Now, I recall this coming up in conversation before, but I cannot for the life of me remember where it is. I'm also unsure of whether or not a conclusion was reached, or if it was exactly the same question.
My question is this: Is the distance table included in the Adventurer's Book correct or pheasible? Because I did a bit of research, on top of what I already knew about bows, and the idea that a great bow can only reach a maximum of 47 yards seems rather pathetic to me (I am assuming that a great bow is essentially a longbow)
The same question applies to the bow and the spear. I'm also unsure as to what is meant by the different ranges, and it reads as though one cannot shoot somebody closer than about 20 yards if you are using a great bow, for example.

Apologies to bring this up again, but it's been niggling away at my mind.

Thanks
Beleg

I think you've interpreted the table in the AB (page 115) wrong, Beleg.

Those distances should be read as follows:

Great Bow
Short Range: 0 to 20 + Body Rating
Medium Range: 20 + Body Rating to 30 + Body Rating
Long Range: 30 + Body Rating to 40 + Body Rating

So for someone with a Body of 4 the table would look as follows:

Short Range: 0 to 24
Medium Range: 24 to 34
Long Range: 34 to 44

That make anymore sense than it did? You still have a max range of 44 yards but I was more interested in putting you straight on the short range query/problem you had.

Thanks, that does make much more sense. I'm assuming the range is to determine any negatives to the roll, like with cramped quarters etc. Though I can't remember where that tables is (So many tables!) I'm still sceptical on the overall ranges though

Loremaster's Book, page 48.

Not having looked into this previously, but from what I see here we maybe talking "effective" range as opposed to "maximum" range.

Beran, I'm not so sure about this. Supposedly an English longbowman could hit a target at 180 yard "most" of the time, and supposedly Henry VIII ordered that no training target could be less than 220 yards away.

You are probably right. But, I would like to point out that (to use a modern example) most tank guns can hit a target out to about 2km away; however, most armies train their tankers to engage at a much closer range. Over the years I have found that the concepts of "effective" and "maximum" ranges are the biggest Bug-bears for gaming systems. Sure, an archer using a long bow could hit a practice target out to 200 yds, but since he would usually only use the bow in everyday life hunting he would be shooting at a much closer range. When you are designing a game which do you use; what can be achieved on the range, or in the closed environment of the woods?

With luck someone from C7 will weigh in on this with an official ruling.

Weapon ranges may be important for mass battles, but for a typical RPG session in TOR it's not really an issue.

Opening Volleys (LB 41) suggests a single volley under most circumstances and possibly a second with bows if there's a greater distance between them.

That may well be true Garbar, but it would still be nice if the ambiguity could be settled. As Beran said, it would be nice if an official ruling appeared.

I think we have an official ruling already; the maximum range that a great bow can be used [effectively] is 40 yards + PC's Body rating. Its fairly clear isn't it?

In my experience and talking to people greater ranges would require more bowman as they look to cover an area rather than singly shooting their arrows.

As a player I would agree, but as a (very) amatuer archer I would like to know the line of thought. To be honest what mystifies me is the inclusion of Body into the range calculation. The power comes from how the bow is constructed the archer just needs the strength to able to draw it. It would make more sense to me to have a set range listed for each bow type.

Not sure I necessarily agree with that line of reasoning...

A record of how boys and men trained to use the bows with high draw weights survives from the reign of Henry VII.

[My yeoman father] taught me how to draw, how to lay my body in my bow ... not to draw with strength of arms as divers other nations do ... I had my bows bought me according to my age and strength, as I increased in them, so my bows were made bigger and bigger. For men shall never shoot well unless they be brought up to it.

Bows have differing draw weights so the game assumes a bow designed for the PCs body rating which therefore affects the range. I'd actually say that Body rating should have a greater impact on ranges than it does in the rules.

I would think that the 40 + Body max is only without penalty. I would let a player shoot farther (at an increasing cumulative circumstantial penalty) if they like, though from a skirmish point of view, and considering the combat system as is, I wouldn't really bother with the table or the concern for ranges at all...but that's just me...

Personally, I think the ranges in the rulebook are for the effective use of one bow against a single target. Anything beyond that range would be easier to avoid. Armies use their archers like artilllery - covering an area with many arrows loosed at the same time. Still highly accurate but over 150 to 300 yards very easy to avoid if it was one arrow aimed at one orc.

RAW states penalities at medium and long range so what you're suggesting here would certainly be a houserule.

Ah, my mistake, didn't have the books with me. Even so, using Forward, Open, Defensive, Rearward, I don't see this coming up much in the narrative.

"[My yeoman father] taught me how to draw, how to lay my body in my bow ... not to draw with strength of arms as divers other nations do ... I had my bows bought me according to my age and strength, as I increased in them, so my bows were made bigger and bigger. For men shall never shoot well unless they be brought up to it."

I guess it depends on how you read that. The potential energy is stored in the limbs of the bow. The strength that is mentioned above, in my mind, is to over come the draw weight of the bow, not to add to the power of the shot. My old 30lb target bow at full draw would have the same range if I fired it or if someone who was stronger then me fired it.

Yeah, I agree. I think its just in there for combat encounters and extra rule crunch if people really want to use it.

I agree but without the ability to draw/bend the bow (ie, a high enough Body rating) then the character wouldn't be able to use it. Therefore Body is added to range to denote bows being made with varying draw weights. The game assumes a bow being used by someone with the optimal/minimum Body to use it effectively, that's all.

Narrative wise I would also assume that most who own a bow have either made it for themselves or had someone make it specifically for them, hence the addition of the Body rating...If you wanted to depict mass produced bows, just drop the + Body...

I agree with the the first part of what you said, about having the strength to draw the bow, and my opinion is that it would be better to have a min Body requirement to use a particular type of bow instead.

That'd work. I think Francesco was probably going with making the rules as simple as possible and for an element with such decidedly low impact to our games (ie, regularity of usage and lack of critical impact on the game) then he probably went with the one he felt was the most straightforward but still offered some granularity to simulate differing bow draw strengths.

Very easy to houserule though if you're not happy with how it currently stands.

It is more of a thought experiment as RPGs rarely get archery right (ie how bows actually work (as in this case), and what happens when an arrow with a warhead hits a body (not usually lethal enough).

Wow. I go away for a few minutes and the conversation explodes.
It's interesting to see everyone's opinions. And I see what you mean about the maximum accurate range. But 40 yards still doesn't seem very far to me. Despite the fact that most combat would not take place over distances much greater than this, I still don't see why someone trained with the bow should be penalised at that range. At over 100 yards I understand, but are merely 40 I'm still lost. But as you seem to agree, this is pretty much what house rules are for

This is all academic discussion on how the instruments in question work. What it ultimately comes down to is "it is your game". Make the changes you feel fit your game world best. If I were running a game and a particularly climatic scene came up where a successful long range shot wold be suitably cinamatic I probably would fudge the rules a little myself.

The Olympic Archery competition takes place at 70 meters, which is about 77 yards. They use recurve bows, which on average tend to be more accurate than a longbow, and plenty of technology added to the bows and arrows to boost that accuracy even more. They're shooting in a quiet, unrushed situation, ideal other than wind and pressure to perform.

They still don't get in the yellow every time.

In a battle, with noise, lives on the line kind of pressure, wind, low tech bows and arrows, and possibly other environmental hazards (branches, rain, a charging orc or five, etc) it doesn't seem a bad idea to take a pretty hefty bite out of that 77 yards the Olympians are competing at.

100 yards wouldn't be a distance I'd be considering at all for my game, save in some sort of ambush situation, and even then if a hit was made with a traditional low tech longbow it would be the result of far more luck than skill.

However, that's my game. I have no problem with you or anyone extending out those ranges. Perhaps if you want those longer ranges you could just double the numbers. So it would be 80 yards +8 yards per Body point. Or maybe stick with the +4 per Body. I guess you'd have to figure out where you want your players to fall as far as range and tweak the numbers to get there. As long as everyone's having fun, that's the key!

Just chiming in to say that hitting a moving target is a different kettle of fish than shooting a static target.
Most of the times, a man-sized target only need to shift 10-15 inches to avoid an arrow. Just one second of arrow flight and the prospective target can be meters away from the point of impact.
Simply put, good aim is only half of the equation

Single target vs. massed troops also makes quite a big difference. If the archer is firing at a block of troops, getting in the general vicinity is going to hit something. A single target is a lot harder to hit.