|
I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I'm getting really tired of the overuse of "Precise Shot". It's basically a feat-robber if you plan to be successful with any sort of projectile.
But I'm taking this feat to Rules Court once and for all.
Throw Anything states simply that you don't suffer a -4 on Attack Rolls for chucking an Improvised Weapon.
Precise Shot states that you don't suffer a -4 on Attack Rolls for Shooting or Throwing -Ranged- Weapons into Melee.
Just to be an absolute jerk I can take all of this exactly at face value and say: "I have Throw Anything. I am going to Throw my Long Sword. It is NOT a Shooting or Ranged weapon. Throw Anything does not indicate that any item in your hand receives the -Ranged- modifier. It simply removes the penalty for throwing it et al."
I want to know if I have any ground to stand on because I plan to work this into a PFS character.
So, just to be sure I understand, you feel that throwing your longsword into melee should have a lesser penalty (by 4 even) than throwing a (ranged) dagger into melee.
Do I have that right?
Or wait... are you saying that taking "throw anything" would allow you to throw your sword with the same proficiency as a dagger thrower who took "precise shot?"
I think he is complaining that, RAW, throwing a longsword into melee doesn't suffer from the -4 on attack rolls, which RAI it probably should.
Any GM worth his salt will RAI it though, so you won't get away with this in PFS.
I think once you throw something it becomes a ranged weapon. If that isn't RAW, it's so obvious RAI that I can't believe anyone would suggest otherwise.
I think the OP is saying that Precise Shot cannot grant it's benefit to an improvised thrown weapon. But I could be wrong.
|
The idea of Improvised weapons is that things that are NOT weapons can be used as one, however this does not turn something that already IS a weapon such as your longsword, into an improvised weapon just because they are using it incorrectly. Things like rocks lying around, chairs, even armor or a drinking mug would be considered improvised weapons, and could be justified as being something you could throw and deal some damage, also they are all things that not really weapons in their own right.
Trying to throw a bastard sword or crossbow would only result in the person looking foolish, the improvised thrown weapon still has to be in the realm of realistic possibility for it to count as exactly that, an improvised thrown weapon.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the way Precise Shot is worded by RAW, you could throw your crossbow and benefit from the feat benefit. The rules are mechanical abstractions, and are not infallible. As far as letting them use precise shot with actual improvised weapons, I'd let it them use it, because why not let them use their feats for what they intended to use them for?
the idea of precise shot with a Hucked chair is rather amusing.
The idea of Improvised weapons is that things that are NOT weapons can be used as one, however this does not turn something that already IS a weapon such as your longsword, into an improvised weapon just because they are using it incorrectly. Things like rocks lying around, chairs, even armor or a drinking mug would be considered improvised weapons, and could be justified as being something you could throw and deal some damage, also they are all things that not really weapons in their own right.
Trying to throw a bastard sword or crossbow would only result in the person looking foolish, the improvised thrown weapon still has to be in the realm of realistic possibility for it to count as exactly that, an improvised thrown weapon.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the way Precise Shot is worded by RAW, you could throw your crossbow and benefit from the feat benefit. The rules are mechanical abstractions, and are not infallible. As far as letting them use precise shot with actual improvised weapons, I'd let it them use it, because why not let them use their feats for what they intended to use them for?
He's not using his longsword as an improvised weapon, it already is a weapon, he's using the feat to mitigate the negatives incurred to throw something that isn't normally thrown, like a longsword. Hence the term "throw anything"
Here's the text of the feat: "You do not suffer any penalties for using an improvised ranged weapon. You receive a +1 circumstance bonus on attack rolls made with thrown splash weapons."
So, it seems that whatever you throw, by this definition, becomes a "ranged weapon" and so the penalties for using a "ranged weapon" in melee should apply. And also, by RAW, the benefit of "precise shot" should also apply.
By RAW. That's how I see it. So, yeah, no -4 melee penalty for tossing that armchair if you have "precise shot." So if you have "throw anything" AND "precise shot" chunk that mutha!!!
The problem comes from the fact that ranged weapon is used both generally to mean 'a weapon used at range' and also specifically to mean a class of weapon like one handed, light etc.
The wording of precise shot is:
"You can shoot or throw ranged weapons at an opponent engaged in melee without taking the standard –4 penalty on your attack roll."
How you interpret this sentence depends on the term 'ranged'. If you read it as 'shoot or throw "ranged weapons"', you could interpret this to mean that even non-improvised, non 'ranged weapons' which can be thrown, such as a dagger, cannot benefit from precise shot. If you read it as 'shoot or throw ranged "weapons"', then precise shot applies to all weapons, as long as they are shot or thrown at range (ie, using the ranged weapons rules instead of melee rules)
RAI I think you would be hard pressed to claim that the first interpretation is correct. As an example, here is the introduction to using ranged weapons in the text:
"Ranged Attacks: With a ranged weapon, you can
shoot or throw at any target that is within the weapon’s
maximum range and in line of sight. The maximum
range for a thrown weapon is five range increments.
For projectile weapons, it is 10 range increments. Some
ranged weapons have shorter maximum ranges, as
specified in their descriptions."
This also makes mention of 'ranged weapon' in an obviously general sense. If you took the OPs interpretation of this term you would have a farcical situation where it isn't possible to use a standard action to throw that longsword in the first place, because it isn't a "ranged weapon".
Here's the text of the feat: "You do not suffer any penalties for using an improvised ranged weapon. You receive a +1 circumstance bonus on attack rolls made with thrown splash weapons."
So, it seems that whatever you throw, by this definition, becomes a "ranged weapon" and so the penalties for using a "ranged weapon" in melee should apply. And also, by RAW, the benefit of "precise shot" should also apply.
By RAW. That's how I see it. So, yeah, no -4 melee penalty for tossing that armchair if you have "precise shot." So if you have "throw anything" AND "precise shot" chunk that mutha!!!
This visual just keeps giving me a chuckle.
"Boscivous, tell us again how you won the dart throwing competition by getting a bullseye every time with your dinner plate!"
I am going to Throw my Long Sword. It is NOT a Shooting or Ranged weapon. Throw Anything does not indicate that any item in your hand receives the -Ranged- modifier. It simply removes the penalty for throwing it et al."
I want to know if I have any ground to stand on because I plan to work this into a PFS character.
Once you throw something you make a ranged attack. If your target is engaged in melee you get -4 unless you have precise shot. And if you are in melee you provoke an AoO. Even if the thing you throw is no ranged weapon.
|
|
A ranged attack, is a ranged attack.
Rays, improvised weapons, whatever.
This is why some Sorcerers will nab Precise Shot.
And that's my second gripe. Why would anyone force a Sorcerer to take Point Blank and Precise Shot just to cast their ray spells. There should be a separate feat for casters to cast into melees and a separate feat for dagger-throwers, scythe-throwers, whatever; to throw into melee.
I know this next point is DnD, but the feat speccs are still the same.
The SoulKnife. He gets the ability to Throw his Mind Blade. But if a GM starts taking into account Partial Cover from other players and Throwing into Melee...now you're at a -8 for using a (Su) Ability that comes with your class at 2nd level.
All I'm saying, it's heinous. It's Precise SHOT, not Precise Missile Object and throwing it does NOT automatically grant it a 10-30ft Ranged Increment because it is NOT a Ranged Weapon. Throw Anything should have Preciseness wrapped up with it. Bar None.
|
|
No. No.
Throw Anything:
You can throw...anything...that is not normally throwable or not designed to BE thrown.
Normal: You take a -4 penalty for an Improvised Weapon and you take a -4 for throwing into melee.
(Or):
Duck!:
Prerequisite: Throw Anything, BAB +5
You communicate well with your party, able to toss objects into melee without injuring your party.
Normal: You take a -4 Penalty throwing into melee.
Im'ma Firin' Ma Lazor!:
You can cast your ray spells into melee without a penalty.
Normal: You take a -4 Penalty casting into melee.
My point is: FIRING, THROWING and CASTING are 3 very different things. I can't shoot a bow for anything, but I can easily throw a penny and nail you in the head from 30ft away every time.
Spellcasters should not need to take COMBAT feats for their spells. EVER! Because then you could take Two-Weapon Fighting and cast TWO Ray Spells in 1 action. It's only sensible! If we're gonna jump the shark, we may as well do it with authority!
|
|
Here's another way to look at it.
A weapon has to have the "Throwing" ability to qualify for "Returning", regardless if you have the "Throw Anything" feat because the weapon does not qualify as a Ranged Weapon.
However, anything that can become a projectile (including houses as tornadoes are want to prove) qualifies as a ranged weapon when it comes to the penalties of launching said projectile into Melee.
It's clearly a double-standard and everyone's all right with this?
Am I on an island here?
I'm not "trying to get away with something" and the odds of my lone, little observation changing Pathfinder rules as a whole is a laughable concept in/of itself. All I want to hear is that my point holds water and I'll be happy to drop it.
Problem 1:
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee specifies "shoot or throw a ranged weapon" instead of "make a ranged attack."
Solution 1:
Replace text in quotes above.
Problem 2:
Precise Shot specifies "shoot or throw ranged weapons" instead of "make ranged attacks"
Solution 2:
Replace text in quotes above.
Alternate Solution for 1 and 2:
Change Melee and Ranged Weapons definitions to overlap when the item is used to make a melee or ranged attack. This also means Deflect Arrows and Point-Blank Shot will work with all thrown weapons, including daggers and thrown swords and such. In addition, this makes Rapid Shot work with all thrown weapons also, unless you rule that "fire" limits it to projectile weapons.
There's a couple FAQ requests (and bonus JJ quote) on this post about melee/ranged weapons.
|
|
Pretty much.
It doesn't help that most of your argument breaks down to "I don't want to have to take a feat because reasons." It's a feat tax, you can dislike it all you like, you need it to perform the task you're looking at.
I don't want to have to take Dodge in order to get Mobility, either, but at least it makes sense.
I'm having a hard time swallowing that certain penalties can apply to unqualified events (e.g. Throwing a Weapon with the Throw Anything Feat and taking the -4 into melee without Precise Shot) but certain boons cannot apply in the same respect (in other words; it's a double-effin'-standard!). I can understand balance reasons, but with the insane number of completely unnecessary feats out there (Childlike Feat for instance; the disguise skill should cover this; at best, it should be a Trait) you'd think one could be crafted for Magic Users casting into melee and Throwers throwing into melee: especially without having to eat the Tax of Point-Blank Shot.
As far as balance would be concerned; Wizards have a finite number of spells (especially ray spells) and people THROWING objects rarely have an infinite number of objects at their disposal. So it wouldn't be a balance issue for Throwers/Casters to be able to bypass Point-Blank Shot because they can't carry around 200 spells or 200 daggers as a ranger can with arrows in a quiver.
RANGED ATTACKS suffer an inherant -4 being aimed into melee because you don't want to hit your friends. Go out to the park with a couple of buddies and try to throw a tennis ball at one of them while they're trying to slap each other.
The mechanic makes a -lot- of sense. Anyone who's ever played a combat archer in a boffer larp can attest that shooting your buddy in the goolies because your target jumped to the left to avoid his swordswing is both embarassing and somewhat common.
You know you also provoke attacks of opportunity for throwing your longsword at someone with Throw Anything? Are they supposed to reprint the entire ranged combat section at the bottom of every ranged combat feat?
Casters: Scrolls and Wands. Four wands of scorching ray = 200 shots. More if the wands are above base level.
I've had a number of blaster casters who have taken point blank and precise shot. For that sort of build, those are more or less standard feats for me. A +1 to hit within 30' is nice for a less than full BAB character, and avoiding the -4 penalty with a ray seems as reasonable as avoiding the same penalty with a bow.
I've never found a problem with it.
If I wanted to build a "throw anything" sort of character, I'd have the same reaction.