The topic of bows and slings came up in an off-forum discussion. In general, some old-schoolers into a bit more verisimilitude have never like the way Bows were implemented in Talisman. Too much like a multi-shot Fireball with excessive impact based on Strength and a range that's just silly. We bantered back and forth about varied notions, but I thought I'd ask here if anyone has thought of something we haven't heard of.

Is there really a way to make a Bow (long or short)

• something different than a standard weapon,
• with some advantage (until arrows are used up)
• without firing shots over the top of woods and fields and plains to a target too far off to see?

Probably not for Talisman's simplicity, but it doesn't hurt to ask for the fun of it. We considered the following (not all to be used at once)...

• short bows allowing advantage in Battle, perhaps letting you be on the attack instead of attacked when drawing an Enemy or facing one generated by a space or card when encountering it.
• Long bows might have the same plus a one space range.
• Bows might although extra bonus in battle as long as one has arrows, but that part was iffy.
• Another option was to make a successful attack with a bow before battle to give you opponent a -1 or -2 in Battle.
• Have Bows be Craft based instead of Strength; use Craft in place of Strength against an opponent; or choose Strength or Craft against an opponents Strength.
• Arrows of course have to be purchased when used up, likely from the Blacksmith; 1G for up to 5... or maybe 2G if the advantage is hefty.
• Anyone with a bow is not allowed to carry more than 5; if you have some arrows left, the cost is still the same to replentish to a max 5.

I'll leave it at that and see what others have to say.

Well, based on keeping it simple, I'd allow it to let you win combat on ties. The fight would have been a stand-off, but you got the shot in soon enough and it tipped the battle.

Hmm... that's good notion versus them used for artillery... although with a bow in hand you really wouldn't fight very well in a hand to hand Battle. Perhaps it would only apply when your are on the attack and not when being attacked?

Bludgeon's idea for ranged weapons was quite a simple one. His expansion is available on Talisman Island in English.

I have reduced the file size of the rules page, but it should still be legible -

In his expansion he has weapons, Enemies that use Ranged Combat and other stuff. Take a look if you haven't already seen it!

Missile weapons are a real drag in Talisman and were badly implemented.

The big problem is, that when you really try to use them on other characters you miss out on a lot of things, since you do not go through the cards. So sometimes people only lose on using them.

I have seen quite some proposals on new use of ranged weapons, most of them JC already handed out, and Bludgeon's idea was probably the best thing one could come up with in talisman.

I think it would be nice to use most of the ideas mentioned here. The game's not only about bows, there can be crossbows too, simple projectiles and a lot of other stuff, so why not use them all, just in different ways. It just should be done carefully, with ranged weapons it usually goes two ways - either they are too good, or really bad.

We have used a minor variant on missile weapons.

At the end of your turn you may fire your bow at any non-craft enemy or character adjacent to you.

Roll combat as normal except if you win you can only take a life or defeat the enemy. If you lose:

a) if you lost against a Character, that Character may move to the square you are on as their move.

b) if you lost against an Emeny, at the start of your turn move that card to the square you are on and fight a combat against it.

It really just meant people were very careful about who they shot at and it was rarely other characters.

Lots of interesting pieces herein. Bludgeon's concept is simple and clean but isn't really worth it if continued use of a bow is sought. There's no consideration of wielder skill involved. Soon enough, adventurers reach a Strength that makes them invulnerable to missiles if the attacker's own elevate skill isn't added. I realize Talisman is built for achievable invulnerabiltiy (eventually killing Enemies without a roll), but its not to my taste, at least where other players are concerned. But others might prefer it that way.

As to missing out when using one, I'm guessing this refers to such as the Samurai missing a turn to fire, or killing off an enemy at a distance and gaining no trophy. That is as it should be if we're talking about the standard Talisman bows attacking (with impunity) a target upto 3 spaces away. That kind of "artillery" should have a severe cost.

Talismania has an intriguing notion for firing at only adjacent spaces; that seems acceptable if all bows are the same. It's also a nice notion that if only one space away, the target can jump you for sniping at them. Not sure I would have Enemies doing the same; Animals wouldn't; Monsters might; Dragons... well, okay, they'd come after you.

If using multiple missile weapons, there really are only three generic types to consider (discounting the crossbow, which had problems equal to the longbows ludicrous range in Talisman, as well as other issues).

• Bows (including the longbow),
• Short Bows,
• Slings, (one of the most common missile weapons through the ages).

Crossbows are a whole other matter; heavy and awkward (even the light ones). A fork-lever or crank to cock in most cases; those that could be pulled by hand might be used for hunting small game at best. Were only common in warfare where preparation for engagement was possible. (Forget the nonsense in fantasy films with adventurer's firing them like six-shooters.) Good penetration, lousy accuracy beyond 50ft, and no accuracy at 50 yards. You don't walk around with one cocked, or eventually the cable stretches (even just a 1/4 inch, and it loses adequate thrust.) Their real effectiveness was in ranks, since any numbnuts could fire one. Whole bunch going off at once whittled down the enemies forces.

So... let me try to sum up, and see what others think... and what counterpoints come to mind. I don't intend the following to be put on cards; these are only talking points for whoever is interested. Some attributes to consider, not all of which would be necessary in the end.

• Range: 0, 1, or max 2 spaces I would think. I hesitate at going any where near the 3 space range of the old commercial Talisman cards.
• Battle Bonus: if used at range or in a direct encounter; might be different.
• Effect: obviously taking a Life or killing an Enemy is one, but is that the only possibility? I have seen discussions of "wounding" - essentially a successful hit just before Battle giving the target a penalty in Battle (-1, etc.). It was a bit cumbersome, but still seemed to work okay. Notes for this feature consider the possibility of something aside from taking a Life. If just taking a LIfe, then they should all take just 1 Life and that's that.
• Trade Out: can it be dropped or stored to pull a hand weapon if used before a Battle; if no, you can't pull another weapon for actual Battle; maybe some could trade and some couldn't. Or maybe if you use them your are stuck without an weapon for any direct engagement.
• Trade In: can it be pulled and prepped to fire after a Battle (I would say no to almost all of them except the Sling). if no, it simply can't be used to attack after Battle (which is problematic anyway, since if you lose the victor gets to take something). Probably best that any one could only be used before or after battle; or all should follow the same rule either way.

NOTE: Trade Out/In assumes players are leaning on the big fat loophole in Talisman that lets them run up and down a mule train to grab whatever toy they need while a dragon is chomping at their heels. Enough said. Otherwise, a bow/quiver/arrows would count as one object together and have to be on the adventurer to trade in/out (if allowed) with another carried weapon...

(Long) Bow

• Range: 1 or maybe 2 spaces
• Battle Bonus: ?? High; not direct encounter.
• Effect: ?? Medium
• Trade out: yes?
• Trade in: no/maybe?

Short Bow

• Range: 0 or maybe 1 space
• Battle Bonus: ?? Medium; possibly direct encounter.
• Effect: Medium / Light?
• Trade out: yes?
• Trade in: maybe?

Sling

• Range: 0
• Battle Bonus: Low, direct encounter only
• Effect: Light.
• Trade out: yes.
• Trade in: yes.

Crossbow

• Range: 0
• Battle Bonuse: Low, direct encounter only
• Effect: Heavy
• Trade out: yes
• Trade in: no.

I'll leave it at that and let others offer countpoints, including different ways to look at it... or decide if all this is even too much for just discussion. Overall it should probably just be a Bow and then maybe a Crossbow or sling instead four different additions.

ADDENDUM : If the max range of any weapon was 1 space, what about a target character having the option to move onto the wielders space and attack in Battle immediately? That would certainly make missile weapons a more tactical use. If you have an opponent 1 space away, and you make a hit for a life, you'd better have more lives than the target, just in case. Of course it is also possible that you could take two lives with some legitimate risk and finish someone off a space away who only has two lives.

And Jon (or anyone else)... if you can and feel up to it, maybe you could post Bludgeon's weapon cards for us to peek at while we talk.

Bludgeon's expansion can be downloaded here -

http://www.talismanisland.com/expansions.htm

It has a number of cards of different kinds, including a couple of Spells and a Character.

The main cards would be these I think -

As a matter of interest I made some wooden weapons for 4th Edition (however short lived that was), but based them, like the game on 2nd Edition mechanics.

The Bow and Arrows was my initial card, which then got split into two types of bow for a follow up expansion that never happened (except on my hard drive). Crossbows were a little too advanced for my liking.

I figured that the use of Arrows as separate ammunition was too fiddly in the accounting, so just took them out of the equation. The bows just came "with" them!

If I was to do the same again, I would only allow them to be "fired" in your current space or the one next to you. The distances in Talisman are possibly huge, with your die roll representing hours or days of travel. It is possible however, that you could be positioned within striking distance of the next space, if you were at the fringes of it...

Oh, and I would keep the wording as I have with the 4th Edition cards, though if the attack was made in the same space, I would allow the target to retaliate if the attack was unsuccessful, most likely with the shooter at a disadvantage...

Thanks Jon, having the cards to look at helps in discussion. I'm afraid I dislike Bludgeon's approach even more upon seeing them... nonsensical, to me at least, but certainly very straight forward. Only a Longbow would have a Strength requirement, and then again, Tailisman build up of Strength is skill and not actual Strength increase. Overall, minimum Strength is an iffy mechanic in Talisman (just as much as range weapons.)

I like your detail concerning no Follower bonuses; good point, and a definite must for (1) simplified verisimilitude,(2) keeping range weapons from becoming too inequitable through artificial Strength , and (3) still having Strength matter. I'm definitely leaning with you on the range issue, likely allowing only a Long Bow to take a shot at the next space. I'm also still keen on some form of Talismania's mechanic for allowing the target to come after the firer.

I'm also consider the whole attacked vs attacking issue, at least where Enemies are concerned. A ranged weapon certainly allows a greater chance of a trophy kill with reduced risk. Not sure yet.

I'm still not certain about being able to take two lives in one Battle through the use of a ranged weapon first (vs arrow hits causing penalties or something else). And if so, I would probably prefer to suffer the accounting fuss to make ranged weapons have a balanced downside... if I ever get around to using them. A couple of my group are still bugging me about it.

That's all for me tonight... fighting and ugly cold so time to curl up in front of a movie.

The Enemy problem for little risk was why I made the text that an Enemy is discarded.

You could make it that if your shot misses in the same space, then the target gets to attack you, perhaps given the confusion or surprise that you missed he gets to attack you, only without help from your stunned Followers? Would serve you right for trying to wimp out at a distance!

Perhaps a target in the next space might be able to retaliate if he had the requisite equipment, by loosing a shot off at you if you missed?

I have seen the bows too(from bludgeon), but i don't like the idea. Characters can easily kill enemies, by rolling above their strength.

Anyway, i like the bows in third edition. Now that we have so much gold in talisman, then we can buy some arrows to spend some gold..

Only the City expansion can give us a bow shop (City on mainboard does not sell bows)

True, nothing on the board yet offers a lot of the old objects and followers for purchase. Doesn't stop us from making them available anyway. This is the homebrew section.... isn't it?

==================

The more I look at the varied issues with bows, the more I'm hesitating. What was done in past editions wasn't good enough; at the same time it was simple and had a balancing cost. I also prefer to avoid external rules applied to a small set of cards, perferring necessary instructions be only on the card. But that may not be possible. The other issue is that if the defender is weak on Strength value and/or tokens is at an unrealistic disadvantage and it makes them even easier targets to pick off; thereby Strength becomes even more dominant in the game.

Here's some new notions I'm playing with, though I'm not fully satisfied enough for even play-testing.

Rules Card: Ranged Combat

Ranged Combat is a third "combat" option (in addition to Battle and Psychic Combat) if an adventurer is in possession of a Missile Weapon . Ranged Combat may only be chosen when:

1. an adventurer makes an attack , or
2. as return fire when it has been attacked in Ranged Combat, or
3. if additional options are listed on the particular Missile Weapon card.

In response to an attack in Ranged Combat, the defender may

• use Strength or Craft (as if it were Strength) in defense, and
• add +1 if wielding a shield.

Ranged Combat is then resolved with a standard die roll. If the attacker loses, Ranged Combat is considered a draw. If the attacker succeeds, results depend on the defender type and its location.

If the defender is on an adjacent space:

• an Enemy is discarded and no trophy is gained;
• an adventurer loses a life. It may (1) immediately attack in Ranged Combat if it possesses a Missile Weapon with adequate range, or (2) it may move directly to the attacker's space on its next turn as its movement.

If the defender is on the same space:

• an Enemy is discarded and no trophy is gained.
• the attacker may take a Life or kill a defender's Follower; the defender may sacrifice a Life to save the Follower.

Once Ranged Combat is resolved, any subsequent Battle or Psychic Combat takes place. If both attacker and defender are on the same space, the attacker may only exchange its Missile Weapon for other Weapons it carries. It may not retrieve Objects or Magic Objects from any of its Followers.

NOTE: Any standard character said to already have a bow or other like Missile Weapon indicated on its card may roll an additional die when attacking in Ranged Combat. It then discards one die of choice. Such characters are considered to have additional skill when general use of Missile Weapons is introduced through an expansion.

Potential Cards

Longbow
Object
Missile Weapon, 2-Handed
Place 5 tokens on this card . You may fire an arrow (discard 1 token) at an Enemy or adventurer 1 space away or engaged in Ranged Combat before you attack in Battle. You may buy upto 5 arrows for 1G at the Blacksmith, but you may carry no more than 5.

Shortbow
Object
Missile Weapon, 2-Handed
Place 5 tokens on this card. You may fire an arrow (discard 1 token) at an Enemy or adventurer in Ranged Combat before you attack in Battle. You may buy upto 5 arrows for 1G at the Blacksmith, but you may carry no more than 5.

Crossbow
Missle Weapon, 2-Handed
+1 in Ranged Combat
Place 3 tokens on this card. You may fire a quarrel (discard 1 token) at an Enemy or adventurer in Ranged Combat before you attack in Battle. You may buy upto 3 quarrels for 1G at the Blacksmith, but you may carry no more than 3.

Quiver
Object
Baggage
The quiver allows you to carry 5 additional arrows or 3 additional quarrels.

Sling
Object
Missile Weapon, 1-Handed.
You may fire at an Enemy or adventurer in Ranged Combat before you attack in Battle. If you win, your opponent is stunned and takes -1 in Battle.

Is it just me or is the code for these forums getting worse? I have trouble logging in now... Anyway.

Hey Ho folks

Just wanted to add my £0.02p. I think that Missile Weapons are a difficult concept to implement in this game. For one, they are either not going to be very useful, not truly represent a ranged weapon or overpowered.

Out of all the suggestions so far, I don't like anyone of them! That's not to say they are bad ideas, they just aren't to my taste.

To avoid being a drive-by troll, I will offer up some ideas. Using the following basic principles, I offer the bare bones of a solution:

1. Each square is a large district. Firing from square to square just seems ridiculous to me. Therefore, such things are right out for me.

2. Ranged weapons are used to kill things from a range, basically giving you the chance to not be hurt yourself.

3. Archaic missile weapons are next to useless in close combat.

4. The Warhorse allows you to add your Craft to your Strength in combat (because the cleverer you are, the better you are at riding people down... ). However, for verisimilitude, we can use something of this ilk, even if it is nonsensical.

So, in line with the above, I present DTH Ranged Conflicts .

There are certain weapons denoted as "Missile Weapons". These allow a character to make a Ranged Attack. A Ranged Attack is a modified form of Battle. You may only declare a Ranged Attack is you are the Attacker.

A character making a Ranged Attack, rolls a die and then adds his or her Craft vs the opponent's Strength +3. A roll of 1 on the die is an automatic fail in Ranged Combat. A roll of 6 is an automatic win. If the roll is higher than the opponent's Strength +3, the character making the Ranged Attack wins the Battle. If the roll is less than the opponent's Strength +3, they lose the Battle automatically.

The average Strength of Enemies is 5. Which means a character generally must beat a score of 8. The average roll of a die is 3.5, which means that characters with a Craft of 3 will need to roll a 5 or 6. This doesn't seem like a great option, given that a lot of character's Strength will be higher than their Craft, however, given that the weapons themselves can add a bonus (a Longbow might be +2 for instance), this actually can be worthwhile and also, if you are facing a creature that is way stronger than you, the automatic 6 win can give you a chance you wouldn't ordinarily have.

Therefore, characters carrying around a Bow seems like a worthwhile option.

Hey Dth. I share your dislike the multiple space fire. I chose 1 weapon (which would be the least common) for a 1 space range because so many players expect it, even in my group. Availability and count of these weapons is something none of us have yet talked about. My order from least to most commone (1 to 3) would be Longbow and Crossbow, Shortbow, and then sling. Purchasing would be costly, partly in forcing the resupply of missles. As Jon has said, the ammunition approach is fussy, but that's part of the deterant; anyone who doesn't want to do the accounting doesn't get to use one.

Looking at your rules, I think I see that the defender doesn't roll a die but gets a +3. For this you balance out with an autokill on a 6... but that's still 16.7% of the time. It's a bit heavy for tastes, but I noticed something else that even I forgot about... related to another abuse in Talisman but concerning Followers.

Does the attacker get to add Craft bonuses from Followers in firing a Missile Weapon?

I would say no, that's ridiculous, since they can't help with firing one missile weapon (I'd do the same for Strength or Craft). But I'd allow the defender to still use Follower bonuses on Strength in defense. The problem is of course that this is all yet another exception to rules (silly as some are) concerning what counts and what doesn't, when, where, and how. Followers have a lot of ridiculous uses in the game, especially where Craft is concerned.

With that kind of limitation on the attacker's bonuses with Missile Weapons, could that be a replacement for defender's +3?

By the way, in the base game, the average Strength of all Enemies is 3.8 (with a median of 3.5); the average Craft is 3.7 (with a median of 5.5). I ran those numbers a long while back: http://jchendee.livejournal.com/#post-jchendee-11552 . Perhaps it shifts based on expansions? I'm sure how you came up with 5, but at 3.8/3.5, and with a 16.7% autokill, and no roll for the defender, I think your bows are little more powerful than you think.

Personally, I’d do Bows as follows.

First of all, it IS a boardgame. Sure, 3 squares is countless miles, but we’re also lobbing Death, Spells, etc… at each other across Regions (i.e. countries), so that doesn’t bother me much. It is a magical land after all.

To be balanced, I’d use the “4 active items max” type home rule. I.e. Mules / Porters / Bags carry extra stuff, but, they aren’t active. You don’t get the stats for things carried by others. You swap items in/out only in your Pitch (or is it Ditch?) phase of your turn.

Therefore, any active 2 handed item, like a bow, takes up TWO item slots. If you have a bow, you have a max of two other active things, none of which can be a weapon or a shield.

Bows Fire at a ST penalty. -2 per Square. i.e. -6 ST at 3 Squares away. You can only take a Life with a Bow. If the archer loses, s/he just loses. No penalty except for using up your attack.

Short / Long / Crossbow etc… might each have a “remove X points of penalty” bonus to differentiate them. Maybe, put in “Can’t move when firing a Crossbow” or similar missile weapon to simulate the low rate of fire. Fiddle with the Max Squares too, per weapon. Gives a lot of variety.

Arrows would be a “Quiver of arrows of INSERT NAME” card adding a bonus (damage, to hit, etc…), but of course, that means 3 out of 4 slots are taken… quite a commitment, but that’s a powerful ranged weapon.

There. For me, at least, that would balance out bonuses and penalties.

Tons-Home-rules said:

Oh my, don't get some of us started on that one.

Tons-Home-rules said:

Very similar to how some of us here choose to play in general, even without bows. You don't get to run up and down your Mule train once that dragon comes charging out of the adventure deck.

All the rest of what you've outlined, though different in the details, still sticks to what other here are trying to do: balance the advantage with some deficits that aren't escapable once you put that bow to use. Unfortunately, the commercial version of the bow didn't have enough sacrifice for how annoying it was. The Archer Follower was even worse; like having a bow you didn't have to count against Object limit, and with unlimited arrows. It's only limitation was that as a Follower you didn't get to add your own Strength to the attack.

JCHendee said:

After I made my expansion, I looked upon it with a critical eye and I must say, I don't like it that much. Seems a little too complex for what it offers. With that in mind, I went back to square zero and made a new version of bow. This time simplicity is everything, No extra rules, no extra rolls, no combat phases.

Bow

Object

Add 1 to your Strength during battle.

If the battle would end in a draw, you win instead.

If you roll 1 in battle, you can't use Bow until you visit City, Village, or Castle and pay 1 gold.

The +1 bonus is there to equalize bow with other common weapons. Beside it, bow has one rather minor benefit and drawback.

The "win on draw" is there to symbolize the advantage a ranged weapon gives over a melee one.

The last "ability" symbolizes ammunition, and how it eventually depletes and must be restocked before one can use a bow again.

Bludgeon said:

I like this. Simple and effective.

JC also had the great notion that if you are attacked, you count as the attacker.

TBH, given the nature of the game, I would the concept of ammunition and just go with "Win on a draw" and "You always count as if you were the attacker, even when attacked" abilities.

Maybe I remember rules wrong, but is there, in 4.5e , such thing as an attacker and attacked?

Hey, B. I think the new simplification will appeal well to modern players focused on speed and winning. And yes, there is a distinction in 4ER between attack and attacked . However, I do not remember (and don't care) if it was ever clarified that a drawn Enemy is attacking or being attacked by the character. We always play a drawn Enemy gets the advantage. So another simplification is that the bow allows one to always be the attacker against Enemies. Then again, that might be too potent or just one too many functions for your bow. Imagine someone with a special ability that gives advantage on an attack... with the this addition to a bow (as range weapon), I just know some player is going to claim they can always assasinate, etc. when an Enemy is drawn.

Personally, I'm still of a mind for limited uses on a bow before having to pay to reuse it - hence tokens. The accounting is fussy, of course, but I consider it part of the deterrent; if you don't have the patience or the money, then don't use one. There are already plenty of bonuses and freebies in the game - too many - so unless the bow operates differently in both advantage and disadvantage, its not worth adding. Personally, I would not put any bows in the adventure deck; they will only be available as Purchase cards at first. Then I'll wait to see if anyone actually uses them.

I don't know if anybody is still following this topic. I was always very intrigued by ranged fight (missile weapons) in Talisman. But I was never completely satisfied the way it worked. There was a Bow and a Quiver of Arrows in 3rd Edition, which was my first Talisman. Truthfully, I didn't like it too much. But what I liked was the concept of arrows as ammo.

4th edition added Bow late, but with gold as ammo.

http://www.talismanwiki.com/Bow

So this wasn't an improvement for me. I also dislike the image of a Bow. Images are a big thing for me in Talisman. I am more fond of simple design as in the beginnings, where a sword or an axe had a very simple and neutral background, instead of an impression from an archery range. Lately, I gave much thought to this topic and, after reading this thread, the idea was completed almost entirely. At least that much that I decided to share it. I've taken what I like from Bludgeon concept and married it with 3rd Edition's one. This way I came to the solution that supports the way I personally prefer ranged fight to be implemented in the game:

- Ranged fight (missile weapons) have to be part of Talisman.

- It has to be something special, which, like JCHendee said, operates differently in both advantage and disadvantage.

- It has to use ammo, which shouldn't be simply gold (I think using gold instead of arrows in 4th Ed is simply too much of a simplification, even for Talisman).

- No shooting out of board space on which user is located.

Hoping that it isn't already taken, I added key word Ranged , with the purpose same as Weapon (only one could be used for the purpose of a single battle). The Ranged Object would include a system of 'charges', which would be named Ammo . The player would put some tokens or dice on the card and subtract 1 Ammo after each use. The concept is, of course expandable to other kinds of ranged items and types of ammo.

I plan to start with just a few cards, which I would insert into this or that deck, replacing other cards. This way the ratios of different card types within specific deck wouldn't be affected. I am strongly against card duplication, so my arrows would replace bags of gold. Yes, in the end one would still shoot gold equivalent, but in my mind, thematically, it sounds right now.

I am open to any comments. Right now I still pounder about some issues:

- is Bow a bit too strong? Wouldn't those stats be better for a future card Longbow?

- is concept of ammo too complicated?

- should ammo (like arrow(s) be Trinkets?

- what should be the initial amount of ammo when ranged object is acquired?

On the topic of Ammo : you could use something similar to the character-specific tokens from the woodland expansion. A bow could come with 3 "arrow tokens" which you spend to use the bow. You can then replenish tokens by doing something (see below) or you can buy them at the city and village.

Examples:

- Miss a turn in a woods space to replenish up to 3 tokens, or just replenish automatically when landing on a woods space

- If you defeat the enemy you could recover the arrow token you used (might make it overpowered)

On the topic of bows in General: We have a house rule that the Elf has a bow as an additional special ability, since he is literally holding one in the picture. he can fire the bow before he engages in battle by rolling a die, and if he rolls a 5 or 6, the enemy is wounded and does not roll a die in battle. He is assumed to always have arrows for simplicity.

Another option would be: if he rolls a 1-2: nothing happens, 3-4: subtract one from opponent's attack score, 5-6: subtract 2 from opponent's attack score.

This works well thematically but also boosts the elf a bit which otherwise is a pretty boring and weak character.