I agree... Considering it's an alternate racial trait for Halflings, there is certainly precedent.
Concur with the original poster. Rapid Reload (Sling) should be a viable option.
In my opinion, you should be able to apply rapid reload to just about any weapon that takes a Move Action (or More) to reload.
Concur with the original poster. Rapid Reload (Sling) should be a viable option.
In my opinion, you should be able to apply rapid reload to just about any weapon that takes a Move Action (or More) to reload.
+1
I don't see why you couldn't. I am guessing it wasn't included due to low use of slings.I'm willing to bet that's a cyclical thing. Slings are crappy because they take too long to load, so nobody bothers with them. A feat exists to shorten reload time of crossbows, but not for slings because nobody bothers with them.
Slings should be able to be fired just about as quickly as a bow without the need for an extra feat. Not all slinging techniques use lots of twirling.
Compare it to, say, using Rapid Reload to load a heavy crossbow as a move action, and it is not at all unrealistic. Consider a person with 3 Strength and Rapid Reload loading a heavy crossbow as a move action and we definitely enter the realms of unrealistic.
Then again slings should do the same damage as a short bow (based on historical data) and...and...and...
I think the reason that not many people use slings in game is not because slings are actually poor weapons, but rather the game designers have continued with errors about slings that existed in the very earliest versions of D&D, so the D&D/Pathfinder sling is actually a lot weaker than it should be..
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are 2 feats in Halflings of Golarion that allow you to load a sling faster :
- Ammo Drop (load as a swift action)
- Juggle Load (load as a free action, requires Ammo Drop)
They have an additional requirement over Rapid Reload : Sleight of Hand 1 rank, but they allow you to reload without provoking AoOs (which Rapid Reload does not).
Concerning historical data, IIRC they show that bows and crossbows were used far more often than slings in battle. I guess that is what the developpers were trying to stick to.
Concerning historical data, IIRC they show that bows and crossbows were used far more often than slings in battle. I guess that is what the developpers were trying to stick to.
Depending on the culture, slings were used as often as bows and more than crossbows. It's just a Eurocentric view that places bows and crossbows above all other missile weapons. Plus slings were considered even more lowly than bows, so the chroniclers largely ignored them, hence the limited reference to them in historical records (at least in Europe).
Crossbows were not that widespread outside of Europe and parts of Asia. For many cultures slings took precedence over bows in warfare.
If the devs were intending to focus on weapons that were used more often in battle then the list of available weapons would be pretty small!
- Ammo Drop (load as a swift action)
- Juggle Load (load as a free action, requires Ammo Drop)
I don't see why a slinger should have to take two feats to do something a bowman can do for free.
When you add in the fact that sling damage is lower than it should be, why would anyone bother trying to specialise with the sling in Pathfinder? Plus the characters that might want to use one have to take a couple of feats to make it slightly more effective.
|
|
During the Roma period the sling were considered superior to bows and crossbows.
The bows used at the time were the equivalent of shortbows (non composite) and the crossbows were made with wood only, so they were the low end models for Pathfinder/D&D.
Gygax and Arneson were modelling their heroes on medieval armies, with more powerful crossbows, longbows and composite bows, weapons that generally outperform the sling.
That said current damage for the sling would be acceptable if the firer was using stones,but the military war load was lead bullets. The were noticeably more powerful and giving a sling using lead bullets the same damage of a shortbow is only logic.
Probably the logic behind the lower damage is that you can apply your strength to the weapon without the need for a specially constructed weapon, but it is a weak motivation.
So both 1d4/1d6 damage and 1 feat to rapid reload the weapon are logical changes.
That said current damage for the sling would be acceptable if the firer was using stones,but the military war load was lead bullets. The were noticeably more powerful and giving a sling using lead bullets the same damage of a shortbow is only logic.
I believe the current stats of the sling already presume lead bullets, and I think there was a mention that using randomly found stones would reduce damage by 1 size category.
Anyway, 2 feats to reload as a free action seems quite absurd, comparing it to the generally superior light crossbow. 1 feat for rapid reload seems fine, and I'd certainly allow it for any sling user in my games (not that I've had any so far).
|
|
That said current damage for the sling would be acceptable if the firer was using stones,but the military war load was lead bullets. The were noticeably more powerful and giving a sling using lead bullets the same damage of a shortbow is only logic.I believe the current stats of the sling already presume lead bullets, and I think there was a mention that using randomly found stones would reduce damage by 1 size category.
Anyway, 2 feats to reload as a free action seems quite absurd, comparing it to the generally superior light crossbow. 1 feat for rapid reload seems fine, and I'd certainly allow it for any sling user in my games (not that I've had any so far).
Exactly my point. The damage would be acceptable if it was trying to depict using stones, it is not acceptable for lead bullets.
|
|
Depending on the culture, slings were used as often as bows and more than crossbows. It's just a Eurocentric view that places bows and crossbows above all other missile weapons.
Not so Eurocentric : both Mongols and Samourais used bows extensively, as did Native Americans. I am quite interested in knowing which cultures used slings extensively.
I see 2 advantages that the bow has over the sling in warfare :
- you can shoot it from a horse
- it has more penetrating power when facing enemies wearing armor
Depending on the culture, slings were used as often as bows and more than crossbows. It's just a Eurocentric view that places bows and crossbows above all other missile weapons.Not so Eurocentric : both Mongols and Samourais used bows extensively, as did Native Americans. I am quite interested in knowing which cultures used slings extensively.
I see 2 advantages that the bow has over the sling in warfare :
- you can shoot it from a horse
- it has more penetrating power when facing enemies wearing armor
I meant Eurocentric in the sense that our historical viewpoint is strongly influenced by European history in which missile weapons were looked down upon by chroniclers, and slings were the lowest of the low in that regard. So the prevalence of slings in historical records is much lower than their actual usage should suggest.
Lots of cultures used slings. I used to have a map showing where slings and bows were used and there wasn't much overlap.
Off the top of my head: Hawaii, various North American peoples, Aztecs, Tibet, ancient Celts, Balearic Islands, Rhodes, Middle East, all over Africa.
Penetrating power depends on the type of armour. There are historical accounts of people wearing metal helmets being killed by a sling bullet hit to a metal helmet. Plus not all bows had the same penetrative power of an English longbow or a good composite bow.