Just need a quick rules clarification for our game tonight.
If a player has, for example, a dwarven throwing axe equipped, does he threaten an Attack of Opportunity against enemies moving through it's ranged attack squares (10 ft)?
Thank you in Advance!
Um, no. There is no such thing as ranged AoO.
You would threaten the area within 5' of you, as you would with a melee weapon.
And there is absolutely such a thing as a ranged AoO, if you have the Snap Shot feat. It has nothing to do with your range increment though (which, by the way, is not your maximum range).
Alright, thank you guys!
That's a shame though, the feat cost to be able to throw my throwing axe (which one might say is built entirely for the throwing at people when the opportunity presents itself XD) is pretty heavy.
Prerequisite: Dex 15, Point-Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Snap Shot, Weapon Focus, base attack bonus +9.
If this is a thrown weapon character it is going to have most, if not all of these. Snap Shot hurts when you are dealing with a thrown weapon that is also a melee weapon (such as a dagger or throwing axe) since they already threaten (in melee) the 5' that snap shot gives you.
If this is a melee character who has thrown weapons as their ranged option, then yes - feat cost is heavy.
In case you want a rule citation for the game tonight:
Making an Attack of Opportunity: "An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack..."
Also:
Snap Shot (Combat): "While wielding a ranged weapon with which you have Weapon Focus, you threaten squares within 5 feet of you..."
A throwing axe isn't a ranged weapon, it's a melee weapon (and a thrown weapon). To be a ranged throwing weapon, it needs to not be effective in melee (like a dart). Yes, the distinction is not intuitive, and makes some things not work the way you would expect. See this post for details (and FAQ flags, if appropriate).
|
There are two types of ranged weapon: thrown and projectile.
The consequence of this is that there are some weapons that are both melee weapons AND ranged weapons. Specifically, these weapons are those melee weapons which have a range increment.
This would include those weapons which, though usually only melee, have gained a range increment through magic such as the throwing enchantment. It does not include weapons or objects that can be thrown as improvised weapons, much like an arrow is not a melee weapon just because you can try to stab someone in the eye with it.
There are two types of ranged weapon: thrown and projectile.
And two types of melee weapon: melee and thrown.
The consequence of this is that there are some weapons that are both melee weapons AND ranged weapons.
Only in odd corner cases like the halfling sling staff.
Specifically, these weapons are those melee weapons which have a range increment.
Those are still melee weapons, not ranged weapons.
Equipment lists the categories as "the weapon's usefulness either in close combat (melee) or at a distance (ranged, which includes both thrown and projectile weapons)"
"melee" and "ranged" both contain two types of weapons, those that are thrown, and those that aren't.
Melee and Ranged Weapons: "Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."
Melee weapon: Longsword
Melee weapon, thrown weapon: Dagger
Ranged weapon, thrown weapon: Dart
Ranged weapon: Longbow
The first two are effective in melee, the last two aren't.
|
|
There are two types of ranged weapon: thrown and projectile.And two types of melee weapon: melee and thrown.
The consequence of this is that there are some weapons that are both melee weapons AND ranged weapons.Only in odd corner cases like the halfling sling staff.
Specifically, these weapons are those melee weapons which have a range increment.Those are still melee weapons, not ranged weapons.
Equipment lists the categories as "the weapon's usefulness either in close combat (melee) or at a distance (ranged, which includes both thrown and projectile weapons)"
"melee" and "ranged" both contain two types of weapons, those that are thrown, and those that aren't.
Melee and Ranged Weapons: "Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."
Melee weapon: Longsword
Melee weapon, thrown weapon: Dagger
Ranged weapon, thrown weapon: Dart
Ranged weapon: LongbowThe first two are effective in melee, the last two aren't.
Your conclusion that a weapon that can be used to make melee attacks AND ranged attacks is not a ranged weapon, based on the weapon being detailed in the melee weapon section, is flawed.
The weapon has to be detailed somewhere! They chose the melee weapon section; this does not preclude it also being a ranged weapon!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your conclusion that a weapon that can be used to make melee attacks AND ranged attacks is not a ranged weapon, based on the weapon being detailed in the melee weapon section, is flawed.
"Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."
Being effective in melee precludes it from being a ranged weapon.
Grick's assessment does seem pretty air-tight
It's really goofy, actually. Point-Blank Shot not working with thrown daggers is kind of weird.
The other way to interpret it, which I think is more of a stretch, is somthing like this: "Ranged weapons are (thrown weapons) or (projectile weapons that are not effective in melee)." Meaning all thrown weapons are ranged weapons, and some of them are also melee weapons. I say it's a stretch, because this would mean that projectile weapons that are effective in melee are not ranged weapons.
|
Grick's assessment does seem pretty air-tightIt's really goofy, actually. Point-Blank Shot not working with thrown daggers is kind of weird.
The other way to interpret it, which I think is more of a stretch, is somthing like this: "Ranged weapons are (thrown weapons) or (projectile weapons that are not effective in melee)." Meaning all thrown weapons are ranged weapons, and some of them are also melee weapons. I say it's a stretch, because this would mean that projectile weapons that are effective in melee are not ranged weapons.
I meant air-tight based on the rules and rulings available, not on common sense :P
Your solution seems pretty good though.
|
|
I meant air-tight based on the rules and rulings available, not on common sense.
Exactly!
Melee weapons are split into light, one-handed and two-handed weapon categories. Ranged weapons are not. Why? If your off hand attack when TWF is a thrown dart, we need to know if a dart is light or not.
Every weapon than can be used as a melee weapon (without being improvised) is on the melee weapon tables. Only those ranged weapons that cannot be used in melee are detailed separately. All melee-only weapons are (obviously) in the melee weapon sections; all ranged-only weapons are in the ranged weapon section. Where shall we put those weapons that count as both? In the ranged section? No, we need to know if it's light, 1-H or 2-H, so without taking a lot more space we put it in the melee section, which has a column for 'range increment' to cope with this.
The names of the sections (melee/ranged) would be more accurate if titled melee & dual purpose/ranged only, but the rules are written to be understood by reasonable people, not those looking to twist the meaning.
If you find yourself thinking that there are two ways a rule can be understood, and you have to make a ruling, the way forward is not to treat it as an English grammar exam, but to rule in favour of the interpretation that makes sense!
I'm constantly amazed that there is an attitude displayed by some posters that present well-thought-out, well-researched and articulate cases that even they think doesn't make sense! I cite the recent 'haste doesn't apply to unarmed strikes' thread. It's fine to point out to the devs when a rule could be written less ambiguously, but to actually rule the insane way just because the grammar used in the rule slightly favours the insane interpretation over the sane one, strikes of intellectual cowardice! DMs are expected to make decisions, those decisions are expected to make the game rules work sensibly! The attitude of 'well, I know it doesn't make sense, but, them's the rules! It's not my fault!' is a way of hiding from your responsibility as a DM.
'But this is the rules section! House rules are that way!'
Rubbish! People ask questions in the rules section to enable them to run their games within the rules, not to pass an exam involving trick questions!
When presented with two reasonable interpretations of RAW, where one leads to absurdity, choose the other way every time! Don't worry about those trying to convince you of the way that doesn't make sense just because the RAW was written ambiguously.
[/rant]
If your off hand attack when TWF is a thrown dart, we need to know if a dart is light or not.
Two-Weapon Fighting - "Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon."
If you find yourself thinking that there are two ways a rule can be understood, and you have to make a ruling, the way forward is not to treat it as an English grammar exam, but to rule in favour of the interpretation that makes sense!
How does it make more sense for a dagger to be a ranged weapon, when that means a halfling sling staff isn't?
People ask questions in the rules section to enable them to run their games within the rules, not to pass an exam involving trick questions!
Which is why just making stuff up and passing it off as RAW is unhelpful. It's better for a GM to know what the rules actually say, so they are empowered to change the rules in a sane matter to fit the way it works best for their table.
|
|
Grick's assessment does seem pretty air-tight, and matches up with JJ's summation of the matter. JJ did choose to leave either option though and not make a definitive ruling, this might be one of those things that's really worth FAQing if you want a set answer.Can we get a link to James Jacobs' answer on this? Because to me it's Malachi's assessment that seems airtight.
Grick linked in JJ's discussion of the matter in the 6th post down from the top of the thread.
But here it is again :)
|
|
If your off hand attack when TWF is a thrown dart, we need to know if a dart is light or not.Two-Weapon Fighting - "Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon."
If you find yourself thinking that there are two ways a rule can be understood, and you have to make a ruling, the way forward is not to treat it as an English grammar exam, but to rule in favour of the interpretation that makes sense!How does it make more sense for a dagger to be a ranged weapon, when that means a halfling sling staff isn't?
People ask questions in the rules section to enable them to run their games within the rules, not to pass an exam involving trick questions!Which is why just making stuff up and passing it off as RAW is unhelpful. It's better for a GM to know what the rules actually say, so they are empowered to change the rules in a sane matter to fit the way it works best for their table.
The designers chose to show if ranged weapons (that aren't also melee weapons) count as light in a paragraph of text. They could have done the same for melee weapons, or they could have created three categories of ranged-only weapons. FWIW, I would have made the same choice they did.
'Making stuff up' and 'rules that can be interpreted in two ways' are different things. When a weapon is given a ranged increment and follows the rules for ranged attacks when making a ranged attack, it's not 'making stuff up' to interpret that as being a ranged weapon, or more precisely as a weapon that is both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon.
The seeming victory of choosing to interpret them as definately not being ranged weapons on the basis that they are included on the melee weapons section of the weapons tables, even though you think that is better to rule it otherwise, is a hollow and meaningless victory. Especially when the counter argument (that dual-use weapons have to be detailed somewhere and the melee section is the best solution) has just as much validity, and has the benefit of making sense!
choosing to interpret them as definately not being ranged weapons on the basis that they are included on the melee weapons section of the weapons tables...
I'll just direct you to my reply the last time you made stuff up about where I'm basing my argument.
There are two types of ranged weapon: thrown and projectile.And two types of melee weapon: melee and thrown.
The consequence of this is that there are some weapons that are both melee weapons AND ranged weapons.Only in odd corner cases like the halfling sling staff.
Specifically, these weapons are those melee weapons which have a range increment.Those are still melee weapons, not ranged weapons.
Equipment lists the categories as "the weapon's usefulness either in close combat (melee) or at a distance (ranged, which includes both thrown and projectile weapons)"
"melee" and "ranged" both contain two types of weapons, those that are thrown, and those that aren't.
Melee and Ranged Weapons: "Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."
Melee weapon: Longsword
Melee weapon, thrown weapon: Dagger
Ranged weapon, thrown weapon: Dart
Ranged weapon: LongbowThe first two are effective in melee, the last two aren't.
Are you seriously trying to use the organization of the equipment list to argue that there are two different subcategories of thrown weapons that are handled differently by the rules, when the very text you are quoting clearly explains that there are some things which can be used as thrown weapons, but are listed under the melee section, for the sake of not wanting to list them twice?
|
|
choosing to interpret them as definately not being ranged weapons on the basis that they are included on the melee weapons section of the weapons tables...I'll just direct you to my reply the last time you made stuff up about where I'm basing my argument.
Cheers, Grick! Your search-fu continues to be strong! It makes cutting and pasting (which is advanced as my skill using computers gets) much easier!
"Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."
Being effective in melee precludes it from being a ranged weapon.
You interpretation is not the only one, and not the one that makes sense. You are interpreting that sentence as meaning that if a weapon is not on the part of the table entitled 'ranged weapon's, then that absence precludes it from being a ranged weapon.
It's one valid interpretation, but your fallacy is in believing that this is the only valid interpretation!
Melee and Ranged Weapons: Melee weapons are used for making melee attacks, though some of them can be thrown as well. Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee.
This paragraph comes from the text leading up to the weapons tables. It is written to enable those who are reading the rules for the first time to comprehend the rules on weapons in general, starting with the weapons tables in particular. A weapon can be used to make melee attacks (they are melee weapons), ranged attacks (they are ranged weapons, or both melee AND ranged attacks (they are both).
Weapons that are categorised as melee need to be separated into light, one-handed and two-handed because the interact with some rules differently. Every weapon that is a melee weapon is on this part of the table, even those that are also ranged weapons. The only weapons that aren't there are the ones that are not melee weapons.
The sentence you quoted is saying that the weapons on the 'ranged weapon's part cannot be used in melee, not that the ones not on it are not ranged weapons!
People ask questions in the rules section to enable them to run their games within the rules, not to pass an exam involving trick questions!Which is why just making stuff up and passing it off as RAW is unhelpful. It's better for a GM to know what the rules actually say, so they are empowered to change the rules in a sane matter to fit the way it works best for their table.
Emphasis added. This is pretty much what I like about the rules forum. I'm not shy about house rules, but I want to know exactly what RAW is before settling on how I want to run things. I really don't like the anti-RAW position some people take on these boards (commonly expressed by calling someone a rules zombie).
I'm not direct this at anyone in this conversation, it's just Grick's spoke to me and I couldn't resist highlighting it.
|
Hmm... In this case, the pregen rogue has point blank shot, which is calculated in with her thrown dagger bonuses, and no ranged weapon provided in her gear.
So it seems that the writers assume the same as Malachi, that when throwing a weapon with a range increment, point blank shot applies.
FWIW.
*BAHZING!*