Well, if you carefully loaded a spiked ball into your sling and launched it at something, would you expect most of the damage to come from the ball or the spikes on it?
That's the sort of conundrum I had been considering. Say, a baseball bat with a spike in it: what on earth is a combat system to do if it cares about "damage type"?
Yet I keep going back to a lesson I learned when reading GURPS (back in the day when GURPS was new). They classed all the weapons (oh yes, they had rules for way too many things), and they called the bullets fired from a gun "crushing damage." Up to that point I'd thought only of bullets as punching holes in things. Bullets are really tiny. And armor-piercing bullets surely would have to be "piercing," right? But a regular bullet "punches" those holes, after all, instead of "pierces," and the way one defends against a bullet is by treating it like blunt force and constructing armor to match.
So on to the case with a slingstone. (First off, an aside: sling "stones" are also called "bullets.") In this game these are irregular chunks you pick up off of the ground. Unless you can throw them with the precision that a bullet is fired, an "armor-piercing" bit on a rock is going to be unreliable, isn't it?
Even if so . . . there's another issue I've deliberately left ambiguous. A typical "fantasy-game mace" is a rod with spikes on the end. Why spikes? Because they look cool. Historical maces didn't strictly require them. Either way, classic D&D suggested that "clerics follow rules based on their order; for example, some can't use bladed weapons," and in with this system clerics still used spiked maces in the "not-sharp weapons" category. Every game since then seems to agree with this artistic license. So much for understanding baseball bats with nails.
As so, I've left it up to your imagination whether you think of the maces wielded by hoarding wastrels as having spikes on them. It's just not worth it to debate whether a little bit of sharpness changes the rules for them.
In the end, when compared to the clear function of a pick to swing its point into the target, and a sword to run its edge along a target, I'd imagine that when the spinning shale chunk strikes the hydra in the head, tearing apart the eye, it probably did so from the force of the throw itself.
. . .
Right! Could still use a reply from
Bob (magmaholic). And, for that matter, an assertion of action from
Dustan (Dustan Hache) after all that discussion.