Highest strength rating of composite bows

[Biggus]

What are the highest published Str ratings for composite longbows in 1st party sources (or 1st party-ish such as Dragon Magazine)? The highest I've found are:

Medium: +7, Serradus (BoED p.147)
Large: +12, Master of the Hunt (MM5, p.202)
Huge: +14, Storm Giant (MM, p.125)

Have I missed any? And are there any gargantuan or colossal composite longbows anywhere?

Edit: for clarification, I'm not looking for ways to break these caps, I just want to know what the highest published numbers are.

[Tohron]

The Morphing enchantment (+1) from Underdark could also be used to turn a weapon into a Composite Longbow with an arbitrarily high strength rating.

[Menzath]

From what I can see one of the only other ones on a larger monster was Forest Giant in MM2, though it's rating is only 4.

As for composite bows in general, Bow of the Winter moon in MiC pg 48 is a composite bow that like hanks energy bow adds your full str bonus with seemingly no downside.

The only other printed bow I can find, is a little ambiguous on how it's composite works. That would be the Bone bow in frostburn pg.75

Unlike the composite or the later printed great bow, Bone bow doesn't have pricing adjustment for how a different composite rating one is created, so the assumption is it works as a composite bow of whatever your str is, with the downsides being its special use rules instead of normal bow use rules.

[Biggus]

Thank you for the answers, but I'm not looking for ways to break those caps, I just want to know what the highest published numbers are.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Hank's Energy Bow applies your full Str bonus as if it was a mighty composite bow of the appropriate amount.

[Rynjin]

Hank's Energy Bow applies your full Str bonus as if it was a mighty composite bow of the appropriate amount.

This isn't what he's looking for. He's essentially asking if anybody knows what NPC statblocks in all published material (modules, bestiaries, etc.) might have a number higher than +14.

[Crichton]

As far as I know, for listed examples of a composite longbows, the +14 pointed out in the OP is the highest one.



BUT, the basic, default entry on composite longbows doesn't cap the STR rating you can have them made for. It just says it's 100gp per point of Strength bonus, so I don't see any reason you couldn't have one made at any number (up to the 200k gp pre-epic limit, so I guess the cap is a STR bonus of +1999 for a nonmasterwork composite longbow?)

While the number isn't published as an example of a composite longbow, the formula for them is, and it's not capped.

[Biggus]

This isn't what he's looking for. He's essentially asking if anybody knows what NPC statblocks in all published material (modules, bestiaries, etc.) might have a number higher than +14.

Yes, that's pretty much it. To be precise, I wanted to know if there are any examples of higher-rated bows for each given size (and for larger sizes, if one has ever been statted) in monster or NPC stat blocks.

BUT, the basic, default entry on composite longbows doesn't cap the STR rating you can have them made for. It just says it's 100gp per point of Strength bonus, so I don't see any reason you couldn't have one made at any number (up to the 200k gp pre-epic limit, so I guess the cap is a STR bonus of +1999 for a nonmasterwork composite longbow?)

While the number isn't published as an example of a composite longbow, the formula for them is, and it's not capped.

Actually, the 200,000GP limit for is specifically for magic items, so you can build a bow with a 1,000,000 Str rating if you can afford it (and can find someone who can make a DC 2,000,015 craft check...).

Which leads into why I'm asking, which in fact is the opposite reason to what most people seem to be assuming: I'm looking to establish a Str rating limit at each size category. Until today I thought the highest published ratings at medium/large/huge were +5/10/14 respectively, which suggested an unofficial limit of +5 at medium and a further +5 per category above that. But when I did a more thorough search, I found a couple which beat those numbers, which made me wonder if there were any even higher ones I'd missed.

I think it's safe to say that a non-magical medium-sized bow with a 1,999 Str rating, or indeed a 199 rating, would seem silly to most people and break the suspension of disbelief (except perhaps if it was made of some super-exotic material). Up until now I've been using a +5 maximum, but I'm going to increase that and I wanted to get a feel for what precedents there were before I decided on the increased limit.

[Tohron]

I think it's safe to say that a non-magical medium-sized bow with a 1,999 Str rating, or indeed a 199 rating, would seem silly to most people and break the suspension of disbelief (except perhaps if it was made of some super-exotic material). Up until now I've been using a +5 maximum, but I'm going to increase that and I wanted to get a feel for what precedents there were before I decided on the increased limit.

Eh, with a high DC Balance check, someone can stand on a cloud in the middle of a dead magic zone, so compared to that, making a non-magic bow that Superman isn't strong enough to fully draw doesn't really stretch my disbelief.

[ShurikVch]

FWIW, in the Deities and Demigods, Corellon Larethian and Uller are both Medium-sized, and wielding +10 composite bows (Artemis got +11 composite bow - but she's Large)

[Lilapop]

You gotta keep in mind that if you don't meet the strength of the bow (even just temporarily through a debuff), you take a penalty. In addition to the wasted money. That puts the practical limit of what bows exist in your world at about the strength of the strongest archer... no idea what that number would be though.

[Biggus]

Eh, with a high DC Balance check, someone can stand on a cloud in the middle of a dead magic zone, so compared to that, making a non-magic bow that Superman isn't strong enough to fully draw doesn't really stretch my disbelief.

Yeah, oddly enough I don't allow that either...

Although I would note that the DC to make a +53 rated bow is higher than that required to balance on a cloud, which kind of demonstrates my point about bows with ratings of 100+. Funnily enough, this is not very different to a bow rated too high for Superman; based on the old DC Heroes game he could use a bow of up to +59.

As I said, it gets a bit silly at this point

FWIW, in the Deities and Demigods, Corellon Larethian and Uller are both Medium-sized, and wielding +10 composite bows (Artemis got +11 composite bow - but she's Large)

Ah thank you ShurikVch, I knew I could rely on you. Not sure if I'm going to include artifact-tier items in my calculations but it's nice to have a benchmark.

[Darg]

Yeah, oddly enough I don't allow that either...

Nonmagical and non-natural flight is possible in D&D (beholders for example), I wouldn't see why you can't balance on a cloud with enough skill when all skills describe superhuman/physics defying feats after a certain point.

[Biggus]

Nonmagical and non-natural flight is possible in D&D (beholders for example), I wouldn't see why you can't balance on a cloud with enough skill when all skills describe superhuman/physics defying feats after a certain point.

In general I have no problem with nonmagical abilities which stretch the limits of what's physically possible, but personally I draw the line at things which are blatantly impossible - it makes me feel like the world I'm playing in is a Warner Brothers cartoon, not a heroic fantasy one. If that doesn't detract from your enjoyment of the game, fair enough; it does for me.

[Crake]

Which leads into why I'm asking, which in fact is the opposite reason to what most people seem to be assuming: I'm looking to establish a Str rating limit at each size category. Until today I thought the highest published ratings at medium/large/huge were +5/10/14 respectively, which suggested an unofficial limit of +5 at medium and a further +5 per category above that. But when I did a more thorough search, I found a couple which beat those numbers, which made me wonder if there were any even higher ones I'd missed.

If you wanted to establish limits on strength ratings, I think it would probably be good to establish limits based on material as well as size.

For a real world example, the current guiness world record for highest draw weight on a bow is 200lb. If we assume a normal bow with +0 str is about 30lb (pretty standard weight for a beginner/low strength archer), this roughly equates to the light load of the given strength rating. This means a 200lb bow would need ~23 strength to draw, or about 6-7 str mod. That appears to be the modern day limit on munane material draw weight, however stronger, harder materials may well improve this draw weight beyond that limit, things like darkwood, or mithril/adamantine being incorporated into the bow could possibly increase that draw weight even further.

There do appear to also be youtube videos of people claiming 240 or even 290lb bows, but i figured guiness world records probably best source, since those are at least third party verified. If 290 is possible, that would probably be closer to +8ish, 240 still in the +7ish rating zone

[Elkad]

If you wanted to establish limits on strength ratings, I think it would probably be good to establish limits based on material as well as size.

For a real world example, the current guiness world record for highest draw weight on a bow is 200lb. If we assume a normal bow with +0 str is about 30lb (pretty standard weight for a beginner/low strength archer), this roughly equates to the light load of the given strength rating.

I think you are off here. For anyone with minimal training on how to press (instead of draw) a heavy bow, draw weight should be closer to to "lift over head" (which is the same as max load). 30lbs is a halfweight practice bow for someone with an 8 str.

Longbows recovered from the Mary Rose were in the 100-185 lb range, most of them in the upper end, which fits well with a 10-14 Str well-trained militia archer's max carry.

Which moves the rest of the table. Make your bow out of tungsten (500,000psi tensile strength) instead of yew (10,000psi), and we get 4000lbs draw weight - strength to 36, or +13.
It'd be heavy as hell - 200lbs ish - but with a 36 str that isn't a big deal.

We still haven't considered exotic materials like dragonbone or adamantine

[ShurikVch]

I read somewhere: there were all-metal steel (bulat?) bows in the ancient India
Draw weight of such bows, allegedly, gone as high as 100 kg - which is what, almost 220.5 lbs?
Although, there are two important moments about them:
1. They, apparently, were neither for combat nor hunting - but only for sports
2. Even physical requirements aside, they weren't as effective as composite bows of similar draw weight (slower straightening?)

[Maat Mons]

I read somewhere there were all-metal steel bows in the ancient India. They, apparently, were neither for combat nor hunting - but only for sports.

Europe made crossbows where the limbs were made of iron. And those were used in battle. It’s not an ideal material, but you can make it work.

They weren't as effective as composite bows of similar draw weight. (Slower straightening?)

The way I like to look at it is, the bow stores a quantity of energy (draw weight integrated over draw length), some of which is spent moving the arrow, and some of which is spent moving itself (as the limbs straighten out). The less energy the bow needs to expend to move itself, the more is available to move the arrow, so you want a bow that’s lightweight but strong.

[Darg]

Europe made crossbows where the limbs were made of iron. And those were used in battle. It’s not an ideal material, but you can make it work.

I believe some of the heavier crossbows, which ended up having to be reloaded with a rope pulley winch, could get up to a draw weight of ~400 lbs. A lot of the energy is also dissipated through the string itself as well. These crossbows had strings as big around as my thumb and needed larger bolts to compensate for the larger string size. Using modern materials you can get similar performance out of a 200 draw weight crossbow which is altogether lighter, faster to reload, and easier on the logistics from having to carry a winch separate from the bow and frankly more room for more ammo. But that *THWUUM* when fired is such a nice sound if you aren't standing in front of one.

[Biggus]

If you wanted to establish limits on strength ratings, I think it would probably be good to establish limits based on material as well as size.

For a real world example, the current guiness world record for highest draw weight on a bow is 200lb. If we assume a normal bow with +0 str is about 30lb (pretty standard weight for a beginner/low strength archer), this roughly equates to the light load of the given strength rating. This means a 200lb bow would need ~23 strength to draw, or about 6-7 str mod. That appears to be the modern day limit on munane material draw weight, however stronger, harder materials may well improve this draw weight beyond that limit, things like darkwood, or mithril/adamantine being incorporated into the bow could possibly increase that draw weight even further.

There do appear to also be youtube videos of people claiming 240 or even 290lb bows, but i figured guiness world records probably best source, since those are at least third party verified. If 290 is possible, that would probably be closer to +8ish, 240 still in the +7ish rating zone

I think you are off here. For anyone with minimal training on how to press (instead of draw) a heavy bow, draw weight should be closer to to "lift over head" (which is the same as max load). 30lbs is a halfweight practice bow for someone with an 8 str.

Longbows recovered from the Mary Rose were in the 100-185 lb range, most of them in the upper end, which fits well with a 10-14 Str well-trained militia archer's max carry.

Which moves the rest of the table. Make your bow out of tungsten (500,000psi tensile strength) instead of yew (10,000psi), and we get 4000lbs draw weight - strength to 36, or +13.
It'd be heavy as hell - 200lbs ish - but with a 36 str that isn't a big deal.

We still haven't considered exotic materials like dragonbone or adamantine

Thank you for putting some actual numbers on it. I'd provisionally decided on a +7 Str maximum for a standard composite longbow; there might be ones made of exotic materials available somewhere but they wouldn't be something you can just go into a shop in any city and buy. And of course magic bows can exceed this limit.

As other posters mention below, it's not just the tensile strength of the bow, but how fast it snaps back into shape when released and possibly also the weight which determines how much force you can fire an arrow with it. I don't know enough about bow physics to know what would be an ideal material for someone with superhuman strength, if anyone does I'd be fascinated to learn.

Edit: and also what you'd use to string it with...

[Crake]

Edit: and also what you'd use to string it with...

Sinew from supernatural beasts, or finely crafted mithril fibres woven into a string perhaps?

It is also worth noting that bows actually have two components to them, tension AND compression. Metal is generally quite fantastic under tension, but tends to be very malleable under compression, which is why mithril would make for an excellent bowstring, and a great bow backing, but a terrible bow body. What a good fantasy supernatural bow body might be is beyond me, maybe some kind of supernaturally strong bone? The only issue is that bone generally becomes quite brittle as it dries out and ages, but there are dragonbone weapons, so perhaps an adamantine backed, dragonbone bow, with a mithril bowstring would be able to reach supernaturally powerful composite bow strength ratings?

[Maat Mons]

I was imagining making a bowstring from the silk of one of the many giant insect that roam the D&D world.

As other posters mention below, it's not just the tensile strength of the bow, but how fast it snaps back into shape when released and possibly also the weight which determines how much force you can fire an arrow with it.

How heavy the bow arms are and how fast they spring back to shape are kind of the same thing. F=ma, and all that.

[Biggus]

How heavy the bow arms are and how fast they spring back to shape are kind of the same thing. F=ma, and all that.

I don't think it's as simple as that, different materials of similar density can have different degrees of elasticity?

As I said I'm not an expert, but I've been reading up on it a bit and some people are saying that actually using a heavy material makes the bow less efficient, for example the second answer here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Archery/com...aft_bow_limbs/

[Maat Mons]

I simplified somewhat, but the thing you seem to have missed is that I was saying that heavier bows spring back slower and are therefore less efficient, so that post is saying the same thing I said. I'm sorry if it sounded like I was advocating for heavier materials.

[Zancloufer]

I believe some of the heavier crossbows, which ended up having to be reloaded with a rope pulley winch, could get up to a draw weight of ~400 lbs. A lot of the energy is also dissipated through the string itself as well. These crossbows had strings as big around as my thumb and needed larger bolts to compensate for the larger string size. Using modern materials you can get similar performance out of a 200 draw weight crossbow which is altogether lighter, faster to reload, and easier on the logistics from having to carry a winch separate from the bow and frankly more room for more ammo. But that *THWUUM* when fired is such a nice sound if you aren't standing in front of one.

Actually the 400lb draw weight Crossbows where pretty normal. Usually had a little lever that came with them to help. The really heavy ones with the pulley winch where closer to 800~1000lbs.
Reason the modern 200lb crossbow works better is draw length. They usually have at least twice the travel length, and that is before you get into other engineering tricks to increase their power.

Actual power is more of a factor of draw weight * draw length, and even in medieval times we have spring metal bows with ~1k draw weight. There is also a whole pile of other things like drag that make a difference, but even then if D&D was realistic the actual power of composite bows should be a factor of size and draw weight, not adding them together.

I suppose if we want some logical in game scaling, we could say the max bonus from strength for a bow could be something like the max damage of the bow plus the enhancement bonus on it (magic makes it better?). This means that bigger bows having more damage dice would also let you scale max Strength on weapon size. Would be +8 for medium sized L.Bow and go something like 8-12-18-24 etc for "normal" bows.