We could collectively write in to deadliest warrior and ask them to do some testing :)
More seriously Wikipedia has this on sling usage.
Remember that it's also the shepherds weapon..easy to transport and a plentiful supply of ammo out in the fields..yes that's right every level one commoner 8 yr old peasant will have one somewhere on his person..
In the end bows are more high fantasy..we shouldn't look for historical versimlitude in D&D in any incarnation
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't care much about verisimilitude, I just hate the mono-culture of ranged weaponry in the game. Make *something* else viable. Thrown weapons could have an edge in close combat, crossbows could be more damaging with single shots, etc. Having one weapon that just dominates the whole of ranged weapons is boring.
Imagine if there were such a huge gap between one melee weapon and all the rest, we'd have a bunch of archers and a bunch of katana wielders and nothing else. LAME.
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 ;)
This discussion makes me wonder why Rapid Reload can't apply to them.
Like 3.5's spiked chain problem :(
As to bows are the greatest, backed by what armies used, as Alkenstar has guns surely they should beat bows by the same distance bows beat every other ranged weapons;P
I don't care much about verisimilitude, I just hate the mono-culture of ranged weaponry in the game. Make *something* else viable. Thrown weapons could have an edge in close combat, crossbows could be more damaging with single shots, etc. Having one weapon that just dominates the whole of ranged weapons is boring.
Imagine if there were such a huge gap between one melee weapon and all the rest, we'd have a bunch of archers and a bunch of katana wielders and nothing else. LAME.
We would need damage to be affected by range which means more rules to make things more realistic. We would also have to account for armor being different. In short, a more complex system is the only way to account for all the variables.
As long as arrows are drawn a free action it is hard to not choose a bow.
I don't even see a reason to pick up a heavy crossbow. They should have just had the the hand crossbow, and a regular crossbow.
|
|
Like 3.5's spiked chain problem :(
As to bows are the greatest, backed by what armies used, as Alkenstar has guns surely they should beat bows by the same distance bows beat every other ranged weapons;P
Unless they've changed things significantly in the new campaign setting or added some significant feats guns don't hold a candle to the bow in PF.
|
|
This discussion makes me wonder why Rapid Reload can't apply to them.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 ;)
There is no reason it can't, as I said, many GMs let rapid reload or quick draw work with them. As far as I can tell it's largely an oversight.
plz ignore the Slexdixia =)
keep in mind that social classes of the time and the emotional impact of a weapon on the pesants is just as effective as the use of that weapon.
remember poaching the kings deer is an ofence punishable by death, slings and snares are very conciealable.
pesants did not use or carry swords or bows as those were weapons of war and they were baned from owning them much less useing them.
the use of a sling can be picked up in a matter of hours [My brother learned in an hour when he was 8 and is deadly acurate to this day he is now 33 and I have never picked up the nack now matter how hard I have tried]
the use of a sling requires a reasonable amount of room say 3 to 4 feet around a user where as a bow can be fired in and through foliage thus makeing it a weapon usable from conciealment
I read somewhere that the squires of mideval knights used glass vials of quicklime in there slings, as the cloud produced when broken on armor would choke an enemy knight to death.
One of the reasons there is little about slings in the historical record is as some posters have mentioned - they were the lowliest weapon on the battlefield, the stuff of shepherds and peasants and beneath most chroniclers' notice.
I have seen some paintings from the same era as when the "long bow" was going out of fashion in Europe that show slingers still being used there. So I suspect that all non-gunpowder ranged weapons were being displaced over the same period by firearms.
A unit of archers can probably be deployed a bit more densely than slingers - a real life issue but not one that really comes into play in D&D.
Likewise the usage of missile weapons in D&D and real life varies greatly. Archers, slingers etc would not be aiming at a specific target, especially at maximum engagement range, but rather putting down a body of fire into an area where the enemy is or about to move through (volume over accuracy, like the difference between using a machine gun and a rifle in modern warfare). In D&D the shooting is primarily one-on-one, mainly at ranges that would be virtually point blank on a battlefield.
Plus at longer ranges D&D archery etc is very unrealistic. I'd rather face the world's greatest archer at his maximum range than 10 level 1 warriors. The law of averages would dictate that the former is more likely to hit me, in game, than the latter. But realistically the former has zero chance of hitting (as me and my friends proved to each other when we were foolish teenagers!) if I can focus solely on the incoming arrow.
Another interesting historical fact is that it was rare that the use of slings and bows was equally common within a culture. It was largely an "either or" situation.
Logistics may have a hand in this too.
When practicing the bow I just went out and picked up the arrows when my quiver was empty, they were fairly easy to find. The rocks I used when trying to teach myself the sling became embedded into the loam or disappeared altogether.
Seems a little strange until you realize that I was in forested terrain. Plenty of wood & silt bottomed waterways, but very light on rocks of sling suitable shape & size (being mostly shale).
wasnt there a way back in 1st edition (outilukes freezing sphere) where you could use a sling to deliver nasty little spells in bullet form?
anything like that exist now?
wasnt there a way back in 1st edition (outilukes freezing sphere) where you could use a sling to deliver nasty little spells in bullet form?
anything like that exist now?
I believe it was an ammo bag, like the old quiver of ehlonna but for sling stones.
Was looking at D&D "Rules Cyclopedia"... what i call OD&D :)
I noticed that slings and crossbows still do the same damage in pathfinder as they did back then.... as do Short bows.
But i noticed that long bows were up to 1d8 damage now in 3.5, but they use to be 1d6 in the old D&D game.... just wondering why long bows got the damage increase.
PS = What every happened the the (Rock, Thrown) entry... in the old book it was 1d3 damage 10/30/50 range..... or does that just all under the Improvised Weapon entry now instead of a simple weapon entry.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
PS = What every happened the the (Rock, Thrown) entry... in the old book it was 1d3 damage 10/30/50 range..... or does that just all under the Improvised Weapon entry now instead of a simple weapon entry.
Have no fear. Top men are on this problem. TOP MEN. Or women.
But i noticed that long bows were up to 1d8 damage now in 3.5, but they use to be 1d6 in the old D&D game.... just wondering why long bows got the damage increase.
Actually, sheaf arrows were introduced that did 1d8, but the "default" in earlier editions was the longer distance flight arrows. By third edition, the "default" ammo was sheaf arrows that did more damage.
.
..
...
....
.....
>> ..and another with a lulz teh damage reference..<<
>> Showing Some Slinging Styles<<
>> ..and a tutorial on the figure-of-8 style o' slinging <<
::
What I find interesting is the variation in styles -- one uses a figure-of-8 style of slinging, which seems very efficient, while another uses the ole' twirl-it-round-and-round-and-let-it-go.
..
I recall Ogre theorycrafting about a Halfling Alchemist Slinger...
TEMPTING O_O
Mutagen buffing, rock slinging little bugger - using the Warslinger halfling variant racial of course.
Warslinger: Halflings are experts at the use of the sling. Halflings with this racial trait can reload a sling as a free action. Reloading a sling still requires two hands and provokes attacks of opportunity. This racial trait replaces the sure-footed racial trait.
::
References: Slinging Web Forum - Tempting new hobby alert!
I noticed that slings and crossbows still do the same damage in pathfinder as they did back then.... as do Short bows.
Indeed. The "why aren't slings more awesome?" debate dates back to AD&D, at least.
It really doesn't matter what they could do in real life. It a game with a need for game balance.
I really do love the "historians"/"fanboys" of certain weapons. For some reason thinking that having experience or having used a weapon once in their backyard makes them an expert on (insert weapon name).
:)
It really doesn't matter what they could do in real life. It a game with a need for game balance.
I really do love the "historians"/"fanboys" of certain weapons. For some reason thinking that having experience or having used a weapon once in their backyard makes them an expert on (insert weapon name).
:)
Perhaps because they actually do have experience..... Denigrating people's expertise and/or historical passion by calling them "fanboys" is really trite. Many of us had our love for D&D/Pathfinder develop out of interest in or firsthand experience in military history/tactics/etc and like to see how we can apply it to the game.
And from where do the writers of the game get the information to base the stats they apply to weapons? Those terrible experts/historians/fanboys out there...
Why shouldn't weapons in game be roughly historically accurate? There is such a huge range of weapon options in the game that making any weapon historically accurate isn't going to affect game balance.
As things stand now, using a composite longbow is by far the best missile weapon from pure statistical/damage output terms. How is that game balancing - even if composite long bows were historically the best possible pre-gunpowder missile weapon? Or that to even up the longbow versus crossbow issue, specialist crossbow fighters can get the ridiculous ability to reload any crossbow as a free action? Game balance is one thing but things that are physically impossible are another.
Giving slings a 1d6 in damage and allowing iterative attacks is far less game un-balancing than being able to load and fire a heavy crossbow multiple times in six seconds. Though being able to fire more than one or two arrows accurately in a six second period is also unrealistic, at least you could physically manage to do so irrespective of accuracy.
Making all the weapons "historically accurate" would only serve to over complicate the rules. When a simple i swing X weapon for Y damage works fine. Why would i want to spend more time thinking about if a certain weapon will pierce this certain kind of armor better than something else.
The D20 system is an abstraction on real life not a mirror image of it.
Example;
AC covers thick armor, shields, or just being quick to not get hit.
Its also a fantasy game not a history book so i really don't care if you've spent your entire life using x weapon or armor and think it deserves better stats.
Slings are garbage after a certain level if you are able to buy/use a bow.
Does it really matter what there are called; what if the sling was called Simple Ranged Weapon 3 and the Bow was called Martial Ranged Weapon 2? Would there still be arguments over which one is better?
I think not since it seems to stem from a PERSONAL opinion of a certain weapon.
It seems after the 2nd edition everything became very boxed like action figures. If you want to offer the most for your class,you will all be using the same weapons,armor, and magic items. I like that we no longer have 32 seperate numbers to track for each weapon, but it really hurt the flavor to have one weapon in each category seemingly dominate the selection process.
But, with that said there is a reason for house rules and such. If you are playing in organized play, then you may be shoe-horned into following the Tolkien formula of character creation. So is life.
It seems after the 2nd edition everything became very boxed like action figures. If you want to offer the most for your class,you will all be using the same weapons,armor, and magic items.
I don't know what to tell you -- I saw an awful lot of fighters using longswords (or two-handed swords) and full plate armor in AD&D. Obviously your experience was different.
AD&D longswords were awesome with the d12 v. large creatures. We used a lot of bastard swords too.
We only used the weapon v. armour charts for important duels, but it was kind of fun looking at the other guys armour and trying to pick the best weapon.
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".
Actually the sling lasted considerably longer in common military usage than either the longbow or crossbow (or any other kind of bow).
I know it doesn't help in terms of making the item desirable for the game, but honestly, regardless of if the stats make sense or not from some measurable historical sense, as has been noted, sling rate of fire only becomes an issue with characters that have a +6 or higher BaB.
Most armies that have slingers are going to have the majority of their troops with +0 or +1 for their BaB. I realize that mobility factors into it, but from at least a suspension of disbelief aspect of things, its hard to picture someone placing a bullet, whiling the sling, and releasing as fast as someone can fire multiple arrows.
The move action reload is the game breaker for slings. It still matters at lower level, due to things like Rapid Shot and Haste which work for bows but not for slings. If you took out the move action reload they would be reasonably balanced; sure they do less base damage and have less range, but you don't need to sell your old weapon and get a new one to take advantage of each time your Str mod increases, which is a fair trade IMO.
Fixing slings is really as simple as getting rid of the move action reload and treating sling ammunition just like bow ammunition. Which I really see no reason not to do.
|
Slings are garbage after a certain level if you are able to buy/use a bow.
And this right here is exactly the problem many of us in this thread are dealing with. No weapon should become 'garbage' after a certain level. All weapons should be viable choices throughout the levels for various character types.
One huge thing that means, is the ability to make iterative attacks. The d4 damage? That's fine. The lower range? That's fine too. That's what makes it a simple weapon. The lower fire rate is what makes it a garbage weapon.
Except of course that it's not true. Slings are still the mechanically superior choice over a bow for anyone using a light shield...i.e. clerics and paladins mostly and maybe some others as you don't have to spend actions to remove and re-equip your shield. Yes the APG's quick shield helps with this somewhat...but you'd still lose actions using the shield unless you had quickdraw. It's just easier to have the shield handy and just pull out a sling when you need range and then switch to melee when you don't. Better then spending time removing a shield to equip your bow and then stapping the shield back on. Yeah it's not the best choice for any THF or TWF or anyone with a heavy shield or tower shield...but the sling does have it's use. I explained this already once and people seem to wanna ignore that slings are actually mechanically still reilvant for some classes as their missle weapons. Yeah the elf wizard will take the bow over the sling...but I bet you anything that a human cleric isn't gonna waste a feat to use a bow either.
With the way magic feats work.... bows are look attractive to me as a Druid / Cleric weapon.
While you can fire a sling, one handed... you need two hands to load it. So my understanding is that i would still need to un-equip my shield, load the sling, then re-equip my shield... so doing it that way would be 3 standard action...
page 152 "...A light shield's weight lets you carry othr items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it."
So my understanding is that you still need two hand free, to use a sling, if you want to fire it more than once.
And it does less damage 1d4 (1d3 with stone -1 to hit)
And it has less range
And it take a move action to reload and provokes AoO.
With the way magic feats work.... bows are look attractive to me as a Druid / Cleric weapon.
While you can fire a sling, one handed... you need two hands to load it. So my understanding is that i would still need to un-equip my shield, load the sling, then re-equip my shield... so doing it that way would be 3 standard action...
page 152 "...A light shield's weight lets you carry othr items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it."
So my understanding is that you still need two hand free, to use a sling, if you want to fire it more than once.
And it does less damage 1d4 (1d3 with stone -1 to hit)
And it has less range
And it take a move action to reload and provokes AoO.
If you can take the complicated actions needed to cast a spell with a light shield strapped to the arm you can load a sling with one too.
You don't need two hands to use the weapon, only to load it -- which you have.
If you can take the complicated actions needed to cast a spell with a light shield strapped to the arm you can load a sling with one too.
As a free action you transfer your weapon to your shield hand... which free up your weapon hand to do the complicated action need for casting a spell..... you are not using your shield hand to do the casting.
With a sling, you need two hand to load the sling. You can not use your shield hand to load a sling, as it is a weapon which you are currently using by trying to reload.
|
|
If you can take the complicated actions needed to cast a spell with a light shield strapped to the arm you can load a sling with one too.
As a free action you transfer your weapon to your shield hand... which free up your weapon hand to do the complicated action need for casting a spell..... you are not using your shield hand to do the casting.
With a sling, you need two hand to load the sling. You can not use your shield hand to load a sling, as it is a weapon which you are currently using by trying to reload.
Umm no...your hand is just free for casting spell with a light shield. Period. No switching hands nonsense anymore. You hand is free enough to cast a spell, it's free enough to hold a rock and put it in a sling. In fact slingers using a large shield (not even a light shield mind you) is a popular military tactic in ancient times.
So if you guys were alowed to re-write the rules for slings in pathfinder, what would the sling stats and write up look like?
Would you have any feats just for slings?
Would you allow the users to load 2 bullets for an attack?
So if you guys were alowed to re-write the rules for slings in pathfinder, what would the sling stats and write up look like?
Would you have any feats just for slings?
Would you allow the users to load 2 bullets for an attack?
There are two possible solutions, both of them ugly but for different reasons.
1) Ranged weapons - all of them - reload as a free action, just like bows do. I know, I know, "MY VERISIMILITUDE ;_;" Frankly, not my ideal choice. But the other option is way more mechanically intense, which is...
2) Death to iterative attacks. We gave iterative attacks a good run! It's had a nice long time to enjoy itself! But it's not working out. It creates significantly more problems then it solves.
Umm no...your hand is just free for casting spell with a light shield. Period. No switching hands nonsense anymore. You hand is free enough to cast a spell, it's free enough to hold a rock and put it in a sling. In fact slingers using a large shield (not even a light shield mind you) is a popular military tactic in ancient times.
I respectfully disagree.
You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A light shield's weight lets you carry other items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it.
You can indeed hold a weapon in the same hand as a light shield (it IS an object after all), you just can't use it (to make attack with) while so held.
The only thing that might get in the way is action economy (different GMs have different rulings on how long it takes to switch an item from one hand to the other, or to otherwise change "handedness").
So if you guys were alowed to re-write the rules for slings in pathfinder, what would the sling stats and write up look like?
Would you have any feats just for slings? No, just change Rapid Reload, to include Slings should solve the problem.
Would you allow the users to load 2 bullets for an attack? Yes, if used with the Manyshot feat.. just need some extra wording to include slings.
Do not want more feats.... just needs some feats on the books now, to be a little more open to other weapon options.
So if you guys were alowed to re-write the rules for slings in pathfinder, what would the sling stats and write up look like?Would you have any feats just for slings? No, just change Rapid Reload, to include Slings should solve the problem.
Would you allow the users to load 2 bullets for an attack? Yes, if used with the Manyshot feat.. just need some extra wording to include slings.
Do not want more feats.... just needs some feats on the books now, to be a little more open to other weapon options.
This seems like it would be a pretty simple fix.
You could make it almost as good as a bow, but for people with shields. The extra feat requirements to get it REALLY good could be considered a drawback of it being a simple weapon.
Ya, i do not mind the range being worst, or the low damage die. And i do not mind paying a feat tax to get Rapid Reload (same as you do with crossbows).
But right now, there is no way to do it by RAW.
..........
That being said, i am glad many people posted on this subject. It is nice to see everyone different views, history outlooks, house rules, and passion for this weapon of yar.
I agree that the easiest way to get rid of the move-action reload is to take the Rapid Reload(sling) feat. I know it's not 100% RAW but if the spear-thrower on page 8 in the Adventurer's Armory (not even an actual weapon, I might add) can have Rapid Reload applied to speed up load time, surely the sling can too.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So if you guys were alowed to re-write the rules for slings in pathfinder, what would the sling stats and write up look like?Would you have any feats just for slings? No, just change Rapid Reload, to include Slings should solve the problem.
Would you allow the users to load 2 bullets for an attack? Yes, if used with the Manyshot feat.. just need some extra wording to include slings.
Do not want more feats.... just needs some feats on the books now, to be a little more open to other weapon options.
So how do we get Paizo to add this to their errata?
@ kyrt-ryder: I completely disagree. Some weapon just aren't designed to be super great. Else, we would not have good weapon, we would only have weapons. You need a distribution on your weapon. And I'm not saying the distribution is good now, though demanding to have all weapon equally good isn't interesting.
The most you can demand is that as many weapons as possible have their use somewhere in the game. and as many already mentioned, slings have their use. Just not as dragon killing weapon though that's is completely fine. If enough different weapons can fill in the role, we have enough diversity.
No.
There is literally no reason to ever use a weapon that is not a bow. Almost every class that lacks martial weapon proficiency and actually uses weapons has bow proficiency.
Crossbows were "the weapon spellcasters use when they ran out of spells," and that's not a niche, that's an embarrassment. Slings are the same, but for druids.