Not being an archer, I need to ask:  aside from drawing a bow itself, how much of a part does one's strength have to do with how much damage an arrow does?  I imagine it might be different, depending on the type of bow, or does it matter little all around?

Pardon my ignorance, but I've never really thought about it, and now its come up.

I'm no archer, but I don't think strength would make that much difference.  It takes a good deal of strength to draw back (and hold) a bow, but I'm not sure that differences in strength could factor into how much energy is transferred to the arrow when it is released.

The only way I could see it is if a guy with a high strength designs a custom bow with a heavier pull (assuming the standard bow is meant for a more typical strength).  However, in game terms, I'm not sure how much that would/wouldn't affect damage (it would give some kind of boost to range, though).

Bows are rated according to their draw weight, that is how much strength is required to pull them back. For example, this bow is available in three  draw weights - 30-40lbs, 40-50lbs, and 50-60lbs - the draw weight is equivalent to a person lifting that same weight. So a 50lb pull is like bending over and lifting 50lbs to your chest and holding it there very steadily.

Stronger people can use bows with lower draw weights, but weaker people can't use bows with heavier draw weight.

So in game terms what you'd say is that a bow itself would have a strength rating, being the strength required to draw it, and the damage is done and the range achieved proportionally.

A bow is like a spring. If you draw it to a particular position--which should be more or less standard for a given bow, basically to the ear for a longbow, to the chest for a smaller non-recurved bow, etc., then you're compressing the spring by a specific amount which stores a standard amount of mechanical energy. Doesn't matter who's pulling it.

BUT, jgants is correct that different bows can have different "pulls", that is, store different amounts of energy. This means they need more strength to draw to the standard position. This can be a function of materials or simple thickness of the bowstave; roughly speaking by making the bow stiffer (but still resilient) with materials like horn and sinew, you increase the spring coefficient--the amount of force needed to bend the bow--and thus the total energy stored at the standard draw position. A thicker bow of a given material will also be stiffer.

Aside: by means of recurving composite bows, or using pulleys in modern compound bows, you can give the user some mechanical advantage so that the force needed to pull/hold the bow decreases as you approach full draw; this makes it easier to aim since you don't have to strain while aiming.

Now when you release the bow, the stored energy is transferred to the arrow. (Well, there's also some recoil transfered to the user, but this is independent of the user's size or strength.) That energy gives the arrow a specific initial velocity--equivalent to the muzzle velocity of a firearm--a function of energy and the mass of the arrow.

The initial velocity of the arrow affects how far it will go. If you don't take air resistance into account, it would go farthest if shot at a 45 degree angle, and the terminal velocity = initial velocity. With air resistance you get a more complicated equation: velocity bleeds off, the trajectory isn't quite a true parabola, and the final velocity is less the farther you shoot the arrow. Final velocity & mass of the arrow gives you to the energy of the arrow when it strikes its target. At extreme range, arrows should do less damage than at short range.

What you might notice above is that the same factors which increase range also increase initial velocity. Therefore a bow which can shoot farther will also "hit harder", if range is constant. This is why longbows have greater penetration than "short bows" (i.e. small non-composite wooden bows drawn to the chest).

Also, all else being equal, higher initial velocity should improve accuracy by allowing use of a flatter trajectory at a given range. But I'm not sure how much of a factor this is, in practice. The advantages of recurve seem to be more significant; an equivalent advantage might come from strength in that if it's easy to hold the bow at draw position, you can also aim it more easily. But that's assuming the bow isn't taxing your strength--in other words there's a bit of a trade-off between accuracy and draw force, therefore between accuracy and range/hitting power.

To sum up: for a given bow, added strength provides little advantage other than making it easier to draw and thus easier to aim. If you have a choice of bows, then being stronger allows you to build/select a bow with greater draw force, therefore greater total energy stored (for a specific bow design), therefore greater range and hitting power.

(crossposted with Kyle, who for once said the same thing in fewer words )

Kyle and Elliot have it.  Think of different types of bows as having a necessary threshold for effective use.  Cross that threshold of minimum strength necessary and any greater strength will achieve no improved effect.

I remeber a year or two ago, I was trying to use a friend's compound bow after being out of condition for years.  Upon drawing the string, I looked like an epileptic while trying to hold the bow steady.  If I'd been in proper condition, I would have been fine, but had I been in superior condition I wouldn't have gotten any more out of the bow.

!i!

Having been an archer all my life, it is not the same way as most gamers think of it. For most gamers I have encountered, they believe strength affects damage from a "Swing harder, more damage". With Bows, it is more a case of "I can pull a heavier weight, keep it steady, aim and shoot". The heavier pull moves the arrow with more force and the important part is the ability for the archer to be able to hold it steady while they shoot.

In more words with fancier explanation you can look to what Elliot or Kyle wrote.

Bill

In real life: I have no idea...

In RPG: Anything you want!

If you ask me, it all comes down to the character's skill.

Pretty much covered. The general concept is that the pull weight will also translate to more output. This is part of the reason you see the constructions of compound bows--those with several strings and wheels on the end. They allow you to have a lower draw weight for their output than compared to "direct pull" style bows.

Composite bows on the other hand utilize different materials to that are laminated together in order to increase the over all stiffness and resiliency/springy-ness of the bow. This allows them to hold up and have somewhat higher pulls without being as long as non-composite bows.

It's actually quite odd how important strength is for weapon use of all types. Even fencers develop their strength from practicing their art (mostly in part of their arms.) Because the strength give them control, control is important.

It's kind of surprising, but D&D actually handles bows and strength decently:

Composite bows are essentially 'rated' as +0 Strength; you need at least Str 10 to operate them.

Mighty composite bows are given a Strength rating (+1, +3, whatever). This rating is added to the damage arrows do. You need an appropriate strength to use the bow effectively (+1: Str 12, +3: Str 16, etc.).

If you have insufficient Strength, you are at -2 to use it.

So the upshot is that high draw bows do more damage, but require more strength to operate. Strength doesn't directly impact damage.

Now perhaps the penalty for insufficient strength is a bit too low, but it seems to model reality decently well (at least in this regard).

Bows in WoD/Exalted do it pretty well too.

Bows have a minimum strength requirement. Being under that requirement means you lose dice, but being over the requirement gives you no bonus whatsoever.

I have been a hunter and hunted with bows for quite some time.

The bow I used was a compound bow. It requires a minimum of 35lb draw to kill a deer properly. Most youth or female hunters will start between 35-45 lbs draws. Most adult males should be able to draw 50-60 lbs and hold it. Generally when I hunted my draw weight was 65-70. I hunted with a bow when I was in high school and part of th power lifting and wrestling teams was consistantly in the top 5 in every lift. So, I'd say I was a little more strong than the average guy and had no trouble pulling 70lbs when needed.

A lot of things determine how much energy an arrow will generate. The top factors are:

Draw Length
Draw Weight
Arrow Weight
Broadhead type & weight

So, the longer the wingspan (thus longer draw length), stonger you are (Higher draw weights), & heavier arrow and broadhead the more energy you can generate.

So, in theory  being stonger can creat more energy with an arrow. However, being taller can do the same thing.

For example:

My draw is 26.5 and thats about 2 inches shorter than average. When I shoot my bow 65lbs it the arrow leaves the bow @ 372 feet/second.

A taller archer with the same arrow and at the same weight but with a draw length of 31 (the typical draw length for someone about 6 1/2 feet tall) would have a speed of 403 feet/second.

Now lets say that his taller archer also happens to be a hero type and can draw about twice the weight the average guy can (about 140lbs) using the same arrow and draw length. That archer could get his arrow to a speed of about 600 feet/second. That's pretty damn significant.

403fps is damn fast already, certainly not dodge able at 20 yards. If the hero wanted to keep speed of 400fps he could effectively us an arrow that was nearly three times as heavy as the average guy when he shoots his bow @ 400 fps. Adding that much extra weight would in effect double the energe he hit the target with.

What about the rate of fire?
I would assume that the stronger you are the more often you can fire. Though here we are moving into the territory of is endurance based on con or str. Also should there be a pay of the rate of fire versus the draw of the bow? I would have thought an archer that can say just manage to pull a 100lb bow would be better off pulling a 70lb bow and having a higher rate of fire (especially if a 70lb bow is enough to kill a deer).

Also you have to be careful when computing damage The pay off between weight and  velocity isn't as obvious as you would think. If you use the energy of a missile (mass x velocity squared - sorry no superscript) then velocity is far more important for computing damage than mass but when you compare this to the actual daamage inflicted through gunshot trauma etc the blance seems far closer (with gunshots the rifling and spin of the round are also critical .. but I digress) I have found that using momentum (m x v) actually gives a more "realistic feeling" level of damage.

Not that any of this last bit is in anyway relevant to the thread though....

Quote from: jibbajibbaWhat about the rate of fire?
I would assume that the stronger you are the more often you can fire. Though here we are moving into the territory of is endurance based on con or str. Also should there be a pay of the rate of fire versus the draw of the bow? I would have thought an archer that can say just manage to pull a 100lb bow would be better off pulling a 70lb bow and having a higher rate of fire (especially if a 70lb bow is enough to kill a deer).

Also you have to be careful when computing damage The pay off between weight and  velocity isn't as obvious as you would think. If you use the energy of a missile (mass x velocity squared - sorry no superscript) then velocity is far more important for computing damage than mass but when you compare this to the actual daamage inflicted through gunshot trauma etc the blance seems far closer (with gunshots the rifling and spin of the round are also critical .. but I digress) I have found that using momentum (m x v) actually gives a more "realistic feeling" level of damage.

Not that any of this last bit is in anyway relevant to the thread though....

Just for giggles I once tried to see how man arrows I could fire in 30 seconds drawing arrows from a quiver. Drawing 65 lbs I could get off 6 shots and hade decent accurace up to 20 yards. After doing that I'm pretty sure I could not have done it for a minute, I was tired as hell after drawing an shooting 6 shots in ~30 seconds. I suspect if I were stronger and in better shape I might get 7-8 shots in 30 seconds and I might be able fire at that rate for a full minute.

I watched a 'professional' archer at Warwick castle. He was like a consultant specialist did a lot of reenactments, films etc. Probably devoted a lot more of his life to Archery than an archer in the 14th century to be honest (although he probably didn't labour in a field for 10 hours on his days 'off')
Anyway he fired 16 arrows in a minute at a target 25 yards away (straw dummy) the first 5 hit the next 5 reached the target the next six got progressively closer until the last arrow landed about 20 feet in front of him. He was using an English Longbow made of yew, traditional design (no idea about the draw).
Made me think about our 20 arows per minute at the batlte of Agincourt myth... Maybe but only for the first minute then they woudl need an hour off...