backpacks has readied the crossbow for the barbarian), hands the weapon to his master... ?

Good point about small crossbows having less power or accuracy over distance in real life. I guess you could rationalize the damage in other ways, like poison arrows, explosives tied to the tip, or... (didn't want to go there but) magical properties. Should it cost more? Then again I get the idea that people want to have two similar weapons for sale and have them give different abilities and strengths or weaknesses, maybe with a limited equipment rule force a person to decide which one to use while leaving the other behind?

[Bareheaded Warrior]

But what about a crossbow? Granted, I'm not sure if they have a "safety" on this or it's on a hair trigger, but why wouldn't a character basically keep a crossbow cocked and ready to fire with them even when not immediately in combat? Thus they're just pointing to aim. Someone with more knowledge can tell me why that's not a viable option.

Because HeroQuest is simple, so we simplify, which means that you select your attack weapon as part of your attack action, "I'm attacking the Fimir with my battle axe", "I'm shooting that orc with my crossbow" and this is discrete on each occasion, which avoids the need to keep track of whether the crossbow was made ready after the last time it was used seven turns ago, or if you can all remember that it was readied seven turns ago, but can you remember whether between then and now was a different attack weapon used, so would it need to be readied again now? How knows, who cares, to keep it simple we just assume that choosing to attack with the crossbow means getting it ready and using it on each occasion.

Good point about small crossbows having less power or accuracy over distance in real life. I guess you could rationalize the damage in other ways, like poison arrows, explosives tied to the tip, or... (didn't want to go there but) magical properties. Should it cost more? Then again I get the idea that people want to have two similar weapons for sale and have them give different abilities and strengths or weaknesses, maybe with a limited equipment rule force a person to decide which one to use while leaving the other behind?

Following play testing over the last year or so since my previous post on this topic, I have dropped the Repeater Crossbow, cool though it is, as it conflicts with my Ranger character type's special Quick Shot ability which enables him to shoot the short bow twice as one action against the same or different targets by sacrificing his movement for that turn.

In terms of the Crossbow Pistol versus Crossbow question, I have decided that this is a spectrum type situation with the heavy version (high damage, slow reload, heavy, cumbersome, long range) at the one end and the light version (lower damage, especially at range, faster reload, light, shorter range) at the other. Bearing in mind we are considering the type of crossbow along this spectrum that our characters are most likely to be taking with them into the confined underground spaces of the dungeon, and it seems the best interpretation of the existing HQ Crossbow is towards the lighter end of the spectrum, after all why would anyone choose to take a beast of a device that can penetrate steel at 200 yards, but takes a lifetime to reload and aim, into a confined underground area where they would be lucky to see as far as 40 yards at the best of times, surely a smaller, lighter, portable version, that can be readied, aimed and shot quickly would be the obvious choice for the experienced dungeoneer.

Of course the lighter version would have less power and accuracy at distance, but if the HQ crossbow IS the lighter version, then it can remain at the three combat dice given. It may be less combat dice than a heavy battlefield version, but if the heavy battlefield version doesn't exist within the game then the comparison isn't needed.

Short bow
The Short bow allows you to roll two combat dice in attack and cannot be used with a shield. You cannot use the short bow on an opponent in a square next to you.

Cost 150 gold coins.

May not be used by Wizard.

WEAPON

Crossbow
The Crossbow allows you to roll three combat dice in attack and cannot be used with a shield. You cannot use the Crossbow on an opponent in a square next to you.

Cost 350 gold coins.

May not be used by Wizard.

WEAPON

[Kurgan]

It's a game, it's simple, so we change it when and where we want. Someone wants the crossbow to be a two handed weapon, boom. Someone wants shields to work with two handed weapons, boom.

I admit it, like so many others, I nerf the HeroQuest crossbow. According to Avalon Hill it's always been intended to work like this:

Crossbow has unlimited supply of arrows. Whether wielded by a hero or crossbowman mercenary/evil crossbowman (or, theoretically, an elven mercenary of any type): It doesn't interfere with any weapons or armor, and it can hit any square you can "see" (meaning trace an unobstructed straight line from any part of your square so that it touches another character's square without intersecting the square of another character or closed door along the way), and yes it can shoot straight through tall solid furniture IF ZARGON WISHES (or if he wants it the opposite way, it can't, see the First Light rulebook). It just can't shoot through closed doors, walls, or through one character to hit another on the other side. It can't shoot the four adjacent cardinal direction squares touching the crossbow wielder, but it CAN hit the four close diagonals. And of course it can hit all the squares outward from it as long as (see the restrictions on objects in the way). It can't be wielded by the Wizard (or Warlock or Berserker).

My restriction is that it can't hit those four close diagonal squares (so the ten [oops, I meant "eight" sorry] squares surrounding the figure are prohibited for firing). Otherwise it's the same as AH's interpretation for me.

I don't adjust the price, or add carrying capacity restrictions. I still allow unlimited arrows (no upkeep costs), no "string break" mechanics, still unlimited range. If you have a spell or potion that boosts your attack dice, it works for attacks made with the Crossbow as well. You can pass it to an adjacent ally just like any other item (or if you die, they can pick it up where you dropped it). Everyone in the party can buy one between quests (though a few characters can't use it). Having two crossbows doesn't change anything (no special dual wielding rules, see the Rogue for the only exception). But Heroic Brew? Two shots with the crossbow, against the same (or different) targets as a single action. "Twist wood" spell destroys it, as does the Wizards of Morcar version of "Rust" (while GS "Rust" can't since it's not a "metal helmet/sword"). An Ice Gremlin can steal it, so long as it isn't the weapon you're wielding (meaning you used another weapon on your last turn).

If things are getting too easy from crossbows, I start introducing monsters with ranged (and diagonal) weapons of their own, which is also built into the game.

For me "cannot be combined with a shield" is a handicap built into the game to force a tradeoff for two weapons: the Battle Axe (because it's so powerful) and the Staff (because it's diagonal). The latter some might have a problem with, because the Wizard can't use the Shield so why bother (not that only the Wizard can use the staff but it's one of the few pieces of gear he can use)? Plus, even in the EU editions the Staff isn't the only diagonal weapon (Spear, plus Shortsword in all but the very earliest printings)... and in the NA edition the Longsword is diagonal (no Spear and Shortsword loses diagonal ability, plus Staff is nerfed to 1 die). Of course with AH's rules you don't need a staff to hit diagonally, since the Crossbow can do that already.

To me, the issue is more that it's not spelled out how you're supposed to not combine the Battleaxe/staff with the Shield. You can't have the benefit of them both at the same time, yes, but you could read it as if you have both, you have to discard one, to have the other even in your possession. But to me the "switch at the start of your turn" (no action required) is fine and easy solution, and you don't get to switch back at the end of your turn again (or else you could always be defending with the shield and always attacking with the staff/battleaxe).

Many others have proposed that switching weapons takes your turn's action (but there are many instances where you would want to not do that... here we're imposing a penalty to prevent someone "cheating" while when you lose a weapon for any reason, or gain one, you want to switch immediately; imagine if you searched for treasure and found one, now you can't even equip it until your next turn!). I don't think the system is broken as it is, just not everyone can quite agree on what part(s) they don't like and if they do, the solution, and that's fine.

I mean, to me the hitting of the close diagonal squares almost feels like cheating (vs. the game's rules, not against realism/plausibility), but it's allowed. I'm sure there are people who play it "as written" who just allow you to switch stuff around so the shield w/ BattleAxe/Staff thing is effectively no restriction. So long as the player always remembers to tell target he switched at the beginning (and end) of his turn, then that's that!

[Parzival]

I would suggest making the Pistol Bow a 1 dice weapon, the obvious advantage being the unlimited range and unlimited ammo, and thus an advantage over the dagger, but not much. An actual pistol bow is just too weak of a weapon.

On the question of holding a person at continuous threat with a crossbow, they are indeed suitable for that, considerably more so than the typical war bow with draw weights of 100 lbs or more. (For those not familiar with archery, the “draw weight” of a bow is a measure of its power. Bows can range from as little as 15 lbs (or “#15”)— a small child’s play bow— to well over 100 lbs— the mighty English longbow. The draw weight of the English longbow was so great that English yeomen developed distorted shoulder bones over their years of practice in order to handle the power. Such a yeoman could hold his bow pulled for some time, but not indefinitely.

The typical recurve target bow generally comes in a range of #25 to #45 draw power. (I’ve had the pleasure of target shooting with a Howard Hill longbow rated at #60— a tough pull, indeed! Beautiful bow.) In movie scenes what you’re probably encountering (aside from just plain rapid camera shot cuts) are very low powered bows used for appearances but with no real strength in the bow itself. After all, a bow is a weapon and a very dangerous one, as much as a loaded gun. No legit armorer is going to supply an actor with a weapon he could accidentally injure or kill someone with. The bows in the closeups or used in a threatening way will have rubber-tipped arrows, flimsy shafts (probably not even of wood), and the bows will be cheap, flexible plastic or rubber with no more spring to them than the average Slinky. You couldn’t injure a paper mouse with those things.

Modern “compound” pulley bows can have similar high power ratings to a longbow, but the pulley system takes the strain away, reducing it down to an easier pull similar to a target bow. There’s a “break point” where the wielder first hits the full power in the draw, but beyond it to full draw the tension lessens, allowing the bowstring to be held at full draw with little strain or discomfort. But these bows did not exist in the medieval era.

The nature of an actual crossbow, then and now, is that once loaded it’s very easy to aim and shoot. Anybody can learn to use a crossbow in seconds. A true bow, however, requires dedication and practice to become proficient.

The disadvantage of the crossbow is and always has been the fire rate.
An accomplished English yeoman could achieve rates of fire around 20 shots a minute— that is 1 shot every 3 seconds. That would be impossible with any crossbow of any type in any era. Indeed, it remained superior to the musket for centuries (Benjamin Franklin recommended the development of longbowmen for the Patriots in the American Revolutionary War!).
I will note that these were probably not aimed shots, but instead the mass volley attack of a significant body of archers, raining arrows down upon approaching Frenchies at Agincourt with no real discrimination as to where the arrows fell. Actual aimed shooting would be slower— but not much.

Regardless of how you load it, a crossbow takes considerably more time to load. Even a hand-drawn bow (which would be rather weak) is a clumsy process— pull back string, set in trigger nock, load bolt, lift to aim. For the powerful armor-piercing bows the process was extremely slow— as much or more than that of a muzzle-loaded musket! HeroQuest’s allowance of the crossbow to be fired every turn is an utter fantasy, indeed! But considering that at best a hero is going to get two shots spread over two turns before the monsters close, it’s fine to overlook it.

Finally, how I rule:
Crossbow can be used to “hip shot” diagonally, even at close range. (The card text only says it can’t be used against “adjacent” targets, which are defined in the game as being orthogonal.
Unlimited ammo.
If you use the crossbow, you can’t use a shield on Zargon’s turn after you’ve fired it. But at the start of your turn you can switch to any weapon you carry, and thus potentially use a shield as well, if you have one.

[Kurgan]

How much time between turns does a hero need to "ready" his weapon? Unlike some games, HeroQuest doesn't specifically break down how large the environment would be scaled to "real life" nor does it really break the turns or steps down into units of real world time. To me it's like wondering how exactly they carry all that gold or why they find this specific amount. Whatever it works out to it works. But that's the thing about HeroQuest, once you start breaking it down into some real world scenario, then you are making a choice and then either changing the one thing to fit into that world you've created, or else massaging the world to fit that specific interpretation. So maybe this one handed crossbow is really powerful and has long range and is easy to cock and aim between actions (or else you have plenty of time to do so). And maybe this set of armor really does slow you down and really can be put on by yourself, and so on. You don't like it, then you say no, you need this extra mechanic to make it happen.

When all else fails I refer to my "invisible porters" (not literally invisible like magic, but that they are "off camera" not not written into the story because they simply do their jobs, while you take the presidential glory). They carry the crossbow and arrows for you, and have it cocked and ready to place into your hands when the time comes to fire.

To me the invisible porters (who are non-combatants by the way) solve all of the realism issues one could imagine with HeroQuest. It's already established that the Heroes have help, and can hire other people to help them in quests.

The porters have all your food and supplies. They are the ones who keep the "dungeon" lit well enough that you can actually see what you're doing. If the hero dies, their last act (before fleeing the dungeon) is to hand off the supplies to the porters of any nearby heroes, otherwise they simply cut and run. Unrealistic you may be thinking? Not at all. In real life, archers relied on guys who brought in more arrows/bolts (possibly wagon loads of them). Other people repaired the armor/clothing of soldiers. Knights had squires and attendants holding their multiple horses that they used to get to, through, and from the battlefield, supplied their lances, helped them get into and out of armor, etc. Without these unsung heroes many a knight wouldn't have been able to do what he did, but he gets the credit for being the guy who struck the blow and filled the suit when the critical moment came. The pay of these porters comes in the differences like everything else (the gold you get to keep already accounts for all the stuff you used to pay the innkeeper for room & board, medical treatments, taxes, tribute, etc. between quests... nobody said these were solid gold coins the size of silver dollars either).

If you are in my game and ask about the invisible porters, I'm happy to explain, but otherwise I'll just not mention them, which is how they like it.