Primitive and early weapons, Kinda T2K......

[.45cultist]

As part of my musings for V2/V2.2 of Twilight 2000 I was looking for more black powder and low tech weapons in planning a Cadillacs and Dinosaurs: Inland Sea adventure. The inland sea is only mentioned once in the game. Paul has a lot of primitive weapons under "Bows" but I was wondering how one would stat an Atlatl for the primitives that will be one of the obstacles.

[The Dark]

There's some information on atlatl energy here (http://www.thudscave.com/npaa/articles/howhard.htm). Using that with the bow supplement to FF&S from the World Tamer's Handbook yields the following:

Heavy dart: Dam -1, Rng 30 (27), Pen Nil
Light dart: Dam -1, Rng 20 (24), Pen Nil

The heavy dart could probably be upped to Dam 1, Pen 1-Nil based on the higher momentum of a heavy (relatively) dart compared to an arrow. Even though atlatls are able to take down deer (it's legal for deer hunting in Alabama), I don't think I'd raise the damage higher.

I'd say an atlatl is Rld 2. Having done both archery and atlatl, I can definitely pull, string, and draw an arrow quicker than I can load an atlatl.

There is no required Str. It's a fairly easy device to use once the motion is learned, and it doesn't require a high strength in the way a powerful bow does.

[.45cultist]

There's some information on atlatl energy here (http://www.thudscave.com/npaa/articles/howhard.htm). Using that with the bow supplement to FF&S from the World Tamer's Handbook yields the following:

Heavy dart: Dam -1, Rng 30 (27), Pen Nil
Light dart: Dam -1, Rng 20 (24), Pen Nil

The heavy dart could probably be upped to Dam 1, Pen 1-Nil based on the higher momentum of a heavy (relatively) dart compared to an arrow. Even though atlatls are able to take down deer (it's legal for deer hunting in Alabama), I don't think I'd raise the damage higher.

I'd say an atlatl is Rld 2. Having done both archery and atlatl, I can definitely pull, string, and draw an arrow quicker than I can load an atlatl.

There is no required Str. It's a fairly easy device to use once the motion is learned, and it doesn't require a high strength in the way a powerful bow does.
Thanks, Missouri allowed them for deer hunting years back and I remembered them in "Quest for Fire".

[swaghauler]

I still have issues with how Bows, Crossbow, and other "primitive" weapons are treated in game. My Compound Bow (80lbs draw weight) using a 400-grain broadhead will COMPLETELY PENETRATE a whitetail deer at up to 40 meters. and there are NUMEROUS videos showing bolts and arrows penetrating up to Level 3A soft body armor and even PASGT helmets. I particularly like the videos presented by The Chopping Block and Twang&Bang, but Jeff Quitney has the best video comparing penetration of weapons. It is a 2 minute Army SF video comparing the M1911 Pistol, M1 Carbine, M1 Garand, and a recurve bow's penetration in a dirt-filled box. The 30-06 won't penetrate, but the broadhead punches right through.

The damage in game isn't right either. I would bet that my Compound bow has stopping power equal to a .44 magnum pistol in the real world. Any bow or crossbow damage should be based on the weapon's Draw Weight. I have been contemplating every 20 lbs of draw weight equalling 1 STR point. Thus an 80lb draw weight would require a STR of 4 to use. Damage could be something like:

STR 1 or 2 = 1D6
STR 3 to 5 = 2D6
STR 6 to 8 = 3D6
STR 9 to 10 = 4D6


Crossbows could be the same but using 1D10 for the damage dice.

Slings might be something like:

STR 1 = 1D6-1
STR 2 or 5 = 1D6
STR 6 to 9 = 1D10
STR 10 = 2D6

This still doesn't address the Penetration issues.

[The Dark]

The WTH numbers are all based on kinetic energy. Using IBO numbers (350 grain arrow, 70-lb draw) at 400 fps (faster than current 70-lb draw bows can shoot, but within the realm of possibility, and it's what I have numbers for) generates about 120 ft-lbs of force, which is about 163 joules. That still works out to Dam 1. You need at least 506.25 joules to get Dam 2 under the damage formula (sqrt of E, divided by 15, rounded to nearest whole number). That works out to 374 foot-pounds. For a 400 grain arrow, you'd need a velocity of approximately 650 fps to get Dam 2.

All that said, I agree that the formula is probably giving Dam numbers that are too low. 65 foot-pounds is supposed to be enough to hunt even large game (as long as you have good aim), but that's going to be Dam -1 in the WTH system. I'm thinking the divisor needs to be dropped significantly for high-mass projectiles, possibly to 10 or even 5. I haven't worked through what that would do for edge cases, so it's possible that would break more than it would fix. Of course, archery should also require more selections per point of skill, because it's more difficult than using a modern firearm. :p

[Pinhead Slim]

transferred energy

It's pretty easy to figure out how powerful an arrow should be, depending on how heavy the arrow is and the velocity of the arrow when it leaves the weapon. It proves that the books have it closer to "right" than you do though, I imagine most bows/arrows used would be around 50ft/lbs. From what I saw most arrows weigh around 400 grains, and a .44 magnum has around 200 grains. The arrow goes a few hundred FPS and the .44 goes about a thousand.

The fact that a "pass-through" is kind of an accomplishment sort of sets my point in stone, that an arrow is about as combat effective as a large handgun/small carbine and the rules almost reflect that. If 4D6 would put it on the same level as 7.62x51 Nato, then it's too high lol. Maybe 2D6, but even then I wouldn't feel good about that because the arrows don't fragment/mushroom/all the good stuff most bullets do. Unless the arrows were broadheads or something.

[.45cultist]

Some one should stat the special arrow Fred Bear used to kill an elephant.

[.45cultist]

The WTH numbers are all based on kinetic energy. Using IBO numbers (350 grain arrow, 70-lb draw) at 400 fps (faster than current 70-lb draw bows can shoot, but within the realm of possibility, and it's what I have numbers for) generates about 120 ft-lbs of force, which is about 163 joules. That still works out to Dam 1. You need at least 506.25 joules to get Dam 2 under the damage formula (sqrt of E, divided by 15, rounded to nearest whole number). That works out to 374 foot-pounds. For a 400 grain arrow, you'd need a velocity of approximately 650 fps to get Dam 2.

All that said, I agree that the formula is probably giving Dam numbers that are too low. 65 foot-pounds is supposed to be enough to hunt even large game (as long as you have good aim), but that's going to be Dam -1 in the WTH system. I'm thinking the divisor needs to be dropped significantly for high-mass projectiles, possibly to 10 or even 5. I haven't worked through what that would do for edge cases, so it's possible that would break more than it would fix. Of course, archery should also require more selections per point of skill, because it's more difficult than using a modern firearm. :p

The main reason guns surpassed bows, a couple of hours to learn one, 20 years to master the other.

[swaghauler]

It's pretty easy to figure out how powerful an arrow should be, depending on how heavy the arrow is and the velocity of the arrow when it leaves the weapon. It proves that the books have it closer to "right" than you do though, I imagine most bows/arrows used would be around 50ft/lbs. From what I saw most arrows weigh around 400 grains, and a .44 magnum has around 200 grains. The arrow goes a few hundred FPS and the .44 goes about a thousand.

The fact that a "pass-through" is kind of an accomplishment sort of sets my point in stone, that an arrow is about as combat effective as a large handgun/small carbine and the rules almost reflect that. If 4D6 would put it on the same level as 7.62x51 Nato, then it's too high lol. Maybe 2D6, but even then I wouldn't feel good about that because the arrows don't fragment/mushroom/all the good stuff most bullets do. Unless the arrows were broadheads or something.

In this post, you fall into EXACTLY the same "engineering trap" that the developers did by using kinetic energy for all damages. Let us examine the lowly knife. In the game, it would "move" at about 20 meters per second because that's how fast the average man can thrust or swing one. Its 500-gram weight WON'T make up for its very low speed. by the logic of FF&S, the knife should only do 1D6-1, yet the developers decided (correctly in my opinion) to give it the same damage as an M16. Why? Because it uses a different "damage mechanism" than the "Kinetic Energy" formula used for guns in game. Bows and other "projectile weapons" use a similar method of doing damage by penetrating AND cutting/lacerating the target. They have more in common with knives than guns.

Let's look at a comparison of firearms versus projectile weapons (bow, crossbows, and atlatls) in the light of hunting and the energy needed to "ethically hunt" various game animals.

Deer: To ethically hunt deer, you will need a firearm that produces 1500 foot pounds of energy to ensure a clean kill. For projectile weapons, the minimum energy needed is 25 foot pounds of energy. It takes 60 TIMES more kinetic energy to kill a deer with a firearm than it does to kill one with a projectile weapon.

Elk/Black Bear: To ethically hunt the larger North American game, it is recommended that you use a firearm with a minimum energy of 2400 ft/lbs. To hunt that same game with a projectile weapon, you will need 42 to 65 ft/lbs of energy. At the minimum threshold, the firearm will need 57 TIMES more kinetic energy to kill an Elk or a Black Bear.

The Grizzly Bear: To ethically hunt a Grizzly Bear, the firearm will need 3000 ft/lbs of energy. The projectile weapon will need only 65 to 70 ft/lbs of energy to effect a clean kill. The firearm requires roughly 60 TIMES the energy of a projectile weapon to kill a Grizzly Bear.

The obvious difference here is that the range for firearms is assumed to be 100 yards while the bow's average effective range is between 20 and 40 yards (why you'd hunt a Grizzly at 40 yards is beyond me). This still doesn't change the fact that kinetic energy CANNOT be used to compare the two classes of weapons.

Obviously, the formula in FF&S/Small Arms Guide WON'T WORK for projectile weapons. This is why I posted the very preliminary chart based on STR above. When you called me out on the chart above, you said 4D6 was "unreasonable" because it matched the damage of a .308 in the game. Keep in mind, the STR 10 bow damage represents a bow with a pull weight of 200 lbs. I am willing to bet REAL MONEY, that 9 out every 10 users of this forum (your's truly included) could NOT effectively draw and fire a 200lb bow. Additionally, the rule of thumb for arrows is: "5 Grains of arrow weight for every pound of Draw Weight." This means that the 200lb bow above would probably be launching a typical medieval Bodkin point war arrow weighing 935 Grains (this is NOT a typo). A 400-grain arrow shaft COULD snap if fired from a 200 lb bow. This all also assumes an average Draw Length of 30" for the arrow shaft. Thus the STR 10 (4D6 DAM) represents a bow 90% of the population could never use. The more common 60lb to 80lb Draw Weight bows only do 2D6 damage. This represents 80% of all bows in use and would require a STR of 3 or 4 to use effectively. I simply included a STR chart to allow a GM to vary the power of bows in game. To use the chart for Crossbows, I would make the ratio of STR to Draw Weight 1 point per 50lbs of Draw Weight. I would also increase the damage dice to D10. This is because, in my game, rifles do D10 and pistols do D6. For example, the damages for various calibers in my game are:

.22LR or .32 ACP = 1D6-1
.380 ACP or .38 Special (2") = 1D6
9mmP = 2D6
45 ACP = 3D6
.40 S&W = 3D6
.44 Magnum = 4D6
5.45mm X 39mm = 2D10
5.56mmN = 2D10
7.62mm X 39mm = 3D10
7.62mmN = 4D10

Note that I still use the original formula to figure out rifle damage, I just substitute D10s for D6s. For pistols, I "split" the energy levels up to 5000ft/lbs (I'm using English rather than metric because my reloading manuals are all in ft/lbs and fps) and use the appropriate number of D6s for said pistol energies.

The Atlatl: The Atlatl is actually fairly effective as projectile weapons go. It is launching a 6 foot/1.85 meter long, 1034 Grain (67gram) "dart" at 146 fps/45 ms. This generates around 50 foot pounds of energy, enough to kill an elk or black bear. Another feature that improves damage is an arrowhead that is at least twice as long as a bow's arrowhead is. I would make its base range STR X 2. Both the Atlatl and the Sling are very hard to use. I would make them One Level more difficult to use at any given range.

I still haven't worked on the Penetration issue yet, but a PEN 1 SEEMS to work ok with my damages. Slings should be MUCH worse (they follow firearms ballistics with regards to PEN).

I would welcome anyone else's ideas on how to make projectile weapons behave more like their real-world counterparts.

[The Dark]

I would go longer for an atlatl's range. On my first day using one, I was doing direct fire (i.e. not trying to loft darts) at a target 30 yards away. With my mediocre strength, that should be extreme range, but it was closer to short/medium in how I was launching the darts. I'm also not sure it should be tied to strength; like a pitcher throwing a baseball, there is a minimum level of strength needed, but the technique matters more than brute power.

935 grains would be light for an English warbow arrow. Based on Mary Rose reconstructions, military arrows look to have ranged from 1200 to 1500 grains. From a 150-lb bow (most of the Mary Rose bows are 150-160), a 1500 grain arrow would generate 134 joules at launch, 115 joules at 50 meters, 98 joules at 100 meters, 85 joules at 150 meters, 80 joules at 180 meters, and 78 joules at 200 meters. At 100 meters, it might penetrate maille over a gambeson, but not plate of 2mm or greater thickness. A broadhead, because it would spread the energy over a broader surface, would have less or no Pen (but probably more Dam) against hard armor. Kevlar gets weird with cutting versus piercing.

[swaghauler]

I would go longer for an atlatl's range. On my first day using one, I was doing direct fire (i.e. not trying to loft darts) at a target 30 yards away. With my mediocre strength, that should be extreme range, but it was closer to short/medium in how I was launching the darts. I'm also not sure it should be tied to strength; like a pitcher throwing a baseball, there is a minimum level of strength needed, but the technique matters more than brute power.

935 grains would be light for an English warbow arrow. Based on Mary Rose reconstructions, military arrows look to have ranged from 1200 to 1500 grains. From a 150-lb bow (most of the Mary Rose bows are 150-160), a 1500 grain arrow would generate 134 joules at launch, 115 joules at 50 meters, 98 joules at 100 meters, 85 joules at 150 meters, 80 joules at 180 meters, and 78 joules at 200 meters. At 100 meters, it might penetrate maille over a gambeson, but not plate of 2mm or greater thickness. A broadhead, because it would spread the energy over a broader surface, would have less or no Pen (but probably more Dam) against hard armor. Kevlar gets weird with cutting versus piercing.

I didn't know about the Mary Rose reconstructions. Thanks for pointing it out. It was a good read. My experience came from shooting a replica "Mongol Composite Recurve" bow (120lb draw weight) with that 935-grain arrow. My back hurt the next day from shooting it.

I think that when you look at the energies used for "ethical hunting," you see that 60 Times the actual energy is an average ratio for all bows. I would say that it might be possible to come up with an "Energy Multiplier" to multiply the Base Energy of projectile weapons by BEFORE you do the calculation to determine the Damage Dice. A Multiplier of 25 jumps out at me initially, but I haven't tested it yet.

[copeab]

IIRC, the World Tamers Handbook for TNE had construction rules for black powder weapons and possibly bows/crossbows.

[pmulcahy11b]

Hmmm, that could be worked on. Add it to the growing and long list of stuff I need to do.

[swaghauler]

Hmmm, that could be worked on. Add it to the growing and long list of stuff I need to do.

Well... You need to hop to it, man! How else are we going to play a Twilight2000 version of Mad Dog Churchill?

Mad Dog Churchill is the only soldier (as an officer in the Commandos) in WW2 to get a confirmed kill with both a Longbow AND a Broadsword. He also carried bagpipes into battle in addition to his bow and sword.

This man LITERALLY "went Medieval" on the Nazi's a**es!

[The Dark]

Doing some testing using the World Tamer's Handbook and playing with the damage divisor:

A standard wood bow maxes out at 1.8 meters (bows cannot be larger than a person's height), and with the WTH rules, requires STR 6, deals 1d6-1 damage, and has a short range of 30 meters. It also has a shaft energy of 90 joules, which is rubbish, and suggests the numbers are ~50% low. Increasing the energy by 50% for all bows is the first modification to make. The longbow now requires STR 9, deals 1d6 damage, and has a short range of 40 meters. Other than damage, I think I'm OK with this. Yes, it requires a high strength, but longbow archers trained for years from childhood to develop the ability to draw a war bow.

Moving on, the strongest bow is Composite Steel. Limiting myself to Str 12 as a maximum, the bow is 1.2 meters long, with a Dam 1 and short range 60. If the formula is changed from 1/15th the square root of the energy, it becomes Dam 2 at 1/10th or Dam 4 at 1/5th. I'm going to test both with the longbow from earlier.

For the longbow, it's Dam 1 at 1/10th or Dam 2 at 1/5th. I think I prefer 1/5th. This makes a (strong) wooden bow equivalent to a heavy pistol or light rifle, and a high-end modern bow equivalent to a powerful rifle. This feels roughly right to me. The weakest bow that would get Dam 2 would be a 0.8 meter wooden bow, requiring Str 4 to draw and with a 20 meter short range, so the high-strength war bow would do the same damage but with double the range. At the high end, a 0.3 meters composite steel bow would do Dam 2, requiring Str 3 and having a short range of 30 meters.

[Targan]

Broadhead/hunting arrows are scary. I've done a bit of work on conversions from one system to another over the years, assisted by systems such as 3G by BTRC. The wounds caused by hunting arrows are different to those caused by bullets. Bows, and arrows with killing heads, definitely need to be given their due.

[.45cultist]

Has anyone looked at the Challenge No. 66 article "Yearning for Antiquity"?

[unkated]

I had 3 bow weapons I devised using the formulae from the Infantry Weapons Guide:

70-lb compound bow shooting a 17 gm arrow (arrow weight from an on-line source; not sure how much I trust it).
315 fps
Dmg: D6-1
Pen: Nil

(Typical) English Longbow (ca. 1300) shooting 58 gm arrow
600 fps
Dmg: 2
Pen: 1-Nil

Barnett Ghost 385 Crossbow shooting 400 gr (25.9 gm) bolt
385 fps
Dmg: 1
Pen: Nil

I will confess that I don't know much about bow mechanics, or how to (properly) translate lbs of pull to fps (or even how to calculate if a user is using all of the available power)

Now, you may not like the way damage is calculated in T2K. However, let me point out that all the other weapons in the game are calculated using the same method, however flawed; it does make for a viable way to compare weapons.

There is the issue in that formulae presented assumes that a bullet is a bullet is a bullet for comparing penetration; AP bullets are treated no different (perhaps the designers felt that at game scale & granularity, it doesn't). And it does not account for whether there is difference in the dynamics of target strike by an arrow, bolt, dart, or javelin.

(But then, T2K is assuming that primitive weapons will be scarce and therefore unimportant compared to gunplay.)

You can of course, change toa difference combat better designed to deal with non-firearm weaponry.

Uncle Ted

[The Dark]

Has anyone looked at the Challenge No. 66 article "Yearning for Antiquity"?

Yes, and they seem slightly underpowered; the Heavy Self Bow is noted as a 45-60 pound draw. That's legal for hunting deer and will reliably take them down, but Game has 6 hits and the HSB does 1d6+1 damage, so it only has a 33% chance of cleanly killing a deer. Such a bow would likely be 2d6 in my modified system, and have a 72% chance of taking down a deer with one hit.

(Typical) English Longbow (ca. 1300) shooting 58 gm arrow
600 fps
Dmg: 2
Pen: 1-NilSpeed is far too high. With a 900 grain (58.3 gram) arrow from a 120-pound draw longbow, velocity will be around 175 fps. Damage using the Infantry Weapons of the World formula will be 0.44. The highest velocity I've seen for a reproduction bow is from an experiment with Turkish bows, where a 125-pound draw composite bow with a 13 gram arrow hit 357 feet per second; this bow would be Dam 0.42. The gun formula does not work for bows.

[swaghauler]

Here are some basic archery concepts and how they relate to archery in the real world. I'm guessing the Forum will have to work out which concepts are relevant to the game and how to apply them to the game engine being used.

The Characteristics of a Bow (or Crossbow):

1) Draw Weight: This is the amount of "pull weight," measured in pounds in the US, To draw back the bow. Common convention has Draw Weight ranging from 20lbs to 200lbs for a normal maximum (there are rumored 240lb bows, but I have never seen evidence of one). Draw Weights for crossbows range from 20lbs up to 500lbs for a crossbow that can be cocked by a cord or "goat's foot" lever (heavier crossbows require a windlass device to cock). I use 20lbs Draw Weight per point of STR for bows and 50lbs Draw Weight per point of STR for crossbows and list this as the STR needed to use this weapon. I think Draw Weight should be the primary measure of damage. When you look at the speed stats of bows published online, the standard bow Draw Weight used is 70lbs. Most modern Compound Bows can adjust their Draw Weight by about 10lbs in either direction. This task requires a skilled bow smith/boyer (AVE: Archery check?) to avoid damaging the bow's cam and pulley system.

Letoff: Compound Bows (and ONLY Compound Bows) have a feature called "Letoff." This is a point in the draw where the cams reach a "hold point" that takes most of the weight of the draw OFF of the shooter. This reduces the STR needed to hold back the bow string so the shooter can aim at a target. The typical "Letoff" of a Compound Bow is 80%, meaning that a standard 70lb Bow will only require 14lbs (STR 1) to hold at full extension. This "Letoff" is keyed to the cams and this means that you need to pull the Compound Bow back to the Draw Length it is set for to ensure "Letoff" occurs. Not pulling back that far not only prevents "letoff" from activating (requiring the shooter above to hold 70lbs/STR 4), but can damage the bow by causing "whiplash" which causes damage to the cables and cams (this is why you never "dry fire" compound bows). Composite Bows, Modern Longbows, Recurve Bows, and Self Bows DO NOT have this feature and you MUST hold their ENTIRE Draw Weight (which makes them harder to aim). They also have NO cam reset or letoff either, which means you can shoot shorter arrows from these bows (see below under Draw Length).

Minimum Arrow Weight: A bow's Draw Weight determines the minimum weight of arrow that it can shoot. An arrow must "flex" a little bit to both absorb the bowstring's energy transfer (from the bowstave) and to curve around the belly of the bowstave (this is often called "The Archer's Paradox"). Too much "flex" and the arrow COULD snap/shatter upon launch. This feature of an arrow is called "spine" in arrow selection guides. Regardless of an arrow's spine, there is a standardized weight for bows based on Draw Weight. This formula is 5 grains of arrow weight per pound of bow draw weight. Most big game arrows (and war arrows) will go 10 grains per pound of draw weight. Thus a 200lb Draw Weight bow would use a 1000-grain arrow. An 80lb Compound Bow will use a 400-grain arrow for hunting.

It's obvious that Draw Weight influences damage.

Draw Length: This is the length of arrow needed to properly fire the bow (or crossbow) at the velocity listed for that weapon. The standard draw length set by international standard is 28" of length. The standard set by the US bow industry (and the stat you most commonly find on the internet) is a 30" Draw Length. Draw Length is determined by the length of your arms. For every inch you change the Draw Length, you adjust your arrow speed by 10fps. Additionally, you will lose 1.7fps for every 10 yards the arrow travels. Traditional bows (composite, long, recurve, and self bows) can use ANY length of arrow. You just won't pull the bow back to its full draw with a shorter arrow and will have too much arrow out front (which can affect its flight) for longer arrows. Compound bows are "tuned" to use a SPECIFIC arrow length. overdrawing or underdrawing a compound bow can damage it. Compound bows can be fitted with "loops" (extensions tied to the bowstring) to allow the fire of shorter arrows. This will require a mechanical release (trigger mechanism held by hand) to use though. A compound bow can use up to a 2" Loop and Mechanical Release to adjust Draw Length.

Efficiency: You will see this trait often "espoused" by manufacturers (most compound bows boast a 95% Efficiency). It is the amount of a bow's power that is transferred to the arrow upon release of the bowstring. The longer or heavier an arrow is, the higher the bow's Efficiency will be. This is because the bow string will act upon the arrow for a longer time before the arrow parts with the string. A lighter arrow will SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE the noise a bow makes (the "shawaaack" sound you will often hear during archery). This is because the excess energy that is left in the bow is causing it to "resonate" and make that noise. String silencers can help this. Heavier arrows will make LESS NOISE when fired because they absorb more of the bow's energy before parting from the string.

Based on what Draw Length influences, I think this should figure prominently into determining Range. I also believe it should (along with cross-sectional density) affect Penetration as well.

These are some basic terms you need to understand in order to model the damage of a bow or crossbow in Twilight.

[The Dark]

There's a good article looking at energy, momentum, and sectional densities of projectiles here (http://www.thudscave.com/npaa/articles/howhard.htm). Converting the foot-pounds of energy to joules:

Medium game (deer, antelope): 34 joules to 56 joules
Large game (elk, boar, black bear): 57 joules to 88 joules
Very large game (cape buffalo, grizzly): 89 joules plus

A primitive bow generates 39 joules, a modern bow 79. The light atlatl dart is 61 joules, and the heavy 84 joules. The low kinetic energy means there won't be any hydrostatic shock or penetration of modern armor, but the high momentum and sectional density suggest it should do well against soft tissue. It's one of those areas that's hard to model, particularly given T2K's reliance on KE for damage and penetration.

To give ideas of where the damage should fall, medium game has 6 hits, large game around 20 (using boar), and very large game 40-50 hits (using bear, cattle, and bison). One could argue for 2d6 for the old bow and around 6d6 for the other three weapons, since they should be able to drop boar. I'm not sure I'd go that high, but it's not totally absurd.

[swaghauler]

Obviously, Twilight2000 uses Kinetic Energy to determine damage and this has led to the "undervaluing" of projectile weapons. The principle reason for this that the devs (along with significant numbers of the shooting community) only did PART of the equation for determining damage. If one reviews the Ethical Hunting Chart I posted above (used to determine the minimum KE needed to hunt various sizes of game animal), you will see that rifle (and pistol) bullets on average, require 60 TIMES the KE to ethically harvest game that a bow or crossbow would require. Why?

Kinetic Energy's "dirty little secret":
If you increase the Velocity of an object, any other object that object contacts must DOUBLE its own resistance to the contacting object. This is part of the Law of Conservation of Momentum. So what does this mean? It means that if two objects possess the SAME KE, the HEAVIER OBJECT will take longer to decelerate. This is because the faster object is meeting more resistance and shedding speed faster than the slower but heavier object. The lighter but faster object exerts more "force" per inch traveled, but because resistance is squared, it is decelerating faster than the heavier object and therefore penetrates less.
This is why a .30-06 will stop in a dirt-filled box that an arrow will cleanly penetrate. This is the difference between Kinetic Energy (the total energy an object has) and Momentum (the energy an object "exerts" over a given time and distance).

How Cross-Sectional Density Affects Penetration:
What's the difference between a 100mph arrow and a 100mph baseball? In a word, cross-sectional density. Milano discusses this in his own firearms upload (which I HIGHLY recommend). The 5oz baseball has a CSD of 0.0014 PSI (CSD is a measure of surface pressure) while a modern 540-grain arrow (even ignoring the mechanical advantage of its cutting head) has a CSD of 0.653 PSI. An 180-grain .30-06 bullet has a CSD of 0.285 PSI. The arrow exerts 2.25 times the surface pressure that the bullet does and a whopping 466 times the pressure that the baseball does. This is why the arrow penetrates the object while the bullet stops and the baseball bounces off.

Adjusting Twilight2000 V2.2's Damage:

I would multiply a projectile weapon's KE by a modifier BEFORE doing the calculation for basic damage dice. This modifier needs to take into account the SCD of the weapon. With that in mind, here's a test sample of modifiers.

Sling Stone (with a low SCD): 10 X KE, then use the Twilight2000 Formula.
Sling Bullet (higher SCD): 20 X KE, then use the formula.
Bows, Crossbows, and Atlatls (much higher SCD): 30 X KE, then run the formula.

This should get projectile weapons closer to real-world effectiveness.

Determining Range in Twilight2000:

I would use the Bow's Design, Draw Length and SKILL Level (yes skill) to determine the base range of projectile weapons.

Bow Design: Compound, Composite, and Recurve Bows. These bows tend to have better Efficiency than Long or Self Bows. The Compound Bow does this through its Cam and Pulley System. The Composite Bow's multilayer construction increases Efficiency and the Recurve Bow's forward facing limbs use a longer "stroke" (impulse of fire) to impart more energy to an arrow. These all will help increase the Range of the arrows fired from these bows. Compound and "Reverse Arm" Crossbows would have a similar "efficiency advantage" over basic Recurved and all of these would have an advantage over basic "self-bow" crossbows.

The Base Range could be: Compound Bow - 20m, Reverse Compound Crossbow - 30m, Compound Crossbow - 25m, Composite Bow/Recurve Bow (20m for a Composite Recurve like the Mongol Bow) - 15m, Recurve Crossbow - 20m, Long Bow/Self Bow - 10m, Self Crossbow - 15m.

Draw Length: Bows (and crossbows) could be classified as Short, Medium or Long by their Draw Length. Longer Draw Lengths add velocity (at about 10fps per inch of length) which adds Range.

The Draw Length adds could be: Short Draw Length is 24" or less (bows) OR 7" or less (crossbows) - SUBTRACT 5m from Range (minimum 5m rng). Medium Draw Length will be from 25" to 29" (bows) OR 7" to 12" (crossbows) - NO ADD to Range. Long Draw Lengths will be 30" or more (bows) OR 13"+ (crossbows) - ADD 5m to Range. You MUST use the ARROW length to determine the Range Add. Shooting a 24" arrow from a 30" Recurve bow gives a 5-meter range penalty.

Skill Level: I would add the archer's Skill Level to the Base Range of the weapon. Also, remember that Commercial Compound/Recurve and Long Bows will generally have Pin Sights that make aiming easier. These bows would have an Average Skill for a Snap Shot, while more traditional (or home-made) Bows would have a Difficult Snap Shot. Slings would be a Formidable Snap Shot.

This is just my take on Bows. As always, use what you will and discard the rest.

Swag.

[The Dark]

Adjusting Twilight2000 V2.2's Damage:

I would multiply a projectile weapon's KE by a modifier BEFORE doing the calculation for basic damage dice. This modifier needs to take into account the SCD of the weapon. With that in mind, here's a test sample of modifiers.

Sling Stone (with a low SCD): 10 X KE, then use the Twilight2000 Formula.
Sling Bullet (higher SCD): 20 X KE, then use the formula.
Bows, Crossbows, and Atlatls (much higher SCD): 30 X KE, then run the formula.

This should get projectile weapons closer to real-world effectiveness.Using this with the World Tamer's Handbook bow construction rules, a 1.8m wooden bow becomes Dam 4, and a 1.5m composite steel bow (which requires Str 10) is Dam 6.

I don't think I'd use the range modifiers, because the ranges are already pretty long (30 meters for the wood bow and 50 meters for the composite steel). Adding modifiers will make them outrange rifles; to me, that's undesirable. Of course, as always, each campaign can judge for itself.

[.45cultist]

Using this with the World Tamer's Handbook bow construction rules, a 1.8m wooden bow becomes Dam 4, and a 1.5m composite steel bow (which requires Str 10) is Dam 6.

I don't think I'd use the range modifiers, because the ranges are already pretty long (30 meters for the wood bow and 50 meters for the composite steel). Adding modifiers will make them outrange rifles; to me, that's undesirable. Of course, as always, each campaign can judge for itself.

I'm looking at the copy I bought from DriveThru now. Between the museums and pattern rooms and the primative and BP shooting clubs, my "Home Front" notes are going to get more stuff. Liberty Missouri has a "suttler" store with pictures of some clubs, including a German one that bought some of their partisan shirts. Bows backed by BP revolvers could give a nasty shock to a brigand band.

[swaghauler]

Using this with the World Tamer's Handbook bow construction rules, a 1.8m wooden bow becomes Dam 4, and a 1.5m composite steel bow (which requires Str 10) is Dam 6.

I don't think I'd use the range modifiers, because the ranges are already pretty long (30 meters for the wood bow and 50 meters for the composite steel). Adding modifiers will make them outrange rifles; to me, that's undesirable. Of course, as always, each campaign can judge for itself.

I don't have the World Tamer's Handbook (I only have FF&S and the Small Arms Guides in both versions) so I have no idea how it figures range. I guess I'll have to get the PDF now. The ranges I was postulating were Base Ranges that were modified NOT adds to the WTH modifications. This is because my primary source, The Small Arms Guide, doesn't even list a method of determining Range other than "comparative analysis" of weapons that are already in the guide. I can see your confusion, though, because there were a few "typos" in both posts that I had to correct.

I'm still not sold on how the WTH calculates range based on bow size. This is because a Mongol Composite Bow with a draw length of 26" and an English Yew Longbow with a draw length of 30" can both have the same "Draw Weight." They would be shooting the same weight of arrow and have roughly the same maximum range. This is because the shorter but thicker/higher density for its length Mongol arrow would be less affected by drag (because of its shorter length) while the Longbow arrow would suffer more drag because of its 4" longer length. The Longbow arrow would have launched at about 40 fps faster than the shorter Mongol arrow so both would travel about the same distance. Up close, the Longbow would shoot MUCH flatter than the Mongol Bow and would have a longer "point blank range" (the distance where elevation is NOT needed to hit a target) than the Mongol Bow. One must also consider that most bows shooting arrows of standard weight (between 5 and 10 grains per pound of Draw Weight) will have lost between 40% and 50% of their Kinetic Energy at 100 meters.


I have been giving my initial thoughts on Range some more consideration today and I would offer an alternate take on determining range "comparatively" (a la Small Arms Guide) based on the following characteristics.

1) Draw Weight. I'm using the STR of the Bow based on dividing a bow's draw weight by 20. to determine the Range Bonus, just add STR in METERS to the bow's base range. An 80lb Compound Bow would add 4 meters to its Base Range for draw weight. Crossbows require 1 STR per 50 pounds of Draw Weight.

2) Efficiency. After doing a little research during my lunch break today, I found out that Efficiency varies by more than I originally thought. Those folding "survival bows," the homemade PVC bows being made and shot on Youtube, and several cheap fiberglass or plastic bows all have Efficiencies below 80%. This means that a 40lb PVC bow will only impart 32lbs of force to the arrow. This reduces the arrow's Kinetic Energy significantly. Most modern, professionally made bows, regardless of what they are constructed from, will have Efficiencies at or above 90% (with many being 95%). I figure the best way to model this would be to... DEDUCT 5 meters for Efficiencies below 80% and ADD 5 meters for Efficiencies above 90%. Efficiencies between 80% and 90% would make NO CHANGE to the bow's Base Range. The Base Range CANNOT be reduced below 5m by poor Efficiency.

3) Draw Length. The longer the length of draw that a bow has, the longer the string acts to transfer energy from the bow. This is a measurable 10 fps per added inch of travel. Thus Draw Length has a large impact on Range because a faster arrow just "shoots flatter" (giving a better "point blank" range for that bow). Lighter arrows like Turkish "Flight Arrows" can also improve range but this is a "fine line" because lighter arrows are more affected by wind and drag. This is why hunters of larger game (at longer ranges) and warriors prefer heavier arrows. Their momentum is less affected by the environment (even if one must aim a little higher to account for their increased drop at range). I like the idea of adding 1 meter for every inch of Draw Length over 29" (13" for Crossbows) and subtracting 1 meter for every inch below 25" (7" for Crossbows) of Draw Length.

4) Bow Type. Differing bow types have different efficiencies and power levels based on the manner of their construction. Keep in mind that the type of construction used in a bow has NOTHING to do with Draw Weight. A self-bow could have a 200lb Draw Weight despite its simple construction (relying on the material to withstand the force like a Yew Longbow does). These types are:

The Self-Bow: The most basic bow type. This bow is made of one material and forms a "D" when drawn. This Bow is the type made when crafting a bow in a "survival situation." I would give this Bow a 5-meter base range (10 meters for Crossbows).

The Composite Bow: This more advanced bow is made from a combination of materials such as bone and wood. It can hold more power than the Self-Bow and has better Efficiency. I would give the Composite Bow a base range of 10 meters (15 meters for Crossbows). This bow type can be combined with the Recurve Bow below, in that instance, you can increase the Composite Recurve Bow's Base Range to 15 meters (20 meters for Crossbows).

The Recurve Bow: This bow has the limbs of the bowstave bent forward. This increases the amount of time the string imparts energy to the arrow (by increasing the bow's "impulse of fire") increasing energy transfer (efficiency) and (slightly) the length of draw. I give the Recurve Bow a Base Range of 10 meters (Crossbows get 15 meters). Composite Recurve Bows have a Base Range of 15 meters (20 meters for Crossbows...see above).

The Compound Bow: Most Compound bows use a cam and pulley system to increase both power and efficiency. Compound Bows have a series of features NOT shared by other bows. They are;
1. A Pin Sight (see below).
2. A "Letoff" that allows you to hold the bow steady to take aim on a target.
3. A fixed Draw Length that can only be adjusted by a Boyer (and by only 1") or requiring the user to use an extension and release.
4. The ability to adjust Draw Weight by up to 10 pounds.
I give the Compound Bow a Base Range of 15 meters (Crossbow's get 20 meters).

5) Sights on Modern Bows. Modern bows are often equipped with PIN Sights that let you zero a given arrow weight for up to 3 or 4 different ranges, based on the quality of the bow. I allow these sights to add 5 meters to the bow's (or Crossbow's) Base Range.


Difficulty Levels for Bows. A Compound Bow and any Modern Bows equipped with Pin Sights allows you to precisely aim to a point. This gives these Bows an AVERAGE Snap Shot. Traditional Bows have no aiming index so they are a DIFFICULT Snap Shot Chance. Truly difficult projectile weapons like Slings would be a FORMIDABLE Snap Shot. I will allow a "Point Blank" Range band for bows like I do for firearms. This is equal to the shooter's Skill Level in meters (note. you use the RAW Skill NOT the Asset here). If this is longer than the bow's Base Range, that's ok. The other Range Bands are STILL figured from the bow's Base Range (NOT the shooter's Skill Level).

So, if your Army Ranger decided to take up Archery in order to "silence" sentries at long range, we can now calculate his bow's Base Range:

Compound Bow (with Pin Sight and Quiver attached). 15 meters + 5m (sight) + 5m (95% Efficiency) + 4m (Draw STR) = 29m Base Range with an Average Snap Shot.

If he picks up a "home-made" 40lb Self Bow, his Base Range would be:

Self Bow. 5 meters - 5m (Efficiency) + 2m (Draw STR) = 5m Base Range (see Efficiency above) with a Difficult Snap Shot. A major step down in range and accuracy.

as always, use what you will and ignore the rest.

Swag.

[swaghauler]

Other projectile weapons need to be discussed as well. Here is my idea for determining the Base Ranges of other projectile weapons in the game. Keep in mind that these ranges are based on hitting an 8" circle. This is the standard for hunting and shooting sports. It represents the "vital zone" of most animal's torso's (including Humans) as well as a "head shot" on larger game.

The Sling:

Slings are very difficult to use having a FORMIDABLE Snap Shot. The Base Range of a Sling for hitting game/moving targets (as opposed to throwing into a mass of enemy soldiers) is 5 meters for a Sling STONE. A Sling BULLET (usually cast from lead) has a Base Range of 10 meters. The Character adds the TOTAL of STR and AGL in meters to this. A perfectly average character with characteristics of 5 would add 10 meters to his Sling's Base Range.

The Atlatl:

The Atlatl is a projectile weapon and DOUBLES Range (thrown weapons ADD Range in my game) just like other projectile weapons. The average hunter will harvest game at around 20 meters using an Atlatl but their ranges can be significantly more against stationary targets. The problem is that an Atlatl requires a LARGE arm movement to launch which will "alert" wary game. This limits the range to avoid the target "dodging" the incoming dart. The Atlatl CAN kill even large animals if it connects. I'm thinking that the Base Range of an Atlatl will be 2 X STR + AGL This means that an average character with characteristics of 5 would have a Base Range of 15 meters (giving a 30m Medium, 60m Long, and 120m Extreme Range). The chance to hit with an Atlatl is AVERAGE.

The Blowgun:

The Blowgun would use CON to determine Base Range in meters. It's Snap Shot accuracy is DIFFICULT.

Point Blank Range:

A projectile weapon's Point Blank Range is the shooter's Skill Level in meters. If the weapon's PB Range (as determined by Skill Level) is longer than the original Base Range, use it anyway. All other Range Bands are STILL figured from the original Base Range. A Point Blank shot is one Difficulty Level EASIER than the weapon's base Difficulty (ie. firing a Traditional Bow at PB is an AVERAGE not a DIFFICULT Skill check).

This is what I'm thinking for these weapons. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Swag.

[The Dark]

In WTH, bows have a range of triple the square root of their energy, rounded to the nearest 10 meters. The wood bow (English longbow) would generate 50 joules per meter of length, and the composite bow (Mongol bow) would generate 70 joules per meter of length, so a composite bow of 5/7 the length of a wood bow would generate the same energy and have the same range and damage.

[swaghauler]

In WTH, bows have a range of triple the square root of their energy, rounded to the nearest 10 meters. The wood bow (English longbow) would generate 50 joules per meter of length, and the composite bow (Mongol bow) would generate 70 joules per meter of length, so a composite bow of 5/7 the length of a wood bow would generate the same energy and have the same range and damage.

That's cool enough that I'm going to have to buy the PDF for sure now. I think I'm going to take my friend Jason's advice on Range and NOT use Skill in the primary range calculation (despite the fact that skill has far more bearing on shooting range with projectile weapons). Instead, I will do like I settled on with Firearms and allow Skill to be the weapon's Point Blank Range in meters (for firearms is use Skill in meters for long arms and 1/2 Skill (ru) in meters for handguns).

The WBH takes care of Draw Length affecting Range as well as Construction Type. The only change I might make is to factor in Efficiency so I can use it as an effect of Wear Value. I would add 10% to a bow's Efficiency, which will bring the majority of bow's above 100% (95% seems to be an upper limit on Efficiency). Bow's who won't be above 100%, like home-made PVC bows (which range from 70% to 80% depending on the builder's skill), and those take-down "survival bows" sold to "preppers" (which average 80% Efficiency) will have to multiply their base energy by their modified score. Thus, a 70% Efficiency PVC bow will multiply their Joules of Energy by .8 (after adding 10%) BEFORE doing the Damage or Range Calculations. For every 2 points of Wear Value above 1, you will SUBTRACT 5% from the bow's Efficiency (thus reducing DAM and Base Range).

The only other change I MIGHT make is to change the Range Multiplier from 3 times the square root to 2 times the square root FOR BOWS (I'd leave Crossbows alone). The ranges you list are a little "long" for most point shooting with bows. An "ethical shot" on a deer for the average hunter is 20 to 25 meters tops. An expert can pin the 8" vitals at 40 to 50 meters. A 100-meter shot would require the bowman to aim more than a FOOT over the target's head (sometimes SIGNIFICANTLY MORE than a foot). Thus, the Short/Base Range should be between 15 and 25 meters for an average (2 or 3 Skill in my game) shooter.

[.45cultist]

That's cool enough that I'm going to have to buy the PDF for sure now. I think I'm going to take my friend Jason's advice on Range and NOT use Skill in the primary range calculation (despite the fact that skill has far more bearing on shooting range with projectile weapons). Instead, I will do like I settled on with Firearms and allow Skill to be the weapon's Point Blank Range in meters (for firearms is use Skill in meters for long arms and 1/2 Skill (ru) in meters for handguns).

The WBH takes care of Draw Length affecting Range as well as Construction Type. The only change I might make is to factor in Efficiency so I can use it as an effect of Wear Value. I would add 10% to a bow's Efficiency, which will bring the majority of bow's above 100% (95% seems to be an upper limit on Efficiency). Bow's who won't be above 100%, like home-made PVC bows (which range from 70% to 80% depending on the builder's skill), and those take-down "survival bows" sold to "preppers" (which average 80% Efficiency) will have to multiply their base energy by their modified score. Thus, a 70% Efficiency PVC bow will multiply their Joules of Energy by .8 (after adding 10%) BEFORE doing the Damage or Range Calculations. For every 2 points of Wear Value above 1, you will SUBTRACT 5% from the bow's Efficiency (thus reducing DAM and Base Range).

The only other change I MIGHT make is to change the Range Multiplier from 3 times the square root to 2 times the square root FOR BOWS (I'd leave Crossbows alone). The ranges you list are a little "long" for most point shooting with bows. An "ethical shot" on a deer for the average hunter is 20 to 25 meters tops. An expert can pin the 8" vitals at 40 to 50 meters. A 100-meter shot would require the bowman to aim more than a FOOT over the target's head (sometimes SIGNIFICANTLY MORE than a foot). Thus, the Short/Base Range should be between 15 and 25 meters for an average (2 or 3 Skill in my game) shooter.

It also has a mass combat rules for a couple hundred people, I haven't looked at those yet.

[The Dark]

Since the OP mentioned wanting black powder weapons and I was wandering in weird portions of the internet, here's one from a video I saw:

Black Powder Colt M1911A1

Originally done just as a curiosity, some regions began converting Colt M1911 pistols to fire black powder rounds as more modern powders ran short. One early problem was that the lower pressures would often fail to cycle the action, which was resolved by salvaging springs from the models chambered for 9mm Para and using those springs on the .45 Colts. The lighter spring allowed the black powder rounds to cycle normally. While still as capable of causing injury as the smokeless powder, the black powder rounds had a shorter accurate range due to the lower muzzle velocity. As smokeless powder production resumed, these guns became hazards when salvaged. Most of them were not visually distinct from unconverted M1911s, leaving them with a dangerously light spring.

M1911A1BP: RoF SA, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 1, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 9

[.45cultist]

Since the OP mentioned wanting black powder weapons and I was wandering in weird portions of the internet, here's one from a video I saw:

Black Powder Colt M1911A1

Originally done just as a curiosity, some regions began converting Colt M1911 pistols to fire black powder rounds as more modern powders ran short. One early problem was that the lower pressures would often fail to cycle the action, which was resolved by salvaging springs from the models chambered for 9mm Para and using those springs on the .45 Colts. The lighter spring allowed the black powder rounds to cycle normally. While still as capable of causing injury as the smokeless powder, the black powder rounds had a shorter accurate range due to the lower muzzle velocity. As smokeless powder production resumed, these guns became hazards when salvaged. Most of them were not visually distinct from unconverted M1911s, leaving them with a dangerously light spring.

M1911A1BP: RoF SA, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 1, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 9

Cool!

[The Dark]

I did up some historical black powder weapons.

Model 1795 Musket: Based on the French Charleville musket, this was produced by Springfield and Harpers Ferry armories to the tune of 20,000 weapons.
Weight 4.55 kg, Ammunition 17.5x43mm ball, Ammo weight 31 grams
RoF SS, Rld 3, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 10, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 39

Model 1812 Musket: An improved M1795, produced only at Springfield, it was just too late to see service in the War of 1812.
Weight 4.55 kg, Ammunition 17.4x30mm ball, Ammo weight 22 grams
RoF SS, Rld 3, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 9, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 47

Model 1803 Rifle: The first American-made armory rifle, produced at Harpers Ferry.
Weight 4.08 kg, Ammunition 13.7x45mm ball, Ammo weight 20 grams
RoF SS, Rld 4, Dam 3, Pen Nil, Bulk 8, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 235

Model 1819 Hall Rifle: The first breech-loading rifle to see service with the military. As the sealing gasket wore, it had a tendency to vent hot gas into the shooter's face.
Weight 4.66 kg, Ammunition 13.7x45mm ball, Ammo weight 20 grams
RoF SS, Rld 2, Dam 3, Pen Nil, Bulk 8, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 230

Model 1806 Pistol: An early flintlock pistol made at Harpers Ferry.
Weight 1.16 kg, Ammunition 13.7x13.5mm ball, Ammo weight 6 grams
RoF SS, Rld 2, Dam 1, Pen Nil, Bulk 2, SS 1, Burst Nil, Rng 3
(no, seriously, the range is only 3, it's seriously underpowered)

[Vespers War]

More thoughts on bows and crossbows.

So, there's a YouTube channel (isn't there always) for an English fellow who makes crossbows (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWnlQMQ-ACfhpD68yWRsnJw). In one of his videos, he compared a modern crossbow and compound bow to a 95-lb longbow and 850-lb crossbow. The longbow produced only 39 joules of energy (which was noted as being low and possibly an indicator that the bow was tired from disuse), the modern bow 71 joules, the steel crossbow 101 joules and the modern crossbow 129 joules.

Under original WTH rules, the longbow would be Dam 0.4, the modern bow 0.6, the 850-lb crossbow 0.7, and the modern crossbow 0.8. With my revision to divide by 5 instead of 15, they're 1.2, 1.7, 2.0, and 2.3 respectively. Dam 2 for an 850-pound draw crossbow still feels a little light to me, but if I use the size of the crossbow (0.7 meters) and the tables from WTH rather than its calculated energy from actual shooting, it calculates to Dam 2.51 with a required STR of 11 and Rng 38.

Also note that a windlass isn't required until 500 joules of shaft energy, and another video of a ~1000 pound draw crossbow only generated 110 joules of shaft energy, so someone made a major error somewhere in their calculation; even just looking at the energy table in the book, you'd need a 3.3 meter long steel bow to require a windlass! For a minor revision, I would drop the windlass requirement by a factor of 10, to 50 joules. For a more major revision, base it on STR rather than energy. A character can span a bow with a STR requirement equal to or less than their STR with no mechanical advantage. With a cocking lever, they can span a bow up to double their STR, and a windlass lets them span any bow. Reload is 2/3/5 respectively based on the spanning equipment needed.

Likewise, the Penetration calculation is that a projectile of 600 joules or more has Pen 1-Nil and anything less is Pen Nil, which would require a 4 meter steel bow. I would drop that by the same factor of 10, to 60 joules.

(honestly, the more I look at the bow rules the more they're a hot mess, but they at least give a starting point to tweak into a reasonable facsimile of plausibility)

[Vespers War]

A year later, some more thoughts on bows.

I'm trying to keep my modifications as simple and easy to drop into existing rules as possible; swaghauler's got the extensive modifications down, so my niche is minor modifications that amend rules rather than replace them.

Here's where my thinking is these days:

1. Change the divisor for damage from 15 to 5, so that the formula for damage is the square root of energy (in joules) divided by 5. Most bows will be 1d6 or 2d6 for damage. This is the base damage for bodkin arrows.

2. Ignore the firearm style Pen. Instead, bows deal damage like melee weapons, and armor subtracts either its parenthetical (for ancient armor) or double its AV (for modern armor) from the damage rolled. This holds for flexible armor (maille or Kevlar). Solid armor (plate or SAPI) doubles its damage reduction against arrows (so 4x AV for modern rigid armor). This is still for bodkin arrows.

3. Broadheads add 1d6 damage to whatever bow they're used with, but all armor is doubled (so flexible modern armor subtracts 4x AV and rigid modern armor 8x AV from the damage roll).

This gives us bows that are fairly useful, and gives a reason for different arrowheads. It gets rid of that pesky Pen problem. Rigid armor has done much better than flexible armor in the tests I've seen, which is why it gets doubled in protective value against arrows. I'm sure it could be tweaked a bit more, but this should give relatively simple drop-in rules that don't require changing anything else in the existing rules.

[Legbreaker]

That makes a lot of sense to me. You're considering crossbows in the same manner I presume?

[Vespers War]

Yes, since from a game perspective it's just a bow turned on its side with a stock. There are some real-world differences (European crossbows tend to have a very short power stroke and heavy draw, while Chinese crossbows tend to have a longer stroke and lighter draw), but for the majority of games, that won't be enough of a factor to justify additional game mechanics.

The one advantage a crossbow would have over a bow is that it can be carried at full draw with a bolt on the string. A bow can be carried with arrow on string, but not held at full draw for long periods of time. Reloading is much slower for a crossbow, but that first shot can be gotten off quicker. I'd keep the STR-based reloading from my post last June for crossbows:
"A character can span a bow with a STR requirement equal to or less than their STR with no mechanical advantage. With a cocking lever, they can span a bow up to double their STR, and a windlass lets them span any bow. Reload is 2/3/5 respectively based on the spanning equipment needed."

[Legbreaker]

Thrown weapons such as spears, axes, knives and hammers could be handled the same too I would think. Anything relatively slow moving (compared to a bullet or shrapnel).

[swaghauler]

I did up some historical black powder weapons.

Model 1795 Musket: Based on the French Charleville musket, this was produced by Springfield and Harpers Ferry armories to the tune of 20,000 weapons.
Weight 4.55 kg, Ammunition 17.5x43mm ball, Ammo weight 31 grams
RoF SS, Rld 3, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 10, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 39

Model 1812 Musket: An improved M1795, produced only at Springfield, it was just too late to see service in the War of 1812.
Weight 4.55 kg, Ammunition 17.4x30mm ball, Ammo weight 22 grams
RoF SS, Rld 3, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 9, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 47

Model 1803 Rifle: The first American-made armory rifle, produced at Harpers Ferry.
Weight 4.08 kg, Ammunition 13.7x45mm ball, Ammo weight 20 grams
RoF SS, Rld 4, Dam 3, Pen Nil, Bulk 8, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 235

Model 1819 Hall Rifle: The first breech-loading rifle to see service with the military. As the sealing gasket wore, it had a tendency to vent hot gas into the shooter's face.
Weight 4.66 kg, Ammunition 13.7x45mm ball, Ammo weight 20 grams
RoF SS, Rld 2, Dam 3, Pen Nil, Bulk 8, SS 2, Burst Nil, Rng 230

Model 1806 Pistol: An early flintlock pistol made at Harpers Ferry.
Weight 1.16 kg, Ammunition 13.7x13.5mm ball, Ammo weight 6 grams
RoF SS, Rld 2, Dam 1, Pen Nil, Bulk 2, SS 1, Burst Nil, Rng 3
(no, seriously, the range is only 3, it's seriously underpowered)

The one issue I see in these stats are the ranges. While I appreciate the difference between rifles and muskets, there is NO WAY that a rifle firing a ball round with a "flange" around it (to fit into the rifling of the weapon) is as aerodynamically efficient, and therefore as accurate, as a Spitzer bullet. Despite this, you have a short range of 235m for the 1803 Rifle and a short range of 230m for the Hall Rifle in a game that gives a Remington 700 with a 26" barrel a short range of 75 to 80 meters.
Also, most smoothbore muskets are able to hit a man at 50m but this does require a bit of familiarity with the weapon. Hitting anything beyond 100m is truly a display of superior skill. I think that the World Tamer's system is far too generous with the ranges its giving you. A smoothbore musket shooting ball should have a short range of between 20m and 30m to represent a more realistic set of range bands for an unrifled musket.

[Vespers War]

The one issue I see in these stats are the ranges. While I appreciate the difference between rifles and muskets, there is NO WAY that a rifle firing a ball round with a "flange" around it (to fit into the rifling of the weapon) is as aerodynamically efficient, and therefore as accurate, as a Spitzer bullet. Despite this, you have a short range of 235m for the 1803 Rifle and a short range of 230m for the Hall Rifle in a game that gives a Remington 700 with a 26" barrel a short range of 75 to 80 meters.
Also, most smoothbore muskets are able to hit a man at 50m but this does require a bit of familiarity with the weapon. Hitting anything beyond 100m is truly a display of superior skill. I think that the World Tamer's system is far too generous with the ranges its giving you. A smoothbore musket shooting ball should have a short range of between 20m and 30m to represent a more realistic set of range bands for an unrifled musket.

I suspect from the age that this was done with my first firearms spreadsheet, which didn't properly limit how much barrel length could add to range. Running the existing stats through my current spreadsheet, I get a range of 81m for both of the rifles (which have barrel lengths of 33" and 32.7"). The Model 1812 drops to 42 meters and the Model 1795 to 37 meters.

However, the powder charge for the Hall is high and the caliber is slightly overstated. Instead of 13.7x45mm, it should be 13.3x34mm (33.61mm to hold a 70-grain charge, but rounded up for simplicity). This changes it to Dam 2, SS 1, and Rng 68, and a round of ammunition is only 14 grams.

[pmulcahy11b]

How about busting a chair over someone's head? Seems like it would do more damage than a simple club, if more difficult to swing (or recover afterward).

Etc...

[Olefin]

How about busting a chair over someone's head? Seems like it would do more damage than a simple club, if more difficult to swing (or recover afterward).

Etc...

Paul I like how you think! And did exactly that in a D&D session - i.e. no blunt weapon available - well lookee here a chair

[Jason Weiser]

I am partial to beer steins or bottles myself. Bit easier to maneuver.

[Olefin]

I am partial to beer steins or bottles myself. Bit easier to maneuver.

just drink the beer first - wasting beer is a sin

[Jason Weiser]

just drink the beer first - wasting beer is a sin

Goes without saying? :D

[Spartan-117]

Trivia point of the day: There is no 2.2 career that grants Early Firearm skill in the 2.2 book. It's only available as a secondary activity. The skill isn't included on the default character sheet. Early Firearms skill covers not only black powder weapons, but also crossbows - archery only covers bows in the RAW.

[Jason Weiser]

Trivia point of the day: There is no 2.2 career that grants Early Firearm skill in the 2.2 book. It's only available as a secondary activity. The skill isn't included on the default character sheet. Early Firearms skill covers not only black powder weapons, but also crossbows - archery only covers bows in the RAW.

To be fair, in many parts of the world, it is a hobby. I can't think off of the top of my head where black powder firearms are a day to day use sort of thing. Not saying it doesn't happen. I suppose if pre-war, you were employed by say, the NPS as a living history guide (those things do exist)? You'd pick up some skill, but as a matter of course? Just cannot see it?

[Olefin]

Actually it depends where you live - there are states where it is legal to hunt with black powder guns - so my grandfather had a black powder rifle and showed me how to properly load and fire it and take care of it - thus a character that came from one of those states could have that as a early firearm skill if you talked to the GM about it.

Alternatively there are a lot of Civil War re-creators in the US - who 100 percent know how to properly load, fire and take care of a black powder rifle

So again if you create a character that has a background as either a Civil War re-enactor or hunted in states that have black powder rifle seasons then you could give him or her the Early Firearm skill as one of their initial skills.

again its not really a career - its more of a specialized skill due to the characters background versus a career skill - and you would need to decide to add it as part of their initial skills as the GM - we had an American Indian player in my initial college group and he made a very persuasive argument to the GM that the bow and tomahawk (i.e. thrown axe) were weapons he grew up with and his character would be very proficient with - and thus he carried a bow and tomahawk

FYI it would be the same with people who were members of the Society of Creative Anachronism or other re-creators with weapons like swords or halberds and the like - but again you arent talking about day to day people - i.e. good luck with Joe Blow who tries to actually use a sword or halberd

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I agree, there's no real reason to have black powder weapons in the realm of career skills. I can't think of any sort of career aside from what Jason mentioned (employment as a living history guide) or perhaps as a movie armourer, where early firearms would be anything except a secondary skill.

[Vespers War]

I agree, there's no real reason to have black powder weapons in the realm of career skills. I can't think of any sort of career aside from what Jason mentioned (employment as a living history guide) or perhaps as a movie armourer, where early firearms would be anything except a secondary skill.

Somewhat tangential but hopefully interesting is that I've heard Kevin Dockery talk about being the last US Army soldier trained in flint-knapping. The Old Guard had Brown Besses for the bicentennial when he was their armorer.

I pretty much agree, though, that most pre-war careers won't have any reason to have black powder firearms proficiency. Even the living history guides and TV/film guys won't necessarily have any experience firing anything other than blanks from the black powder guns. Some folks might have live fire experience from NSSA or SASS events, but those work better as secondary rather than career skills.

I also suspect Early Firearms was a last-minute addition or otherwise overlooked, because it's not in the skill list on pages 48-49 or the skill descriptions on pages 136-138 of the v2.2 rulebook. Archery covers making ammunition for either bows or crossbows and making staves for either (but not stocks for a crossbow), so a crossbow user needs Early Firearms for shooting and Archery for making ammunition, which makes it an odd double-skill weapon compared to a bow.

[Spartan-117]

I wouldn't fixate on the black powder element of Early Firearms. Its use as the skill for crossbow is much more interesting. I think the case could be made to put Early Firearms on the Subsequent terms list for the Special Forces career...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossbow#Modern_military_and_paramilitary_use

https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/aug/09/balkans

https://web.archive.org/web/20090305184249/http://www.segurancaedefesa.com/Besta.jpg

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l189/KORNET-E/162.jpg

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l189/KORNET-E/crosbow.jpg

https://web.archive.org/web/20140202110148/http://english.pladaily.com.cn/site2/militarydatabase/2006-02/05/content_403376.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20071025075700/http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Marines.html

https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/serbian-minister-of-defence-dragan-sutanovac-tries-a-news-photo/79788140

[pmulcahy11b]

I am partial to beer steins or bottles myself. Bit easier to maneuver.

I knew a cadet in our favorite haunt when I was in ROTC who got busted in the face with a beer mug (full!). He suffered a broken nose, but no one called the police, and Griffee did not leave early. He didn't even go to the hospital until after the morning classes, when CPT Thorson ordered him to go.

[Olefin]

Early firearms really needs to be rewritten to include a lot more than just historical re-enactment

Early Firearms (STR): Early Firearms is totally new, and enables the use of archaic firearms such as the black powder pistol and the crossbow (the use of which has more in common with firearms than with archery).

First off as I said muzzle loading rifle hunting is allowed in almost every state - and there are a lot of people who do it - and it has no relationship at all with historical re-enactment - its just another way to hunt.

As for the bow - didnt any of the authors ever get the archery badge in the Boy Scouts? Or do bow hunting? There are a ton of people in the US who hunt with bows and crossbows - and again absolutely nothing to do with re-enactments.

Again its not really a career issue - but depending on the country there could be a lot more people who can use bows of all sorts or archaic firearms

Great example is the UK - you can possess a black powder pistol without a license where good luck getting a license for a real one - so the chances of someone with a pistol in the UK being a muzzle loading black powder pistol is pretty high.

[Olefin]

course given the timeline of the game the regulations that changed gun ownership in the UK may have never gone into effect at all

[Rainbow Six]

Great example is the UK - you can possess a black powder pistol without a license.
You can, but not if you have any intention of using the thing.

https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/guns/ammunition/black-powder-licences-72074

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org.uk/general/gunlaw.htm#Blackpowder_information

To legally possess a muzzle loading firearm which is to be actually used, rather than kept solely as an ornament or curio, a Firearm Certificate (FAC) is necessary irrespective of the age of the firearm. All the same restrictions apply as they do to a modern breech-loading firearm.

To legally possess blackpowder for use in a firearm it is necessary to hold a, "Certificate to Acquire and Keep Explosives".

You can possess a black powder pistol without a licence if you have no intention of using it. If you want to actually use one you need a Firearms certificate and a certificate to keep explosives.

[Olefin]

FYI I used to be a camp counselor who taught archery - and take it from me I spent most of my time hunting for arrows that went everywhere except the target. So its not that easy to get to be good with a bow. (But we always had the one kid who showed up with the expensive bow and showed that at least some kids were getting properly trained as archers).

Around where I live now there a lot of bow hunters who are damn good at it - including two of my neighbors who are out there regularly with their kids perforating their deer target.

Thus I would hate to be a marauder group in my area thinking all they have to worry about is guys with shotguns or hunting rifles who start getting picked off by guys with bows from out of the trees or windows without giving away their position.

[Vespers War]

Early firearms really needs to be rewritten to include a lot more than just historical re-enactment

I always assumed the parentheticals were just examples rather than the only way to get the skill. Otherwise, we'd also have to consider rewriting +1 CON to be more than just jogging, Survival to be more than just camping, and Observation to be more than just bird watching. I grew up with a guy who does bow hunting. I learned from a competition target shooter as part of therapy for an arm injury. We have different techniques from our different bases of learning, but hunting and target shooting are both a valid basis for Archery skill (which has no parenthetical).

[Olefin]

I always assumed the parentheticals were just examples rather than the only way to get the skill. Otherwise, we'd also have to consider rewriting +1 CON to be more than just jogging, Survival to be more than just camping, and Observation to be more than just bird watching. I grew up with a guy who does bow hunting. I learned from a competition target shooter as part of therapy for an arm injury. We have different techniques from our different bases of learning, but hunting and target shooting are both a valid basis for Archery skill (which has no parenthetical).

Oh and I agree with re-enactment for some weapons - not many people are going hunting with a long sword.

And black powder hunting is a very challenging way to hunt - I know people who do it just for that reason. Not because they want to act like Daniel Boone or a Civil War soldier. Hope the new version is more open to black powder arms and the like as weapons that would be encountered with some details.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

None of which alters the fact that Early Firearms is not a skill you are going to pick up as a career skill in the overwhelming majority of cases.

There are probably 95-99% of jobs in the modern setting, where there is no chance what-so-ever, to acquire Early Firearms as a career skill.
Leaving Early Firearms off the list of skills in careers is pretty easy to understand for any modern setting - after the apocalypse it's a different matter entirely because such skills become closely related to survival.
But other than that, there is no practical reason to have Early Firearms as a career skill for 95-99% of jobs in the modern world.

[Legbreaker]

None of which alters the fact that Early Firearms is not a skill you are going to pick up as a career skill in the overwhelming majority of cases.
This.

There are probably 95-99% of jobs in the modern setting, where there is no chance what-so-ever, to acquire Early Firearms as a career skill.
For that matter, how many are likely to use, or even have the most basic of training in ANY sort of firearm in a modern setting? Pretty much the only ones it could be justified for outside the military are law enforcement, security and some farming roles. Black powder weapons (aka early firearms) are exceptionally rare in comparison with many gunsmiths and dealers only seeing a handful in their entire careers. They are very much a niche item the use of which squarely fits into background or secondary activities. Even for those VERY few jobs which MIGHT involve some knowledge of them secondary skills should cover it nicely - much like most stone age archaeologists are well aware of the theory of flint knapping, but only a tiny percentage actually have any measurable skill at it.

[Spartan-117]

None of which alters the fact that Early Firearms is not a skill you are going to pick up as a career skill in the overwhelming majority of cases.

There are probably 95-99% of jobs in the modern setting, where there is no chance what-so-ever, to acquire Early Firearms as a career skill.
Leaving Early Firearms off the list of skills in careers is pretty easy to understand for any modern setting - after the apocalypse it's a different matter entirely because such skills become closely related to survival.
But other than that, there is no practical reason to have Early Firearms as a career skill for 95-99% of jobs in the modern world.

I don't disagree that it's not applicable to a population at large. I do think it's a slippery slope to try to delineate careers/career skill selection based on % population. RPGs, by their nature, focus on those small percentages at the extremes. The % of people who have served in the military is extremely low in most large population countries that do not have conscription. Then there's a fraction of that small percentage that enter any kind of special warfare community training pipeline - a fraction of those who go on to serve in those roles. Yet Twilight 2.2 breaks out Rangers, Special Forces, Scout Snipers, Force Recon, SEALs... the authors were clearly not writing to the 95th or 99th percentile. They were writing to the 99.999th percentile.

If one of my players wanted to select it as subsequent term skill for a Spec Ops or Engineer Branch with some justification, I'd allow it. I mean, it's a lot more believable than 100% of all farmers in the world knowing Computer: 1.

Come in from the fields farmers!! We need a Linux SAMBA server built!

https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2015/04/7382463636_5c8824d5f8_b.jpg

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I did say "modern" world, not dirt poor farmers in the Third World.

The reality is, this game is a hobby indulged in typically by people who don't have to worry about subsistence living. They have the leisure time available to indulge in these sorts of hobbies.
We have to accept that the game was written for these people and that the game designers were going to provide a framework that is familiar to those players, the game was designed by people in the First World to be played by people in the First World, typically running characters from the First World.
More specifically, the game was designed by Americans, for Americans and the game was built with an Americanocentric point of view.

Twilight: 2000 2.2 is no more guilty of providing an abundance of special forces type soldiers as any other military game. Even when you tell players that there will be no special forces types allowed in the game, there's always one who will still try to con you into allowing them to have their 125 year old rocket scientist, battlefield surgeon, construction engineer, SAS marksman with Green Beret command training, while being a Ranger leader in the Navy SEALs with 80 years of experience in combat zones from World War One to Desert Storm plus a sideline in being a black marketeer who has contacts with the Mafia, Yakuza and Triads who once saved the life of Princess so-and-so's personal dog walker's favourite cousin during a mid-air hijack where they had to jump from one plane to another so the Princess owes them a favour or forty...
Or worse, they want all those things for a character who is barely 21 years old.

Maybe I exaggerate a little... however, most players want to play something exciting, interesting or exotic. The worst of them want to play something utterly outlandish.
They are less likely to want to play a busted-arse, dirt-poor farmer from the Third World even if they do get Early Firearms as a career skill.

[Raellus]

Thanks to Swaghauler for bringing this thread to my attention.

Are there any official rules for the use of slings? I thought I remembered seeing a slingshot (not the same weapon, I realize, but perhaps a starting point) in the v2.2 BYB, but I just checked and there's no such entry. Slings were have a significantly greater range and damage than a slingshot, I am sure.

Besides being a direct fire infantry projectile weapon that would be easy to manufacture c. 2000 (same for its ammunition), slings could also be used to hurl incendiaries or possibly explosives over walls and such.

Here are a couple of brief articles on the history of the sling in warfare:

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2017/01/31/learning-from-david-gloiath-true-origin-sling-weapon/

https://www.dangergoods.com/slinghistory

-

[.45cultist]

You will need the velocity for the sling's wind up, I think.

[Vespers War]

Yeah, either velocity or measured distance and time of flight, which would allow average velocity to be calculated. I haven't run across much in the way of experimental archeology or physical anthropological studies of slings - one experiment with Peruvian shepherds, but they only recorded distance and didn't record details about the projectiles or slings that were used. I'd roughly guesstimate them at Dam 1 or 2 and BR around 35, but that's just a semi-educated guess. I also have no clue how they'd interact with modern armors and whether flexible vs rigid armor would make any difference.

[swaghauler]

Yeah, either velocity or measured distance and time of flight, which would allow average velocity to be calculated. I haven't run across much in the way of experimental archeology or physical anthropological studies of slings - one experiment with Peruvian shepherds, but they only recorded distance and didn't record details about the projectiles or slings that were used. I'd roughly guesstimate them at Dam 1 or 2 and BR around 35, but that's just a semi-educated guess. I also have no clue how they'd interact with modern armors and whether flexible vs rigid armor would make any difference.

I've used both paracord and leather Shepherd's Slings as well as Slingshots. Modern slings often use ball bearings as ammo or you can use a SMOOTH rock around 100 to 200 grams in weight. Lead fishing sinkers (200 grams) for ocean rigs are also used. These almond-shaped projectiles resemble historic lead sling bullets. The first mistake many novice slingers make is using too light of a rock. You need some mass to keep that rock in the sling for the windup. The leather slings provide much better control while the paracord slings generate more velocity due to their "elasticity." We used a radar gun to measure speed and our stones and ball bearings ran between 30m/s and 50m/s out of our shepherds' slings. The Slingshots were definitely slower at around 30m/s but you can actually shoot arrows from a Slingshot. Dave Canterbury (of dual survival fame) has a couple of videos on this.
On the range and accuracy side, these are just like bows. The POINT ACCURACY is much harder to achieve than lobbing rocks into a skirmish line and ranges are shorter for point targets than area targets (just like bows). The true irony is that optimum accuracy occurs at a slower release speed than most people anticipate. The modern slingers compete at around 40m and I would say this is into a Long range band for Twilight2000 V2.2. So I'd say a base Range of 10m to 15m is about average. The range for a Slingshot is around 10m, but even with the toughest rubber band you can buy, a Slingshot will not match the range of a Shepard's Sling.
The Slingshot is easy to get accuracy with. You center your target between the "Y" arms of the Slingshot with the arrow or ball bearing located in the rubber pocket just under your dominant eye. You then center the ball bearing so it covers half of the target and release the rubber band. At longer ranges, you hold the ball bearing OVER the target to hit it. To give you an idea of the Slingshot's accuracy, people hunt SQUIRRELS with them.
The Shepard's Sling requires LOADS of practice to get hits with. You must time your release of the end of the cord with the stone's alignment on target. I was given this tip which does work... "when the string wrapped around your finger 'tugs' on it, release the knotted end." This does work and you will be in the vicinity of the target. I'd say the DIFFICULTY for a Shepard's Sling should be at least a DIFFICULT if not a FORMIBABLE test of skill. The Slingshot would be an AVERAGE test of skill.

[Olefin]

all depends on where you grew up and what you did as a kid too - we made slingshots in the Boy Scouts and I got my archery badge both in the Scouts and at a YMCA camp as well as hunted with bow. And we made rubber band zip guns as well - and if you know what you are doing with them you can actually make them into one shot pistols

[Vespers War]

I've used both paracord and leather Shepherd's Slings as well as Slingshots. Modern slings often use ball bearings as ammo or you can use a SMOOTH rock around 100 to 200 grams in weight. Lead fishing sinkers (200 grams) for ocean rigs are also used. These almond-shaped projectiles resemble historic lead sling bullets. The first mistake many novice slingers make is using too light of a rock. You need some mass to keep that rock in the sling for the windup. The leather slings provide much better control while the paracord slings generate more velocity due to their "elasticity." We used a radar gun to measure speed and our stones and ball bearings ran between 30m/s and 50m/s out of our shepherds' slings. The Slingshots were definitely slower at around 30m/s but you can actually shoot arrows from a Slingshot. Dave Canterbury (of dual survival fame) has a couple of videos on this.
On the range and accuracy side, these are just like bows. The POINT ACCURACY is much harder to achieve than lobbing rocks into a skirmish line and ranges are shorter for point targets than area targets (just like bows). The true irony is that optimum accuracy occurs at a slower release speed than most people anticipate. The modern slingers compete at around 40m and I would say this is into a Long range band for Twilight2000 V2.2. So I'd say a base Range of 10m to 15m is about average. The range for a Slingshot is around 10m, but even with the toughest rubber band you can buy, a Slingshot will not match the range of a Shepard's Sling.
The Slingshot is easy to get accuracy with. You center your target between the "Y" arms of the Slingshot with the arrow or ball bearing located in the rubber pocket just under your dominant eye. You then center the ball bearing so it covers half of the target and release the rubber band. At longer ranges, you hold the ball bearing OVER the target to hit it. To give you an idea of the Slingshot's accuracy, people hunt SQUIRRELS with them.
The Shepard's Sling requires LOADS of practice to get hits with. You must time your release of the end of the cord with the stone's alignment on target. I was given this tip which does work... "when the string wrapped around your finger 'tugs' on it, release the knotted end." This does work and you will be in the vicinity of the target. I'd say the DIFFICULTY for a Shepard's Sling should be at least a DIFFICULT if not a FORMIBABLE test of skill. The Slingshot would be an AVERAGE test of skill.

Just to provide a point of comparison, Jorg Sprave has gotten over 100 m/s with a slingshot. Despite that, he was only getting around 130 joules because the projectile mass wasn't all that high.

The current world record for distance from a sling (not a slingshot) is 437.10 meters using a 52 gram projectile from a 129.5 centimeter sling, back in 1981. Effective ranges would of course be lower, and as you mentioned would vary depending on whether one was firing at a single point target or "just" flinging projectiles in the direction of a massed block of opponents. I think 15m sounds fair for point targets, since it puts the maximum effective range as being roughly a football field.

[swaghauler]

Here's a video comparing the Brown Bess to a "Kentucky Long Rifle" (most of which were made in PA).

https://youtu.be/R2bNV9e17Ko

[swaghauler]

Here's a video from Tod's Workshop on what I'd call a Swiss Arrow (throwing dart) and Plumbatta.

https://youtu.be/dSIrR0Jo09Y

If that's a capital I instead of a lowercase l, look for a refined post below

Swag

[swaghauler]

I want to bump the Primitive Technology Channel again. And no, he doesn't speak in ANY of his videos... The same as above... if the I is really a lowercase L, I'll repost the link below.

https://youtu.be/rrlr02YDr5A

[swaghauler]

Here's Dave Canterbury's Slingshot Bow shooting arrows.

https://youtu.be/6LxKfpAPYA