
![]() |

A player want to increase the range of his throwing daggers (10 feet) by feats and did not find any.
Just to make sure it's clear, 10 ft is not total range, it's a range increment - maximum possible range for thrown weapons is 5x range increment, so 50 ft in this case.

Ravingdork |

Far Shot and Distance Thrower (Ultimate Combat feat) together will allow you to throw that dagger a goodly distance without penalty.
You are accurate with thrown weapons at longer ranges than normal.
Prerequisite: Str 13.
Benefit: With a thrown weapon, you reduce your penalty on ranged attack rolls due to range by 2.
Normally, a dagger would take a -2 to hit at 11 feet, -4 at 21 feet, and -6 at 31 feet, and so on to a maximum range of 50 feet.
With those two feats it becomes -0 at 11 feet, -0 at 21 feet, -1 at 31 feet, and -2 at 41 to 50 feet. Makes a big difference for your distance throwers out there.

Ravingdork |

Thanks AinvarG and Ravingdork for clearing that up.
AinvarG is thinking of D&D v3.5's version of Far Shot, which doubled the range increment of thrown weapons.
Pathfinder's Far Shot does NOT. It cuts the penalty in half, but the max range remains the same.

kyrt-ryder |
Aromaz Esoj wrote:Thanks AinvarG and Ravingdork for clearing that up.AinvarG is thinking of D&D v3.5's version of Far Shot, which increased your throwing range by 50%.
Pathfinder's far shot does NOT. It cuts the penalty in half, but the max range remains the same.
And Ravingdork is thinking of 3.5 Far Shot's effects for Projectile Weapons.
As you can see 3.5's Far Shot doubled the range increment of Throwing Weapons (and, in my personal opinion, was a better feat, though there is some debate of course.)

Ravingdork |

Why, kyrt-ryder, I really don't know what you mean. ;P
Another fun feature of v3.5 rules was that you took the penalty AT each full range increment, whereas in Pathfinder, you take the penalty when you EXCEED each range increment.
Now you dagger can be thrown 10 feet without penalty, whereas it used to be choosing between a -2 to hit, or an attack of opportunity from an enemy.

kyrt-ryder |
Another fun feature of v3.5 rules was that you took the penalty AT each full range increment, whereas in Pathfinder, you take the penalty when you EXCEED each range increment.
Now you dagger can be thrown 10 feet without penalty, whereas it used to be choosing between a -2 to hit, or an attack of opportunity from an enemy.
Now that is an interesting change in wording. It sucks they never did anything to fix the fact that Storm Giants (or other Huge-Tall creatures) can't throw a dagger without penalty any farther than they can stab with it >.<

Talonhawke |

Ravingdork wrote:Now that is an interesting change in wording. It sucks they never did anything to fix the fact that Storm Giants (or other Huge-Tall creatures) can't throw a dagger without penalty any farther than they can stab with it >.<
Another fun feature of v3.5 rules was that you took the penalty AT each full range increment, whereas in Pathfinder, you take the penalty when you EXCEED each range increment.
Now you dagger can be thrown 10 feet without penalty, whereas it used to be choosing between a -2 to hit, or an attack of opportunity from an enemy.
Could be wrong but i think you start counting range after reach but i very well could be wrong.

AinvarG |

Does Far Shot not apply in Pathfinder to thrown weapons? I thought it did - not that it helps much for a dagger, but a total range of 75' is a fair bit better than 50'.
Yup, had the old in my head. I realized my error as I was considering an archer build with that feat, so I had to come back and make sure it had been corrected. I should have known y'all wouldn't let me lead someone astray for long. Apologies for the error. It'll happen again.