Bows in hand-to-hand combat. Really.

[NPC Mads Jakobsen]

Suppose your character has his bow out. Maybe bow is his best skill, maybe it’s a magic bow, maybe he lost his flail. Against him comes some NPC with an axe, who engage him in hand-to-hand combat. Should the character receive some penalty, realistically speaking?

Now I know some games penalize bows in hand-to-hand combat form a game balance point of view: bows are good at long range so they should be bad at short range, or every no-brainer will use bows all the time. That’s OK with me, but that’s not what I’m asking.

I also realize that it’s hard to hit someone in hand-to-hand combat with a bow. But is it significantly harder than casting a spell, conversing in Chinese, or trying to hit somebody with a flail, all whilst in a stressful hand-to-hand combat situation? That is to say, should bow skill receive a special penalty that no other skill normally get?

In short: what is the problem with bows in hand-to-hand combat?

MJ

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by NPC Mads Jakobsen
In short: what is the problem with bows in hand-to-hand combat?

MJ

The main problem is that the bow is designed to be used as a ranged weapon that uses the kenetic energy built up in the bowstring and bow to launch the arrow forward towards its target. At point blank range bows are ineffective.

At short range, anything under 6 feet or so they could be effective, but targets can easily move out of the way.

The way I've used most bows in hand to hand combat has been either as a short stave or club, or to use the bowstring as a nice flailing weapon. Of course this is when the bow has the bowstring disconnected. Otherwise I'd just give a nasty bowstring-burn <g>.

[Marius B]

...the only bonus Archery skill gives at 1st level is +1 to Parry.
Why?
I've no idea.
Ask Kevin Siembieda....

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Marius_Bredsdorff
...the only bonus Archery skill gives at 1st level is +1 to Parry.
Why?
I've no idea.
Ask Kevin Siembieda....

Probably because the bows in question are so damned big you can't fire them at first level and that they block damage by hiding more of your body behind it when you get attacked <g>.

[Andrew Martin]

Mads Jakobsen wrote:
> ...should bow skill receive a special penalty that no other skill normally get?

No. Or, the penalty should be the same as for trying to use a gun, casting a spell, or similar in hand to hand combat.

In my game systems, the longer the range of a weapon you have, the better the initiative you have. But when a opponent gets within the range of their shorter weapon, initiative flips around. For example at range:

Archer )-> Axeman-P

Archer has the initiative. But when Axeman gets into range with his axe, Archer looses initiative to Axeman.

Initiative in my system means being able to know what the opponent is doing, then being able to do one's own actions first! So it makes sense for Archer to keep away from Axeman, so as to keep the initiative. Failing that, Archer should drop his bow and switch to a melee weapon as quick as possible. For example, using a arrow as a stiletto-like dagger to defeat the opponent in melee. Tactics for Axeman is to either down Archer in melee, or, if suiciding, to destroy the bow's effectiveness, by attacking the bow's string.

[NPC Mads Jakobsen]

Easier that stepping out of the way of a flail or sword?

Does the arrow reach it's maximum speed already as it leaves the bow?

MJ

[Phishtrader]

A bow is used to store mechanical energy and then release it in a controlled and directed fashion to propel a typically pointed and fletched shaft of wood up to several hundred feet with the intention of causing grevious bodily harm to that which it strikes.

In melee combat a bow could be used as a very unwieldy light club or to block attacks made against a combatant. In all likelyhood the bow would become useless as a bow after the first block and more likely to be completely broken after a few more blows.

If a character has an arrow nocked and ready to fly they should be able to loose it as an attacker closes, but after that it won't do much to stop an opponent armed with any serious weapon (sword, ax, flail, spear, etc).

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by NPC Mads Jakobsen
Easier that stepping out of the way of a flail or sword?

Does the arrow reach it's maximum speed already as it leaves the bow?

MJ

Not having done a lot of physics in quite a while ...

I don't think it does. The arrow itself has some kinetic energy that is converted to movement as the arrow leaves the bow. That's why there's a lead-up to the maximum damage a bow can do. I'd have to check with the wife to see if this is true as she's big on physics and math. I've just the imaginative one.

As for being able to step out of the way of it.. the arrow's flight will be in one direction and usually through a target. With a flail or a sword facing forward it would act the same way. With a sweeping or slicing attack from these weapons it would be harder to dodge. Or you could just jump back.

[Clark]

Originally posted by NPC Mads Jakobsen
Does the arrow reach it's maximum speed already as it leaves the bow?

Yes. There's no way for the arrow to accelerate once its tail leaves the bowstring.

[NPC Mads Jakobsen]

So, Saranjeuhal says there should be a damage penalty.

Andrew Martin says a iniative penalty (for game balance reasons it seems to me).

Jon M. Berg seems to say it can't parry, being flimsy, so fighting with a bow makes you easier to hit.

Hmmm.

MJ

[Mokkurkalfe]

If you stand two feet away from an archer you can chop/crush/impale him waaaay before he can nock an arrow.
But if the archer already has an arrow ready, then it's different.
Plus, a bow won't stand long(if at all) if you try to parry with it.

If any of my players would engage in a meelee with a bow, they wouldn't last long...

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by NPC Mads Jakobsen
So, Saranjeuhal says there should be a damage penalty.

Andrew Martin says a iniative penalty (for game balance reasons it seems to me).

Jon M. Berg seems to say it can't parry, being flimsy, so fighting with a bow makes you easier to hit.

Hmmm.

MJ

Actually I didn't say there should be a damage penalty.

IF you have the arrow nocked and you manage to hit the target then you manage to hit the target and normal range modifiers should come into play. If you don't have it knocked then you're going to have problems. Firing a bow requires that you place the bow in a very specific position with very definitive arm movement to draw the bow back. This normally requires that you stay stationary, but can be performed while moving.

Thing about it this way. When you release an arrow, the bowsting has to return to it's normal position. Depending on the length of the arrow, you may be looking at 2/3 of the arrow being beyond the bow body itself before this happens. As a good rule of thumb I've always used that point blank range is the length of the arrow. Short range damage can occur at greater than the length of the arrow, indicating that the arrow has indeed left the bow. IF it hits it's target it should get full damage. As the range increases, so does the damage decrease until the arrow fallsto the ground.

You should be able to parry or deflect with a bow. Remember that these weapons are designed to be bent against the "will of the wood". They're incredibly tough and durable. Of course, it all depends what type of weapon is being parried, and what part of the weapon is being parried. It's harder to parry an axe haft than the axe head, but it does less damage to the bow. Of course it also depends on the size of the bow. Larger bows can be used to "swing parry" and knock a weapon out of it's contact path. "Block parrying" requires that you stop the full attack, and is usually performed with a shield or swordbreaker for example.

[threegee]

Practically speaking, every weapon has a sweet spot in terms of its range. Depending on the height of the attacker, for most melee weapons, this spot is less than five feet away. For a bow, however, this spot is 10-20 feet away. There's nothing worse than charging a bowman who is prepared, because he's shooting what, for him, is a stationary target at point blank range. Of course, after the arrow is fired, he's too busy trying not get hit by Mr. Happy to fire a second arrow.

And yes, the maximum velocity is achieved as the arrow leaves the bow. Unless your games are very strange and involve rocket-assisted arrows.

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by threegee
And yes, the maximum velocity is achieved as the arrow leaves the bow. Unless your games are very strange and involve rocket-assisted arrows.

Sounds somewhat Palladium-like <g>.

[NPC Mads Jakobsen]

Soooo, what's the penalty?

MJ

[Andrew Martin]

NPC Mads Jakobsen wrote:
> Andrew Martin says a initative penalty...

Not quite. Initiative gets reversed. With Axeman at range, Archer has initiative. In hand-to-hand combat, Axeman has initiative. This flipping of initiative completely overrides the character's Speed or similar attributes. "S" system is designed to have very few modifiers.

> ...(for game balance reasons it seems to me).

To match reality as much as possible. Swapping initiative seems the most effective method I've found so far.

[Saranjeuhal]

If the bow is nocked, Archer has initiative. It takes about 1/3 of a second for the arrow to travel about 25 yards. This is much faster than your Swordsman can attack. If the target is in short range I'd give +1 to attack if the target was coming right at you and you had a clear shot. The nearer he/she gets then the larger the target area you can hit.

If the bow is not nocked, then depending on the type of bow the Archer has then it will take a second or two for him/her to draw it, depending on the poundage and type of bow. If the Archer is moving at the same time as nocking, I would then attribute a penalty to both actions as nocking takes some effort to do. I would also give the Swordsman +1 to attack because while nocking you've effectively reduced your concentration and increased your body target area.

Remember to go for the head. It's the only way to be sure!

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Clark


Yes. There's no way for the arrow to accelerate once its tail leaves the bowstring.

It may still be accelerating though as it leaves the bowstring. A bow gathers potential energy which is transferred to kinetic energy which in turn increases the arrows velocity. As velocity increases to the maximum velocity, the point where maximum velocity is reached is most likely after the arrow has left the bowstring, not as it leaves. The acceleration of the arrow will start to degrade once the potential energy of the bow is no longer applied to the arrow.

[Phishtrader]

Originally posted by Saranjeuhal


You should be able to parry or deflect with a bow. Remember that these weapons are designed to be bent against the "will of the wood". They're incredibly tough and durable. Of course, it all depends what type of weapon is being parried, and what part of the weapon is being parried. It's harder to parry an axe haft than the axe head, but it does less damage to the bow. Of course it also depends on the size of the bow. Larger bows can be used to "swing parry" and knock a weapon out of it's contact path. "Block parrying" requires that you stop the full attack, and is usually performed with a shield or swordbreaker for example.

Bows are not incredibly tough and durable. Bows do exhibit great strength, but only when the limbs are flexed in the correct manner. A modern recurve bow, analogous to the D&D compound bow, can be ruined as far as accurate use is concerned by improperly stringing it. A slight amount of twist introduced into one or both limbs will render the bow inaccurate and potentially dangerous to use.

Bows in a medieval fantasy setting will be made from various hardwoods and/or horn and/or bone. None of these materials will withstand repeated blows from a large melee weapon and retain their shape or purpose.

If a bowman becomes engaged in melee, his best option is to switch to a "real" melee weapon or run away. Using the bow will only gain him a few moments of safety.

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Jon M. Berg


Bows are not incredibly tough and durable. Bows do exhibit great strength, but only when the limbs are flexed in the correct manner. A modern recurve bow, analogous to the D&D compound bow, can be ruined as far as accurate use is concerned by improperly stringing it. A slight amount of twist introduced into one or both limbs will render the bow inaccurate and potentially dangerous to use.

Bows in a medieval fantasy setting will be made from various hardwoods and/or horn and/or bone. None of these materials will withstand repeated blows from a large melee weapon and retain their shape or purpose.

If a bowman becomes engaged in melee, his best option is to switch to a "real" melee weapon or run away. Using the bow will only gain him a few moments of safety.

You mean you don't own the Dragonbone Bow of Unholy Defense?<g>.

I agree with all your points. Sometimes those few moments of safety are enough to pull out a stilleto and ram it where it works best.

[Ghost]

Switching weapons takes time, a common move for an archer in an emergency isn't to use it to parry, you dodge and ram the bow into your attackers guts as you dodge around his off side. When he doubles over you have time to draw your melee weapon and finish him (if your fast enough, with a single dagger thrust to the base of the skull before he can recover from being winded). if your oponent has no "off side" (because he is ussing a shield or two weapons) you may not be able to get the bow into his gut, instead trip him as you pass.

Remember, in an emergency its better to let him ruin your bow than split your skull.

Ghost

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Ghost
Switching weapons takes time, a common move for an archer in an emergency isn't to use it to parry, you dodge and ram the bow into your attackers guts as you dodge around his off side. When he doubles over you have time to draw your melee weapon and finish him (if your fast enough, with a single dagger thrust to the base of the skull before he can recover from being winded). if your oponent has no "off side" (because he is ussing a shield or two weapons) you may not be able to get the bow into his gut, instead trip him as you pass.

Remember, in an emergency its better to let him ruin your bow than split your skull.

Ghost

Or you could simply drop the boy and pull a weapon at the same time to attack with. Most of the time most archers draw with their leading hand and hold the bow in the off-hand. So for me I could drop the bow in my left hand and draw a weapon with my right hand at the same time.

I've also used a bow in a game to "catch" an attackers head between the string and box and surprise him by partially choking him as I ran away <g>.

[Ghost]

Yep, you could just drop the bow and draw the melee weapon, but again its time, faster just to move. Dropping the bow risks you being unable to recover it, and if you try to draw anything larger than a dagger without dropping the bow but whilst moving to engage you risk becoming entagled.
In hand to hand always try and do something the foe will not expect, do it quick and if you wish to live move around as much as possible.
Both your option and mine are viable depending on the situation of course and what is going to get your foe out of the fight fastest and with the least risk to you.

Of course option 3 is always to run away whilst yelling for help at the top of your lungs!:D

Ghost

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Ghost
Of course option 3 is always to run away whilst yelling for help at the top of your lungs!:D

Ghost

And option 4 being screeching loudly like a banshee at the guy attacking you that he gets momentarily stunned for a second or two and gives you time to run away. Not that I've ever done that in a game. Ahem.

[Epoch]

Suppose someone is 15 feet away, and you're drawing a bead on him with a bow. He steps abruptly to the side, moving, say, three feet to the side. To re-aim your bow, you move it a certain distance, representable as an angle.

That angle's tangent is 3/15, or 1/5, so the angle is Arctan(1/5) which is 11.3 degrees (I think that calculator I'm using is in degrees).

Now, if someone is five feet away, and they perform the same three-foot step to one side, you have to recenter to the tune of Arctan(3/5) =31.0 degrees -- in other words, you have to move the bow nearly three times as far.

Assuming that you have a constant maximum speed at which you can turn the bow in a controlled manner, it will take you three times as long to reaim the bow at someone who's five feet away in comparison to someone who's 15 feet away. If they're sufficiently fast, they can use that extra grace period to attack you, move further out of the way, knock your bow aside, or whatever.

Now, this is to some extent compensated for by the fact that you have to aim less well at short range, but, I think, not enough.

So I think that the physics of the matter support a to-hit penalty for using a missile weapon of any kind in a melee situation -- for this reason and that ordinarily, you don't have to hop around and avoid being hit while you're aiming a missile weapon.

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Epoch
So I think that the physics of the matter support a to-hit penalty for using a missile weapon of any kind in a melee situation -- for this reason and that ordinarily, you don't have to hop around and avoid being hit while you're aiming a missile weapon.

Nice logic there. What I would suggest though is that it's the distance and speed that the target is moving away from you determines whether or not there is a penalty. It shouldn't be an automatic penalty. It would depend on how much you had to compensate.

So in your two examples, where the arc is larger there would be a penalty, but in the first example there wouldn't be (possibly)

[threegee]

I would like to point out that it is NOT possible that an arrow continues to accelerate after it has left the string. F=ma. No force = no acceleration. Unless the arrow spontaneously becomes pure energy, in which case, this is the wrong formula, anyway. It may be that for certain styles of arrows, the maximum velocity is reached before the arrow leaves the string, but it certainly doesn't happen afterward.

Also, hands up for everyone who has actually been in a melee involving archers. Bows take time to use; time that is not being spent defending oneself. Like I said before, you shoot people as they close, or when they aren't looking.

[Epoch]

After a certain amount of distance away from someone, the amount you have to move the bow is negligeable, and the difficulty becomes lining up a good shot.

And I assume, as do most RPG's, I think, that the "default case" is for someone to be actively trying to avoid being hit. Which is why I suggest a penalty for the bowman in melee, and not in other cases.

But, obviously, if the target is standing still, then it should get easier to hit him, the closer you are.

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by threegee
I would like to point out that it is NOT possible that an arrow continues to accelerate after it has left the string. F=ma. No force = no acceleration. Unless the arrow spontaneously becomes pure energy, in which case, this is the wrong formula, anyway. It may be that for certain styles of arrows, the maximum velocity is reached before the arrow leaves the string, but it certainly doesn't happen afterward.

Correction, you're assuming that acceleration is instantaneous across the entire shaft.

Stop motion photography of an arrow that has 'just' left the string shows that the arrow is bent... the shaft arcing off the line drawn from notch to arrowhead. This means the notch end of the arrow contains more energy than the pointy end. Although all the energy is imparted into the arrow, it will still accelerate as that energy overcomes the remaining inertia (at the tip) and balances across the shaft and as the arrow resumes a more aerodynamic shape. You almost need to apply F=ma to both ends of the arrow.

But, is this difference in velocity enough to make much of a difference, damage-wise? Probably not. Unless you're using one of those systems (that shall remain nameless) in which damage can be ranked by powers of 10!

Eb

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by threegee
I would like to point out that it is NOT possible that an arrow continues to accelerate after it has left the string. F=ma. No force = no acceleration. Unless the arrow spontaneously becomes pure energy, in which case, this is the wrong formula, anyway. It may be that for certain styles of arrows, the maximum velocity is reached before the arrow leaves the string, but it certainly doesn't happen afterward.

Well, if the arrow (and the archer) are falling to the ground, gravity will lend a helping hand in accelerating the arrow after it's left the string. Normally when you fire an arrow horizontally it does accelerate after it leaves the string, but downwards as gravity takes hold of it. Although it doesn't accelerate in the same direction, it does accelerate in a different direction.

[threegee]

That's a good point. I stand corrected. Just the same, the arrow generally goes slower the farther it is from the string. There's no second-order meta-acceleration that makes it zip along, once classic ballistic principals set in.

[EvilSchemer]

Originally posted by Clark


Yes. There's no way for the arrow to accelerate once its tail leaves the bowstring.

Technically, it acellerates if you fire it down hill, like from the top of a hill or cliff or wall. Gravity will acellerate it. Just as the poor schmoes firing up at the guy on the hill/cliff/wall lose some momentum because they're firing uphill.

Firing in a ballistic arc will lose you some acelleration as it reaches its nadir, then it will gain that acelleration back as it descends to its target.

CC

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Ebenezer


Correction, you're assuming that acceleration is instantaneous across the entire shaft.

Stop motion photography of an arrow that has 'just' left the string shows that the arrow is bent... the shaft arcing off the line drawn from notch to arrowhead. This means the notch end of the arrow contains more energy than the pointy end. Although all the energy is imparted into the arrow, it will still accelerate as that energy overcomes the remaining inertia (at the tip) and balances across the shaft and as the arrow resumes a more aerodynamic shape. You almost need to apply F=ma to both ends of the arrow.


This would be Archer's Paradox if I remember the term correctly?


But, is this difference in velocity enough to make much of a difference, damage-wise? Probably not. Unless you're using one of those systems (that shall remain nameless) in which damage can be ranked by powers of 10!

Probably not. The main question was originally to do with what penalty is applied, if any. Now we're just being physics lawyers ...

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Epoch
Suppose someone is 15 feet away, and you're drawing a bead on him with a bow.

I won't question your math and angle data. I think that it's out of the realm of consideration at these short distances because...

...I have a 65# pull (at 29" draw, my usual draw being 32" makes it around a 73# pull) recurve bow and it can throw an arrow across 15 feet so fast that you probably can't see it. Unless your dodger starts his dodge before I release, he'll definitely be finishing his 3 foot movement with an arrow in him. And I'm a lousy archer. Anyone with a modicum of archery skill could take an unaimed shot at a man-sized target at 15 feet or less and score a hit.

The key to a close-up shot lies in the archer's coolness under fire.

Eb

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Ebenezer
The key to a close-up shot lies in the archer's coolness under fire.

Or using one of those damn nice Yumi (Japanese Long Bow) that can put a hole in you at around a mile away.

[threegee]

Okay, now we're talking about two different kinds of acceleration. Because this is a forum for roleplayers, not engineers, I was using the term in the lay sense, i.e., as positive linear acceleration. Technically, acceleration is any change in velocity. The bow string accelerates the arrow in what we will call the 'forward' direction. That increases as the string is released through a certain point where the acceleration is at it's maximum, then decreases until the arrow leaves contact with the string, and the acceleration in the forward direction is zero. Once the arrow is projected into the air, the acceleration of gravity becomes a factor for the entire flight, and is exactly constant under all conditions. Generally, arrows are fired somewhat upward, so there is a postive vertical component to the arrows velocity until gravity makes the arrow come back down, at an increasing speed. Finally, we have the acceleration due to air resistance that is opposite to the forward direction. As long as there is a positive forward component to the arrow's velocity, there will be this acceleration due to air resistance, which in simple terms, slows the arrow in its flight.

Any questions? Comments? What were we talking about, anyway?

[Saranjeuhal]

Roll 3d6. Score under 12 and you buy lunch.

Otherwise the target dodges.

Besides if we want hard physics we'd all still be playing Traveller right? :D

[Scott_Lynch]

Assuming that you have a constant maximum speed at which you can turn the bow in a controlled manner, it will take you three times as long to reaim the bow at someone who's five feet away in comparison to someone who's 15 feet away. If they're sufficiently fast, they can use that extra grace period to attack you, move further out of the way, knock your bow aside, or whatever.


Your logic is impeccable, Epoch, but I think it misses the fact that the critical factor here is really the speed with which the archer's *target* can move. Whether five feet or fifteen feet away, a person leaping with a melee weapon is at a disadvantage against someone with a nocked and drawn arrow, just as they would be against someone with a drawn and loaded firearm. It takes only a bare fraction of a second for an archer to adjust to hit a target at fifteen feet. Even three times that fraction is still likely to be less time than the target would need to interrupt the firing sequence from five feet. Extraordinarily fast characters (Elves with a D&D3 Dex of 20, say) might gain the initiative on a bowman at close range, thus, my suggested solution would be to make this a question of initiative rather than apply a penalty to the archer's attack.

All of this, of course, assumes a nocked and drawn arrow. An archer with an arrow ready is death on wheels up close; an archer fumbling for his quiver while someone tries to gut-slit him is in serious trouble.

Cheers and best,

Scott L

[Epoch]

From Ebenezer:
I won't question your math and angle data. I think that it's out of the realm of consideration at these short distances because...

...I have a 65# pull (at 29" draw, my usual draw being 32" makes it around a 73# pull) recurve bow and it can throw an arrow across 15 feet so fast that you probably can't see it. Unless your dodger starts his dodge before I release, he'll definitely be finishing his 3 foot movement with an arrow in him. And I'm a lousy archer. Anyone with a modicum of archery skill could take an unaimed shot at a man-sized target at 15 feet or less and score a hit.

The key to a close-up shot lies in the archer's coolness under fire.

You hit on the answer yourself, there, Ebenezer -- I am assuming that the target begins his dodge before the archer releases. After all, nobody's going to adjust their aim after release.

From Scott Lynch:


Your logic is impeccable, Epoch, but I think it misses the fact that the critical factor here is really the speed with which the archer's *target* can move. Whether five feet or fifteen feet away, a person leaping with a melee weapon is at a disadvantage against someone with a nocked and drawn arrow, just as they would be against someone with a drawn and loaded firearm. It takes only a bare fraction of a second for an archer to adjust to hit a target at fifteen feet. Even three times that fraction is still likely to be less time than the target would need to interrupt the firing sequence from five feet. Extraordinarily fast characters (Elves with a D&D3 Dex of 20, say) might gain the initiative on a bowman at close range, thus, my suggested solution would be to make this a question of initiative rather than apply a penalty to the archer's attack.


While I certainly agree with you that an archer with a nocked and drawn arrow is far more dangerous than one who's drawing from a quiver, I think that you overestimate most people's ability to aim against a dodging target.

Now, my example was simple to keep the math simple, but, of course, it's not that the target simply takes a single three-foot step out of the way -- a sensible opponent attempting to close ground with an archer will be jinking left and right continuously, making the archer constantly adjusting aim.

Clearly, the archer is moving a considerably shorter distance to reaim than the target is to dodge, so, all other things being equal, we might imagine that unless the target was grossly faster than the archer, all this would be for naught, and the archer would easily pin the target.

However, while the target is making "twitch" style movements, jumping to one side, ducking, or whatever, the archer has to make a controlled, steady movement for the reaim -- if he twitches himself, he won't be hitting anything. For a relatively inexperienced archer, you can't reaim quickly -- especially not if you're making a 30 degree arc adjustment (and at that point, you're talking about moving a foot, which really throws you off). An experienced archer, in most RPG paradigms, has a greater base chance to hit -- so, all other things being equal, a to-hit penalty is less problematic for him than for an inexperienced archer.

Thus, I think it's not-unreasonable to use a to-hit penalty to model trying to shoot a melee-range opponent, even when the arrow is already nocked and drawn.

(Of course, one must wonder -- if the arrow was already nocked and drawn, how did the archer let the opponent into melee range to begin with?)

[Andrew Martin]

Epoch wrote:
> (Of course, one must wonder -- if the arrow was already nocked and drawn, how did the archer let the opponent into melee range to begin with?)

Maybe the attacker hasn't run out of hitpoints yet? :D

[Alka-Seltzer]

Originally posted by threegee
And yes, the maximum velocity is achieved as the arrow leaves the bow. Unless your games are very strange and involve rocket-assisted arrows.

Mmmmm, rocket-assisted bow and arrow, mmmmmmmm.

[Clark]

Originally posted by Saranjeuhal


It may still be accelerating though as it leaves the bowstring. A bow gathers potential energy which is transferred to kinetic energy which in turn increases the arrows velocity. As velocity increases to the maximum velocity, the point where maximum velocity is reached is most likely after the arrow has left the bowstring, not as it leaves. The acceleration of the arrow will start to degrade once the potential energy of the bow is no longer applied to the arrow.

No. Kinetic energy IS velocity (actually KE is proportional to the square of the velocity). 100% of any potential enrgy is in the bowstring and bow, not the arrow. Thus once the arrow loses contact with the bowstring, no more energy can be transferred to teh arrow, thus it cannot accelerate.

To look at it another way, In order for there to be any acceleration there must be force. Once the tail of the arrow leaves the string, no more force - hence no more acceleration.

F=ma.

[Clark]

Originally posted by EvilSchemer


Technically, it acellerates if you fire it down hill,
CC

Only if it's travelling at less than terminal velocity (the velocity at which its weight overcomes its drag through the air) as it leaves the bow. I have no idea what the terminal velocity of an arrow is.

[Clark]

Originally posted by Ebenezer


Correction, you're assuming that acceleration is instantaneous across the entire shaft.


Eb

You're right, I think everyone was assuming a rigid arrow. However the net motion of the center of gravity will not accelerate. (We're really splitting some pretty fine hairs here...)

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Clark


You're right, I think everyone was assuming a rigid arrow. However the net motion of the center of gravity will not accelerate. (We're really splitting some pretty fine hairs here...)

We're gamers. Did you expect anything less ?

My rules are better than your rules <g>.

[Saranjeuhal]

Originally posted by Clark


No. Kinetic energy IS velocity (actually KE is proportional to the square of the velocity). 100% of any potential enrgy is in the bowstring and bow, not the arrow. Thus once the arrow loses contact with the bowstring, no more energy can be transferred to teh arrow, thus it cannot accelerate.

To look at it another way, In order for there to be any acceleration there must be force. Once the tail of the arrow leaves the string, no more force - hence no more acceleration.

F=ma.

Kinetic energy is NOT velocity. Kinetic energy is associated with movement, with mass and velocity being two parameters that interact to give the kinetic energy of an object that is moving.

When the arrow loses contact with the bowstring then the potential energy in the bowstring and bow is no longer transferred to the arrow which means that the bowstring can no longer help or force the arrow to accelerate. As has been discussed in other posts there may be other extraneous factors that help in the continued acceleration of the arrow, including gravity or the effects of Archer's Paradox.

Of course now we're REALLY splitting fine hairs down the middle. Or would that be the tail?

This thread reminds me of an actual game we were running where this came up and dominated conversation for about 30 mins <lol>.

Suffice to say, the original question for this thread was "what's wrong with bows in hand to hand combat". Maybe we should get back to answering that? :D

(God, I miss coffee at 3 in the morning and decent discussion like this around a table with friends. Ah the !joys of being a parent and 4000 miles away from the people you used to argue with on a daily basis <g>)

[The Incredible Hatboy]

Actually, if you only care about the velocity forwards (disregarding motion up or down), then as soon as the arrow leaves the bow, its velocity is set. There's NOTHING acting on its vx (that's velocity in the x direction; I can't use subscript here) after the tail end of the arrow stops being in contact with the bowstring. I'm not sure how much effect there'd be due to the force of the bow being unevenly applied across the arrow.

[Clark]

Originally posted by Saranjeuhal


Kinetic energy is NOT velocity.

Well, right, but they're essentially different ways of describing the same phenomenon - in other words, kinetic energy cannot be "converted" to velocity, since it is already a way of describing velocity. Anyway, you're also right that we're so far off topic here that it's not even funny.

- Clark, mechanical engineer who can't resist nitpicking discussions of Newtonian mechanics, and will now shut the hell up.