# Slings are... wow, really?



## aboyd (May 10, 2011)

Are they _that_ deadly?  I noticed in the Wikipedia page this quote:



> The sling was used for hunting and warfare. One notable use was in Incan resistance against the conquistadors. These slings were apparently very powerful; in _1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus_, historian Charles C. Mann quoted a conquistador, who said that an Incan sling "could break a sword in two pieces" and "kill a horse." Some slings could hurl massive stones and its span could be as much as 86 inches (2.18 m) and could weigh an impressive 14.4 ounces (408g).




The ranges discussed there are also substantially greater than anything I've seen in the D&D books.

I started looking on youtube.com for anything that might back up such a bold assertion, and found some fun things but nothing like video of actual big game being felled by a stone.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWHV2WYdfTI[/ame] This guy has sling stones going 38 meters/second, or about 85 miles per hour.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0icKGs4Ge0[/ame] This video is fun too.  

At slinging.org, they have this interesting quote:



> Its main competitor, the bow, had both a shorter range and slower rate of fire.




Yet in D&D, our stats are all pretty much the opposite: slings are slower than bows or the same, have shorter range, and do less damage.

So what do I hope to gain from this thread?  Well, first, if anyone does work with slings, I'd like to hear more about their effectiveness.  However, secondly and more importantly, I'd like to hear from anyone who knows of sling variants (or variant bullets) in the rules.  So far all I've found is that in the 3rd party Kingdoms of Kalamar book, there is a sling bullet that looks like a golf ball, and has a range 20% greater than normal.

If I really wanted to make slinging deadly, are there variant bullets or slings within the rules that might aid me?  Thanks!

EDIT: here is a really long video that puts the sling to the test.  It seems that great slingers are shockingly accurate & deadly, but only the great ones.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELYea2UDfeY[/ame]


----------



## frankthedm (May 10, 2011)

WFRP2e seemed to treat slings reasonably well. 

Slings in fiction-land often get shortchanged. Suffer The Slings


----------



## Greenfield (May 10, 2011)

So, in game terms, David got a critical hit on a called shot.  Cool!


----------



## Empirate (May 10, 2011)

Ancient history is full of deadly slingers. The Balearic Isles were known for producing deadly slingers who outranged bowmen, could fire more accurately at a distance, and produced a veritable hail of bullets. The Balearics were, in fact, named for their specialty (note the similar wordstem compared to ballistics).


----------



## Ashtagon (May 10, 2011)

I did some statistical analysis a while back.

First, it's worth bearing in mind that the incredible upper ranges of slings are achieved by people who have been practising for a long time (in game terms, spent a feat on boosting range), and are using much lighter ammunition. The smallest slingshots used in the same data had weights of less than 1/10 lb. The 'standard' D&D sling uses ammo of 1/2 lb weight. That will have a much shorter range by virtue of its weight. Indeed, once you eliminate the outliers and eliminate those data points with differently-weighted shot, the D&D sling does in fact correspond in range to the weapon data from that slinging website.

My overall changes to the sling are as follows:

* Create a feat to allow for increased range (+50% to base range with slings, stacks with Far Shot).
* Allow slings to benefit from iterative attacks.
* Allow slings to benefit from either Strength or Wisdom for damage bonuses (this is part of an overall change to projectile weapons generally to grant Wisdom to damage).


----------



## Rhun (May 10, 2011)

Ashtagon said:


> * Allow slings to benefit from either Strength or Wisdom for damage bonuses (this is part of an overall change to projectile weapons generally to grant Wisdom to damage).




Why Wisdom?


----------



## Empirate (May 11, 2011)

Well, the Longbow was supposed to be trained from youth in order to master it. English kings made decrees that said every capable youth must train regularly, and this training was supervised by government officials, because it was considered the only thing that kept England in the war with France.

'Mastering' the Longbow meaning the capability to deliver (non-direct target) volley fire at long range, at a rate of fire of about 6 to 10 in a minute, more under extreme circumstances - but who really carries around that much ammo for a battle? The Longbow required massive strength to use, and massive amounts of training, just to deliver indirect fire support.

So while the Longbow was capable of the things the D&D rules tell us (iterative attacks, for example), that was its peak performance in the hands of specialists.

In D&D, this is simply reflected by needing martial weapon proficiency. So a generic Fighter has apparently trained enough in his downtime to master the Longbow along with the Longsword, Rapier, Greataxe, Kukri, Guisarme, Javelin, Longspear, Heavy Flail, Scimitar, Trident, Greatsword, Warhammer, Lance, and _Scythe_.

Looking at this data, I'd say: needing another feat to be able to use a sling like a pro shouldn't be necessary.


----------



## Greenfield (May 11, 2011)

The law required every able bodied man over the age of 14 to own a longbow and to practice at least 6 hours a week.  And no, there wasn't a government official who supervised the practice sessions.  The local pastor could call the men of the village together to practice, but that was about it.

A pastor in England discovered last year that the law was still on the books, and decided to use it.  She called the men of the town together under that law as part of a church picnic.

The way practice was "enforced" was archery tournaments, with cash prizes.  Think of the famous scene from Robin Hood, if you will.  In a land that was essentially under military occupation (Normans lording it over the Saxons), nobody thought it at all odd that pretty much everyone in sight owned a weapon.  Think about that.

As for the number of arrows used:  There was a cycle referred to as "end to end", where archers gathered the arrows their enemies had fired at them and reused them.  The same arrows flew in both directions.

And the average archer in time of war carried a lot more than the 20 arrows a D&D quiver carries.  At the battle of Agincourt, 5,000 British archers faced 60,000 French knights and infantry.  Outnumbered 12 to 1, the archers pretty much kicked the infantry's ass.  They were the artillery of the age.

There is a Korean archery trick that I saw demonstrated to defeat the "End to end" cycle.  Using a long grooved rod as a guide for the arrow, they can shoot a dart-sized arrow as short as six inches from a standard Korean horse bow.  The rod acts as a guide, and the lightweight projectile takes off at a much higher velocity than the normal arrow, and carries for a much greater range.  They get to plink at enemy forces when the enemy thinks they are safely beyond bowshot, and leave the enemy with arrows they can't fire back.


----------



## Hassassin (May 11, 2011)

Under King Henry VIII in the first half of the 16th century most English peasants were required by law to practice with the longbow. No one over 24 could practice at a range of less than 220 yards (200 m/660 ft.) and practice was regular at least every Sunday.


----------



## Empirate (May 11, 2011)

*Greenfield*, thanks for the great knowledgeable input, I appreciate it! I love me some historical debate!

Therefore, here's some minor nitpicks from a historian: Azincourt might have been a lot closer in numbers. Recent research puts the numbers as close as 6,000 to 9,000. Personally, I believe the numeric gap to be greater, maybe up to a 1:3, but certainly not 1:12.
Even bodkin arrows cannot pierce good steel (which most of the French were wearing) at other than point blank range, so the mighty Longbow cannot have won that battle on its own. The exaggerated numbers are mostly due to (English) chroniclers - to exaggerate numbers is a normal tendency of the period.

Also, by 1415, Normans didn't lord it over Saxons anymore. The nation that had been made up of those two groups had long before fused into Englishness. The most recent studies put that fusion at around 1200 at the latest.


----------



## Greenfield (May 11, 2011)

Thanks for the historical update.

As for the fusion:  The Robin Hood legend is said to have roots in a particular individual, but it is still a legend.

Timing of the tales would place it in the late 1100s to early 1200s though, considering the people involved:  The "Evil Prince John" of Robin Hood fame later became the unloved King John the 1st, who signed the Magna Carta in 1215.

The Normans were, of course, from Normandy, and Richard is said to have spoken French better than he spoke English, due to the influence of his French mother.  The same is said of John (no matter how delightful the English accent of Claude Raines who played him in the famous movie.)

As for the longbow against heavy armor:  If only the French had thought to armor their horses as thoroughly as they did themselves...    Having your horse fall while at a full charge can kill a man, and having it land on you can do much the same.

Also note that the heaviest armor we have from the age was actually tournament armor, rather than field plate.  Tournament armor was heavier, specifically to resist the lance.  This was the stuff that caused tales to be told of knights needing ladders or winches to hoist them into the saddle, and of men who, once down, were as helpless as turtles on their backs.  (Not entirely true, but an indicator of the difference.)  Not something a man could or would wear for battles that may last days, and campaigns that might last for months.

<edit>Not an historian, not pretending to be, and I'm sure your knowledge tops mine.  I'm just a gamer, with thte normal gamer's interest in the period.</edit>


----------



## Celebrim (May 11, 2011)

In my game, both slings and longbows are Exotic Weapons, reflective of the long time required to become skilled in such powerful but difficult to use weapons.

Slings rock.  

In fantasy games, they are likely to rock even harder once the slinger realizes he can manufacture exotic or magical ammunition relatively easily.


----------



## FoxWander (May 12, 2011)

Greenfield said:


> There is a Korean archery trick that I saw demonstrated to defeat the "End to end" cycle.  Using a long grooved rod as a guide for the arrow, they can shoot a dart-sized arrow as short as six inches from a standard Korean horse bow.  The rod acts as a guide, and the lightweight projectile takes off at a much higher velocity than the normal arrow, and carries for a much greater range.  They get to plink at enemy forces when the enemy thinks they are safely beyond bowshot, and leave the enemy with arrows they can't fire back.




Do you have a link to more info about this?  It sounds interesting.


----------



## Greenfield (May 12, 2011)

It was a live demo I attended in person.  There's an archery class/club at a local park, and I shoot there once in a while.

So sorry, I don't have a link.  I'll ask the name of the guide stick next time I see the archer who did the demo.  Neither of us show up every week, so...


----------



## Tovec (May 12, 2011)

Keep in mind I haven't read the other posts on this thread, otherwise...

Well I believe the slings shown in those videos were "War Slings" found in the races of the wild.

The "war slings" are..
5gp, 1d6 (s) dmg, 1d8 (m) dmg, X4 crit, 50 range increment 
Whereas regular "slings"
free, 1d3 (s), 1d4 (m), x2 crit, 50 range increment 

The latter is a simple weapon whereas the former is exotic. Meaning the GOOD version of the weapon is something that takes extensive training and pretty kickass, and the crappy one is a strip of cloth throwing rocks.


----------



## Mystic Lemur (May 12, 2011)

50' still seems a little short on the war sling. Maybe up it to 75'.

Do slings not get iterative attacks? I always played that they did. A sling bullet can't be any slower to pull and load than an arrow.


----------



## FoxWander (May 12, 2011)

According to the rules, slings require a move action to reload- so no iterative attacks.


----------



## aboyd (May 12, 2011)

Thanks Tovec!  Here are some other things I've found.

Miniatures Handbook

Bullet of Sound: +1 sling bullet, 1d8 sonic damage to all within a 10' radius, save or be stunned for 1 round.  Price 196 gp.

Kingdoms of Kalamar

Sculpted shot: looks like an iron golf ball, as normal sling bullet except +20% range.  Price 4 sp.

Dragon Compendium

Flashstone: upon striking, in a 15' burst, save or be blinded for 1 round, plus lingering penalty to Spot & Search.  It doesn't appear to do any normal damage.  Price 30 gp.

(Right next to the Flashstone is the Firestone.  It doesn't say that it can be used with a sling, but it has similar text otherwise.  It's 1d6 fire damage to the square/person it strikes, plus ignites flammable materials.  Price 50 gp.)

Complete Scoundrel

Powdered Silver: 1d6 "silver" damage (only harms those who have DR that is overcome by silver), save or be sickened 1 round.  Price 20 gp.

Liquid Sunlight: 1d6 damage to vampires & those harmed by daylight, has a torch-like radiance for 1 round after striking.  Any creatures with light sensitivity are dazzled for 1 round if struck.  Price 20 gp.

Ferrous Aqua: 1d6 "cold iron" damage (only harms those who have DR that is overcome by cold iron), save or be sickened 1 round.  Price 20 gp.

Rust Cube: if it strikes a metal object (including worn armor), the object takes 1d6 points of damage (ignoring hardness), plus an additional 1d6 points of damage each round for the next 2 rounds.

Planar Handbook

Elemental Loadstone: 2d6 bludgeoning damage on a successful hit, but range increment of only 10' because the rock is very dense (weighs 50 pounds or so).

Magic Item Compendium

Explosive Sling: +1 sling, deals normal bullet damage plus extra 2d6 points of fire damage to target (no save).  Creatures within 10 must save or also take 2d6 points of fire damage.  Price 36,300 gp.

Stunshot Sling: +1 sling. 3x/day, save or be stunned for 1 round.  Price 7,800 gp.

Blight Stone: sling bullet, must hit as a ranged touch attack, deals no damage but creates a 10' radius cloud, dealing 5d6 points of damage to plant life (save for half).  Price 300 gp.

Glitter Stone: ranged touch attack, explodes in a 10' radius burst, invisible creatures become visible for 3 rounds.  Price 450 gp.

Stench Stone: Any living creature struck becomes nauseated for 1 round, target exudes a stench for 3 rounds that causes all creatures within 10 feet to be sickened.  Price 300 gp.

I love all this stuff, but only Sculpted Shot and Tovec's war sling appear to be non-magical.  Maybe that's good enough, though I was hoping for more.

Oh, FoxWander & Mystic Lemur, I always ran my games in such a way that the Quick Draw feat would allow a PC to attack at full BAB with a sling.  I have no idea if other DMs would allow that.  I suppose some probably already allow full BAB attacks, not realizing the details of the sling rules, and I suppose some DMs would completely disallow full BAB even with Quick Draw.  Since the sling appears to be underpowered when matched with what we see in our own real-world history, I'd be hopeful that a Quick Draw ruling would suffice.  It really seems to need help to come up to snuff.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (May 12, 2011)

Iirc *From Stone to Steel* might have a little about different mundane sling bullets (eg, stone, clay, lead), as well as different sized shot, and multiple shot.  I think it also mentions slingstaffs?


----------



## Ashtagon (May 12, 2011)

Empirate said:


> Looking at this data, I'd say: needing another feat to be able to use a sling like a pro shouldn't be necessary.




Just to be clear, my conclusion from analysing real-world data is that 50 feet is a realistic range for a competent slinger (ie has "weapon proficiency"). That feat I homebrewed to add 50% to the range is to bring slinging into the realms of the fantastical. It reflects the ranges that can be achieved when using a shot that is about 1/10 the weight of the shot the game statistics use, _without_ a corresponding loss of damage.

Someone else asked why Wisdom to damage. It's because it reflects the idea of being able to perceive weak spots more accurately. All ranged weapons get Wisdom to damage in my house rules. Mighty bows and slings get a choice of Wisdom _or_ Strength (not both) to damage.


----------



## Jhaelen (May 12, 2011)

I always liked slings in the Runequest rpg.

Initially I was a bit surprised they count as an impaling weapon, but after some research I understood why. Slings were particularly nasty when used by trolls who chew 'bolgs' (a lead coin; the troll currency) and use them as sling bullets...

So, yes, slings in D&D are underestimated.


----------



## Mark CMG (May 12, 2011)

Ashtagon said:


> Someone else asked why Wisdom to damage. It's because it reflects the idea of being able to perceive weak spots more accurately. All ranged weapons get Wisdom to damage in my house rules. Mighty bows and slings get a choice of Wisdom _or_ Strength (not both) to damage.





Based on the premise of allowing Wisdom as a damage bonus choice based on finding weak spots, why would non-ranged weapons be any different?  Also, why not Intelligence instead of Wisdom?


----------



## Greenfield (May 12, 2011)

Question:  What is the issue with using slings at full BAB?  I've read the rules and there doesn't appear to be any limit or penalty on BAB.

Loading one is a move action, so you're limited to one shot per round, but actually drawing the ammo is a free action, according to RAW.  I'd be more inclined to extend Rapid Reload to slings to allow for multiple shots than I would Quick Draw.  Seems more appropriate.


----------



## FoxWander (May 12, 2011)

Greenfield said:


> Question:  What is the issue with using slings at full BAB?  I've read the rules and there doesn't appear to be any limit or penalty on BAB.
> 
> Loading one is a move action, so you're limited to one shot per round, but actually drawing the ammo is a free action, according to RAW.  I'd be more inclined to extend Rapid Reload to slings to allow for multiple shots than I would Quick Draw.  Seems more appropriate.




Well, there isn't a limit/penalty to BAB. By "full BAB", I think aboyd just meant getting the multiple attacks from high BAB.

Rapid Reload does seem more applicable for getting iterative attacks with a sling.  Even though by RAW it's limited to crossbows, that feat at least seems to be aimed at mitigating the complicated actions of reloading which would be what makes loading a sling a move action- just as it is with a crossbow. Since pulling out ammo is already a free action, Quick Draw seems less applicable. Although, some DMs (like aboyd) might allow Quick Draw to work simply because it's a more taken/popular feat so it lessens the feat investment to make slings more effective- something most posters in this thread (myself included) seem to think they should be.


----------



## Ashtagon (May 12, 2011)

Mark CMG said:


> Based on the premise of allowing Wisdom as a damage bonus choice based on finding weak spots, why would non-ranged weapons be any different?  Also, why not Intelligence instead of Wisdom?




Wisdom because that is the ability score that Spot/Perception is keyed off, and it plays very well into the David (religiously-inspired (ie Wisdom) warrior) vs Goliath trope.

It's basically there because ranged weapons by RAW don't have any ability score bonus to damage, and this gimps ranged weapons just as much as not having iterative attacks. As for why melee weapons shouldn't have this, it's an arbitrary balance thing.

If you don't like it, don't play that house rule.


----------



## Greenfield (May 12, 2011)

Ashtegon said:
			
		

> It's basically there because ranged weapons by RAW don't have any  ability score bonus to damage, and this gimps ranged weapons just as  much as not having iterative attacks. As for why melee weapons shouldn't  have this, it's an arbitrary balance thing.



???wtf???

Slings and hurled weapons add Strength bonus to damage, and normal bows can be made extra heavy for this purpose (i.e. "Mighty" bows).  And that's right our of the RAW, no house rule needed.


----------



## Ashtagon (May 12, 2011)

Greenfield said:


> ???wtf???
> 
> Slings and hurled weapons add Strength bonus to damage, and normal bows can be made extra heavy for this purpose (i.e. "Mighty" bows).  And that's right our of the RAW, no house rule needed.




Well, the sling is gimp by virtue of not having iteratives. The "mighty" bow has a gp cost that is excessive compared to any equivalent-damage melee weapon. Not a problem for PCs (I cheerfully admit the mighty longbow is the only ranged weapon worth owning under RAW), but it makes NPC militia unbelievable as threats. The regular bow is gimped by not having a damage bonus. And the crossbow is gimped by having neither iteratives nor damage bonuses.

Run the figures some time. You'll be astonished at just how weak ranged weapons actually are in D&D.


----------



## Mark CMG (May 13, 2011)

Ashtagon said:


> Wisdom because that is the ability score that Spot/Perception is keyed off, and it plays very well into the David (religiously-inspired (ie Wisdom) warrior) vs Goliath trope.
> 
> It's basically there because ranged weapons by RAW don't have any ability score bonus to damage, and this gimps ranged weapons just as much as not having iterative attacks. As for why melee weapons shouldn't have this, it's an arbitrary balance thing.





I see.




Ashtagon said:


> If you don't like it, don't play that house rule.





People ask questions when someone makes a rules change.  Everyone knows that if they don't like a house rule they don't need to use it.  Don't be defensive.  It's unnecessary.


----------



## aboyd (May 13, 2011)

FoxWander said:


> Although, some DMs (like aboyd) might allow Quick Draw to work simply because it's a more taken/popular feat so it lessens the feat investment to make slings more effective- something most posters in this thread (myself included) seem to think they should be.



I honestly don't care which feat gets used, and hearing about the nuances of rules interpretation here, I'd probably go with Rapid Reload too.  My thought is merely that I want slings to have a shot at full BAB multiple attacks, and however we get there is fine (even a new custom feat), so long as the level of investment is the same _or less_ than it is for crossbows & the like.  

(Also, wow, I found what I was looking for.  The Ultimate Equipment Guide 1 & 2 have natural/chemical/mechanical slings that provide extra damage without magic!  Maybe in a little while I'll type up a summary here, just to keep this thread as my catch-all for sling awesomeness.  Yay.)


----------



## Ashtagon (May 13, 2011)

Mark CMG said:


> I see.
> 
> People ask questions when someone makes a rules change.  Everyone knows that if they don't like a house rule they don't need to use it.  Don't be defensive.  It's unnecessary.




Fair enough. It's just that every time I mention that specific house rule, far too many people go lolwut, without taking time to do the maths on just how badly-off ranged weapons actually are. It's reached the point where I'm no longer really interested in even mentioning it because of the storm it generates. It's also a separate tangent, since it's part of my general house rules, not a sling-specific change.

Does anyone have any comments on sling-specific house rules (feat for extra range, and free reload actions)?

ETA: For anyone interested, here are a couple of older threads on this topic:

Concussion from the Skies (sling fix, need help) - Giant in the Playground Forums
Ranged weapon fixes - Giant in the Playground Forums

And here is a comparison of my home-brewed weapon damages, followed by the RAW weapon damages (assumptions are that character has +3 ability score bonus to damage where relevant at 1st level, with an additional +1 each additional level). Sorry for the formatting. I'll try to clean it later.


```
House Rules
                 BAB+1    BAB+6    BAB+11    BAB+16
Mighty longbow    8.5      15.833    21.       25.3  (also applies to most d10 weapons)
longbow           7.5      14.167    19.       23.1  (also applies to most d8 weapons)
short bow         6.5      12.5      17.       20.9  (also applies to most d6 weapons)
sling             5.5      10.833    15.       18.7  (also applies to most d4 weapons)
hand crossbow     6.5       7.5       8.5       9.5
light crossbow    8.5       9.5      10.5      11.5
heavy crossbow   12.       13.       14.       15.

SRD version
comp. longbow     7.5      14.167    19.       23.1  
longbow           4.5       7.5       9.        9.9  
comp shortbow     6.5      12.5      17.       20.9  
shortbow          3.5       5.833     7.        7.7  
sling             5.5       6.5        7.5      8.5  
hand crossbow     2.5       4.167     5.        5.5  (assumes character has iteratives from Rapid Reload)
light crossbow    4.5       7.5       9.        9.9  (assumes character has iteratives from Rapid Reload)
heavy crossbow    5.5       5.5       5.5       5.5  (halve these numbers without Rapid Reload feat)
```


----------



## Celebrim (May 13, 2011)

Ashtagon said:


> Does anyone have any comments on sling-specific house rules (feat for extra range, and free reload actions)?




I'm fine with them. 

As I said before, I do something slightly different.  However, mechanically what I do amounts to almost the same thing.

Under my rules, the sling begins with extended range and the ability to use iterative attacks like a bow.   However, using one proficiently requires purchasing an Exotic Weapon proficiency.   Because the weapon is 'small' you can also use it with a shield.  It therefore makes an excellent skirmisher type weapon once you invest in it.

So you get an effective weapon at the cost of a feat.

Under your rules you can use a sling without spending a feat, but its not that great... it's just not great in different ways than under my rules.   However, if you spend a feat you get an effective weapon.

Both seem reasonable to me.   And its just different details of how you implement the basic idea of 'if you train with this extensively, it gets awesome'.  

Personally, I try to avoid 'turret strategies'.  If you upgrade ranged weapons too much, you create a situation where if the party invests heavily in ranged attack capability, it never need worry about the tactical situation - it has an answer for everything.  For that reason, I'm skeptical about the utility of upgrade missile weapons too much.   Missile weapons will frequently have absolute tactical advantages over melee weapons.  If they are comparable in other regards, then melee becomes pointless (see virtually all martial combat since the early 19th century).


----------



## Rhun (May 13, 2011)

Ashtagon said:


> but it makes NPC militia unbelievable as threats.




NPC "militia" is not generally going to have a high enough Wisdom to gain any sort of damage bonus under your rule either, because they are like to have a 10 Wisdom. Unless all of your militia are "enlightened" more so than the average commoner.



Ashtagon said:


> Run the figures some time. You'll be astonished at just how weak ranged weapons actually are in D&D.




I've got a dedicated archer in a game that consistently out-damages every other character in the party. So, it all depends on your build.


----------



## Celebrim (May 13, 2011)

Rhun said:


> I've got a dedicated archer in a game that consistently out-damages every other character in the party. So, it all depends on your build.




I once hosted a campaign where the whole party created optimized range combat builds backed up with spell caster battlefield control and proceded to machine gun everything I threw at them in almost perfect safety.  The only thing that ever touched them was opponnents with ranged attacks or battlefield control.  Nothing else lived long enough to present a real threat.


----------



## Greenfield (May 13, 2011)

I run NPC militia archers as area effect damage.  That is, they mass fire and rain pain down into a general area.  Exact size of the are depends on the number of archers, and the base damage is tied to their level (as they are better able to concentrate fire.)  Then do damage as base - AC of the target, Reflex Save for half.

It's so much easier than trying to roll 50 attacks.


----------



## FoxWander (May 13, 2011)

Rhun said:


> I've got a dedicated archer in a game that consistently out-damages every other character in the party. So, it all depends on your build.




Could you post a run-down of that characters feats and such, please?  Ranged PCs in my games always seem to be not so great and wind up regretting going in that direction.


----------



## Celebrim (May 13, 2011)

FoxWander said:


> Could you post a run-down of that characters feats and such, please?  Ranged PCs in my games always seem to be not so great and wind up regretting going in that direction.




Scout + Ranger + Swift Hunter + Improved Skirmish + Manyshot seems to be very popular. 

Elven Clerics with the Elf Domain.

Psionic Warrior or Fighter + Order of the Bow Initiate or Peerless Archer 

Paladin+Kensai archer builds also seem to be popular.

Factotum + Fighter + Zen Archery 

I'm sure there are alot of possibilities many of which I've never heard of.

I've seen optimized builds with theoretical average damage at 20th level of 400+/round.   Really, only 70-100 per round per character is sufficient for a party to take down pretty much anything in the game with little or no risk.   The heavily optimized builds probably could solo encounters at thier character level.   It gets even worse if the player realizes just how broken the hide/spot interaction is under RAW.


----------



## Rhun (May 13, 2011)

I'm sure somebody can make a much more optimized built than this, but this PC is fun to play and rocks all on his own. Order of Bow Initiate is a "sup-par" prestige class that I took solely for the close combat shot class feature. Generally he uses Rapid Shot (from ranger fighting style) + Woodland Archer.

He generally inflicts 30-40 points of damage per round (much more to giants, as he has a giant bane bow and giants as a favored enemy...what can I say, we're playing through Against the Giants). Next level he'll take the Ranged Weapon Mastery feat, which will boost that even more.

Wood Elf Male - Ranger 2 / Fighter 4 / Order of Bow Initiate 2

FEATS
1st Level: Point Blank Shot
3rd Level: Precise Shot
Fighter 1: Weapon Focus (Composite Longbow)
Fighter 2: Woodland Archer
6th Level: Manyshot
Fighter 4: Weapon Specialization (Composite Longbow)


----------



## kitcik (May 13, 2011)

I don't do archer PCs, but people have pointed out to me this and this.


----------



## Ashtagon (May 15, 2011)

If you find yourself with a party of PC shooter builds that routinely mow down enemies, then it's possible you aren't giving them appropriate challenges.

Shooters are best challenged by either enemy shooters. This really should be their standard approach if PCs are shooting back all the time, unless intentionally playing them stupid. The PCs aren't the first kids to have discovered archery, and they won't be the last either.

If the monsters have to be melee types, they should still be played intelligently. In an open field, they are going to know they will be beaten by archers, and will plan accordingly. They are either going to find a better place to launch an ambush from, or build an ambush point. They are monsters, not idiots.

The other thing that will challenge shooter builds is terrain. Decent ranged weapons aren't much good indoors, due to close encounter distances. Low ceilings also mess with archery ranges very effectively -- I impose a maximum range of two range increments per 10 feet of ceiling clearance, half that for thrown weapons (this is a hard limit, imposed by the physics of archery). Forests should also impose significant penalties on ranged attacks due to low branches -- halve or even quarter the range increment value.

But giving a party of ranged specialists melee enemies in an open field is just so one-sided it isn't even a real challenge.


----------



## Celebrim (May 15, 2011)

Ashtagon said:


> If you find yourself with a party of PC shooter builds that routinely mow down enemies, then it's possible you aren't giving them appropriate challenges.




This presumes that a DM is supposed to tailor his challenges to the skills and abilities of the PC party.  

I don't concur.

I do concur that monsters that are intelligent should be played intelligently.  I'm will to stack my ability to play a monster intelligently against pretty much anyones.  Nonetheless, I don't design encounters according to what I think is necessary to challenge the PC's.  I design encounters according to what I think is the game reality.  Locks don't increase their difficulty when a PC takes skill focus.  Monsters across the world don't take additional archery skills just because the PC's are good at negating melee attacks.  Monsters won't have Energy Resistance (Electricity) up just because the spellcaster is an air elementalist.  The monsters will act and plan according to what they know, but I don't metagame versus the players.



> But giving a party of ranged specialists melee enemies in an open field is just so one-sided it isn't even a real challenge.




Yes, but I found that under the stock rules, to a missile specialized party, the terrain was largely irrelevant except in extreme cases like a burrowing creature tunneling into a small room such that every place you could stand was in the monsters reach.  The 5' step rule and things like multishot made it simply too easy for an archer build to remain in melee range and still out damage a melee attacker.  Melee attackers could do some slightly convoluted things like attempt to sunder the bows or take ready actions, but doing so required oppurtunity and planning to do so reduced their options and tended to have costs in the all important action economy.  

Melee attackers are much more terrain dependent:

a) Attacker is beyond an obstacle like a moat: Missile just shoots over it.  Melee needs a tactical plan.
b) Attacker is at range: Missile just exchanges shots.  Melee needs a tactical plan.
c) There is difficult, perhaps slippery, and maybe dangerous terrain between the attacker and the party: Missile just shoots over it.  Melee needs a tactical plan.
d) Attacker is flying: Missile just does its normal thing.  Melee may be screwed.
e) Attacker is in a defensive position: Missile just fires into it.  Melee may be screwed.

In short, my experience with the game is that if you make missile comparable to melee in outcome, all you've really done is obseleted melee.


----------

