Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pranqstr" data-source="post: 7147556" data-attributes="member: 6890806">I've played various versions of (A)D&D over the years, everything but 4th ed. And the slings could keep up with shortbows and even have a greater range, well, sling stones (1d4 damage) had about the same range as a bow, and the sling bullet had a greater range (1d4+1 damage). I started playing 5e and noticed the damage is 1d4, and range is pretty pathetic. damage and range is the same as a hand crossbow, and WotC have created feats to make the hand crossbow a much more dangerous weapon, but not the sling. I know, the crossbowmaster feat could easily be changed to sling master, but the sling actually has a bigger place in history, and i'm sure in fantasy history to, slings are great for areas which have poor resources - arrows and bows are expensive and require more resources. I was told by a DM I was discussing it with, the game designers are a bit elitist and no one wants a sling. I do. And I think a sling of fire could be more fun than a bow of fire... Here is the message I sent asking for clarification:I noticed the range and damage of a sling is much lower than historical standards. In previous game editions the sling was 1d4 with stones and 1d4+1 with lead bullets. The range in older editions was greater than 5e, especially with lead bullets.  Is the 1d4 damage and shortish range for stones? What about lead bullets (1d4+1 or 1d6, perhaps and 80/350 range)?  After reading this article, I can understand why the short range of stones. Grabbing stones from the same area, produced weights from 105grams to 160grams, it would be hard to aim anything with a greater than 50% difference in ammo weight. But if you were careful and consistant, you could get shortbow range, I would think. <a href="http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/sling.html" target="_blank">http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/sling.html</a> The average stone density (in grams/cm^3) is 2.6 to 2.8 (rarely do they get above 3.0), but lead is 11.34. So a greater density will hold velocity longer, but require more force to launch. The slingers from Balearic islands and Rhodes were well know as being able to out distance Roman shortbows, with stones. The lead bullets had an even greater distance. [SUB]<a href="http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/military-history/ancient-weapons-the-sling/" target="_blank">http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/military-history/ancient-weapons-the-sling/</a>[/SUB] Yes, the slingers had a lot of training, but so did (real) Viking swordsman or English archers. Discuss?</blockquote>

Verification