Pathfinder 1E Slashing Damage Arrows?

[Keldin]

As near as I can tell, there are no arrows that do slashing damage, at least none from Pathfinder sources only (as opposed to the one in Races of the Wild).

I figured I'd try one last-ditch effort and ask here: are there any arrows that do slashing damage? Pathfinder sources only, please?

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

I did some digging, no sign of Pathfinder slashing arrows.

There is some debate about this online, but by RAW, the Weapon Versatility feat should allow you to do this.
Here is the Discussion.

 

[Puxido]

What about making a custom arrow? They have a few arrow types I know of, even smoke arrows, why not make your own?

Guillotine arrow: An arrow made for slicing damage, in the shape of a guillotine as its head. Acts in every way as a common arrow but trades piercing damage for slicing damage. You take a -2 from your attack roll for it's inaccuracy.

 

[Starfox]

Not quoting rules, I see no reason why you could not make slashing arrows, but they would lose a great deal of effectiveness. I think Puxido's proposed rule above is overly generous, tough I'd not reduce accuracy and only damage and crit multiple, say 1d4/x2. Or make them improvised weapons, with a -4 to hit. This is based on how weapons in Pathfinder work; they don't have an accuracy rating unless they are improvised.

 

[Puxido]

Not quoting rules, I see no reason why you could not make slashing arrows, but they would lose a great deal of effectiveness. I think Puxido's proposed rule above is overly generous, tough I'd not reduce accuracy and only damage and crit multiple, say 1d4/x2. Or make them improvised weapons, with a -4 to hit. This is based on how weapons in Pathfinder work; they don't have an accuracy rating unless they are improvised.

Personally I thought that was overly harsh, I don't see why a slashing arrow would actually lose accuracy, I haven't ever shot one before, I could find a video for reference. I also don't see how it would lose its effectiveness? What advantage does piercing have over slashing?

 

[Starfox]

An arrow has very low impact, and energy. What damage it does comes from wounding and bleed. If you spread the impact od an arrow over a wider area, as you have to do to make it slashing, it is barely capable of percing skin, let alone armor.

 

[concerro]

An arrow has very low impact, and energy. What damage it does comes from wounding and bleed. If you spread the impact od an arrow over a wider area, as you have to do to make it slashing, it is barely capable of percing skin, let alone armor.

Good point. PF has not official slashing arrows. I think 3.5 had them. They were 3 to 5 gp IIRC. The still had the sharp point, but also had blades on the end. I dont know how that would work in real life.

Off-topic: They also had magic arrow that sold for about 130 gp per arrow that would stick in you. If you pulled them out or you were cured that would force the arrow out, but it did 1d8 on the way out per arrow.

 

[Puxido]

We all have good points here, but I think this video will give us more knowledge onto this subject.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cJ-EhLjjxI

 

[Starfox]

Nice video. The line at which a wide-point arrow becomes a slashing weapon is subject to debate, but sure, some of the widest ones are surely slashing. They work well enough against the soft watermelon, but even the pinapple gives them problems - imagine a ribcage, coated in chainmail or a dragon haunch covered in scales.

 

[gamerprinter]

To me an arrow no matter what it's head configuration is a direct fire piercing only weapon. I know some hunting arrow tips are blade like, but its still fired in a straight line. There is no arc swing that could cause slashing damage because its a direct fire weapon. I could see a non-pointy, weighted arrow tip cause bludgeoning damage, as the only possible alternative to piercing damage. A different, more "blade-y" arrow tip doesn't change trajectory, nor the direct fire nature of archery, so to me "slashing" is an impossible quality for any arrow - no matter what (it shouldn't be possible to have one).