Realism and Bows

[EUOL]

So, here's a topic I've always been curious about.  Maybe it won't be of any interest to others, but it's something I'd like to know more about.

How effective is a bow and arrow for close-ranged combat?  Did people really, for instance, use bows to do robin hood style 'hands up or I'll shoot' kinds of things?  Did people really use them inside of buildings, shooting down hallways, that sort of thing (like you always see in fantasy books.)  I wonder how much the use of the bow in stories is influenced by the way we use guns in modern society.  Any ideas?

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

ok, i'm not an expert, but the answer to your last wondering is, i suspect "most of it." I don't think you can use a bow effectively in close range or in enclosed areas. This is why archers got cut up quick when infantry units got close.

I also don't think you can stab a guy in the face effectively with an arrow, a la Legolas.

Now, you CAN target a specific point. like, if you're 20 feet away, you COULD hold someone up at bow-point. Whether it was actually used that way....

I'll bet there's  a good history of the bow book in the library. Unless anyone here is an archery expert.

[Spriggan]

You can use them indoors, I know that in Japan it's happened before.  But traditional long bows wouldn't work very well because of their arch.  How well would be a different story.  You'd have to have enough room and time to pull and arrow out and pull back the bowstring.  No bow could be used in close combat effectivly.  That's why archers had swords (usealy short swords).  You'd fire once then drop the bow and use the sword.  As for useing a Bow to stick rob someone, I'm sure that someone in history did.  However, it probaly intailed one person holding the bow and another doing the robbing.  

[JP Dogberry]

According to my housemate, who does archery as a hobby, you would be able to quite effectively use a bow at close ranges, in certain ceircumstances. If someone is hitting you with a sword, no you want be able to have time to draw the bowstring back. However, if you already have the string back, or the swordsman is charging at you from a bit away, it would be pretty effective.

I'm told the arrow takes a moment or two to stabalise in flight, so at short range it would likely go into the body at an angel, but it would still go in, and it would still hurt.

[Mistress of Darkness]

I think crossbows provide a closer analogy to our modern guns. Assuming, of course, that the crossbow is already cocked and loaded.

All the bandit stories I've heard, the bowmen hide in the trees, and then the bandit leader rides out into the middle of the road and says "surrender", or something, and the bowmen pop their heads out so the party about to get robbed realizes it's surrounded.

Problem is that if a swordsman is rushing you, the chance of one arrow actually killing him, or even slowing him down, is very bad. Unless, of course, you're Legolas and can shoot them in the eye and brain every single time you draw a bow. But even Legolas had short swords for close fighting.

[Maxwell]

well if you're using a bow at close range you'd want to use a twist pull-back, it doesnt go nearly as far, but it stabalizes like three times as fast and goes in like a drill... also you can put a bow over somebodies neck and twist real hard, or just hit them with it, its not like it's just a string, ther's a hard wooden part too...

[EUOL]

I think crossbows provide a closer analogy to our modern guns. Assuming, of course, that the crossbow is already cocked and loaded.

However, black-powder muskets (as I understand it) actually were invented BEFORE crossbows came into common use.  At that point, the crossbow was a more accurate, useful weapon.  However, timeline-wise, they didn't last very long, and technologically you really shouldn't include them in any medieval fantasy story.

[Spriggan]

Yes, but for a while crossbows were used more then Blackpowder.  The first muskets were very expensive and required lots of tranning to use, while crossbows weren't.  Also the first muskets were very dangerious and would blow up on the user.  They consisted of basicly a barrel and a stick used to hold up the barrel.  There was no practical way to aim besided just pointing.  And since there was no rifleing they were only accurate upto maybe 30 feet or so.  They also took quite a long time to load, for being in combat anyway.  It wasn't for sometime after blackpowder had been introduced that it became more widly used, and that only happened after a better, safer model had been made. And gunpowder had been stabalized a bit more.  This was around the late 15th centuary.

Cannons, and other explosives, had been used effectively sine about the 12th centuary.

Edit: Here's a cool little link that gives summeries of different forms of archery.

[EUOL]

Great link, sprig.  Thanks!

[Master Xaio]

Ok, well I've been doing archery for a while so I'll chip in.  
1. Archery can be very accurate at close ranges.   A good archer could probably quite easily nail someone in the foreheard or heart at 20 metres.  Drawing at high speeds, this may also be quite possible.

Using them inside; well, it would be kinda hard in terms of ceilings whatever.  Then again, for that matter using swords inside is a bit hard as well, for the same reason.  Unlike the crap you see in the movies.

It really depends upon the skill level of the archer you are talking about; if the archer is highly skilled, well its a different ballgame to a less skilled archer.  

You probably know this, but to give you an idea of what a skilled archer could do; a welsh archer could shoot approx 12 arrows a minute, and each one would hit the target.

[Mistress of Darkness]

However, black-powder muskets (as I understand it) actually were invented BEFORE crossbows came into common use.  At that point, the crossbow was a more accurate, useful weapon.  However, timeline-wise, they didn't last very long, and technologically you really shouldn't include them in any medieval fantasy story.

Cross-bows won't mess with the feel of your setting as much as muskets would though. I never had a problem with them in David Edding's Sparhawk trilogies, anyway.

[Gemm: Rock & Roll Star; Born to Rock]

Should probably take a good gander at the Warcraft RPG and see if they have suitable notes on muskets, since I'm sure they do. The dwarfs in Warcraft 3 have muskets, and they kick serious tail.

[Entsuropi]

They do. They are just ranged weapons with mega high damage. Like 3D6 i think.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Used to help out at the Archery range at scout camp when I was a counselor. Shooting a bow at a moving target within about 10 meters and hitting is difficult, if not impossible with a modern bow and arrows unless they run right on top of you... Using primitive bows, I doubt you'd hit anything or at least hit an incredibly low number of times even as a practiced archer (1 in 6 maybe) unless your target was packed in a mass and there were hundreds of you...

Shooting inside a building,... it could be done if you have enough room.