What ever happened to Slings.
Back in 1st, 2nd ed... every Blunt restricted class used slings as range weapons.
But in Pathfinder, i rarely see anyone mention them now.
Did something happen to Slings, to make them Obsolete in Pathfinder ??
Everyone except for wizards can use them.
I've heard of them being used as a 'poor-man's composite bow', allowing application of the thrower's Strength bonus before a composite bow is affordable. Their low damage die generally discourages continued use though.
Yes, but i alway hear about Bows or Cross bows.
Everyone can use a club, but most players do not us it.
Just wondering if slings became obsolete for some reason?
|
Eh, low damage output and the slow rate of fire have relegated them to the pile of completely unused ranged weapons, otherwise known as 'everything except for the composite longbow'.
There is a halfling racial trait that allows you to use them at full rate of fire. I've been debating a halfling bard slinger to give it a whirl ;)
Ok so a sling, you need a Move Action to reload and it causes an AoO
While a bow, is free action and does not cause AoO.
... Do i understand this correctly?
|
|
Ok so a sling, you need a Move Action to reload and it causes an AoO
While a bow, is free action and does not cause AoO.
... Do i understand this correctly?
Move action to load. I'm not sure about the AoO off the top of my head. The Move action itself is enough to kill it's usefulness.
See if your GM will let it slide with quickdraw or play a halfling (with the APG alt. racial trait)
They really should have made all range weapon work the same. The sling already did lower damage, due to it being blunt, and for a long time, was a staple of Druids, Clerics, and wizards.
Oh well, guess it time to make an elf.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every character I make carries a sling. I guess it varies from group to group, but virtually everyone and everything in many of my games will be sporting slings. Bad-guys almost always carry them (they're free, negligible weight, etc). They're good for launching alchemical items greater distances, or chucking a rock with a light spell on it down a long corridor or into an underground pond, etc.
As someone else noted, it's the poor man's composite longbow. On most low-level warriors (assuming they're not archery specialized) I prefer a sling over a longbow anyway (if your strength is decent, your average damage is about the same and minimum damage is better). On a character with an exceptionally high strength, they're pretty brutal (orc warrior with a 17 strength has a 4-7 damage, which is much better than 1-8). They're also one of the only ranged weapons good against skeletons (barring light hammers).
Historically, slings weren't that slow to load either. While not RAW, Rapid Reload should definitely apply to Slings as well as crossbows, or at least a sling-based equivalent be added to the game. Until Paizo publishes such a thing they'll probably continue being very uncommon in most games. Until they do however, they'll be the GM's nasty surprise.
GM Musings: Slings can (and probably should be) dropped on any critter you see. You don't even have to carry ammo (if you don't mind damage dropping 1 die size and taking a -1 penalty for using rocks). A group of orcs bombarding their enemies with slingshots (1d4+3 damage), only to drop the sling and draw their melee weapons when they close with their enemies (or their enemies close with them) is a scary thing. Yes, yes.
|
My dwarf cleric carries a sling. Ironically, he carries it because one of his domains is Earth (Magic Stone spell) but he has never used it because one of his domains is Earth (acid bolts).
One of the players in our group has a halfling sling staff, and uses it quite effectively. I am even considering using a feat to get one in size Medium for one of my characters.
I'll keep a sling at low levels for all the reasons point out. At low levels for a character that isn't ranged dedicated it offers good damage at good range with minimal problems (you can reload a sling while using a light shield for example). For a mixed threat fighter it's great at low levels especially with deadly aim and clerics with magic stone can make good use of a sling as well (so can druids).
|
|
I'll keep a sling at low levels for all the reasons point out. At low levels for a character that isn't ranged dedicated it offers good damage at good range with minimal problems (you can reload a sling while using a light shield for example). For a mixed threat fighter it's great at low levels especially with deadly aim and clerics with magic stone can make good use of a sling as well (so can druids).
Yeah, the biggest the sling issue is just rate of fire, not an issue unless you are launching more than one per round.
I'll keep a sling at low levels for all the reasons point out. At low levels for a character that isn't ranged dedicated it offers good damage at good range with minimal problems (you can reload a sling while using a light shield for example). For a mixed threat fighter it's great at low levels especially with deadly aim and clerics with magic stone can make good use of a sling as well (so can druids).Yeah, the biggest the sling issue is just rate of fire, not an issue unless you are launching more than one per round.
Or want to be mobile while attacking.
Or want to be mobile while attacking.I'll keep a sling at low levels for all the reasons point out. At low levels for a character that isn't ranged dedicated it offers good damage at good range with minimal problems (you can reload a sling while using a light shield for example). For a mixed threat fighter it's great at low levels especially with deadly aim and clerics with magic stone can make good use of a sling as well (so can druids).Yeah, the biggest the sling issue is just rate of fire, not an issue unless you are launching more than one per round.
If you are attacking at range and using a sling mobility isn't an issue generally. However javelins are good too.
|
|
If you are attacking at range and using a sling mobility isn't an issue generally. However javelins are good too.Or want to be mobile while attacking.I'll keep a sling at low levels for all the reasons point out. At low levels for a character that isn't ranged dedicated it offers good damage at good range with minimal problems (you can reload a sling while using a light shield for example). For a mixed threat fighter it's great at low levels especially with deadly aim and clerics with magic stone can make good use of a sling as well (so can druids).Yeah, the biggest the sling issue is just rate of fire, not an issue unless you are launching more than one per round.
'Generally' I agree with you, it is a valid point though. :)
I did not even know it was a move action to reload them. It seems like I find a new rule every week.
I did not even know it was a move action to reload them. It seems like I find a new rule every week.
It is part of the 'no ranged weapon is allowed to be as good as composite bows' policy.
Hey now thats not fair! With enough feats a crossbow can be nearly as good as a normal longbow :P
bows arent that easy to use....so making them simple would be out, and every stinking sorceror would have one.
slings however are far from simple, at least for me....
I think slings are clubs for everyone fall into the cave man weapons group...
on another note we had a druid halfling who was suing gaint from 2 and was hucking some scary sized sling bullets!
Well I still see slings...mainly for shield users with light shields...i.e. clerics, druids before wild spell and paladins along with the odd shield using gish.
Hell if Cold and I agree on something in the first pass at it you know it's true!
Well I still see slings...mainly for shield users with light shields...i.e. clerics, druids before wild spell and paladins along with the odd shield using gish.
Paladin in my RotRL's loved using a sling at the lower levels, and the dang thing could smite nasty too. :(
Most of my characters carry one at early levels. It probably runs a strong second to the dagger. ( I adore daggers. )
Greg
When 3rd edition came out slings became simple weapons, which must be worse than martial weapons. Why a shortbow isn't a simple weapon too I will never understand. But let's face it, the sling wasn't the best medieval weapon.
As pointed out, it is an ok weapon when you have less than BAB 6, my characters always carry one. Furthermore it is small and works against skeletons :p .
To be fair, the Sling in Pathfinder/D&D is more like a slingshot as as sling is pretty complex and requires a lot of training to use.
To those thinking slings are meant to be weak, there's a reason their ammo is called bullets.
Ironically, while bows were better for mass warfare, slings would be better for individual combat such as, you know, adventurers. But then a weapon might be as good as composite bows.
Slings in games that I have played are not terrible, but as soon as something better is available, we jump on it. I had a dwarf druid who kept one end tied to his wrist and had it wrapped like a bracelet around his arm. He just just pulled the loose end free and loaded it in the same move action. He could "drop" it and it stayed tied to him and he could draw his short spear.
That was really the only usefulness I got out of it, but it was very handy for attacking orcs as they closed the gap. Kept me from worrying about locating it once I dropped it, too.
Historically slings - in hte hands of a trained user - could out-range some bows and were the equal in damage. In game terms they should be the equal of short bows in both range and damage.
I expect whoever first wrote the stats for slings back in the early days of D&D didn't have a clue about slings. The weak stats they had back then have been carried forward through all the iterations of D&D and on into Pathfinder.
Sling bullets made from lead (symmetrical bullet shaped or acorn shaped) could penetrate armour or embed themselves deep in an unarmoured body. A blow from a sling bullet to a helmet could kill the wearer. A simple stone would not be as accurate due to the shape of it and would not have been as dense as a lead bullet.
According to some sources, Roman legionaries were all trained with the sling. They are still used in some places today - Palestinian youths taking on Israeli soldiers, African herdsmen too.
The last recorded use in warfare was during the Spanish civil war when staff slings were used to throw grenades further than they could be by hand.
Historically slings - in hte hands of a trained user - could out-range some bows and were the equal in damage. In game terms they should be the equal of short bows in both range and damage.
I expect whoever first wrote the stats for slings back in the early days of D&D didn't have a clue about slings. The weak stats they had back then have been carried forward through all the iterations of D&D and on into Pathfinder.
Sling bullets made from lead (symmetrical bullet shaped or acorn shaped) could penetrate armour or embed themselves deep in an unarmoured body. A blow from a sling bullet to a helmet could kill the wearer. A simple stone would not be as accurate due to the shape of it and would not have been as dense as a lead bullet.
According to some sources, Roman legionaries were all trained with the sling. They are still used in some places today - Palestinian youths taking on Israeli soldiers, African herdsmen too.
The last recorded use in warfare was during the Spanish civil war when staff slings were used to throw grenades further than they could be by hand.
the Israelite armies (of biblical note) were known for their slingers, similar to english longbow men. Hence the story of david and goliath.
There is plenty of historical documentation to back up the massive effectiveness of the hebrew slinger.
|
Well I still see slings...mainly for shield users with light shields...i.e. clerics, druids before wild spell and paladins along with the odd shield using gish.Paladin in my RotRL's loved using a sling at the lower levels, and the dang thing could smite nasty too. :(
Greg
Not even just at lower levels. Most clerics and paladins at high levels I know of carry magical slings as their missle weapon of choice. Crossbows and bows need their shield to be removed and thrown weapons with returning is still limited to once per round and has a really short range compared to the sling. On top of which you can also stack special effect enchantments of the ammo and launcher over the thrown weapon. When you have a light shield stapped to your arms so you can cast spells, a sling is the best mechanical option for missle options unless your starting very far apart.
Could you explain that statement Prof? I'm curious the logic behind it.Ironically, while bows were better for mass warfare, slings would be better for individual combat such as, you know, adventurers.
The big thing with bows and why they sorta "won" is that they were distinctly better for mass combat. Bows own the volley.
Thing is, that's not really all that useful to a squad of five.
Also the reason slings in D&D are bad comes down to two reasons. 1) They're modeled after slingshots, and 2) Nooo bows must be the best D:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could you explain that statement Prof? I'm curious the logic behind it.Ironically, while bows were better for mass warfare, slings would be better for individual combat such as, you know, adventurers.
The big thing with bows and why they sorta "won" is that they were distinctly better for mass combat. Bows own the volley.
Thing is, that's not really all that useful to a squad of five.
Also the reason slings in D&D are bad comes down to two reasons. 1) They're modeled after slingshots, and 2) Nooo bows must be the best D:
This doesn't explain your statement that slings were better for individual combat, which is the explanation I was hoping to hear.
What do you feel makes the sling a better individual combat tool than the bow?
Sling bags are smaller and bullets are easier to carry then arrows. On the other hand, sling bullets could be significantly heavier...which means you can't carry as many (until you get your magic sling bag of efficiency) but that they deliver much more mass for power. Regardless of what books have taught, making new arrows isn't quite as easy as mashing an arrowhead onto a stick and then superglueing a few feathers to it, while sling bullets ARE as easy as melting down lead. In the case of emergencies or a lack of ammunition, bows can't fire rocks.
Unless you're using the D&D logic of just literally throwing away your bow when you take out your sword, it's vastly easier to tuck away a sling then it is to put away your bow when drawing another weapon. 3.5 is a bit of a strange case where shields are kinda terrible; trying to throw away your bow then draw shield and weapon is a bit easier then tucking in the sling and drawing your one weapon. There's also fatigue - drawing a bow tires the individual out distinctly more then throwing sling bullets.
Bows need to be restrung, slings don't. With a bow, unless you keep it always strung forever, aren't always combat ready. Then you have a wide array of environmental conditions that can warp the bow or destroy the string - things slings don't worry about.
Sling bullets are also close to invisible when they fly, and don't leave a big fat arrow sticking out of their entrance point. Sneak kill, anyone? The greeks also recounted their armor being shattered by sling bullets. Likewise, Cortez feared Aztec slings more then Aztec bows. Again, there's a reason they were called bullets.
As for the bizarre fetish with bows...let me put it this way.
You know that annoying guy who rants about how katanas can cut tanks and can split bullets? Imagine he's talking about bows. That's D&D.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
To be fair, the Sling in Pathfinder/D&D is more like a slingshot as as sling is pretty complex and requires a lot of training to use.
I don't think I agree. A slingshot is actually fairly modern thing, probably because you can't make them work at that scale without elastic. I'm finding no estimates earlier than the late 1800s for the first handheld slingshots. Also, Pathfinder/D&D slings fire half-pound lead balls, not ball bearing sized balls of steel. The description, "a leather cup tied to a pair of strings", describes a traditional sling, not a slingshot (slingshots have elastic, not strings, tied to a frame, not loose). Whether or not it should be a simple weapon is a whole different kettle of fish, but given that daggers are too, I don't mind much.
I think the main source of nerfing of the slingshot is that in 3.5E, sling damage went to the number used for sling stones, but the ammunition got upgraded to bullets. So now a sling bullet does the d4 a sling stone used to do, and a sling stone does a sorry d3. Sling bullets used to do 1d4+1, equivalent to a d6.
It's a pretty needless nerf. If you upgrade slings to a d6, most will still favor crossows and bows for their better performance, particularly where critical hits are concerned.
Wikipedia's entry on slings isn't too bad, and gives you a picture of what the Pathfinder sling looks like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling_(weapon)
I've actually been spending some time researching the kestros of late. Interesting weapon.
I've heard that historical slings (in the hands of a trained user) did just as much damage, often had longer range, AND were as accurate (if not more so) than a bow. What's more, they didn't require quite the same amount of training to master as did a bow, so it was easier to arm groups of people with.
Slings could be useful for Alchemists in getting extra range on bombs..staffslings doubly so.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I've heard that historical slings (in the hands of a trained user) did just as much damage, often had longer range, AND were as accurate (if not more so) than a bow. What's more, they didn't require quite the same amount of training to master as did a bow, so it was easier to arm groups of people with.
I'll buy a sling being as effective as the lighter bows in ancient times, since slings were pretty common as a military weapon in that era. Bows did edge them out, but I'm sure ease of use in formation was a factor. However, when we're getting up to heavier bows in Medieval times, the kind that left significant changes in the skeletons of the people who used them, I'm pretty certain the bow was more effective.
Generally, if a weapon's being used, there's a reason, and if there's not, there's usually a reason too. Usually good ones in both cases.
I'm dubious of any weapon situation that amounts to:
* it was cheaper
* it was as effective at taking people out
* it had better range
* it was more accurate
* it took less training
* it was known
* BUT people didn't use it
|
|
Not even just at lower levels. Most clerics and paladins at high levels I know of carry magical slings as their missle weapon of choice. Crossbows and bows need their shield to be removed and thrown weapons with returning is still limited to once per round and has a really short range compared to the sling. On top of which you can also stack special effect enchantments of the ammo and launcher over the thrown weapon. When you have a light shield stapped to your arms so you can cast spells, a sling is the best mechanical option for missle options unless your starting very far apart.Well I still see slings...mainly for shield users with light shields...i.e. clerics, druids before wild spell and paladins along with the odd shield using gish.Paladin in my RotRL's loved using a sling at the lower levels, and the dang thing could smite nasty too. :(
Greg
Other than the halfling racial feature slings are rated to once per round. I've seen some GMs allow rapid shot or quick draw to be used to accelerate the rate of fire of bows but neither is really well supported by the rules and neither is universally supported.
I've heard that historical slings (in the hands of a trained user) did just as much damage, often had longer range, AND were as accurate (if not more so) than a bow. What's more, they didn't require quite the same amount of training to master as did a bow, so it was easier to arm groups of people with.I'll buy a sling being as effective as the lighter bows in ancient times, since slings were pretty common as a military weapon in that era. Bows did edge them out, but I'm sure ease of use in formation was a factor. However, when we're getting up to heavier bows in Medieval times, the kind that left significant chances in the skeletons of the people who used them, I'm pretty certain the bow was more effective.
Generally, if a weapon's being used, there's a reason, and if there's not, there's usually a reason too. Usually good ones in both cases.
I'm dubious of any weapon situation that amounts to:
* it was cheaper
* it was as effective at taking people out
* it had better range
* it was more accurate
* it took less training
* it was known
* BUT people didn't use it
The sling is essentially a skirmishers weapon..as has been said elsewhere bows are easier to use in close formation. Certain other nations in the Mediteranian were famous for their slingers..notably Rhodes and the Baliaeric Islands.
I've heard that historical slings (in the hands of a trained user) did just as much damage, often had longer range, AND were as accurate (if not more so) than a bow. What's more, they didn't require quite the same amount of training to master as did a bow, so it was easier to arm groups of people with.I'll buy a sling being as effective as the lighter bows in ancient times, since slings were pretty common as a military weapon in that era. Bows did edge them out, but I'm sure ease of use in formation was a factor. However, when we're getting up to heavier bows in Medieval times, the kind that left significant chances in the skeletons of the people who used them, I'm pretty certain the bow was more effective.
Generally, if a weapon's being used, there's a reason, and if there's not, there's usually a reason too. Usually good ones in both cases.
I'm dubious of any weapon situation that amounts to:
* it was cheaper
* it was as effective at taking people out
* it had better range
* it was more accurate
* it took less training
* it was known
* BUT people didn't use it
I'm willing to bet when it came to straight out killing people, slings were more commonly used than bows.
Bows weren't used for murder very often. They were used for hunting and war.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm willing to bet when it came to straight out killing people, slings were more commonly used than bows.
Bows weren't used for murder very often. They were used for hunting and war.
I'm talking in militaries, where if a weapon was cheaper, easier to train with, known, and more effective, it was going to be used absent some strong driving force preventing it. Slings likely vanished from the battlefield (for the most part) for a legitimate reason, and Occam's razor suggest we start with "it wasn't effective compared to other available alternatives".
In any case, *both* bows and slings were weapons of hunting and war. Most missile weapons were. Not sure a sling's a wonderful weapon of mugging like you think it is, since it gives more of a warning sound before release than a bow does, and requires exposing more of your body to use. But haven't really researched which missile weapons were used for murder, just war.
[added comment]
I'm aware sling bullets are harder to see than arrows, but slings do make noise on release. In my experience, it's (1) more than a bow makes and (2) happens on the wind up when the pouch starts swinging, rather than just at the time of release. Note that a good slinger doesn't need to whip the sling around and around over again, one motion can do it. Don't know if that extra bit of warning would help you get out of the way, but it seems like it might.
[and done]
There's not much to suggest that a sling's a better killing weapon than a bow with a heavy pull. The lighter bows of the ancient era, I'd believe. In D&D terms, you'd call that a longbow vs. a shortbow, though the terms aren't terribly accurate historically.
as has been said elsewhere bows are easier to use in close formation.
What, you mean like was said in the post you quoted? :)
Certain other nations in the Mediteranian were famous for their slingers..notably Rhodes and the Baliaeric Islands.
Hence my statement "pretty common as a weapon in [the ancient] era". :)
|
|
@Russ - I'm fine with the idea that the bow is the best ranged weapon out there out the gate. My only complaint is that the gap between the composite bow and every other weapon is so big you can essentially never cross that gulf. An expert slinger should be better than a mediocre archer. If slingers were always one feat behind the archers (rapid reload) that would be cool but the gulf is much bigger than that. Also, it's not just the sling, every other ranged weapon it 2+ feats behind the bow.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
To those thinking slings are meant to be weak, there's a reason their ammo is called bullets.
Apparently I can't resist commenting on some of the silliness in this thread...
Yes, there's a reason they are called bullets (when you're not slinging stones). That reason is the word "bullet" means "little ball".
Bullet's not some magical word that means "kick your butt nasty". And it wasn't what the people who invented sling bullets called them anyway.