BB, you have my hackles up based on an arrogant tone of presentation, among other things, so I am going to work dilligently to remain civil during my participation in this thread.
Geebuz go talk to the marine drill sergeants who train their soldiers this way. Sheesh.
I'm going to rewrite this for you, to correct some errors.
Geebuz go talk to the [M]arine drill [instructors] who train their [Marines] this way.We aren't soldiers – we are Marines. Overly touchy? -shrug- That's who and what we are – there's a difference. And the word is capitalized, thanks. Nor do we have “drill sergeants” - we have drill instructors.
Becoming a soldier is not about learning how to shoot. It's about learning how to shoot while someone is shooting back at you.
No, it really IS about learning how to shoot. The two weeks of Boot Camp we spent at the rifle range were the -calmest- and least stressful two weeks out of the thirteen. They weren't teaching us to shoot under stress – they were teaching us to SHOOT. Some of our guys had never even held a rifle before. Theoretically, School of Infantry would have been where we learned to shoot under stress. Can't speak to that, since HQ, 4thMarDiv screwed up orders for 10 of us and we missed it. A moving target at the same range as a fixed target is a whole different animal, though.
However, accuracy with thrown weapons falls off faster as well. So the five range increments rule used for other ranged weapons doesn't make sense for thrown weapons either.
Errrrr... Hunh? If accuracy falls off faster with thrown weapons, they should have fewer range increments than other ranged weapons. (leaving off the fact that projectile weapons have ten increments rather than the five of thrown weapons) So these two sentences contradict themselves.
Within one day of practice they were reliably hitting targets the size of a human chest at 25 feet repeatedly with knives and axes.
Congrats to them – they are now (sorta) proficient with an exotic weapon. (Yes, it is exotic to them, since our culture no longer fights wars with knives or axes.)
The actual experts who were teaching them, people you would call "proficient" with throwing knives and axes, simply did not miss at that distance. At all. Ever.
Proficient -and- have feats like “Weapon Focus (axe),” “Point-Blank Shot,” and the like – maybe even “Greater Weapon Focus (axe)." That's in addition to having a higher Dex and BAB.
Nobody said that thrown weapons can only be thrown 10 feet.
Actually, based on the phrasing, the OP seemed to think the increment listed for ranged weapons represented the max range. This may have been inaccurate, but that was the impression given.
range increments are not only wrong for the limits, but that the penalties for throwing farther than the range increments don't fall off fast enough
I need some clarification on this, because you cannot “throw[ing] farther than the range increments.” With ranged weapons, your target falls into one of five (for thrown) or ten (for projectile) range increments – or else it is beyond max range of the weapon (increment x5 for thrown weapons or increment x10 for projectile weapons). Are you saying the -2 per increment penalty for thrown weapons should be more severe? That would make them “fall off” faster.
Wait, I don't guess you are:
Taking a -4 to your attack throw at 25 feet is simply far too much of a penalty for ranged throwing concepts.
So I'm confused by what you were trying to say “don't fall off fast enough.” Clarification, please.
That's a 20% additional miss chance compared to a bow user at 25 feet and that's simply not realistic based on actual demonstrated expertise by real world experts with throwing weapons.
Have you fired a bow? I find using a bow at 20, 30, and 40 yards to be far far EASIER to hit than with throwing a knife, axe, or javelin at 10 or 20 FEET. I've done all four. More than once.
The result is that certain character concepts are simply totally gimped compared to other simply due to the unrealistic limits that game designers who apparently never researched thrown weapons put into the game.
I'd like to see your concepts that are “simply totally gimped,” because *as* an accomplished archer, I have seen where bows routinely actually -are- more effective than thrown weapons.
Great... this thread now has me itching to shoot competitively again. :D
I tend not to play characters who throw weapons, even thought I would like to. It's not because of the range limitation, but because I can't do the following:
Throw axe (ranged), run up to target, pull axe out of target, hit target with axe again (melee), in the same round.
Until that mechanic exists, I think I'll stay away from thrown weapons.
Seems like throwing weapon rules ignite some minds and discussions.
But whatever marines do or not doesnt matter a lot here in my opinion.
There are guys who use playing card decks as throwing weapons but it doesnt matter either.
All i am asking for is that thrwoing range for some weapons should be increased, because it makes them more viable and fair to play. Those are shuriken, daggers and the like, raise them to 15 feet throwing range! So you can get Far Shot as a rogue or the distance weapon quality and still get your sneak attack without -2 to hit.
Hmmm, kay.
Maybe i shouldn't have said same damage.
A fighter who has pumped Gtr Wpn Fcs/Spl is unlikely to do so for a second Wpn.
I only meant power attack applies to throwing weapons as well as mellee.
Consider a TWWarroir.
Spent all those feats and doesn't want to chew another 3-5 on archery.
Daggers are cool. have them all oveyou (Imri style) and if a foe is in difficult terrain and you don't wanna suck an AOO?
Full Attack with your daggers!
Y get the same PA Damage bonus and can even get rend.
Enemy outside of charge range? You can TWF as a standard action (meaning you can TWF by throwing to daggers). Charge your distance and throw for the rest (with +10 feet- Strong arm, Supple wrist trait)
As for other classes? Well, if your building for a long campaigngo with big game hunter instead of Wpn Fcs. It gets you effective Wpn fcs/spl against nearly everything CR9 or above and applies to your thrown jaw/daggers as much as your normal melee Wpn.
All i am asking for is ... raise them to 15 feet throwing range!
*poof* House-rule it, if you think it is that important to your group's enjoyment of the game. I dislike the concept of ranged attacks allowing sneak-attack damage, so I house-rule that away.
|
I confess to being interested in your reasoning. I also find the notion that "real people" don't have feats rather curious. If feats are supposed to represent training and abilities and what-not, why wouldn't real people who train have them? Since some feats (Ambidexterity leaps to mind) clearly do exist in the real world, it's not the concept that bothers you. Is it the fact it's called "Precise shot"?
This thread jumped the tracks many posts ago, and has become nothing but personal attacks on others and arguing. Everyone needs to drop it, or it will get locked. (Which is probably the best thing for it now anyway.)
Especially since the original posters ultimate problem has been answered:
All i am asking for is ... raise them to 15 feet throwing range!
*poof* House-rule it, if you think it is that important to your group's enjoyment of the game. I dislike the concept of ranged attacks allowing sneak-attack damage, so I house-rule that away.
Thats what it comes down to - house rules. You don't like it? Change it in your game.
I have hit a raccoon on my roof 40 feet away with one throw and knocked it off the roof.
With a slingshot I can routinely hit old birdfeeders in my yard up to 40 yards (120 feet) away.
From 100 yards away I can routinely hit a couple of oil drums in my yard with a slingshot.
I have an outhouse in my backyard, and it has the classic moon-shaped hole in the door, about the size of a crescent shaped sliver of a dinner plate. I can put a slingshot pebble into that hole about 1/5 of the time I shoot at it from 30 yards or less away.
When there is snow on the ground I typically throw a couple of snowballs at a pine tree roughly 100 feet from my deck. I rarely miss.
A baseball pitcher can hit a dinner plate at 60 feet away nine out of ten times with a fastball.
So looks like with all that practice you have essentially trained yourself in Far Shot, with a +3 to +4 bonus otherwise.
Or if you object to being given stats, that is what would be required in game to effect the same things. 2nd level commoner with a 14 dex could do as well.
By these measures, throwing weapons are very well simulated in Pathfinder. Whether they are balanced with the rest of the game is another issue.
As for the rotating wife thing, funny enough, the poster calculated wrong, and it should have been 95% (point blank and far shot making the difference). And there is still a very valid point that Precise Shot represents training to overcome the need to be extra cautious when throwing near allies. It is fairly easy, in real life, to take that "-4" to throw a safe shot (tossing a soda to someone for instance, and not hitting them in the head). Training to push that safety zone very small makes complete sense.
By these measures, throwing weapons are very well simulated in Pathfinder. Whether they are balanced with the rest of the game is another issue.
Wizards of the Coast actually did a very good job modelling realism in Dungeons and Dragons 3.0/3.5. (And since Paizo used that for Pathfinder, the same holds true.) Once you realize most people would be 1st level, and Einstein was 5th; and that they weren't actually trying for a realistic game. Still not bad. Link.
I have hit a raccoon on my roof 40 feet away with one throw and knocked it off the roof.
With a slingshot I can routinely hit old birdfeeders in my yard up to 40 yards (120 feet) away.
From 100 yards away I can routinely hit a couple of oil drums in my yard with a slingshot.
I have an outhouse in my backyard, and it has the classic moon-shaped hole in the door, about the size of a crescent shaped sliver of a dinner plate. I can put a slingshot pebble into that hole about 1/5 of the time I shoot at it from 30 yards or less away.
When there is snow on the ground I typically throw a couple of snowballs at a pine tree roughly 100 feet from my deck. I rarely miss.
A baseball pitcher can hit a dinner plate at 60 feet away nine out of ten times with a fastball.
So looks like with all that practice you have essentially trained yourself in Far Shot, with a +3 to +4 bonus otherwise.
Or if you object to being given stats, that is what would be required in game to effect the same things. 2nd level commoner with a 14 dex could do as well.
By these measures, throwing weapons are very well simulated in Pathfinder. Whether they are balanced with the rest of the game is another issue.
...
Great, except none of this is remotely related to my actual argument, which is that the range limits of 10' on thrown daggers is completely ridiculous because a non-magically enhanced human can hit a target virtually 100% of the time at 25 feet, and that they can do this reliably enough that dozens, if not hundreds, of human beings have done this with their own family tied to a target, some spinning, while throwing not one or two, but dozens of knives or axes at tiny targets inches away from the human being tied to the target.
Comparing that to some sort of PF AC and some sort of PF bonus or feat completely ignores the FUNDAMENTAL FACT that if the human being in the real world misses, they have a very good chance of hitting their wife or child. And they NEVER MISS.
In PF if you are throwing a knife at a target and have your wife in the "melee" then you NEVER HIT her. EVER. Unless you have some house rules.
So the two are simply not comparable. The level of confidence and accuracy of the human beings is just not comparable to some PF numeric approach because no matter HOW GOOD YOU ARE, no matter WHAT FEATS YOU HAVE, no matter WHAT MAGIC YOU USE, 1 shot out of 20 is going to miss.
So all these attempts to "model" the human real world knife thrower are OBVIOUSLY and FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED.
I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Those human beings simply cannot afford a 5% miss chance because UNLIKE THEIR FICTIONAL PF BRETHREN, if they miss they HIT THEIR WIFE.
So go on and make up whatever numerical, feat-laden examples you like. It's just a complete waste of time because of the 5% guaranteed miss chance.
Understand now?
But aside from these useless attempts to model real world knife throwers with PF numbers, the whole question is whether a knife thrower is 10% more likely to miss a target at 20 feet than they are at 10 feet, or 20% more likely to miss at 25 feet.
They most demonstrably and obviously ARE NOT. That's my point. As demonstrated so clearly in the video I posted and so clearly in the long and public history of knife and axe throwing artists who have demonstrated no drop in accuracy at those distances.
Wizards of the Coast actually did a very good job modelling realism in Dungeons and Dragons 3.0/3.5. (And since Paizo used that for Pathfinder, the same holds true.) Once you realize most people would be 1st level, and Einstein was 5th; and that they weren't actually trying for a realistic game. Still not bad. Link.
By these measures, throwing weapons are very well simulated in Pathfinder. Whether they are balanced with the rest of the game is another issue.
The number of examples of how poorly the 3.0 and 3.5 rules model reality have been posted and argued so many times that I hope we don't start all that again just because someone wants to claim that the modeling is good overall as some sort of argument that they MUST THEN be good for thrown weapons.
They are not.
In PF if you are throwing a knife at a target and have your wife in the "melee" then you NEVER HIT her. EVER. Unless you have some house rules.
That is not a problem specific to thrown weapons - that is the way all ranged weapons work. the d20 system isn't designed for that level of realism.
Great, except none of this is remotely related to my actual argument, which is that the range limits of 10' on thrown daggers is completely ridiculous because a non-magically enhanced human can hit a target virtually 100% of the time at 25 feet, and that they can do this reliably enough that dozens, if not hundreds, of human beings have done this with their own family tied to a target, some spinning, while throwing not one or two, but dozens of knives or axes at tiny targets inches away from the human being tied to the target.
They most demonstrably and obviously ARE NOT. That's my point. As demonstrated so clearly in the video I posted and so clearly in the long and public history of knife and axe throwing artists who have demonstrated no drop in accuracy at those distances.
So, its not possible that said professionals, who would have spent years training, could of accumulated an attack bonus (from Dex or BAB, or an ability similiar to Far Shot or Weapon Focus) to essentially negate said distance penalty?
The real problem isn't the range penalties. Its the totally random outcome of a d20. Real life results would follow a bell curve, and so results of 10 would be far more likely than a 1 or a 20. If you assume an average roll, then given the examples I and other have posted above, said professionals will not miss. Ever.
Of course, all of this is pointless anyway. Nothing discussed here should actually be considered an attack - it would all more properly be a skill check. Say, Profession (knife thrower) or something. The throwers targets aren't trying to dodge them, and they aren't trying to kill the thrower. Said thrower isn't rushed to throw his knife. This means, if what is being described is actually a skill and not an attack, the thrower can take 10, erasing any chance of failure in any of the examples listed above..
I don't see what is so hard to understand about this. Those human beings simply cannot afford a 5% miss chance because UNLIKE THEIR FICTIONAL PF BRETHREN, if they miss they HIT THEIR WIFE.
No matter what you do, there will always be a 5% miss chance, from rolling a natural 1. It doesn't matter if you have +1,000,000 to your roll, a natural 1 always misses. Even the patron god of thrown weapons, who can hit the eye of a needle placed on the horizon, will still miss 5% of the time. (All right, in this case he may very well have a divine ability to negate natural 1 rolls. Point still stands.)
With the rules in the book (which are used for every form of attack, not just thrown) there will always be a 5% chance of missing. Which means you either need to houserule the game as has been suggested, or play something else. If you feel the rules are lacking, than change them. No amount of your rambling will convince the rest of us, just like no amount of examples we give showing it can work will change your mind. Its obvious the system can not handle the type of realism you want. Switch to some system that uses a d100 for skills. That may give you the level of detail you want to model you "vitually 100%" chance of success, because the very best the d20 system can handle is 95%. Which apparently isn't good enough for you.
Thanks for the interesting link Jeraa.
Thanks to Doc, i will ask my GM to houserule it to 15 feet. He will probably not really like it, since the sneak attack damage i can do with shuriken is incredible, even though the cost is incredibly high. Throwing 50 enchanted shuriken in 10 rounds is not even at level 10 a cheap thing. Thats what annoys me more actually^^ Perhaps i will invent a magical storage for the shurikens where they return to automatically one round later.
Else i only have to say: Do away with false pride, because pride itself is already a sin.
Thrown weapons can rock in the right build-
particularly for
TWWarrior- They get their full two weapon training bonus when they full attack- this includes thrown weapons.
Two Weapon Fighting Ranger- Stacking FE and instant enemy spell. Big Game Hunter is nice too.
I've got a build of each and they do well against the whole TWF's can't full attack enough'
Simple- Start combat empty handed.
If enemy starts adjacent/within a move for fighter (who TWF as a standard action/5ft stepfor ranger: Move in and Kick Ass.
If enemy is to within 30 ft.
Ranger will instead full attack with Returning, Chakrams (30ft range)
then 5 ft step away. An enemy who ignores you- a. Gets full attacked again by your returning Chakrams or b. closes (possibly taking a double move (AOO) or stopping short. Either way he eats another full attack.
Big Game Hunter/favored enemy can stack with this depending on size/instant enemy spell.
Similar example for TWWarroir, except he adds his full 2WpnTraining.
Sure Wpn Fcs and Spl won't apply.
Power Attack Does, So does Two Weapon Rend and Doubleslice.
Not bad.
If enemy is to within 30 ft.
Ranger will instead full attack with Returning, Chakrams (30ft range)
then 5 ft step away. An enemy who ignores you- a. Gets full attacked again by your returning Chakrams
Sorry returning dosen't work that way they go back to the square they were thrown from. You 5 ft step this combat style falls apart. One of the many many issues with thrown weapon based combat.
Ken, good luck! I hope you & your GM find a workable, enjoyable solution.
Formal apology begins here.
If I offended other American military personnel by pointing out the mode of reference used by BrassBaboon to refer to Marines was offensive to Marines, then I offer my sincere apologies to the offended parties and offer to buy a drink of their choice at the next event we both attend in celebrating our bond of brotherhood (or eh, sisterhood if I offended one of my sisters). This offer is also valid if you happen to be in central Louisiana at some point. I didn't think I had said or implied Marines were better than anyone, just that a given post contained factual errors in referring to us. Any perceived insult was completely unintended. If I thought the Marines were better than anyone else, my TACP buddy would straighten me out in a hurry.
End apology.
BB – what it boils down to is that Pathfinder – and the d20 system from which it grew – is a game, an abstract representation of reality that has to balance playability and realism. Different games have found different places to perch along that scale. In my opinion, GURPS tends to perch closer to the “Realistic” end than does PF/3.5/d20. Game mechanics exist specifically to model abstract real-world concepts. That is something that, as gamers, we have to accept and move past. We are playing not real people in a not real world. Trying to force the game to support something we saw on stage or on tv or on youtube is, bluntly, ludicrous. It won't happen. As gamers, we have to accept that and move on to enjoying the game. If we can't enjoy the game, we need to play a different one.
In focusing on the first few lines of my post, I don't know if you read the rest of it. Some of your positions were unclear as stated. I'm interested in continuing this discussion of rules with you as you've raised questions that haven't been answered yet.
Doc may be frustrated but that doesn't give him the right, or YOU the right, to call my posts "arrogant" when you apparently have not read through the posts with snide and insulting comments about my argument. As I said, I respond in kind.
Factually inaccurate. If you will reread my post at the top of page 2, I asked a number of questions concerning your position. Heck, skip the first two quote boxes, since those are the ones that got you hung up on “Marine hate” and go to quote-box the third where I started trying to understand your argument.
I don't need "PF numbers". I'll demonstrate AGAIN.
Well, since we are (I thought) trying to figure out how to better model real-life thrown weapons in a PF game – yeah, you do need numbers.
My wife knows someone whose sister is the “wife” part of a “wife on a spinning knife target” trick. Accidents happen. The wife has been hit. More than once. (just to offer a counterpoint to your “never misses in real life” statement)
Sorry returning dosen't work that way they go back to the square they were thrown from. You 5 ft step this combat style falls apart. One of the many many issues with thrown weapon based combat.
If enemy is to within 30 ft.
Ranger will instead full attack with Returning, Chakrams (30ft range)
then 5 ft step away. An enemy who ignores you- a. Gets full attacked again by your returning Chakrams
Actually, it still works, just don't move. The enemy having to close 30ft is still enough to deny them their full attack and you still get yours. This is good enough for most people. If you want to take a 5ft step away you could but you need more Chakrams. Not hard, they're cheap and light.
Actually, it still works, just don't move. The enemy having to close 30ft is still enough to deny them their full attack and you still get yours. This is good enough for most people. If you want to take a 5ft step away you could but you need more Chakrams. Not hard, they're cheap and light.
No as you would need around 6 +1 returning chakrams at 8k each to get say 2 rounds of full attacks. Thats 48,000 gold invested to get 2 rounds of full attacks. You cant even shift back to the first spot and pick them up. Picking an item up off the ground provokes an AOO. For that price even the TWF combatant is better equipped than you are. And gets a lot more rounds of full attacks.
As i said one of the many many issues facing a thrown weapon build.
Then maybe the smart thing to do is to recognise that you can't build throwing weapons as a "optimal" main build like archery but it can serve better as a handy supplement to a strength melee build or a sneak attack character. Merisel the iconic rogue is probably a very good example of this.
I dont disagree with you. With the core rules as written its an adjunct attack method, even if a group of combat computer simulations indicate the francesca throwing axe is one of the deadliest weapons ever (in large scale melees where its odd bounces meant even a miss would likely hit someone else in the opposing line). STR Ranger apparently does think it can be an optimal main build with his misunderstanding of the returning weapon property. To be honest I like the returning property house rule that got posted a couple of weeks ago on this forum.
|
So all these attempts to "model" the human real world knife thrower are OBVIOUSLY and FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED.
If we can't model real people off of Pathfinder Characters, stop trying to model Pathfinder characters off of real world people. If it's fundamentally flawed one direction, the simple extension of this is that it is flawed in both directions.
So all these attempts to "model" the human real world knife thrower are OBVIOUSLY and FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED.If we can't model real people off of Pathfinder Characters, stop trying to model Pathfinder characters off of real world people. If it's fundamentally flawed one direction, the simple extension of this is that it is flawed in both directions.
Well if Doc can apologize, I can too. I was not deliberately dissing marines by using the word "soldier" in its dictionary sense. I apologize if that triggered part of your frustration.
I also have not been trying to model real world people with PF builds, that's what the folks disagreeing with me have been doing. I am just saying, and I think more than adequately proving, that the 10 foot range rules just don't male sense when you look at actual thrown weapon skills. Sure it's a game and an approximation, but ther is a difference between being an abstraction and being just plain nonsensical. Of course you can MAKE it work but the cost is too high. I am no fan of 4e, but one thing they improved dramatically in 4e is the ability to build and play viable thrown weapon builds. And doing so did not remotely break thrown weapon characters. It simply brought them up to par with other builds. It would have been nice if PF had done the same, and I house rule it in my games to make them viable.
As someone who has some familiarity with thrown weapons, I don't think you have proven that the 10' increment of thrown weapons doesn't make sense. This is, in part, because you are trying to use real-world trick-throwers to prove your point while not allowing dissenters to suggest PF-based builds that accomplish your real-world example.
You appear to be interested in winning rather than in being correct.
I have a hunch few others, if anyone, will continue attempting to debate your stance with you, in large part because you are failing to establish a common ground upon which to actually debate. Once that happens - people stop discussing this matter with you - you will feel you "won" and proved your point. Not true. People will stop talking about it with you because they will have figured out you want to be able to throw 5 daggers through the eyeslit of an enemy fighter's helm while he is charging you and thus "prove" how superior thrown weapons really are and are not at all interested in whether this is possible *or* balanced. So just remember - silence does not imply assent. It just implies we're tired of beating our heads against a wall.
g
STR Ranger apparently does think it can be an optimal main build with his misunderstanding of the returning weapon property
To be honest I don't use 6+ Returning Chakrams. Got a little too much into theory craft.
The TWW Build duel wields Scimitars and is primarily a Crit Build.
The Ranger is TWFing with Scimitar/Kukri, also a crit build.
Since Both are feat heavy- I took quickdraw over archery (1feat vs many)
They carry +1Chakrams with no other magic. The chucking option is usually done in round one to draw multiple enemies to me. (I know there's no real 'aggro' rule but dm's happy for most monsters to charge the dude who threw a bunch of bladed discs at you.
After that it's blender city. May not be optimal but is a nice ranged option.
Quite oftenfinish 1 dude with a blender routine, then Quickdraw and chuck whatever iteratives i have left at other enemies to get them to attack me.
;)
Throwing a knife at a stationary target outside of combat might not be hard, neither is hitting with a sword if you are standing infront of it, even if you are not proficient with it.
I cleaned up some personal sniping. Don't post angry, please.
|
Then maybe the smart thing to do is to recognise that you can't build throwing weapons as a "optimal" main build like archery but it can serve better as a handy supplement to a strength melee build or a sneak attack character. Merisel the iconic rogue is probably a very good example of this.
I dont disagree with you. With the core rules as written its an adjunct attack method, even if a group of combat computer simulations indicate the francesca throwing axe is one of the deadliest weapons ever (in large scale melees where its odd bounces meant even a miss would likely hit someone else in the opposing line). STR Ranger apparently does think it can be an optimal main build with his misunderstanding of the returning weapon property. To be honest I like the returning property house rule that got posted a couple of weeks ago on this forum.
I have some doubt about multiple returning weapons and the thrower capability to catch all of them when they return.
For that to work you need to have them returning with the same time intervals you used to throw them and you throwing them again at the same speed.If you are doing something different all the uncatched weapons will fall to the ground.
About the cost of enchanted shuriken. They count as missile ammunitions, not as throw weapon for magic weapon/greeater magic weapon (and I would say for making magic items too).
So wand with those spell will enchant 50 of them in a go.
Throwing dagger vs. dagger. They are two different beasts.
The dagger in Pathfinder can be throw, that is not a granted thing with RL daggers as they aren't always balanced for throwing.
At the same time there are specialized knifes that are build for throwing.
For ease of rules we can give all the daggers the capability to be throw with a 10' range increment, so we will avoid the question "this is a dagger balanced for throwing or not?", and use the stat for the dart for the throwing dagger, giving it reduced damage if used in meele (1d3 instead of 1d4).
All the stuff about dagger rotation and distance from the target. There is a stile of throwing that allow the knives are thrown so that they fly straight into the target with little or no rotation. It is harder to learn but has its advantages.
Look at Merisel again. Notice how she's brimming with daggers? That's because thrown weapons are a lot like other projectiles, for the most part when you're throwing a weapon...it's not coming back. So you don't build a thrower counting on oomph magical plusses because it's not economical. It's also why an ideal thrower build almost HAS to be sneak attack based. because that and feats are where your damage for such a build is coming from. And that's why throwing weapons are always a secondary part of a main style, not a main style in and of themselves.
I have some doubt about multiple returning weapons and the thrower capability to catch all of them when they return.
For that to work you need to have them returning with the same time intervals you used to throw them and you throwing them again at the same speed.
I would say that it actually makes throwing the real strong style for taking the vital strike line.
Hey I am new to doing posts on forums and such so forgive me if I don't reply to things correctly I simply as a recreational historian (and weekly player of palladium and D&D particularly Pathfinder) would like to point out a few things.
The realistic truth about throwing weapons is that some are simply designed better than others, kind of like the original round ball early guns used versus the cylindrical bullets used in modern designs invented in the civil war.
Shuriken were actually not designed for distance throwing at all really. To say that the range is to little is sort of misguided. Ninja and the like used them as a distraction to hopefully make an opponent move in a manner that was easily anticipated (and hey if you hit the guy with the point bit that works to!) Throwing knives are lighter than most other weapons and much harder to throw far than most. They can be balanced and weighted to throw more easily so that I would have to say should be revisited, I personally have thrown axes as a kid and they are not easy to get that spin action to land right where you want it. But you know They can be thrown better depending on the ax. I mean in all honesty I was throwing a small hand ax, The kind you can get at the store for chopping small stuff. but you look at an ax like the French Francisca which could be thrown further and more powerfully than any other weapon at its time (and as a history note the Germanic tribe known as the "Franks" won the territory known as "France" named after the weapon they used to win such territory the "Francisca") This weapon would not be represented in the book under the throwing ax correctly.
In the end all these weapons are generalized not out of ignorance of knowing how to use them or how far they are actually thrown. But to give an easy rule set for people to use and play with. DM's should and "I" would encourage anyone to change these limitations to further add realism into the game. But in the end thrown weapons in history were never present on the battlefield as the armies main source of attack. It was always to supplement the melee that would generally ensue after a volley of spears or axes was thrown. So to build a character who does this entirely is possible but very specialized vs the average fighter Whom with less training can be good at swinging an object to painfully hurt a guy. Hence FEATS. Things that your character can do that are above and beyond what would be considered the "norm" for that task. rather than change the weapons which are perfectly fine for game balance. simply add a feat perhaps (Precision throwing: add 5 ft to chosen weapon types range increment "made up feat just now") that way you end up with the range you were seeking but don't unbalance the game.
It is a game after all and the easiest way to play is by the book.
didn't even see that this was 2011... Oops.