New Weapon: Sling

[Otaku-sempai]

Ok, how about this:

"Unspecified Primitive Ranged Weapon"
Uses Dagger Skill
Damage: 3
Edge: G
Injury: 12
Encumbrance: 0
No Called Shots
Fluff as desired.

(Falenthal and I are fluffing it as "Sling")

Also, I would argue it takes a great deal of practice, not training.

I would never approve of that, but it's not like you need my permission. I would say something about semantics regarding 'practice' and 'training' but you are right--there is a distinction. Point to you.

Starting over, I would list the Sling as an NPC weapon and only give it to a player's character if he really wanted to put the effort into it. But the minimum Damage (and Injury?), before enhancements, might be okay too. Regardless, I would keep my listed called shot. It might end up like this:

Sling
Damage: 3
Edge: G-rune
Injury: 12
Called Shot: Piercing blow regardless of the outcome of the Feat die.
Notes: Ranged weapon (as Bow). Encumbrance rating is 0.

It could be fluffed with up to three Qualities: Grievous (Damage: 5), Keen (Edge: 10), and Fell (Injury 14).

[Glorelendil]

Starting over, I would list the Sling as an NPC weapon and only give it to a player's character if he really wanted to put the effort into it. But the minimum Damage (and Injury?), before enhancements, might be okay too. Regardless, I would keep my listed called shot. It might end up like this:

Sling
Damage: 3
Edge: G-rune
Injury: 12
Called Shot: Piercing blow regardless of the outcome of the Feat die.
Notes: Ranged weapon (as Bow). Encumbrance rating is 0.

Would you ever choose that weapon? (If it's purely an NPC weapon it's fine of course.)

And maybe you would. Maybe you'd be willing to take reduced damage because character concept is more important to you. But I don't think you should have to make that trade-off. One of my design goals is to not penalize players for RP choices. If a player wants to use a sling rather than a bow (or a sword rather than an axe, etc.) they shouldn't have to pay a mechanical price for that choice.

This is why I particularly like the Dungeon World system: your damage is determined by class and special abilities, not your weapon type. A Warrior with a frying pan does as much damage as a Warrior with a broadsword.

[Otaku-sempai]

Would you ever choose that weapon? (If it's purely an NPC weapon it's fine of course).

Keep in mind that I started with a higher Damage (4) and Injury (14). And I wouldn't guarantee that I wouldn't keep those stats instead or even up the Damage to 5. But those were the base stats for your "Unspecified Primitive Ranged Weapon," minus the called shot.

This is why I particularly like the Dungeon World system: your damage is determined by class and special abilities, not your weapon type. A Warrior with a frying pan does as much damage as a Warrior with a broadsword.

That has no appeal for me at all.

[Glorelendil]

That has no appeal for me at all.

I think we're figuring out the root of the disagreement.

[Otaku-sempai]

I think we're figuring out the root of the disagreement.

What turned me off was that last bit:

A Warrior with a frying pan does as much damage as a Warrior with a broadsword.

Ugh.

Changing topic a bit, I don't think the bow did as much to make the sling obsolete as the crossbow did for both of them. The crossbow is more mechanically complex and requires more maintenance, but it is also powerful and more easy to actually use, just requiring some target practice. Any grunt could be taught to use it in a very short time.

The bow and the sling had their own strengths and could coexist quite well. It's just too bad that Tolkien gave no love to the lowly sling.

[Glorelendil]

What turned me off was that last bit:

A Warrior with a frying pan does as much damage as a Warrior with a broadsword.

Ugh.

In practice very few warriors choose frying pans. But it does mean that they can choose mace, sword, crossbow, lightsaber, rapier, trident, bec-de-corbin or whatever else they want, without worrying "Am I gimping my character by choosing a sub-optimal weapon?"

[aramis]

Adding sling (and staff sling) as a separate slinger skill isn't a big issue... just require it be bought with points.

Including it with dagger is

1. unrealistic — slings are a unique skillset from all the extant skills defined —
2. unbalanced — making dagger into an überskill
3. prone to abuse - because any skilled slinger can make one in 5 minutes from a laced boot

If one wants a slinger, spending 6 of the 10 starting points on sling 2 isn't a big issue. If not, well, they won't be terribly effective. Which should make a reasonable ability cost for the character to be able to make a sling on the fly.

[Glorelendil]

prone to abuse - because any skilled slinger can make one in 5 minutes from a laced boot

What's your concern here? You get weapons you're skilled in for free in TOR, so what's the potential "abuse" if somebody wants to make one? That they'll potentially get an AP point for the Craft test?

As for the realism, "Dagger" already covers Brawling and Throwing attacks, so that particular realism horse is long gone from the barn. And that's because it's not really "Dagger" skill, it's "A Bunch of Lower-Damage Weapons" skill.

I'm not philosophically opposed to creating a new weapon skill, but that pretty much means the new weapons have to be comparable or nobody is going to invest in them. Which is also fine, but adding a weapon that is pretty much like a short bow but is called Sling does not add as much variety to the game as adding Staff and Sling to Dagger...I mean Simple Weapon...skill, but making both weapons relatively weak. I'd like there to be an option for somebody to play a less martial character who is able to use both staff and sling without investing a bunch of XP.

[Otaku-sempai]

As for the realism, "Dagger" already covers Brawling and Throwing attacks, so that particular realism horse is long gone from the barn. And that's because it's not really "Dagger" skill, it's "A Bunch of Lower-Damage Weapons" skill.

Yeah, but those are worded to include improvised weapons, like using a table leg as an impromptu club or missile, not for weapons that you might actually want to train in and practice with. You are trying to use them for everything from a chakram to a quarterstaff to a crossbow; and that was never the intent for those rules.

I'm not philosophically opposed to creating a new weapon skill, but that pretty much means the new weapons have to be comparable or nobody is going to invest in them. Which is also fine, but adding a weapon that is pretty much like a short bow but is called Sling does not add as much variety to the game as adding Staff and Sling to Dagger...I mean Simple Weapon...skill, but making both weapons relatively weak. I'd like there to be an option for somebody to play a less martial character who is able to use both staff and sling without investing a bunch of XP.

But a short bow and a sling are not alike. They may share some common properties, but the short bow launches a piercing attack in the form of an arrow-like bolt or dart; the sling hurls a stone or other shot that produces a ranged crushing or bashing attack. And we can add variety to the sling by hurling other missiles such a grenade of burning oil or even a handful of loose nails or shards. And a staff is basically a spear without a spearhead, used as a two-handed close-combat weapon. It is also nothing like a dagger nor is there any reason why it should be comparatively weak next to similar weapons such as the spear or a long-hafted axe. I've started writing them up as weapons that you might encounter in the hands of an enemy.

Btw, using your formula (and starting from the example of the Troll club), this is how I generated an ordinary club:

Club (Cudgel)
Damage: 4
Edge: 10
Injury: 12
Encumbrance: 1
Called Shot: None
Usable by Hobbits
Part of the 'Dagger' group
Balance: 0

[Falenthal]

I think I remember this conversation from somewhere...

Well, I can only repeat (not really add) that we have different views on:
1) What the Dagger skill (not the weapon!) can include and what not.
2) The purpouse in our games (and for the game itself) of including a quarterstaff and a sling in it: you want variety in the range of killing weapons (correct me if I'm wrong), Glorelendil and myself want variety in character personalization.

A Dagger is not a Sling, nor a Quarterstaff. Nor a fist or a table leg. Yet the game allows to improve your fighting ability with all of them at the same time. We are defending that, following the same logic, other weapons who's lethality is comparable to that of a dagger (not the way it's used or it's techniques) could be inlcuded in the same group.
Of course, our concept of a sling's or quarterstaff's lethality is much lower than yours.
That's ok, we will just have to agree that our stats for the same weapons will never be to each other likings, because we want to achieve different goals with them.
I want a character with a staff and a sling to NOT be in equal terms in a fight with somene with an axe, a sword or a bow. That's quite the contrary to what you're looking for. Again, that precludes us from agreeing on the stats of those weapons from the start on.