|
Don't make me suspend it twice. ;DJust to be sure, there are two things going on here...
The first is an example of how to create a comparable non-halfling "slinger" in a home game that excludes the use of Halflings of Golarion. For this, the "martial sling" actually is a sling that uses the game mechanics of a composite longbow. The small details can easily be worked out from there.
This also examples the real cost of what a character should expect to have to reasonably spend to make a sling competitive with a bow. Anything irrationally more expensive becomes silly as you are just forcing people to needlessly use a bow.
(this is also why I am a proponent of Rapid Reload working on slings, because it is then 1 feat to get close to a bow)
The second is an example of how to make this work in PFS. In PFS, the weapon MUST be a composite longbow for game mechanics RAW. After establishing the game mechanics firmly, a player hand waives the mental picture fluff that is the composite longbow for the martial sling (with an open-minded GM), or simply pretends the composite longbow is a martial sling (for a close-minded GM). The difference is a matter of semantics only at that point.
The most important point is to have fun with the game, as it is a game.
If a person can't get past the "name" cosmetic tag placed on a set of game mechanics, then they shouldn't bother with the idea at all. I can't help that, only Paizo can.
Both your open-minded and closed-minded GM examples violate part or all of the 'no reflavouring' rule for PFS. Don't be a jerk at the table please.
Can anyone post a link to where the devs explain why they decided that slingers need feat(s) - Ammo Drop and Juggle Load - to do what archers can do without needing feats? Assuming such a post exists.
Yeah, reskinning isn't allowed in PFS. So your only real option is to not actually be using a sling.
Frankly, I'd rather my PC be remembered as "that underpowered sling fighter" than "that crazy man who thought his longbow was a sling". If I want to play a crazy PC, I will make a crazy PC.
Thanks CWheezy.
Sean K Reynolds compared players wanting crossbows to be effective weapons is like players wanting water balloons to be effective weapons.That basically sums up the developer opinion, they have picked bows, greatswords, etc. as the best weapons, deal with it.
Also, here is an excellent dpr calculator just make a copy and it is yours!
It is disappointing that devs have taken that view. I agree a long bow will do more damage than a sling. But to somehow rule that loading and firing a sling is so much more complicated than a bow that you need two extra feats is stretching credulity. Even some of the "fluff" text around the feats is ridiculous.
Your coordination is so perfect that you can simply drop ammunition from your hand at the exact moment required for it to fall into an open sling as your twirl it around.
So the reason slings are slow to fire is because slingers try and load the bullet into the cup while they are "twirling it around". (Not to mention that with this feat a character with 3 Dex is effectively as coordinated as one with 18 dex when it comes to drop a bullet into a moving sling cup...... With one rank in Sleight of Hand they should be able to do all sorts of amazing feats of coordination and dextrousness).
Even with an acknowledged lower damage output than a long bow (though when using a bullet they should equal a short bow) to have their base speed of use lower than a bow with no logical explanation is plain wrong.
Thanks CWheezy.
Sean K Reynolds compared players wanting crossbows to be effective weapons is like players wanting water balloons to be effective weapons.That basically sums up the developer opinion, they have picked bows, greatswords, etc. as the best weapons, deal with it.
Also, here is an excellent dpr calculator just make a copy and it is yours!
It is disappointing that devs have taken that view. I agree a long bow will do more damage than a sling. But to somehow rule that loading and firing a sling is so much more complicated than a bow that you need two extra feats is stretching credulity. Even some of the "fluff" text around the feats is ridiculous.
Your coordination is so perfect that you can simply drop ammunition from your hand at the exact moment required for it to fall into an open sling as your twirl it around.So the reason slings are slow to fire is because slingers try and load the bullet into the cup while they are "twirling it around". (Not to mention that with this feat a character with 3 Dex is effectively as coordinated as one with 18 dex when it comes to drop a bullet into a moving sling cup...... With one rank in Sleight of Hand they should be able to do all sorts of amazing feats of coordination and dextrousness).
Even with an acknowledged lower damage output than a long bow (though when using a bullet they should equal a short bow) to have their base speed of use lower than a bow with no logical explanation is plain wrong.
Apparently, some weapons are supposed to suck enough that a small damage dice and crit range isn't sufficient.
If you really want your mind blown watch the 2 minute demonstration of how to load a mussleloader and then realize they forgot to prime the pan. Then think that all of this becomes a free action by level 2 or so because they learn how to premeasure their powder.
|
Thanks CWheezy.
Sean K Reynolds compared players wanting crossbows to be effective weapons is like players wanting water balloons to be effective weapons.That basically sums up the developer opinion, they have picked bows, greatswords, etc. as the best weapons, deal with it.
Also, here is an excellent dpr calculator just make a copy and it is yours!
It is disappointing that devs have taken that view. I agree a long bow will do more damage than a sling. But to somehow rule that loading and firing a sling is so much more complicated than a bow that you need two extra feats is stretching credulity. Even some of the "fluff" text around the feats is ridiculous.
Your coordination is so perfect that you can simply drop ammunition from your hand at the exact moment required for it to fall into an open sling as your twirl it around.So the reason slings are slow to fire is because slingers try and load the bullet into the cup while they are "twirling it around". (Not to mention that with this feat a character with 3 Dex is effectively as coordinated as one with 18 dex when it comes to drop a bullet into a moving sling cup...... With one rank in Sleight of Hand they should be able to do all sorts of amazing feats of coordination and dextrousness).
Even with an acknowledged lower damage output than a long bow (though when using a bullet they should equal a short bow) to have their base speed of use lower than a bow with no logical explanation is plain wrong.
Apparently, some weapons are supposed to suck enough that a small damage dice and crit range isn't sufficient.
If you really want your mind blown watch the 2 minute demonstration of how to load a mussleloader and then realize they forgot to prime the pan. Then think that all of this becomes a free action by level 2 or so because they learn...
I shoot both crossbow and muzzleloader and the idea that a light crossbow is slower to load than the gun is funny to me.
The problem with a self delusion trick is that it invites a score of issues like "why did warp wood just break my sling.
I think I would be just as upset if warp wood wrecked my composite bow, which generally had little to no wood in them. ;)
Sean K Reynolds compared players wanting crossbows to be effective weapons is like players wanting water balloons to be effective weapons.
cite? Link?
That is disappointing.
It is. It basically shows fan-boyism from game developers that you would have thought they'd have left at the door.
IF Pathfinder was set in a particular culture in a particular historical time, then I could see the sense in making a weapon the 'must-have' option.
However, Pathfinder covers every culture and time from East to West, North to South, Stone Age through to the widespread use of firearms. Obviously these are covered in a fantasy setting, but the historical parallels are obvious.
To pick one weapon and make it stand out above all others no matter what the situation, and not even to make that weapon the ultimate historical development at the end of the timescale, is a very odd decision. One I can only assume is down to the baggage of AD&D and ultimately Chainmail.
|
Yes, calling the longbow better than every other ranged weapon is not fanboyism at all.
I'm reminded of the scene from Indiana Jones where the highly skilled sword fighter is shot by Indy.
Because the pistol is better.
By every scientific measurement I've ever seen, the Longbow is better than the sling. It fires faster, more accurately, at a longer distance, and does more damage.
Feel free to present literally any evidence to the contrary.
The fanboyism is when you want something to reflect what you want, because you want it.
If I wanted to be a water balloon fighter, I would be out of luck. If I want to be a sling fighter, even by the lowest numbers, I'm viable as I do my share of damage by DPR (1/4th of equal CR).
But yes, some things are better than others. And I get to work faster when I drive than if I ride my bike.
Yes, calling the longbow better than every other ranged weapon is not fanboyism at all.I'm reminded of the scene from Indiana Jones where the highly skilled sword fighter is shot by Indy.
Because the pistol is better.
By every scientific measurement I've ever seen, the Longbow is better than the sling. It fires faster, more accurately, at a longer distance, and does more damage.
Feel free to present literally any evidence to the contrary.
The fanboyism is when you want something to reflect what you want, because you want it.
If I wanted to be a water balloon fighter, I would be out of luck. If I want to be a sling fighter, even by the lowest numbers, I'm viable as I do my share of damage by DPR (1/4th of equal CR).
But yes, some things are better than others. And I get to work faster when I drive than if I ride my bike.
can't use a longbow as a flail, though. Sometimes its not about better and worse. There are factors that may make something better in a given situation. Your bike would look a lot more attractive as an option for getting to work if you lacked gas money.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think guns should double your rate of fire, have instantaneous reload times, and also deal 20d6 base damage, because guns are objectively better than bows, and should be modeled in the game as such. People who want to play archers should be very happy to accept that they're worse than gunfighters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ive been planning an urban campaign where most weapons of a certain size are banned within city limits. im hoping that people will then try out the "inferior" weapons like the sling, the swordcane and the brass knuckles
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By every scientific measurement I've ever seen, the Longbow is better than the sling. It fires faster, more accurately, at a longer distance, and does more damage.
Feel free to present literally any evidence to the contrary.
Funny that you are prepared to overlook all evidence that slings outrange and outpace the bows used by the Persians and Parthians, yet you demand evidence for a strawman argument.
Nobody is claiming that the sling outperforms the longbow. Nobody. So let's take that particular strawman away once and for all, eh?
The discussion is about recognising the sling's qualities, not trying to make it better than the longbow, crossbow or firearms. Nor is it trying to make the sling better than the greatsword or rapier.
It is questioning why the sling has been so badly overlooked by the game's designers.
|
|
By the way, the numbers are there, I think that when a fighter spend all his feat to be good with his favored weapon (not to mention special feat ofr that weapon) and DPR, and still does so little damage then the optin can be safely designed as "it sucks".
Again, define "so little damage".
It met my criteria. If you have 4 slingers against an equal CR opponent based on the book, they down it in a round.
|
|
I think guns should double your rate of fire, have instantaneous reload times, and also deal 20d6 base damage, because guns are objectively better than bows, and should be modeled in the game as such. People who want to play archers should be very happy to accept that they're worse than gunfighters.
Modern? Probably. From the period. Nope.
|
|
The fanboyism is when you want something to reflect what you want, because you want it.Such as longbows being the best ranged weapon, when crossbows and guns should realistically be all better?It is curious how it is stated that if the bow was more used than the slign is because the bow was just better, but if the crossbow popularity over the bow have nothing to do with it being better.
In the end whatever happens, the bow have to be better, and whatever advantage the other weapons have should be minimized, and whatever advantage the bow have should be maximized.
For example, the heavy crossbow does 1d10, that is, an arcehr with str 14 is doing more average damage. Absurd.
The crossbow was better, for those who couldn't wield longbows properly because they didn't have the training.
Crossbows required very little training. Hence the popularity.
I could spend literally hours discussing the how war in Europe declined in personalization after the medieval period, which was an increase from the Greek and Roman period. And with less skill I could discuss how the samurai declined in value in Tokugawa Japan following the introduction of modern weapons that allowed an untrained peasent to be on par with decades and decades of training.
Instead I will stay that as long as I can get to 1/4 of the damage on an equal CR creature with a weapon in a build that focuses on that weapon, I'm content.
|
|
By every scientific measurement I've ever seen, the Longbow is better than the sling. It fires faster, more accurately, at a longer distance, and does more damage.
Feel free to present literally any evidence to the contrary.
Funny that you are prepared to overlook all evidence that slings outrange and outpace the bows used by the Persians and Parthians, yet you demand evidence for a strawman argument.
Nobody is claiming that the sling outperforms the longbow. Nobody. So let's take that particular strawman away once and for all, eh?
The discussion is about recognising the sling's qualities, not trying to make it better than the longbow, crossbow or firearms. Nor is it trying to make the sling better than the greatsword or rapier.
It is questioning why the sling has been so badly overlooked by the game's designers.
I overlooked it because it was from the same person who overstated the number of people at that event from 20k to 100k, and because actual science testing the weapons shows otherwise.
If you have any actual scientific evidence, please post it.
What we do know is that every army that could afford bowmen in the period portrayed in setting, choose them over slings.
Despite slings being cheaper.
|
|
I would still like the Manyshot question answered. That never happened in history. Therefore, there's not really a good argument why it shouldn't apply to throwing weapons, slings, and anything that isn't a question of mechanical issues (ie. crossbows, firearms). And even those I would be fine with, because I have just as much trouble picturing someone firing two arrows in the same shot from a longbow as I do picturing someone cramming two bolts into a single-shot crossbow.
|
|
Manyshot is a problem feat for me. If I were a Dev, I would make Deadly Aim precision damage.
@Loneknave - No actually I'm not. Look it up. Xenophon got the numbers way, way off.
I also referenced other Greek historians who were horribly inaccurate in other battles.
Because Greek histories were really, really inaccurate.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course the fanboy "must be better" set do not want rules like how badly cold and wet can ruin a bow or how hard they can be to use in tight spaces etc. Because in reality (what SKR said we should look at before wanting our water balloons to not suck)Those would get so many of the super archers dead.
You keep refering to "that period" yet you refuse to state what period that is. How come?
|
|
Of course the fanboy "must be better" set do not want rules like how badly cold and wet can ruin a bow or how hard they can be to use in tight spaces etc. Because in reality (what SKR said we should look at before wanting our water balloons to not suck)Those would get so many of the super archers dead.
Not to mention Longbows really should be exotic weapons, considering how rare they actually were.
But there were reasons why slings fell out of favor and bows became more popular. Just like there were reasons clubs fell out of favor and swords became more popular.
Is there now a catch 22 argument of "If you support it a little, you have to make it as good as any other option"? Should they just exclude primitive options from the game.
Clubs < Swords
Slings < Bows
Both can be viable, neither is optimal.
That is why people who can choose between swords and clubs, all other things being equal, choose swords.
You keep refering to "that period" yet you refuse to state what period that is. How come?The Medieval period.
Where, outside of your head, did I "refuse" to state that, exactly?
"The medieval period" is kinda vague, and do you have any evidence that Pathfinder is supposed to represent the medieval period?
Not explicitly refuse, but you've been asked several times and ignored it.
|
|
You keep refering to "that period" yet you refuse to state what period that is. How come?The Medieval period.
Where, outside of your head, did I "refuse" to state that, exactly?
"The medieval period" is kinda vague, and do you have any evidence that Pathfinder is supposed to represent the medieval period?
Not explicitly refuse, but you've been asked several times and ignored it.
Citation?
Also it is a "Medieval Fantasy Setting" so there is that...
|
|
Manyshot is a problem feat for me. If I were a Dev, I would make Deadly Aim precision damage.
@Loneknave - No actually I'm not. Look it up. Xenophon got the numbers way, way off.
I also referenced other Greek historians who were horribly inaccurate in other battles.
Because Greek histories were really, really inaccurate.
Then you would be amenable to slings and thrown weapons able to use Manyshot, if the feat must exist at all?
I feel like I might be approaching some sort of compromise.
|
|
Manyshot is a problem feat for me. If I were a Dev, I would make Deadly Aim precision damage.
@Loneknave - No actually I'm not. Look it up. Xenophon got the numbers way, way off.
I also referenced other Greek historians who were horribly inaccurate in other battles.
Because Greek histories were really, really inaccurate.
Then you would be amenable to slings and thrown weapons able to use Manyshot, if the feat must exist at all?
I feel like I might be approaching some sort of compromise.
I'm fine with it, as it logically makes as much sense as firing two arrows with a bow to load to rocks in a sling.
But again, I wish they had made deadly aim precision damage and don't understand why they didn't, given the fluff.
Instead I will stay that as long as I can get to 1/4 of the damage on an equal CR creature with a weapon in a build that focuses on that weapon, I'm content.
Meanwhile, if you could only deal 1/4 of the damage required to kill an enemy of equal CR to you, I would consider that a serious failure on the part of a dedicated damage-dealing character.
I overlooked it because it was from the same person who overstated the number of people at that event from 20k to 100k, and because actual science testing the weapons shows otherwise.
So you discount slings because Herodetus couldn't count?
If you have any actual scientific evidence, please post it.
There is plenty of scientific evidence about slings being able to achieve the same range as bows. www.slinging.org is a good place to start. As with bows the combat effective range is likely to be a lot less than maximum achievable range. In real life at least, given Pathfinder is skewed well in favour of the firer over the target in one-on-one scenarios.
What we do know is that every army that could afford bowmen in the period portrayed in setting, choose them over slings.
Despite slings being cheaper.
As for why armies chose bows over slings... there were plenty of armies that used both and plenty of areas that produced only slingers (Rhodes, Balaerics).
I don't care about cost (and cost does not mean a weapon is more effective. If I was up against a man in full plate armour there are plenty of cheap weapons I'd rather have over a long sword lovingly crafted by a master swordsmith).
I care about the capabilities of the sling being reasonably accurately portrayed in game.
Things like a trained bowman (BAB 6 for comparison) can automatically fire two arrows a round. An equally trained slinger can't without spending an extra feat. Putting aside things such as range, penetration, damage etc, it is plain wrong that a trained slinger can't fire as fast as a trained bowman. And to try and gain parity in speed of fire the slinger has to spend feats.
Why can a BAB6 archer fire twice a round? Because he has trained extensively and can draw, nock and loose an arrow quickly and effectively. Why can't a BAB6 slinger fire twice a round? Because apparently despite the same amount of extensive training he can't place a stone in a the sling pouch, take up the release cord and fling the stone quickly and effectively.
Manyshot is a problem feat for me. If I were a Dev, I would make Deadly Aim precision damage.
@Loneknave - No actually I'm not. Look it up. Xenophon got the numbers way, way off.
I also referenced other Greek historians who were horribly inaccurate in other battles.
Because Greek histories were really, really inaccurate.
Then you would be amenable to slings and thrown weapons able to use Manyshot, if the feat must exist at all?
I feel like I might be approaching some sort of compromise.
I'm fine with it, as it logically makes as much sense as firing two arrows with a bow to load to rocks in a sling.
But again, I wish they had made deadly aim precision damage and don't understand why they didn't, given the fluff.
Since Manyshot is the single biggest factor in making the longbow ridiculously better than every other ranged option (except possibly guns used by a gunslinger) just making Manyshot no longer be longbow-exclusive would do a lot to bring other weapons closer to par.
And if realism is such a goal then weapons should interact with armors differently....
Was it 1st or 2nd Ed that had different weapons performing differently against different armours?