Bow vrs crossbow

[Ewhit]

Can someone e explain to me why a light crossbow or heavy crossbow would be chosen over a short bow or long bow besides the aesthetic look for having a crossbow.

Am I correct in the following:
Example for use
5th lvl fighter. 2 attacks and to make it simple no fighting style or dex bonus

s. bow is 1d6 range or L. Bow 1d8 ignore range
L. Crossbow 1d8 h. Crossbow 1d10 ignore range
All have two handed ammo but crossbow has loading

Without spending a feat for crossbow expert, the crossbow can only shoot once even if you have 2 attacks and with the bow you can attack twice.

And if so, why would anyone want a L./H. Crossbow besides for looks.

Ty for info but if it wasn't clear my example is for a fighter lvl 5 2 attacks

[supergoji18]

Can someone e explain to me why a light crossbow or heavy crossbow would be chosen over a short bow or long bow besides the aesthetic look for having a crossbow.

Am I correct in the following:
Example for use
5th lvl fighter. 2 attacks and to make it simple no fighting style or dex bonus

s. bow is 1d6 range or L. Bow 1d8 ignore range
L. Crossbow 1d8 h. Crossbow 1d10 ignore range
All have two handed ammo but crossbow has loading

Without spending a feat for crossbow expert, the crossbow can only shoot once even if you have 2 attacks and with the bow you can attack twice.

And if so, why would anyone want a L./H. Crossbow besides for looks.
because not all classes have the extra attack feature

[Mellack]

If you only get one attack, such as a rogue, then you should take the heavy crossbow for more damage.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

because not all classes have the extra attack feature

Ding! We have a winner!

Includes: Anyone before level 5
Rogues
Lore Bards
Dex-Clerics, especially Trickery

And there's also the crossbow expert feat, which granted pushes characters towards using a hand crossbow, but also lets you rapid fire the larger ones.

[smcmike]

Crossbows do more damage, and for a character without multiple attacks, loading doesn't matter. So why would you use a bow over a crossbow, unless you have multiple attacks?

[JeffreyGator]

because not all classes have the extra attack feature

For example warlocks getting all simple might use a light crossbow at level 1-2 before eldritch blast got added damage. It does more damage than a shortbow.

A cleric generally only ever has one attack and so might prefer the crossbows.

The biggest disadvantage of the crossbows to me is their weight.

If you peruse some of the iconic class art these are the classes that are shown with crossbows.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

The biggest disadvantage of the crossbows to me is their weight.

Yep this is important. I played a Valor bard with 8 STR, and at levels 3 to 5, when I wanted to use medium armor, heavy crossbow, and carry a shield and rapier, just in case, I could barely carry my own equipment. No chance of bringing any loot back on my own.

[jas61292]

Another thing to consider, when comparing the Heavy Crossbow with the Hand Crossbow is that, while the extra attack you can get with a hand crossbow is nice, it comes at the opportunity cost of using your bonus action. Furthermore, it has diminishing returns as you get more attacks, just like two weapon fighting, especially for a fighter. While it never gets quite as bad, due to the heavy crossbows lower damage die and lack of damage boosting fighting style, the usefulness still decreases by basically upping the opportunity cost of using it for your bonus action. Depending on your build, if you have usage for your bonus actions, a heavy crossbow could be a much better choice for your than a hand crossbow. And, of course, if you have the crossbow feat (which is a good feat regardless of what bow/crossbow you use), then the heavy crossbow is going to be better than a longbow in damage, so long as you don't have to fight at super long distances.

Oh, and since I was talking about fighters, I would just like to mention that, having played a champion, it is always nice to have bigger damage dice for that expanded crit range to work with. Regardless of how much it effects average damage, rolling 2d6 for a crit is just not that satisfying.

[PoeticDwarf]

Can someone e explain to me why a light crossbow or heavy crossbow would be chosen over a short bow or long bow besides the aesthetic look for having a crossbow.

Am I correct in the following:
Example for use
5th lvl fighter. 2 attacks and to make it simple no fighting style or dex bonus

s. bow is 1d6 range or L. Bow 1d8 ignore range
L. Crossbow 1d8 h. Crossbow 1d10 ignore range
All have two handed ammo but crossbow has loading

Without spending a feat for crossbow expert, the crossbow can only shoot once even if you have 2 attacks and with the bow you can attack twice.

And if so, why would anyone want a L./H. Crossbow besides for looks.

Ty for info but if it wasn't clear my example is for a fighter lvl 5 2 attacks
Heavy: feat and use bonus action
Hand: feat
Light: rogue

[wunderkid]

it has diminishing returns as you get more attacks, just like two weapon fighting, especially for a fighter.

I can't off the top of my head work out what you mean by diminishing returns? Two weapon fighting fell behind gwf because of the feat for -5/+10 I thought? More than glad to be corrected but I thought that was the case. And if that is the case then sharpshooter keeps the crossbow relevant.

Again could be wrong and there's something I've missed.

[RickAllison]

I can't off the top of my head work out what you mean by diminishing returns? Two weapon fighting fell behind gwf because of the feat for -5/+10 I thought? More than glad to be corrected but I thought that was the case. And if that is the case then sharpshooter keeps the crossbow relevant.

Again could be wrong and there's something I've missed.

It's diminishing returns because of action economy. At low levels, bonus action attacks double your amount of attacks. With Extra Attack, it only gives you 1.5X the number of attacks. If a fighter, it then decreases to 1.33X and 1.25X. It's diminishing returns because the extra attack matters less when you have more to begin with.

[SMac8988]

Could also see the cross bows working nicely with the beast master, since then you can use your second attack with your beast. And once you get that beast multi attack could be a nice bit if damage still with only one attack from the cross bow

[Drackolus]

Could also see the cross bows working nicely with the beast master, since then you can use your second attack with your beast. And once you get that beast multi attack could be a nice bit if damage still with only one attack from the cross bow

Hadn't thought of that! Good spot.
In that respect, yes, the fighter should use the bow if he lacks the appropriate feat. I would like to point out that crossbows were primarily used because it was much easier to hand a civilian a crossbow and show him how to shoot than to train someone for many years to use a bow effectively. Crossbows are basically made for non-fighters.

[JackPhoenix]

Hadn't thought of that! Good spot.
In that respect, yes, the fighter should use the bow if he lacks the appropriate feat. I would like to point out that crossbows were primarily used because it was much easier to hand a civilian a crossbow and show him how to shoot than to train someone for many years to use a bow effectively. Crossbows are basically made for non-fighters.

And light crossbow IS a simple weapon more effective than shortbow! What a coincidence! (though it was more apparent in 3.5, when both light and heavy crossbow were a simple weapons, while short and long bows were martial)

[Serket]

I can't off the top of my head work out what you mean by diminishing returns? Two weapon fighting fell behind gwf because of the feat for -5/+10 I thought? More than glad to be corrected but I thought that was the case.

It falls behind because the ratio of attacks goes down. At level 1 a TWFer has two attacks to the GWs one, and it looks good. At level 5 it's 3:2 (without feats), and it's pretty even, though if you add feats the TWFer loses. At level 11 it's 4:3 and it's not even funny.

Feat support is also (massively!) in favour of the two-handed weapons, but even without feats it still fall off, simply because you only ever get one bonus action attack. The more attacks you have, the less one matters.

[JumboWheat01]

Could also see the cross bows working nicely with the beast master, since then you can use your second attack with your beast. And once you get that beast multi attack could be a nice bit if damage still with only one attack from the cross bow

That's actually pretty clever. I'll have to bring that up to my buddy who's planning on a ranger. I know I can prolly sell him on the whole crossbow idea, my little rogue's been rocking his so well with that powerful sneak attack damage.

[SMac8988]

That's actually pretty clever. I'll have to bring that up to my buddy who's planning on a ranger. I know I can prolly sell him on the whole crossbow idea, my little rogue's been rocking his so well with that powerful sneak attack damage.

I'm going to have to change my build to do it now. Idk what all to take feat wise now though

[2D8HP]

Never one to miss an opportunity to rant on archery and historical minutiae, here goes!. Swiped from Wikipedia:
"During the*Battle of Crécy, in August 1346, upwards of 5,000 Genoese crossbowmen were employed by the French in the first line against the English. At around 4 PM, a sudden rainstorm arose. The English longbowmen simply removed their bowstrings, and stored them under their water-resistant leather caps to keep them dry. Crossbows, on the other hand, cannot be unstrung and restrung without tools. The strings of the crossbows thus became stretched upon being drenched by rain. When the rain-soaked and now-stretched crossbow strings were used roughly an hour later during the initial attack against the emplaced and defending English, the crossbows were largely rendered useless".
Sadly I can't find thr reports of the military use of dragons during the battle :smallfrown:

-Your welcome:smallsmile: