Multishot and ring of increase damage
Janis Papanagnou
a ranger in my current game, I'd be interested to know how a ring of
increase damage would change damage done in case of an arrow (or resp.
dagger) multishot. I have both weapons at Expert (1-4 shots per turn,
no racial bonus), daggers and arrows are enchanted to +6 (artifact bow
still +0). I suspect that a +5 ring of increase damage would add up to
20 additional points of damage, or will the damage bonus be added just
once per multishot?
And arrows (with d6/d6 damage) seem a bit better than daggers (d4/d3).
The advantage of daggers is that you don't need a missile launcher and
can keep a melee weapon in hand, which seems irrelevant because one can
use missile weapons at melee range as well. Am I missing anything here?
Does the PHYS(5,0) from the Longbow of Diana add another damage factor?
(If so; is that once per turn or once per missile shot?)
Janis
Gorice
"Janis Papanagnou" <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:goc18u$1ft$1...@svr7.m-online.net...
> With some recent vigorous thread in mind and since I incidentally play
> a ranger in my current game, I'd be interested to know how a ring of
> increase damage would change damage done in case of an arrow (or resp.
> dagger) multishot. I have both weapons at Expert (1-4 shots per turn,
> no racial bonus), daggers and arrows are enchanted to +6 (artifact bow
> still +0). I suspect that a +5 ring of increase damage would add up to
> 20 additional points of damage, or will the damage bonus be added just
> once per multishot?
A superficial look at the code (uhitm.c around line 890) suggests that you
get the damage bonus on each missile in a multishot volley. I might have
missed something but a wizmode test (with a +10 ring) seems to bear this
out. Interesting, never thought about =increase damage with missile
weapons for some reason but a highly enchanted one would make Expert
rangers or rogues quite deadly!
> Does the PHYS(5,0) from the Longbow of Diana add another damage factor?
> (If so; is that once per turn or once per missile shot?)
Doesn't that just give +5 to hit? I didn't think launchers' to-hit bonuses
ever
applied to the damage done?
G
Janis Papanagnou
> "Janis Papanagnou" <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>news:goc18u$1ft$1...@svr7.m-online.net...
>>With some recent vigorous thread in mind and since I incidentally play
>>a ranger in my current game, I'd be interested to know how a ring of
>>increase damage would change damage done in case of an arrow (or resp.
>>dagger) multishot. I have both weapons at Expert (1-4 shots per turn,
>>no racial bonus), daggers and arrows are enchanted to +6 (artifact bow
>>still +0). I suspect that a +5 ring of increase damage would add up to
>>20 additional points of damage, or will the damage bonus be added just
>>once per multishot?
>
>
> A superficial look at the code (uhitm.c around line 890) suggests that you
> get the damage bonus on each missile in a multishot volley. I might have
> missed something but a wizmode test (with a +10 ring) seems to bear this
> out.
Thanks for confirming my presumption.
> Interesting, never thought about =increase damage with missile
> weapons for some reason but a highly enchanted one would make Expert
> rangers or rogues quite deadly!
Indeed! 8-) Actually, even quite instant-deadly in most cases.
I had just arrived at Astral when I stopped playing and peeked into the
game of some other NAO player who incidentally enchanted that ring just
at that moment. Which made me think about using them for missiles in my
current game; wishing for that ring and enchanting it, before I'm going
to face the riders.
>>Does the PHYS(5,0) from the Longbow of Diana add another damage factor?
>>(If so; is that once per turn or once per missile shot?)
>
> Doesn't that just give +5 to hit? I didn't think launchers' to-hit bonuses
> ever
> applied to the damage done?
Don't know. My suspicion was that it might be the basic damage done if
one hits with the bow in melee attack, umm, on the head of the monster
(or so).
Janis
ran...@pactechdata.com
wrote:
[...]
> And arrows (with d6/d6 damage) seem a bit better than daggers (d4/d3).
> The advantage of daggers is that you don't need a missile launcher and
> can keep a melee weapon in hand, which seems irrelevant because one can
> use missile weapons at melee range as well. Am I missing anything here?
Missiles thrown by hand get a damage bonus for high strength
(or damage penalty for extremely low strength). Missiles shot with
a launcher do not. (That's has been/will be changed for slings,
but not for bows....)
Kent Paul Dolan
[...]
> Missiles thrown by hand get a damage bonus for
> high strength (or damage penalty for extremely low
> strength). Missiles shot with a launcher do not.
> (That's has been/will be changed for slings, but
> not for bows....)
That should be changed for bows, too, IMO.
Pulling a battle bow
[(NetHack isn't too specific about what bow
type is in use, so that could be anything
from the English "cloth-yard bow" taller
than a man, to the Mongol's bow shot from
horseback, barely a meter in length]
to full draw very much depends on the strength of
the user, and it is quite possible to shoot an arrow
(weakly) with a bow from a less than fully drawn
position.
However, above some strength that is sufficient to
draw the bow fully, further strength should not add
damage, as the draw is at that point limited by arm
length.
There should probably be a dependence on PC size,
too.
Gnomes' arms are probably not long enough to fully
draw a battle bow if it is one of the larger types.
FWIW
xanthian.
David Damerell
>And arrows (with d6/d6 damage) seem a bit better than daggers (d4/d3).
>The advantage of daggers is that you don't need a missile launcher and
>can keep a melee weapon in hand, which seems irrelevant because one can
>use missile weapons at melee range as well. Am I missing anything here?
Strength bonus to damage from thrown but not launched weapons.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, March.
Ilmari Karonen
> ran...@pactechdata.com wrote:
> >
> > Missiles thrown by hand get a damage bonus for
> > high strength (or damage penalty for extremely low
> > strength). Missiles shot with a launcher do not.
> > (That's has been/will be changed for slings, but
> > not for bows....)
>
> That should be changed for bows, too, IMO.
>
>
> However, above some strength that is sufficient to
> draw the bow fully, further strength should not add
> damage, as the draw is at that point limited by arm
> length.
Presumably the default damage is calculated with a full draw, so there
should be no damage bonus above that, but insufficient strength should
still cause a penalty (and perhaps a message like "You struggle to
draw the heavy bow.").
Ideally, bow-type launchers should each have a target strength required
to do full damage. This would also allow for more tradeoffs between
different bow types, some of which could require more strength but have
correspondingly higher maximum damage (and range).
Crossbows should not really suffer from damage penalties, but, unless
the player is extremely strong (say, STR > 18), should require some
minimum delay between shots to allow for drawing them. The delay
could be strength-dependent, such that a strong player could fire a
bolt per turn, but a very weak one would have to spend a longer time
drawing the bow. (Of course, this would probably also require a
change to monsters' crossbow use so that they can't rapid-fire them
either.)
--
Ilmari Karonen
To reply by e-mail, please replace ".invalid" with ".net" in address.
Kent Paul Dolan
> [snip]
I agree with all of that, and hope it makes its way
into some new release. I think there are four
distinguishable situations for drawing a crossbow.
1) Crossbows can be drawn directly using the string
by a sufficiently strong PC, and that could be done
simultaneously with notching the quarrel into place
on the string and in its groove.
2) Crossbows can be drawn using the usual force
multiplying lever by a somewhat less strong PC, but
that means setting the quarrel in place as a
separate action when a hand is free.
3) Crossbows must be set butt end on the floor and
drawn by putting ones full weight on the lever by
the weakest PCs, then picked up and a quarrel
loaded.
4) Gnomes, and other player characters polymorphed
to size small monsters, being both weak and also
light of weight, might not be able to draw a
crossbow by any means at all.
In all successful cases the bow will be fully drawn,
but the two situations of using the lever, and of
using the lever while the weapon rests on its butt
on the floor, should involve a time per shot
penalty, the second one quite severe.
The second case leaves the PC in an awkward position
for self defense or parrying too, so some kind of
vulnerability penalty should be considered.
FWIW
xanthian.
Gorice
>> weapons for some reason but a highly enchanted one would make Expert
>> rangers or rogues quite deadly!
>
> Indeed! 8-) Actually, even quite instant-deadly in most cases.
>
> I had just arrived at Astral when I stopped playing and peeked into the
> game of some other NAO player who incidentally enchanted that ring just
> at that moment. Which made me think about using them for missiles in my
> current game; wishing for that ring and enchanting it, before I'm going
> to face the riders.
>
Out of interest, assuming you've finished the game by now, how did it turn
out?
Janis Papanagnou
> "Janis Papanagnou" <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:goedka$ben$1...@svr7.m-online.net...
>>Gorice wrote:
>>>"Janis Papanagnou" <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>Interesting, never thought about =increase damage with missile
>>>weapons for some reason but a highly enchanted one would make Expert
>>>rangers or rogues quite deadly!
>>
>>Indeed! 8-) Actually, even quite instant-deadly in most cases.
>>
>>I had just arrived at Astral when I stopped playing and peeked into the
>>game of some other NAO player who incidentally enchanted that ring just
>>at that moment. Which made me think about using them for missiles in my
>>current game; wishing for that ring and enchanting it, before I'm going
>>to face the riders.
>
> Out of interest, assuming you've finished the game by now, how did it turn
> out?
It was somewhat disappointing. I wished for a +2 ring of increase damage,
and a blessed scroll of charging made it +5. (Before that I had genocided
L's and h's because I didn't want to delay the game by those two purple L
that were on the level.) I decided to go without conflict in the beginning
to keep my pet angel. Going to face Famine first. Not quite sure what
exactly happened or what I have (maybe) done, but Famine stood adjacent to
me with only 25 (or so) HP's, so the first volley of three(?) +6 arrows
killed the Rider. Then I had some problem with a player character; really
don't know how many arrows I fired at him but when I finally started to use
my stethoscope I saw that he had still 180/260 (or so) HP's, and I cannot
recall to have had such a tough player character before. Anyway, I reached
the lawful altar, wanted to finish the game quickly, wished for the [HoOA,
and sacrificed the Amulet. Besides the player character that seemed to me
to be overly tough there really wasn't much to say about the endgame. That
was my fifth ascended randomly choosen gnomish ranger at NAO; I seem to be
quite successful with this combination. Multishot rules, apparently.
BTW, given the response from Pat Rankin and David I might have done 2 more
points average damage with my daggers, but given how many arrows I had to
spend my stock of daggers wouldn't have sufficed anyway, I suppose.
Janis
Link
wrote:
> With some recent vigorous thread in mind and since I incidentally play
> a ranger in my current game, I'd be interested to know how a ring of
> increase damage would change damage done in case of an arrow (or resp.
> dagger) multishot. I have both weapons at Expert (1-4 shots per turn,
> no racial bonus), daggers and arrows are enchanted to +6 (artifact bow
> still +0). I suspect that a +5 ring of increase damage would add up to
> 20 additional points of damage, or will the damage bonus be added just
> once per multishot?
>
> And arrows (with d6/d6 damage) seem a bit better than daggers (d4/d3).
> The advantage of daggers is that you don't need a missile launcher and
> can keep a melee weapon in hand, which seems irrelevant because one can
> use missile weapons at melee range as well. Am I missing anything here?
The difference is more relevant in the early game, which is before you
can make highly enchanted weapons. By the time you can get a stack of
+6 daggers, your AC is probably so low, and your damage is so high,
that it doesn't really matter what weapon you use. However, if you
really feel like overkilling the vampires and demons, I think you can
use a single wish to get a guaranteed 20 silver arrows (I've never
tried this).
In the early game, the weight difference between arrows and daggers
can be very noticable. Also, in the early game, the racial +1
possible shot per attack is very noticable. The +2 racial arrows you
start the game with means an extra +2 damage per shot with those
arrows (+3 damage per shot if you are an elf). Finally, arrows can
easily be poisoned before you reach the bottom of the mines, for an
extra +d6 damage per shot against non-poison-resistant monsters, if
you are willing to mix random potions together.
Yes, daggers do get a STR bonus to damage when thrown, but they are
still going to do much less damage than arrows.
Honestly, by the time I can get +6 arrows, my primary attack is melee
with a +6 silver dagger, meaning that I'm really not concerned at that
point to which type of ranged weapons are better for damage.
Janis Papanagnou
>
> Honestly, by the time I can get +6 arrows, my primary attack is melee
> with a +6 silver dagger, meaning that I'm really not concerned at that
> point to which type of ranged weapons are better for damage.
I don't think I understand your last point. At the time you get +6 arrows
you would likely multishot, and then there's no need in meleeing any more
because even in melee range you could fire your bow.
Janis
Link
wrote:
At the time I get +6 arrows, I'd rather go for faster realtime than
try to go for as few turns as possible. In this case, I'd rather
fight by holding down a direction key (melee), than I would by using
the extra keystrokes to fire arrows and then pick them back up.
(Of course, I would switch to a bow if I felt that something was a
threat to my character, but most of the stuff at that point can be
safely defeated with a +6 silver dagger)
Zeitgeist
This is where autopickup exceptions can really help. Just name your
highly
enchanted ammo and set an exception to pickup anything with that name,
and
you won't have to waste any time manually picking it up.
--
Zeitgeist.
Gorice
> Gorice wrote:
>> Out of interest, assuming you've finished the game by now, how did it
>> turn out?
>
> It was somewhat disappointing. I wished for a +2 ring of increase damage,
> and a blessed scroll of charging made it +5. (Before that I had genocided
> L's and h's because I didn't want to delay the game by those two purple L
> that were on the level.) I decided to go without conflict in the beginning
> to keep my pet angel. Going to face Famine first. Not quite sure what
> exactly happened or what I have (maybe) done, but Famine stood adjacent to
> me with only 25 (or so) HP's, so the first volley of three(?) +6 arrows
> killed the Rider. Then I had some problem with a player character; really
> don't know how many arrows I fired at him but when I finally started to
> use
> my stethoscope I saw that he had still 180/260 (or so) HP's, and I cannot
> recall to have had such a tough player character before. Anyway, I reached
> the lawful altar, wanted to finish the game quickly, wished for the [HoOA,
> and sacrificed the Amulet. Besides the player character that seemed to me
> to be overly tough there really wasn't much to say about the endgame. That
> was my fifth ascended randomly choosen gnomish ranger at NAO; I seem to be
> quite successful with this combination. Multishot rules, apparently.
Dude, that's one seriously mean player character, I don't blame you for not
wanting to prolong the formalities with the RNG sending in Chuck Norris!
> BTW, given the response from Pat Rankin and David I might have done 2 more
> points average damage with my daggers, but given how many arrows I had to
> spend my stock of daggers wouldn't have sufficed anyway, I suppose.
Yes I forgot about the str bonus on thrown weapons. Factoring that in does
appear to make thrown daggers generally the better option - as long as you
have
a decent str bonus and can carry enough, I suppose. But as a post-quest
ranger
you've got arrows coming out your ears so it seems a shame not to use them.
Anyway, thanks for the summary!
G
tenaya...@gmail.com
> On Mar 3, 3:29 pm, Link <chillyn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 6:29 pm, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanag...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Link wrote:
>
> > > > Honestly, by the time I can get +6 arrows, my primary attack is melee
> > > > with a +6 silver dagger, meaning that I'm really not concerned at that
> > > > point to which type of ranged weapons are better for damage.
>
> > > I don't think I understand your last point. At the time you get +6 arrows
> > > you would likely multishot, and then there's no need in meleeing any more
> > > because even in melee range you could fire your bow.
>
> > At the time I get +6 arrows, I'd rather go for faster realtime than
Me too. But by the time I can make +6 arrows I don't need to pick
them up.
> > try to go for as few turns as possible. In this case, I'd rather
> > fight by holding down a direction key (melee), than I would by using
> > the extra keystrokes to fire arrows and then pick them back up.
>
> > (Of course, I would switch to a bow if I felt that something was a
> > threat to my character, but most of the stuff at that point can be
> > safely defeated with a +6 silver dagger)
>
> This is where autopickup exceptions can really help. Just name your
> highly
> enchanted ammo and set an exception to pickup anything with that name,
> and
> you won't have to waste any time manually picking it up.
>
Would you please write out the Options line for such an autopickup
exception? Should I set Autopickup to include weapons? Thanks!
--
Tenaya
Link
Can I do the autopickup name exception on NAO? In the later-game, I'd
still rather hold down a direction key for combat, but in the early-
game this autopickup name exception thing could be really useful.
Janis Papanagnou
> "Janis Papanagnou" <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:gohdp7$ia3$1...@svr7.m-online.net...
>
>>don't know how many arrows I fired at him but when I finally started to
>>use
>>my stethoscope I saw that he had still 180/260 (or so) HP's, and I cannot
>
>
> Dude, that's one seriously mean player character,
Sorry, but by "mean" do you mean "average" or "evil"? (My dictionary shows
both possibilities.)
> I don't blame you for not
> wanting to prolong the formalities with the RNG sending in Chuck Norris!
LOL - yes sure :-) (So you meant "evil", I suppose.)
>>BTW, given the response from Pat Rankin and David I might have done 2 more
>>points average damage with my daggers, but given how many arrows I had to
>>spend my stock of daggers wouldn't have sufficed anyway, I suppose.
>
> Yes I forgot about the str bonus on thrown weapons. Factoring that in does
> appear to make thrown daggers generally the better option - as long as you
> have a decent str bonus and can carry enough, I suppose.
As a gnome I had just +3 bonus (with max Str 18/50). (Though I possessed but
didn't use the [GoP, because I wanted to be able to cast spells.)
> Anyway, thanks for the summary!
You're welcome. :-)
Janis
Janis Papanagnou
> On Mar 2, 6:29 pm, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanag...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>>Link wrote:
>>
>>>Honestly, by the time I can get +6 arrows, my primary attack is melee
>>>with a +6 silver dagger, meaning that I'm really not concerned at that
>>>point to which type of ranged weapons are better for damage.
>>
>>I don't think I understand your last point. At the time you get +6 arrows
>>you would likely multishot, and then there's no need in meleeing any more
>>because even in melee range you could fire your bow.
>
> At the time I get +6 arrows, I'd rather go for faster realtime than
> try to go for as few turns as possible.
Aha, I see what you mean.
> In this case, I'd rather
> fight by holding down a direction key (melee), than I would by using
> the extra keystrokes to fire arrows and then pick them back up.
Though I'd prefer ranged attacks in that case, even if I'd follow the
same motivation as you do; instead of <dir> you'll type <f> <dir> and
will kill the opponent *faster*. With an average of (non-racial bonus)
2.5 arrows per command you have less keystrokes than otherwise.[*]
(With the many arrows in the advanced game you typically don't even
need to pick them up again, BTW; there are so many arrows, especially
for post-quest rangers.)
> (Of course, I would switch to a bow if I felt that something was a
> threat to my character, but most of the stuff at that point can be
> safely defeated with a +6 silver dagger)
Sure, if your melee weapon can remove most of your opponents in a few
turns that's fine.
Janis
[*] It's even possible to type faster with two fingers on two keys
than with one finger twice on the same key, BTW. But personal habits
and typing proficiency rules, of course, and I understand if you keep
habits you're used to and are comfortable with. :-)
Gorice
> Gorice wrote:
>> "Janis Papanagnou" <janis_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:gohdp7$ia3$1...@svr7.m-online.net...
>>
>>>[...] Then I had some problem with a player character; really
>>>don't know how many arrows I fired at him but when I finally started to
>>>use
>>>my stethoscope I saw that he had still 180/260 (or so) HP's, and I cannot
>>>recall to have had such a tough player character before. [...]
>>
>>
>> Dude, that's one seriously mean player character,
>
> Sorry, but by "mean" do you mean "average" or "evil"? (My dictionary shows
> both possibilities.)
>
think
about the multiple "meanings" that "mean" can have.
G
Link
When I say that I hold down a direction key, I literally mean that I'm
holding down a direction key. It might be faster if I was typing with
two fingers, but it's much better (in terms of lazyness) to just hold
one key down until something dies.
Janis Papanagnou
>
> When I say that I hold down a direction key, I literally mean that I'm
> holding down a direction key.
Oh! - Isn't that extremely dangerous?
(My lethality rate dropped significantly as I stopped "holding down" keys.)
> It might be faster if I was typing with
> two fingers, but it's much better (in terms of lazyness) to just hold
> one key down until something dies.
Janis
Janis Papanagnou
>>Gorice wrote:
>>
>>>Dude, that's one seriously mean player character,
>>
>>Sorry, but by "mean" do you mean "average" or "evil"? (My dictionary shows
>>both possibilities.)
>
> Yup I intended "evil" ...but you worked that out from the next bit. Didn't
> think about the multiple "meanings" that "mean" can have.
Correction (after ttyrec replay); he was less mean than I wrote...
Yitzhak the Rover (lawful): Level 27 HP 214(214) AC -7, invisible.
Volleys of +6 arrows (with +5 =RoID) required 9 turns to kill him:
3 3 1 3 1 4 3 4 4 = 23 (+3 from the last volley that passed his dead body)
("Yitzhak", not to confuse with "Izchak" - which seems intentional? ;-)
Janis
saint...@gmail.com
> ran...@pactechdata.com wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Missiles thrown by hand get a damage bonus for
> > high strength (or damage penalty for extremely low
> > strength). Missiles shot with a launcher do not.
> > (That's has been/will be changed for slings, but
> > not for bows....)
>
> That should be changed for bows, too, IMO.
>
> Pulling a battle bow
> to full draw very much depends on the strength of
> the user, and it is quite possible to shoot an arrow
> (weakly) with a bow from a less than fully drawn
> position.
>
> However, above some strength that is sufficient to
> draw the bow fully, further strength should not add
> damage, as the draw is at that point limited by arm
> length.
As an experience bowman in reality I would have to disagree a little.
Having "just enough" str to pull a bow will indeed result in an arrow
speed that's identical to having str to spare. However, having the
extra str makes a great deal of difference in your ability to release
the arrow when you want and smoothy draw another. Damage isn't just
about arrow speed but also placement. Being able to bulls-eye a target
because you could hold the bow drawn for another few seconds will
cause a lot more damage than a glancing blow. The stronger you are,
the steadier you can hold a drawn bow for longer periods of time.
If you were going for the most realism extra str past the "bow pull"
would go into your chance to hit. So for example say a bow requires
str 12. Any str over 12 would be considered to be a +dex bonus for the
shot.
That's pretty complicated IMHO. Just allowing STR to give a bonus
damage to bows seems like a reasonable compromise to me.
Zeitgeist
> On Mar 3, 12:20 am, Zeitgeist <tomfhai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is where autopickup exceptions can really help. Just name your
> > highly
> > enchanted ammo and set an exception to pickup anything with that name,
> > and
> > you won't have to waste any time manually picking it up.
>
> Would you please write out the Options line for such an autopickup
> exception? Should I set Autopickup to include weapons? Thanks!
>
autopickup setting.
----- 8< ----- SNIP HERE ----- 8< ----- SNIP HERE ----- 8< -----
autopickup_exception="<*storm"
autopickup_exception=">* cursed*"
OPTIONS=autoquiver,autopickup,pickup_types:$"=/!?+
----- 8< ----- SNIP HERE ----- 8< ----- SNIP HERE ----- 8< -----
Then I name my ammo something like "arrowstorm" and will automatically
pick up any named ammo that I fire.
--
Zeitgeist.
tenaya...@gmail.com
Fantastic! Thanks so much!
ran...@pactechdata.com
[...]
> If you were going for the most realism extra str past the "bow pull"
> would go into your chance to hit. So for example say a bow requires
> str 12. Any str over 12 would be considered to be a +dex bonus for the
> shot.
>
> That's pretty complicated IMHO. Just allowing STR to give a bonus
> damage to bows seems like a reasonable compromise to me.
High strength already gives an attack (aka to-hit) bonus,
for all weapons and all attack modes including shooting. That
bonus is much more modest than dexterity gives though.
As far as crossbows go, they were changed some time back to
shoot for maximum distance regardless of strength or dexterity,
and to require high strength to retain full multi-shot volleys.
(Note that with high-enough strength, bows can shoot arrows for
greater than maximum [sic] distance.) The threshold for full
multi-shot effectiveness will be slightly lower for gnomes than
for others, since crossbows fill in as race-specific bows for
gnomes.
The idea of a multi-shot volley for a crossbow is actually
pretty absurd, but eliminating that--or worse, requiring high
strength just to arm and shoot--would result in crossbows being
used even less than they are now, so most likely isn't going to
happen.
Ilmari Karonen
>
> The idea of a multi-shot volley for a crossbow is actually
> pretty absurd, but eliminating that--or worse, requiring high
> strength just to arm and shoot--would result in crossbows being
> used even less than they are now, so most likely isn't going to
> happen.
Maybe they're repeating crossbows?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_crossbow