New Weapon: Sling

[Glorelendil]

Btw, I've never associated realism with D&D.

Ha! Me, either. Except for the part about Elves being shorter than Humans. Everybody knows Tolkien got that part wrong.

But I was referring to the D&Dism of gear that clearly differs in quality and is restricted only by cost/availability (or sometimes class-restrictions...another terrible model.) I vastly prefer the approach TOR uses: you can have any gear you want, but everything is a trade-off.

The thing I don't like about two different qualities of sling bullets is that there's no trade-off: if you can get the better ones, they are better in every way. That's not how TOR is designed. And then to solve it you have to introduce restricted gear, which still isn't how TOR is designed.

That's why I suggested that adding Encumbrance (to represent the fact that you're lugging them around, rather than picking up stones as you need them) might compensate. But even then I'd make the difference between the types more subtle. Maybe 1 additional point of Damage?

If the decision is easy & obvious that's a good indication that there's a design flaw.

[Otaku-sempai]

If sling ammunition should carry encumbrance then I'm not sure the type would make a difference. Stones would bulk more, but in terms of weight, either would probably be about the same. Either way, a pouch of sling projectiles should not count for more than an Encumbrance of 1.

Perhaps standard, round Sling-stones should be the default and Sling-bullets should be considered to be a result of an upgrade in Quality:
- Grievous (plus 2 to Damage): Larger, heavier projectiles that inflict more harm.
- Keen (Edge is reduced by 1): Shaped in an ellipsoid to be more aerodynamic and deliver better penetration.
- Fell (plus 2 to Injury): Stones have been replaced with denser and more compact iron or lead shot.

It might be that we should settle on one, standardized Range (Bow).

Sling
Damage: 4
Edge: G-rune
Injury: 14
Encumbrance: 0
Group: -
Notes: Ranged weapon. Range is the same as for Bow. On a successful Called Shot, the attack results in a Piercing blow regardless of the outcome of the Feat die.

If this works, should standard Damage be 4 or 5 (upgradable to 6 or 7)? 3 seems too low.

[Glorelendil]

If sling ammunition should carry encumbrance then I'm not sure the type would make a difference. Stones would bulk more, but in terms of weight, either would probably be about the same.

I was basing it off game balance, not realism. You would want bullets to "weigh" more to compensate for their increased damage. But if you need fluff to defend it, it's that you have to carry a lot more bullets because you can't resupply whenever you want.

Either way, a pouch of sling projectiles should not count for more than an Encumbrance of 1.

Exactly why I was suggesting that the damage should only be increased by 1: if it's even 2 more damage it's too obviously worth a point of Encumbrance to get it. (Even at 1:1 I think most people would choose more damage.)

I just realized that the IDEAL culture for this weapon is Beorning: it would give them a much needed ranged weapon for no encumbrance, which is critical for keeping their total Encumbrance at 12 or less.

[Otaku-sempai]

I was basing it off game balance, not realism. You would want bullets to "weigh" more to compensate for their increased damage. But if you need fluff to defend it, it's that you have to carry a lot more bullets because you can't resupply whenever you want.

Not really. The shot doesn't have to weigh more than a standard sling-stone because it is denser and more compact. A bullet of the same weight as a stone can be hurled farther and at greater velocity. Look at how smaller caliber bullets actually have better penetration in water than larger rounds. Using a larger, heavier stone might add the quality of Grievous (although, realistically, it would also decrease the effective range of the sling; but if we settle for a standard range equivalent to Bow, I would overlook that just as I would overlook giving metal bullets a greater range).

I'm thinking giving standard Sling-shot, whether stone or metal, the same Damage rating, saving increases for upgrading the qualities. Or, perhaps as a compromise, simply using a larger stone gives an increase of only one rating.

I just realized that the IDEAL culture for this weapon is Beorning: it would give them a much needed ranged weapon for no encumbrance, which is critical for keeping their total Encumbrance at 12 or less.

Could be, although I wasn't trying to pin-down one specific Culture. The Woses and the Wild Hobbits and the less sophisticated tribes of Dunlendings would also be likely to include slingers. And the odd Bree-lander or an occasional hunter west of the River Lune or trying his luck near Tharbad. As a weapon, the Sling would be a hold-over from the days before the Númenóreans settled in Eriador.

[Glorelendil]

I was basing it off game balance, not realism. You would want bullets to "weigh" more to compensate for their increased damage. But if you need fluff to defend it, it's that you have to carry a lot more bullets because you can't resupply whenever you want.

Not really. The shot doesn't have to weigh more than a standard sling-stone because it is denser and more compact. A bullet of the same weight as a stone can be hurled farther and at greater velocity. Look at how smaller caliber bullets actually have better penetration in water than larger rounds. Using a larger, heavier stone might add the quality of Grievous (although, realistically, it would also decrease the effective range of the sling; but if we settle for a standard range equivalent to Bow, I would overlook that just as I would overlook giving metal bullets a greater range).

Are we having two completely different conversations? This is the second time in a row I feel like my point was totally ignored. Or was that paragraph a reply to a different post?

Or maybe what I wrote is not clear, so I will try again:

I don't care what each bullet actually weighs. It is entirely irrelevant. If you give Bullets higher encumbrance for game balance (not realism) you can justify it by saying "You only have to carry a dozen stones because you can always pick up more, but if you're going to carry bullets you have to carry enough for a whole Adventure, and thus their Encumbrance is higher."

I just realized that the IDEAL culture for this weapon is Beorning: it would give them a much needed ranged weapon for no encumbrance, which is critical for keeping their total Encumbrance at 12 or less.

Could be, although I wasn't trying to pin-down one specific Culture. The Woses and the Wild Hobbits and the less sophisticated tribes of Dunlendings would also be likely to include slingers. And the odd Bree-lander or an occasional hunter west of the River Lune or trying his luck near Tharbad. As a weapon, the Sling would be a hold-over from the days before the Númenóreans settled in Eriador.

I meant "ideal" from a game mechanics point of view, not from historical appropriateness. Nor did I mean it should be specifically a Beorning weapon, just that Beornings gain a very real benefit from a 0-encumbrance ranged weapon.

[Otaku-sempai]

MAGICAL WEAPON

Item: Sling of the Wood-elves

Type: Sling
Craftsmanship: Elven
Banes: Spiders of Mirkwood
Qualities:
1. Biting Dart 2. Superior Keen 3. Sure Shot
Notes: These slings are woven by the Elves of Mirkwood out of the silk of the giant spiders that dwell there. Projectiles launched from them almost seem to deliberately seek out the Wood-elves ancient, arachnid foes.

[Otaku-sempai]

I don't care what each bullet actually weighs. It is entirely irrelevant. If you give Bullets higher encumbrance for game balance (not realism) you can justify it by saying "You only have to carry a dozen stones because you can always pick up more, but if you're going to carry bullets you have to carry enough for a whole Adventure, and thus their Encumbrance is higher."

Are we certain that ammunition is supposed to count towards Encumbrance? Because my impression is that it does not, and so I'm thinking that this is an issue that can be ignored. If I am mistaken then, please, point me in the right direction. I can't find a citation in RAW that addresses this.

I just realized that the IDEAL culture for this weapon is Beorning: it would give them a much needed ranged weapon for no encumbrance, which is critical for keeping their total Encumbrance at 12 or less.

Could be, although I wasn't trying to pin-down one specific Culture. The Woses and the Wild Hobbits and the less sophisticated tribes of Dunlendings would also be likely to include slingers. And the odd Bree-lander or an occasional hunter west of the River Lune or trying his luck near Tharbad. As a weapon, the Sling would be a hold-over from the days before the Númenóreans settled in Eriador.

I meant "ideal" from a game mechanics point of view, not from historical appropriateness. Nor did I mean it should be specifically a Beorning weapon, just that Beornings gain a very real benefit from a 0-encumbrance ranged weapon.[/quote]
Gotcha. I guess the Beornings don't have the best selection of ranged weapons. Not all Beornings share their chieftain's vegetarian eating habits, do they? Do some Beornings hunt? Even if they don't, they could still stand something other than spears for ranged defense.

[zedturtle]

I don't care what each bullet actually weighs. It is entirely irrelevant. If you give Bullets higher encumbrance for game balance (not realism) you can justify it by saying "You only have to carry a dozen stones because you can always pick up more, but if you're going to carry bullets you have to carry enough for a whole Adventure, and thus their Encumbrance is higher."

Are we certain that ammunition is supposed to count towards Encumbrance? Because my impression is that it does not, and so I'm thinking that this is an issue that can be ignored. If I am mistaken then, please, point me in the right direction. I can't find a citation in RAW that addresses this.

I think both your points are whizzing around, like some many slung stones (or bullets).

I think what GE is saying is that realism isn't a reason to ignore Encumbrance as a limiting factor.

I think what OS is saying is that invoking Encumbrance for ammunition is a slippery slope down to 'realism' and +1 modifiers littered all over the place.

I liked the earlier proposed solution of having a Reward that enabled higher damage/better Edge/whatnot and was fluffable in whatever way (heavier stones, metal bullets, etc.)

[Otaku-sempai]

I think what OS is saying is that invoking Encumbrance for ammunition is a slippery slope down to 'realism' and +1 modifiers littered all over the place.

I liked the earlier proposed solution of having a Reward that enabled higher damage/better Edge/whatnot and was fluffable in whatever way (heavier stones, metal bullets, etc.)

Yes, you are correct about my concern over Encumbrance for ammunition. I'm not sure that it is warranted.

And, yes, I am now thinking that one, base version of Sling-shot is the way to go, with modifiers added through Rewards that add Qualities. Unfortunately, the very simplicity of the Sling itself works against fluffing it up without the use of magic. How do you construct a superior Sling? It's just easier to instead add Qualities to the ammo.

[Falenthal]

How do you construct a superior Sling?

With a laser scope and auto-reload ammo cartridge, of course.

Seriously, I think that the idea of a basic sling that can get up to three Qualities (like every other weapon) is better than having two slings.

The reasons why a Sling becomes Fell, Grievous or Keen can be left in the air. I also can't imagine exactly how a Dagger or a Bow can become Grievous, for instance, but don't have a problem with that.

Better ammo, a more elastic leather for the strap, a longer strap so that the stone gains more impulse,... I don't know, whatever you can invent.