Every one of my characters has multiple slings. Use them as equipment ties, belts, bedroll fasteners... shoelaces...
Fighter can't attack flying critter? NO EXCUSE! Sling with rock, sure it's -1 to hit and only a D3, but a decent mid level fighter will have a good BAB and some DEX, and you add STR bonus to that...
So... not being able to attack ranged opponents is a choice.
Slings (and rocks) are free. You can buy ammo to make them better if you want, but it is not required.
Slings are awesome.
Getting an archer competent for D&D wasn't that hard. Getting them competent to shoot arrows for HOURS is what took an obscene amount of training.
Under normal battlefield circumstances, wouldn't you run out of arrows and/or die before you got exhausted?
How much does a masterwork sling cost? It sounds like you could cheaply outfit an entire regiment with them?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How much does a masterwork sling cost? It sounds like you could cheaply outfit an entire regiment with them?
Masterwork adds 300gp to weapon cost.
So 300gp
Correct.
I wouldn't bother. ;)
Agreed, it would be better to get MW sling bullets and enchant them (in lots of 50.)
Or light crossbows.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or light crossbows.
Except... light crossbows wouldn't use a strength modifier to damage, right?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except... light crossbows wouldn't use a strength modifier to damage, right?
Or light crossbows.
Maybe. Are we talking about enchanting a lot of 50 light crossbows and throwing them at the enemy?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IRL, Bows are far better for tight formation. Slings take up more space when used, and require more practice to get your aim right since you can't "sight" them like with a bow. These reasons are probably why slingers became less prevalent than archers. IRH (in real history) it wasn't uncommon for slingers to kill at over 200 yards, and when they used lead shots (at shorter ranges) they would actually penetrate the ribcage and do organ damage, or even occasionally penetrate the skull... worth taking seriously IMO. Professional slingers would be like modern fast-ball pitchers, and the sling magnifies their power notably. The possibility of getting a 6 oz lead "egg" hammered through the temple into your brain at 50 yards isn't exactly something to ignore.
Anyhow, the benefits of the sling in PF are...
- You can easily argue for the ability to load properly shaped flasks (clay pots) of lantern oil or alchemical items. Especially since this was done in history (clay pots of burning pitch, the medieval long-range moltov cocktail)
- A sling adds STR to damage in PF for free, no matter what your strength. Composite bows are only good for crafted strength (hit penalties if lower STR, unable to apply higher STR). This means if you get a STR boost you can apply it to a sling, and if you take STR damage it doesn't impair you as much with a sling.
- You can load a sling if your off-hand has a small shield, so if you're a sword & board user, this is a nice action-saver.
- A loaded sling can be fired one-handed, in case you need the other hand for something that round like casting a spell. Having more options is a good thing.
- It's a simple weapon, so more classes can use it.
- Cost of both the weapon and the ammo, and the option to improvise ammo from any rock-populated environment.
- No additional craft skill needed - Craft Weapons works for slings and sling ammo
My Dwarven Ranger is a TWF Urgrosh user with a STR build, and he has both a sling for long range, and a bandoleer of darts for short range (TWF barrage - benefit of Quickdraw).
I've never regretted it, and I've used the sling often by firing every other round as I approach distant foes. I've use lantern oil as ammo (to paint invisible targets and smoke foes out of fortified locations), use rocks for "apathy shots", and can whip up cold iron bullets for 34cp per 10 with only 1 rank in craft weapons, in under a day of effort. Plus it worked great on some skeletons we fought.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK, the sling has a huge cultural advantage with herders. It weighs next to nothing, takes next to no space to carry, and practice ammunition is readily available and free. Every herdsman out there watching the grass grow and be eaten has lots of time to practice; the occasional predator or rabbit for live targets, and enough boredom to master the weapon. Having a source of skilled ranged combatants available has value, especially if you can increase their effectiveness with supplying them lead bullets on the cheap.
The sling's weakness in our series of games is the fault of the games, not the weapon.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will point out the obvious here: "Takes too long to learn how to use" is a problem for armies of lesser folk, not g~~%!&ned PCs. ;D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, of course if you have a Barrett Model 12 with InfiniClips of special ammunition, your sling can wait a long tim in the bottom of your field kit.
Barring that, any alchemist can do right by you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK, the sling has a huge cultural advantage with herders. It weighs next to nothing, takes next to no space to carry, and practice ammunition is readily available and free. Every herdsman out there watching the grass grow and be eaten has lots of time to practice; the occasional predator or rabbit for live targets, and enough boredom to master the weapon. Having a source of skilled ranged combatants available has value, especially if you can increase their effectiveness with supplying them lead bullets on the cheap.
The sling's weakness in our series of games is the fault of the games, not the weapon.
This is the most rational response in this whole thread.
I mean, typical historical users of the sling on the battlefield were herders, as pointed out above. Guys who had loads of time to do very little besides chuck rocks with their little leather thongs.The real problem with ranged weapons in Pathfinder is the way they are modelled in the combat system. IMHO, bows are too good, especially once you put the right feats into them. Crossbows *should* take more time to reload, compared to bows, regardless of feat investment. Muzzle-loading firearms especially should respect reasonable loading times. And the humble sling ought to be roughly on a par with bows as far as action use is concerned. Whether a sling bullet has comparable penetrating power to an arrow is a different discussion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether a sling bullet has comparable penetrating power to an arrow is a different discussion.
Slings have pitiful penetrating power but superior stopping power.
A decent arrowhead can cause the arrow to go right through someone. You can tell from modern bow hunters (and modern day tribal bow hunters; I met one when I was 19) that the cause of death for their prey is blood loss. Neolithic broadheads are also notoriously sharp, so they would function the same way. I personally know of two people who put an arrow through a moose's skull while hunting, which is shocking. For bow hunting, you shoot your target, ideally through a major organ or blood vessel, and then the prey usually runs away and dies a few minutes later, leaving an easy blood trail to follow.
But for a sling, the penetration comes from pure trauma. Remains from old battlegrounds show shattered ribs with sling shot inside the chest cavity. The sling basically punched a hole right into the body with sheer force. There are even ancient tools (some kind of big tweezers) which were designed to remove sling ammunition from human bodies. Just contemplating the trauma from such a shot is very unpleasant.
|
A sling is inferior to an assault rifle. The same way a wooden club is inferior to a steel sword.
Are they? Lets say you are equally skilled with all four of those weapons. Now you have to eliminate a guard at a distance without alerting other guards in the area to your presence. Are you going to use the assault rifle, or the sling?
You have to get a weapon past a metal detector, are you going to use a steel sword or a wooden club?
If all weapons were equal then they wouldn't be replaced by newer ones.
New weapons are created every day that by your standards are inferior to current weapons. Why create a bolt action rifle when you can have a fully automatic rifle? Why create a revolver when you can have an Uzi?
You are correct in a direct 1 vs 1 scenario of equally skilled combatants there are weapons that provide clear advantages over other weapons. But that does not make them intrinsically better, it just makes them different and more suited to that style of combat than another.
Meet up with someone in an open field and the sword will probably beat the club, and the rifle will beat the sling. Go to an event that requires you to pass through a metal detector and the guy who was able to sneak in a sling and a rock will beat the guy who left his assault rifle in his car. The guy who picks up the stick on the ground will beat the one that describes his Longsword waiting at home.
I'm willing to bet that if you attempted to club an armored foe with a steel longsword, you would find it a good bit more effective than a wooden club. Its got more heft, length, durability, and it focuses the impact over a narrower area, which means a greater chance of physical trauma. You'd probably dull the sword in the process, but it'd still end up being more effective than the club.
You'd use the sword hilt, probably, grasping the blade and using it as a hammer of sorts. A not very good hammer, at that. There's a reason people with perfectly good swords carried other things to use against heavily armoured targets.
Slamming someone with the heavy blade of a sword would probably work just as well.
The reason people carried other weapons of wielded the sword as you described (typically with gauntlets or similar hand protection) was because they didn't want to totally destroy their swords in the process.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you're backwards there. Whacking someone with the flat of a sword blade would in no way injure them as much as a solid whack with a club. Awkwardness in handling, wind resistance, and spreading the impact over a (relatively) large flat surface aren't working in your favor.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
True.
The sword was amazing at killing unarmored and lightly armored foes. But as armor got better, the military of the times had to invent new ways to counter it. Flails and war hammers (with a hook or spike) were quite popular for anti-armor, from what I heard.
Getting back to slings...
From all my readings, the sling is actually a superior weapon for an individual in direct open combat. By most accounts it has better range, higher rate of fire and did more damage than a bow.
But while a slinger is deadlier (and less expensive to equip) than an archer, the battlefield reverses that advantage. For example the slinger sucks for siege warfare (can't really snipe), for tight formations (slings take up alot of space to safely use), for synchronized volleys, and for ROI in training time. This make "slingers" as a cohesive war unit less effective than archers.
If the sling were to be remade accurately, it would be a martial weapon which has better range, damage and rate of fire than a bow. However whenever you fire it you threaten all adjacent squares during the spin, potentially delivering attacks of opportunity on friends and foes alike (unmodified rolls only, don't apply attack bonuses. Damage as light flail). It can only be fired from standing, and can't fire while mounted, prone or sitting. Nor can it be fired from an arrow slot or similar 90% cover situations. It would be able to deliver many kinds of ammo, from incendiary (oil) to alchemical to simple chemical (clay pots of blinding chalk powder or burning lye, etc). And of course it can be used with a small shield as is often depicted and as can be demonstrated.
There would be a feat for using a sling while mounted... Mounted Slinger (prerequisite 1 rank in Ride). There were allegedly Scythian cavalry slingers but that would take some special training.
So it's a mixed bag of awesomeness and problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True.
The sword was amazing at killing unarmored and lightly armored foes. But as armor got better, the military of the times had to invent new ways to counter it. Flails and war hammers (with a hook or spike) were quite popular for anti-armor, from what I heard.Getting back to slings...
From all my readings, the sling is actually a superior weapon for an individual in direct open combat. By most accounts it has better range, higher rate of fire and did more damage than a bow.But while a slinger is deadlier (and less expensive to equip) than an archer, the battlefield reverses that advantage. For example the slinger sucks for siege warfare (can't really snipe), for tight formations (slings take up alot of space to safely use), for synchronized volleys, and for ROI in training time. This make "slingers" as a cohesive war unit less effective than archers.
If the sling were to be remade accurately, it would be a martial weapon which has better range, damage and rate of fire than a bow. However whenever you fire it you threaten all adjacent squares during the spin, potentially delivering attacks of opportunity on friends and foes alike (unmodified rolls only, don't apply attack bonuses. Damage as light flail). It can only be fired from standing, and can't fire while mounted, prone or sitting. Nor can it be fired from an arrow slot or similar 90% cover situations. It would be able to deliver many kinds of ammo, from incendiary (oil) to alchemical to simple chemical (clay pots of blinding chalk powder or burning lye, etc). And of course it can be used with a small shield as is often depicted and as can be demonstrated.
There would be a feat for using a sling while mounted... Mounted Slinger (prerequisite 1 rank in Ride). There were allegedly Scythian cavalry slingers but that would take some special training.
So it's a mixed bag of awesomeness and problems.
Yeah, part of the issue with grading and statting up weapons is that not all weapons are good in all situations. Slings, for example, are very good in the hands of a single well-trained individual for small-scale battles (AKA Adventurers) but have a lot of problems when put into army-scale combat. By the same token, adventurers will almost never lug around 15-20 foot long pikes, despite massed pike formations being one of the most effective military formations around until gunpowder got good enough to make them obsolete.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you have a steel sword it's still better than a club at taking out armour.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A thought for people who like making adventure realistic:
You can only carry so much realistically. This doesn't apply well to D&D, but let's step back and consider that statement.
Let's say you're an adventurer and you're about to go on the road. You have a horse with a few saddlebags to carry some extra stuff (rope and what-not I suppose), but we're going to assume you're not carrying your weapons there. You have, therefore:
1. A couple places for useful things on your belt / in belt pouches.
2. A backpack.
3. Your hands.
4. Maybe room for something in your boots?
And that's basically it. So, when we're talking weapons, we need to remember that if we're some dude going on a weird fantasy adventure that's still somehow constrained by realism for what he can carry, then certain things will seem useful. For instance...
If you have a quiver of arrows at your side, it takes up a place where your sword might go, right? (Swords don't get sheathed on your back; it's stupid, don't do it.) But if you have your quiver on your back, you can't really have a big backpack full of goodies; so keep that in mind. And a bow is really something you'd be carrying in your hand - so that takes up one of your hands. That leaves you with room for a one-handed weapon on your belt, perhaps room for a buckler strapped to your belt or a shield dangling from your back (if it was designed with the appropriate strap in mind?).
But let's say you want to carry a big, mean spear instead. And you want a shield to use with that spear, too. Well, you can't just keep a big stabbing spear in a sheath (though maybe if it were a javelin you could make a sort of javelin quiver for it), so you'll have that in hand. If you had it strapped to your back somehow you'd get caught while walking between trees in the forest, or have to take it off before going through a doorway. So: if you have a big spear, you can't realistically carry a longbow.
...but if you have that big spear, you COULD carry a sling. In fact, a sling can be worn like a headband, or wrapped about the wrist, or looped around your belt. It's so small that it's easy to find a place for it somewhere, and ancient slingers DID wear it like a headband at times.
The bullets, however, are a mite bulkier. So, you'll have some bullets or stones in a pouch at your belt; but hey, you have your spear, your shield, and your sling, and probably a knife in your boot or something, too.
But you get the idea: I don't think anyone will sincerely argue that the sling is as valuable as a heavy crossbow or medieval longbow on the battlefield. However, if you're limited in what you can carry or what you can afford, it might make a good backup weapon.
The sling is a cool weapon and I like it a lot in fantasy (I'm building a sling-based warpriest as my next character), but in the real world there's a reason we fight with assault rifles and tanks rather than cavalry and slingers... And in the context of the medieval era, there's a reason the bow and the crossbow were used and the sling generally wasn't.
On a different note, though: if you include a bow, a crossbow, and a sling in the same RPG, please make them all valid choices for characters to use. The only reason the sling is valid right now is because of a combination of Warslinger (halfling specific) and lots and lots of feats (the Startoss Style especially). And people that use crossbows just get laughed at a lot.
EDIT: Also, you can use a sword like a club by grabbing the blade and performing a murderstroke. It works fine for killing dudes in armor.
Well my sling worked really well for my brawler as you probably do not want to blow feats on bow proficiency unless you got it some other way to have a ranged weapon. It does make a good backup ranged weapon for strentgh based brawlers. I just wish there was a way to use rapid reload feat with slings. Also I consider the main cost of sling bullets is the weight even if they are cold iron. Although this becomes worse at higher levels it is an easy way to deal with flying creatures or say ones you cannot reach in melee easily because of say switchback staircases. Quite fun to be able to kill skeletons from afar at low levels with a sling though unless you bought blunt arrows.
if you have your quiver on your back, you can't really have a big backpack full of goodies
I think most adventurers imagine a quiver on their back as well as a backpack. A good adventuring backpack design could leave enough space.
Although if we're going for actual realism, any time you jump with an open quiver, all the arrows are going to fall out.
There are quivers that go other places than your back. I generally envision those for my archer characters. The harder part for me is where they're carrying the strung longbow bow.
It's the permanently loaded crossbows that bother me, ever since the first time I tried one in real life.
There are quivers that go other places than your back. I generally envision those for my archer characters. The harder part for me is where they're carrying the strung longbow bow.It's the permanently loaded crossbows that bother me, ever since the first time I tried one in real life.
Why? Just like guns, they can have a safety. With the safety it won't shoot that bolt while its on your back or whatever.
Not too mention the fact that the crossbow string would loosen over time, becomeing worthless, if constantly stretched into the pull position.
I think you're backwards there. Whacking someone with the flat of a sword blade would in no way injure them as much as a solid whack with a club. Awkwardness in handling, wind resistance, and spreading the impact over a (relatively) large flat surface aren't working in your favor.
I never said to use the flat of the blade. In fact, I'm pretty sure I referenced "narrower area" (than a club) and "dulling the blade."
How on earth did you infer that I was suggesting bludgeoning someone with the flat of the blade?
Although if we're going for actual realism, any time you jump with an open quiver, all the arrows are going to fall out.
I don't think that's necessarily the case (unless you believe Lars Anderson and how he tries to make comic-recreations of what it's like to have a back quiver and insists there's only one true way of doing archery which is with a low-pull bow being rapidly shot). Mongolian horse-archers seemed to do fine riding on horseback with quivers that didn't spill arrows everywhere, for instance.
Yes, it's something that could happen, but it shouldn't happen every time you jump. I could see it happening as part of a fumble, perhaps?
I never said to use the flat of the blade. In fact, I'm pretty sure I referenced "narrower area" (than a club) and "dulling the blade."
How on earth did you infer that I was suggesting bludgeoning someone with the flat of the blade?
On this particular conversation: Yeah, you could just whack someone in armor with the SHARP of the blade and do just fine. But the murderstroke I linked above exists for a reason: it's effective. Either way, whether performing the murderstroke or just hitting the dude with your sword, you'd be more effective than if you had a regular wooden club with no metal reinforcements.
If you had a mace or morningstar, on the other hand...
Yeah, you could just whack someone in armor with the SHARP of the blade and do just fine. But the murderstroke I linked above exists for a reason: it's effective. Either way, whether performing the murderstroke or just hitting the dude with your sword, you'd be more effective than if you had a regular wooden club with no metal reinforcements.
If you had a mace or morningstar, on the other hand...
Definitely.
There was an incident in the Peloponnesian war when a large group of youths with slings wiped out a unit of heavily armored soldiers, because the soldiers simply could never get close enough. I doubt it was a unique incident. But noble historians prefer not to record such events.
I think shepherds used slings to drive off wild dogs and such. Also slings are good for casual hunting of small game without risking costly ammunition. It's easy enough to lose arrows in the woods. I frequently give humanoids and ogres slings, just because it seems like something they would have.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kind of odd that the sling, which took significant training to even be able to fire properly, is a simple weapon and the firearm, which you can learn to use with reasonable proficiency in half an hour, is exotic.
The Simple/Martial/Exotic division has always been massively arbitrary. Slings are almost certainly simple not because of the training time, but because they're traditionally seen as a peasant weapon. Firearms are in the exotic category to represent them being relatively new technology.
Still not the most egregious example: that distinction probably goes to stuff like how a normal club is simple, but a club with an asian name is exotic.
how many feats does it take to make a good slinger?ammo drop and juggle load are your bare minimum, unless you're a halfling. They can just exchange their acrobatics bonus for the same effect.
That's just what you need to make more than one attack a round. There's also all the usual feats any character who wants to really focus on ranged combat will want to pick up (Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, etc).
how many feats does it take to make a good slinger?
It depends on if you're a halfling or not.
Now I see why slings are free...Slinger.
Compare the real world price of a basic slingshot (which is free for any halfway competent child) to that of a decent composite bow. which go for prices ranging from $379 to $540 at Sportman's Warehouse.
It stands to reason that the bow should be at least a slightly better weapon.
Now I see why slings are free...Slinger.Compare the real world price of a basic slingshot (which is free for any halfway competent child) to that of a decent composite bow. which go for prices ranging from $379 to $540 at Sportman's Warehouse.
It stands to reason that the bow should be at least a slightly better weapon.
By that logic, a sword made entirely out of gold should be deadlier than one made out of steel, since it's more expensive.
By that logic, a sword made entirely out of gold should be deadlier than one made out of steel, since it's more expensive.Now I see why slings are free...Slinger.Compare the real world price of a basic slingshot (which is free for any halfway competent child) to that of a decent composite bow. which go for prices ranging from $379 to $540 at Sportman's Warehouse.
It stands to reason that the bow should be at least a slightly better weapon.
Have you priced a decent sword lately? It's not far off. :) In the game the price of a sword is more than a peasant would earn in a year.
Not too mention the fact that the crossbow string would loosen over time, becomeing worthless, if constantly stretched into the pull position.
I think you're backwards there. Whacking someone with the flat of a sword blade would in no way injure them as much as a solid whack with a club. Awkwardness in handling, wind resistance, and spreading the impact over a (relatively) large flat surface aren't working in your favor.I never said to use the flat of the blade. In fact, I'm pretty sure I referenced "narrower area" (than a club) and "dulling the blade."
How on earth did you infer that I was suggesting bludgeoning someone with the flat of the blade?
Actually, only if you leave it cocked for days is it bad, a day is considered fine.
After all, crossbows are designed to be cocked for extended periods.
You just have to remember that shooting the bow once a day will cause less wear on it (even if it is to uncock it) then leaving it cocked for days at a time.
how many feats does it take to make a good slinger?
I've been investigating this here, and I find that if you're a halfling it's plenty easy. You basically get the Warslinger racial and you build very similarly to an archer after that (except you get a lot of Startoss Style feats to get extra damage). If you want to use a staff-sling, though, you'll need Weapon Focus (Sling) and the Slipslinger Style feat.
My halfling warpriest build that evolved from this is actually pretty solid - more solid than most archer builds I've seen. But that's partly because the Arsenal Champion is so damned good.
If you're playing a non-halfling, it's a lot harder because you need Juggle Load to make it work. And if you want to use a staff sling, you'd STILL need Slipslinger Style. In fact, a Human Warpriest would have to do this:
Level 1: Weapon Focus (Sling) (bonus warpriest feat), Ammo Drop (human bonus), Juggle Load
JUST to be able to reload a sling as a free action. Which is crappy.
Whereas a Halfling Warpriest at level 1 would do this...
Level 1: Weapon Focus (Sling) (bonus warpriest feat), Point Blank Shot
Thanks to the Warslinger racial trait, the halfling is actually ahead of humans feat-wise when it comes to using a sling. Basically, if you want to use a sling of any kind, play a halfling.
After all, crossbows are designed to be cocked for extended periods.
First I've heard that. I'm no expert in crossbows, so could you please cite some supporting sources?
And if you want to use a staff sling, you'd STILL need Slipslinger Style.
Slipslinger requires you to be a halfling (or more specifically, to have the warslinger racial trait), so non-halflings can never make a sling staff work.
Level 1: Weapon Focus (Sling) (bonus warpriest feat), Ammo Drop (human bonus), Juggle Load
JUST to be able to reload a sling as a free action. Which is crappy.
Well, not quite JUST reload. The two feats give you the ability to load your sling one handed and load slings without provoking, which warslinger doesn't.
So... TWF slings? I guess.