Ranged Attacks VS Ranged Weapons


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

33 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 2 people marked this as a favorite.

There is some confusion in another thread about whether or not all ranged attacks suffer the -4 penalty for when someone is in melee.

There is also confusion about whether or not the precise shot feat applies to removing penalties that apply to all ranged attacks because it uses the "ranged weapon" verbage.

Some parts of the game use the term "ranged weapon" instead of "ranged attack".

Example 1:

Quote:
If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.

Example 2:

Quote:

Precise Shot (Combat)

You are adept at firing ranged attacks into melee.

Prerequisite: Point-Blank Shot.
Benefit: You can shoot or throw ranged weapons at an opponent engaged in melee without taking the standard –4 penalty on your attack roll.

The specific FAQ question is bolded below.

Do spells such as Acid Splash and similar effects which are not "weapons", but do use ranged attacks suffer the same -4 penalty to attacks when firing at an opponent in melee, even though they are not weapons?
Do feats such as Precise shot which remove such penalties apply to ranged attacks, even if they specifically weapons?


Ranged attack can be spell, however, ranged weapons needed to be weapon, use weapon. You can't use Precise Shot for Acid Splash because it is not weapon. However, some GMs might let you use that feat with any ray spells or Acid Arrow.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you can't use Precise Shot on spells requiring a ranged attack roll, then you don't suffer the -4 penalty to those attacks when your target is in melee.

Of course, if you want to use the strict wording "ranged weapon," then if my barbarian chooses to throw his greataxe at an enemy in melee, he'll only suffer the -4 improvised weapon penalty, because a greataxe isn't a ranged weapon. So, it's no less effective to throw a greataxe at a character in melee than it is to shoot an arrow at the same character when you don't have Precise Shot.

Additionaly, the Throw Anything feat muddies the water even more. It essentially states that anything you use to make a ranged attack is, by default, a ranged weapon (which actually makes pretty solid logical sense).

d20pfsrd wrote:

Throw Anything (Combat)

You are used to throwing things you have on hand.

Benefit: 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.

Normal: You take a –4 penalty on attack rolls made with an improvised weapon.

I think RAI is that both the penalty and the feat apply to spells requiring ranged attack rolls, but it isn't perfectly clear from the wording used.


darth_gator wrote:

If you can't use Precise Shot on spells requiring a ranged attack roll, then you don't suffer the -4 penalty to those attacks when your target is in melee.

Of course, if you want to use the strict wording "ranged weapon," then if my barbarian chooses to throw his greataxe at an enemy in melee, he'll only suffer the -4 improvised weapon penalty, because a greataxe isn't a ranged weapon. So, it's no less effective to throw a greataxe at a character in melee than it is to shoot an arrow at the same character when you don't have Precise Shot.

Additionaly, the Throw Anything feat muddies the water even more. It essentially states that anything you use to make a ranged attack is, by default, a ranged weapon (which actually makes pretty solid logical sense).

d20pfsrd wrote:

Throw Anything (Combat)

You are used to throwing things you have on hand.

Benefit: 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.

Normal: You take a –4 penalty on attack rolls made with an improvised weapon.

I think RAI is that both the penalty and the feat apply to spells requiring ranged attack rolls, but it isn't perfectly clear from the wording used.

This -4 penalty discussed here is for attacking with an improvised weapon -- not for attacking into melee. So this language in no way stands for what you said it stands for.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DoubleBubble wrote:
Ranged attack can be spell, however, ranged weapons needed to be weapon, use weapon. You can't use Precise Shot for Acid Splash because it is not weapon. However, some GMs might let you use that feat with any ray spells or Acid Arrow.

Rays are specifically called out as working as weapons with feats so a GM that doesn't should.

Liberty's Edge

Rays are specifically called out as being used as a ranged weapon in the Magic chapter, so those types of spells do get the penalty as well as gain benefit of the feat.

Acid Splash isn't a ray, but rather a missile. Regardless of that, mechanically the spell operates in exactly the same way that any ray spell does: you have to succeed on a ranged touch attack to hit your target. Acid splash is affected by the same limitations that ray spells are: you can fire into the darkness or at an invisible creature in the hopes that you hit something, you don't have to see the creature that you're trying to hit, intervening objects or creatures can block line of sight or provide cover.

Although it is not specifically mentioned that ray spells get penalized for allies in melee combat, we know that they do because the rules say that they work just like ranged weapons.

Regarding Acid Splash (and other spells like it), if it works like a ray in every way, and there isn't a rule to call it out as an exception, why wouldn't it be penalized for an ally in combat or gain the benefit of Precise Shot? We all know that the authors can't provide every little minute detail or example in the rules because otherwise the size of the book would swell to an even more unreasonable size. This example falls into that category.


HangarFlying wrote:

Rays are specifically called out as being used as a ranged weapon in the Magic chapter, so those types of spells do get the penalty as well as gain benefit of the feat.

Acid Splash isn't a ray, but rather a missile. Regardless of that, mechanically the spell operates in exactly the same way that any ray spell does: you have to succeed on a ranged touch attack to hit your target. Acid splash is affected by the same limitations that ray spells are: you can fire into the darkness or at an invisible creature in the hopes that you hit something, you don't have to see the creature that you're trying to hit, intervening objects or creatures can block line of sight or provide cover.

Although it is not specifically mentioned that ray spells get penalized for allies in melee combat, we know that they do because the rules say that they work just like ranged weapons.

Regarding Acid Splash (and other spells like it), if it works like a ray in every way, and there isn't a rule to call it out as an exception, why wouldn't it be penalized for an ally in combat or gain the benefit of Precise Shot? We all know that the authors can't provide every little minute detail or example in the rules because otherwise the size of the book would swell to an even more unreasonable size. This example falls into that category.

This is not minute. If all ranged attacks are ranged weapon attacks, then just say so. Alternatively, if all ranged attacks suffer in melee penalties, then just say so.

I don't know whether the writers want: 1) To subject non-ray ranged spells to in-melee penalties and allow spellcasters to use PBS and PS to overcoming the penalties; 2) To subject such spells to in-melee penalties and not allow spellcasters to overcome the penalties with PBS and PS; or 3) To not subject such spells to in-melee penalties making PBS and PS irrelevant.

All three possibility have rule-based and/or game-balance implications too big to ignore and yet they have gone ignored. This is not minute and is easy to clear up.


We've been told that Ray's act like weapons. We've been given nothing to indicate that acid splash type spells should also be treated as weapons or should be treated as rays.

This is kinda made clear by this question
For acid splash, what do you take weapon focus in to have it work?
Weapon focus "Ray" works for all ray spells. So WF acid splash doesn't seem like the correct option, we don't WF ray of frost and WF scorching ray. But we can't have WF spells because rays are spells. WF ranged non-ray spells?

It's very easy to have written this issue to cover such questions if they had wanted to by saying ranged attacks instead of ranged weapon attacks or ranged weapons. Was there meant to be a difference or should all of them mean the same thing?


darth_gator wrote:

If you can't use Precise Shot on spells requiring a ranged attack roll, then you don't suffer the -4 penalty to those attacks when your target is in melee.

Of course, if you want to use the strict wording "ranged weapon," then if my barbarian chooses to throw his greataxe at an enemy in melee, he'll only suffer the -4 improvised weapon penalty, because a greataxe isn't a ranged weapon. So, it's no less effective to throw a greataxe at a character in melee than it is to shoot an arrow at the same character when you don't have Precise Shot.

When used that way the greataxe becomes a thrown improvised weapon, and would take a -8 without precise shot

The Concordance

I'm okay with spells (minus rays and weapon-like ones) getting around the ranged weapon penalties. That's just my opinion. I think it will reduce the value of said spells if you couldn't cast them without penalty during most combat situations.

In either case, a FAQ is necessary I think.

Liberty's Edge

Driver_325yards wrote:

This is not minute. If all ranged attacks are ranged weapon attacks, then just say so. Alternatively, if all ranged attacks suffer in melee penalties, then just say so.

I don't know whether the writers want: 1) To subject non-ray ranged spells to in-melee penalties and allow spellcasters to use PBS and PS to overcoming the penalties; 2) To subject such spells to in-melee penalties and not allow spellcasters to overcome the penalties with PBS and PS; or 3) To not subject such spells to in-melee penalties making PBS and PS irrelevant.

All three possibility have rule-based and/or game-balance implications too big to ignore and yet they have gone ignored. This is not...

The rules already tell us that rays function like ranged weapon attacks. Ranged weapon attacks suffer in-melee penalties. Rays, therefore, suffer in-melee penalties. You can use the Precise Shot and Point Blank Shot feats for rays.

Acid Splash functions like rays, smells like rays, feels like rays, and tastes like rays. Why wouldn't the rules that apply to rays not apply to Acid Splash? If there are no rules that specifically state that Acid Splash doesn't work that way, there is no reason to assume that it doesn't.


Acid Splash isn't a ray.
EDIT:
Or do you propose that Weapon focus ray works for acid splash?


Or does he propose that you would have to take something as specific as Weapon Focus (Acid Splash)?

Or does he propose that you could take something as general as Weapon Focus (Spell Range Touch Attack) and it would cover rays, acid splash, snowball, and whatever else?


Chess Pwn wrote:

We've been told that Ray's act like weapons. We've been given nothing to indicate that acid splash type spells should also be treated as weapons or should be treated as rays.

This is kinda made clear by this question
For acid splash, what do you take weapon focus in to have it work?
Weapon focus "Ray" works for all ray spells. So WF acid splash doesn't seem like the correct option, we don't WF ray of frost and WF scorching ray. But we can't have WF spells because rays are spells. WF ranged non-ray spells?

It's very easy to have written this issue to cover such questions if they had wanted to by saying ranged attacks instead of ranged weapon attacks or ranged weapons. Was there meant to be a difference or should all of them mean the same thing?

I think all ranged attacks are meant to suffer the same penalties, but like a few other rules the wording is not as good as it was meant, such as how haste once specifically called out "held weapons", but that was not the intent.


True, but his stance was that, "it functions like rays, smells like rays, feels like rays, and tastes like rays. Why wouldn't the rules that apply to rays not apply to Acid Splash?"
Weapon focus ray applies to rays. he's saying that anything that applies to a ray should apply to acid splash. That should mean that his view is that weapon focus ray works for acid splash.

But you cannot take Weapon Focus (Spell Range Touch Attack)

Quote:
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.

(Spell Range Touch Attack) is not a type of weapon because ray is a "type of weapon" choice for spellcasters. If you could do (Spell Range Touch Attack) why wouldn't have have put that in instead of just ray?

And I don't believe you could do Weapon Focus (Acid Splash) as acid splash isn't a type of weapon.


Chess Pwn wrote:

True, but his stance was that, "it functions like rays, smells like rays, feels like rays, and tastes like rays. Why wouldn't the rules that apply to rays not apply to Acid Splash?"

Weapon focus ray applies to rays. he's saying that anything that applies to a ray should apply to acid splash. That should mean that his view is that weapon focus ray works for acid splash.

But you cannot take Weapon Focus (Spell Range Touch Attack)

Quote:
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.

(Spell Range Touch Attack) is not a type of weapon because ray is a "type of weapon" choice for spellcasters. If you could do (Spell Range Touch Attack) why wouldn't have have put that in instead of just ray?

And I don't believe you could do Weapon Focus (Acid Splash) as acid splash isn't a type of weapon.

Oh, I agree with you. However, if his stance is correct, then Weapon Focus (Ray) is essentially Weapon Focus (Spell Range Touch Attack). Also, if he is correct, why were Rays every specifically distinguished separately from all of the other "ray-like" spells. He is essentially saying that the word Ray is flavor and that the FAQ addressed flavor text.


Driver_325yards wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

True, but his stance was that, "it functions like rays, smells like rays, feels like rays, and tastes like rays. Why wouldn't the rules that apply to rays not apply to Acid Splash?"

Weapon focus ray applies to rays. he's saying that anything that applies to a ray should apply to acid splash. That should mean that his view is that weapon focus ray works for acid splash.
...
And I don't believe you could do Weapon Focus (Acid Splash) as acid splash isn't a type of weapon.
Oh, I agree with you. However, if his stance is correct, then Weapon Focus (Ray) is essentially Weapon Focus (Spell Range Touch Attack). Also, if he is correct, why were Rays every specifically distinguished separately from all of the other "ray-like" spells. He is essentially saying that the word Ray is flavor and that the FAQ addressed flavor text.

I don't see anything wrong with Weapon Focus(Acid Splash). I can imagine a wizard practicing every day by hitting objects thrown by his friends with Acid Splash spells. The difference between Weapon Focus(Acid Splash) and Weapon Focus(ray) is that the first would apply only to one spell and the second applies to all ray spells. A conjured missile of acid has unique aerodynamic properties, but aiming one ray is like aiming any other ray.

However, I think that declaring that spells that require attack rolls are weapons would open a long chain of FAQs. For example, a wizard's weapon proficiencies are:

Core Rulebook, Wizard wrote:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Wizards are proficient with the club, dagger, heavy crossbow, light crossbow, and quarterstaff, but not with any type of armor or shield. Armor interferes with a wizard's movements, which can cause his spells with somatic components to fail.

I don't see "ray" or "acid splash" listed in those proficiencies. If rays are weapons the same as crossbows, then the wizard is not proficient with rays and would have a –4 non-proficiency penalty on his attack rolls.

I would rather simply declare that the –4 shooting-into-melee penalty and Precise Shot apply to all ranged attacks, not simply attacks with ranged weapons.


Chess Pwn wrote:

True, but his stance was that, "it functions like rays, smells like rays, feels like rays, and tastes like rays. Why wouldn't the rules that apply to rays not apply to Acid Splash?"

Weapon focus ray applies to rays. he's saying that anything that applies to a ray should apply to acid splash. That should mean that his view is that weapon focus ray works for acid splash.

But you cannot take Weapon Focus (Spell Range Touch Attack)

Quote:
Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.

(Spell Range Touch Attack) is not a type of weapon because ray is a "type of weapon" choice for spellcasters. If you could do (Spell Range Touch Attack) why wouldn't have have put that in instead of just ray?

And I don't believe you could do Weapon Focus (Acid Splash) as acid splash isn't a type of weapon.

ok. I agree that it is not a ray because a ray is a specific thing, which is why I just propose that the PDT just say the penalties apply to all ranged attacks, and that precise shot apply to all ranged attacks. That way they won't need a weapon focus(all touch attacks that are not rays) weapon. <---I am sure they would word it better than that, but it would just still problems.


But would you be able to apply Weapon focus, bardic performance, arcane strike, PBS, etc. apply to acid splash? Or does acid splash get all the negatives and none of the positives?


Chess Pwn wrote:
get all the negatives and none of the positives?

It seems to be a popular position whenever this kind of debate arises.


Chess Pwn wrote:
But would you be able to apply Weapon focus, bardic performance, arcane strike, PBS, etc. apply to acid splash? Or does acid splash get all the negatives and none of the positives?

I don't know how to apply weapon focus to acid splash since it is not a weapon. I think the PDT would say not to that feat, but clear things up so that the default penalties any ways to remove them worked for all ranged attacks.

I am going off of memory, but I though bardic performance called out attacks, and damage, not weapons.


wraithstrike wrote:


I don't know how to apply weapon focus to acid splash since it is not a weapon.

Maybe disregard the name of the feat and allow it to apply to any specific attack you would like to focus on?


wraithstrike wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
But would you be able to apply Weapon focus, bardic performance, arcane strike, PBS, etc. apply to acid splash? Or does acid splash get all the negatives and none of the positives?

I don't know how to apply weapon focus to acid splash since it is not a weapon. I think the PDT would say not to that feat, but clear things up so that the default penalties any ways to remove them worked for all ranged attacks.

I am going off of memory, but I though bardic performance called out attacks, and damage, not weapons.

a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.


Chess Pwn wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
But would you be able to apply Weapon focus, bardic performance, arcane strike, PBS, etc. apply to acid splash? Or does acid splash get all the negatives and none of the positives?

I don't know how to apply weapon focus to acid splash since it is not a weapon. I think the PDT would say not to that feat, but clear things up so that the default penalties any ways to remove them worked for all ranged attacks.

I am going off of memory, but I though bardic performance called out attacks, and damage, not weapons.

a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.

Huh. The damage bonus specifies that you need a weapon, but the attack bonus doesn't. So would Acid Splash get the bonus to the attack roll but not the bonus on damage?


Gisher wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
But would you be able to apply Weapon focus, bardic performance, arcane strike, PBS, etc. apply to acid splash? Or does acid splash get all the negatives and none of the positives?

I don't know how to apply weapon focus to acid splash since it is not a weapon. I think the PDT would say not to that feat, but clear things up so that the default penalties any ways to remove them worked for all ranged attacks.

I am going off of memory, but I though bardic performance called out attacks, and damage, not weapons.

a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.
Huh. The damage bonus specifies that you need a weapon, but the attack bonus doesn't. So would Acid Splash get the bonus to the attack roll but not the bonus on damage?

I think the intent is for it to either apply the bonus to the attack and damage to the same ability or neither one.

The Concordance

Gisher wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
But would you be able to apply Weapon focus, bardic performance, arcane strike, PBS, etc. apply to acid splash? Or does acid splash get all the negatives and none of the positives?

I don't know how to apply weapon focus to acid splash since it is not a weapon. I think the PDT would say not to that feat, but clear things up so that the default penalties any ways to remove them worked for all ranged attacks.

I am going off of memory, but I though bardic performance called out attacks, and damage, not weapons.

a +1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.
Huh. The damage bonus specifies that you need a weapon, but the attack bonus doesn't. So would Acid Splash get the bonus to the attack roll but not the bonus on damage?

Correct. The "weapon" rider only applies to the damage rolls. You'll get the competence to attack rolls with non weapons.


wraithstrike wrote:


I think the intent is for it to either apply the bonus to the attack and damage to the same ability or neither one.

Who ever really knows intent. I think intent is determined after the fact to justify whatever ruling. At the end of the day it's game balance that rules the day and I am okay with that.

Also, why can't they just call acid splash a weapon so you can get the bonus to damage and attack? What am I missing that makes the writers what to keep some things that do damage with an attack roll in the realm of weapons and others in this amorphous world of things that seem like weapon attacks is every way but aren't because they have not been labeled as such. It just all seems so unnecessarily complicated. Rays v. Acid Splash? Really and why?

I say if they are going to address the FAQ just fix the whole problem and do away with unnecessary distinctions.


In 3.5 there were more than one type of weapon-like spell, and you could weapon-focus the different types. Acid splash is a missile which was one of the types. Paizo tried to clean up the rules some from 3.5 but there are things like this that slip through. I think they ought to re-add weapon-like spell types for our play. I don't find lacking the shooting-into-melee penalty for many spells to be much of a problem personally. Concealment and cover apply to all ranged attacks, and they're what are important at higher levels.


Driver_325yards wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


I think the intent is for it to either apply the bonus to the attack and damage to the same ability or neither one.

Who ever really knows intent. I think intent is determined after the fact to justify whatever ruling.

I think that is true sometimes, but I think most of the time the ruling is already in place with core rules. They just have to decide how to word it so it won't create more questions.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

wraithstrike wrote:


I think that is true sometimes, but I think most of the time the ruling is already in place with core rules. They just have to decide how to word it so it won't create more questions.

+1

I also think there are a ton of times they say repetitively what it should be. Say like the stacking multiple Cha to a thing. That resulted in a FAQ that matched what they had always said. They don't stack except when different bonuses.


*Sigh* really?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Statboy wrote:
darth_gator wrote:

If you can't use Precise Shot on spells requiring a ranged attack roll, then you don't suffer the -4 penalty to those attacks when your target is in melee.

Of course, if you want to use the strict wording "ranged weapon," then if my barbarian chooses to throw his greataxe at an enemy in melee, he'll only suffer the -4 improvised weapon penalty, because a greataxe isn't a ranged weapon. So, it's no less effective to throw a greataxe at a character in melee than it is to shoot an arrow at the same character when you don't have Precise Shot.

When used that way the greataxe becomes a thrown improvised weapon, and would take a -8 without precise shot

Please quote the specific rules text that says throwing a melee weapon changes the weapon's type to Ranged or Thrown. From a basic understanding of English, yes, that is absolutely true. And how many times have we found that basic English meanings aren't necessarily applicable to PFRPG rules? In PFRPG, "ranged weapon" is a specific list if tangible things, and greataxe does not appear on that list, ergo, a greataxe is not a "ranged weapon." Additionally, because the greataxe isn't a "ranged weapon," Precise Shot wouldn't apply to the attack anyway.

For what it's worth, I agree that a character would take -8 to the attack roll when throwing a greataxe at a target engaged in melee, because RAI pretty clearly intends it to be so (and I would allow a character to apply Precise Shot, because I interpret "attacks with ranged weapons" to mean "attack rolls made from range"...but that's interpretation, not RAW). But the question is whether or not Precise Shot applies to ranged attacks made with spells that are not specifically identified as 'ranged weapons'. If someone is going to be so pedantic as to limit a feat's applicability because it specifically says "ranged weapon," then they have to apply the same pedantry to each instance that specific phrase is used. Hence my (somewhat ridiculous) example: The -4 penalty to attacking into melee at range ONLY applies to those items that are specifically identified as "ranged weapons."

Liberty's Edge

Driver_325yards wrote:
darth_gator wrote:

If you can't use Precise Shot on spells requiring a ranged attack roll, then you don't suffer the -4 penalty to those attacks when your target is in melee.

Of course, if you want to use the strict wording "ranged weapon," then if my barbarian chooses to throw his greataxe at an enemy in melee, he'll only suffer the -4 improvised weapon penalty, because a greataxe isn't a ranged weapon. So, it's no less effective to throw a greataxe at a character in melee than it is to shoot an arrow at the same character when you don't have Precise Shot.

Additionaly, the Throw Anything feat muddies the water even more. It essentially states that anything you use to make a ranged attack is, by default, a ranged weapon (which actually makes pretty solid logical sense).

d20pfsrd wrote:

Throw Anything (Combat)

You are used to throwing things you have on hand.

Benefit: 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.

Normal: You take a –4 penalty on attack rolls made with an improvised weapon.

I think RAI is that both the penalty and the feat apply to spells requiring ranged attack rolls, but it isn't perfectly clear from the wording used.

This -4 penalty discussed here is for attacking with an improvised weapon -- not for attacking into melee. So this language in no way stands for what you said it stands for.

Please reread my entire original post. I understand the wording for Throw Anything is referencing the improvised weapon penalty, not firing into melee. Actually, the part of the rule I was interested in has nothing to do with the penalty listed under "Normal." It was actually, "You do not suffer any penalties for using an improvised ranged weapon." This seems to indicate that making an attack with ANYTHING from range makes that thing a ranged weapon. Which, as I said originally, makes sense.

The point is that a greataxe is a melee weapon. There isn't a single phrase in the rules that explicitly states throwing it makes it a ranged weapon...except the rules text in Throw Anything. Therefore, if one is going to be pedantic about the exact wording in Precise Shot, i.e. it only applies to "ranged weapons," then every other rule that specifically references "ranged weapons" (such as using a ranged weapon against a character engaged in melee) ONLY applies to ranged weapons...which the greataxe is not. Even if you throw it. Because it's a melee weapon.

Again, I do NOT take that position. It's intended as a demonstration how taking the phrase "ranged weapon" in Precise Shot to mean ONLY those weapons that appear on the list of codified Ranged Weapons can cause nonsensical issues with other ranged attacks.

The Concordance

So the words "for using an improvised ranged weapon" in Throw Anything don't mean anything? It's telling you the classification in the feat.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

darth_gator wrote:


Greataxe is a melee. There isn't a single phrase in the rules that explicitly states throwing it makes it a ranged weapon

I get your view.

I couldn't disagree more.

You won't be convinced by rules post I believe says its ranged.

Can we both agree to leave it as "Ask your GM"?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually under melee and ranged weapons (CRB pg.141) you'll see they've defined "Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."

Below, under the text on thrown weapons it describes how to treat throwing a weapon not designed to be. A thrown 2-handed weapon attack is a full round action, and for any such it has range increment 10, 20/x2 criticals and -4 to hit penalty. If you look on pg. 144, where improvised weapons are defined it is the same penalty and other stats. So yes, there is a phrase defining your thrown greataxe as a ranged weapon (and thus a firing into melee penalty when applicable.

What there isn't is any text stating that its considered an improvised ranged weapon. It has exactly the same combat rules as for an improvised weapon, and most likely an gm will let Throw Anything cover it, but RAW it doesn't seem to be.

Liberty's Edge

James Risner wrote:
darth_gator wrote:


Greataxe is a melee. There isn't a single phrase in the rules that explicitly states throwing it makes it a ranged weapon

I get your view.

I couldn't disagree more.

You won't be convinced by rules post I believe says its ranged.

Can we both agree to leave it as "Ask your GM"?

Again, cite the actual rule that says throwing a melee weapon changes the weapon's type to Ranged Weapon. You can believe there's a rule that says it's ranged, but I'm not finding it in the CRB. Common sense and logic don't apply to PFRPG rules; this has been established multiple times.

Neither the rule on CRB Pg. 141 regarding thrown weapons, nor the rule on CRB Pg. 144 regarding improvised weapons explicitly states that throwing a melee weapon makes it a "Ranged Weapon." Those rules explain properties and uses of official thrown weapons and improvised weapons; they say nothing about changing a weapon's type from melee to ranged. Assuming those weapons would change type is logical and reasonable; it isn't codified as RAW.

I'll reiterate one more time and I'm out: I don't believe that's RAI, and in no game I run would I treat thrown melee weapons as anything other than a ranged weapon for determining if Precise Shot, Point Blank Shot, or penalties for using a ranged weapon against a target engaged in melee apply to an attack with a thrown melee weapon. Everything I've posted on this is commentary on how it would be asinine to use the specific phrase "Ranged Weapon" in various rules to mean that those rules are limited to applying ONLY to items that appear on the official Ranged Weapon list. The examples I cited are only a few of the examples where it's pretty clear those rules are intended to apply to any ranged attack a character makes.


darth_gator wrote:


Neither the rule on CRB Pg. 141 regarding thrown weapons, nor the rule on CRB Pg. 144 regarding improvised weapons explicitly states that throwing a melee weapon makes it a "Ranged Weapon." Those rules explain properties and uses of official thrown weapons and improvised weapons; they say nothing about changing a weapon's type from melee to ranged. Assuming those weapons would change type is logical and reasonable; it isn't codified as RAW.

CRB wrote:
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.

If you throw it, it is ranged. There is no limiter stating it must have the thrown quality or a range increment (although even that would still qualify improvised thrown weapons as they have a 10' range increment) or any other quality - you throw it, it is ranged. Explicitly.


wraithstrike wrote:

There is some confusion in another thread about whether or not all ranged attacks suffer the -4 penalty for when someone is in melee.

There is also confusion about whether or not the precise shot feat applies to removing penalties that apply to all ranged attacks because it uses the "ranged weapon" verbage.

What about ammunition? If you range attack with shuriken (which is not a weapon but ammunition), does it get the -4 into melee? Does it benefit from Precise Shot / Weapon Focus?

/cevah

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

darth_gator wrote:

Neither the rule on CRB Pg. 141 regarding thrown weapons, nor the rule on CRB Pg. 144 regarding improvised weapons explicitly states that throwing a melee weapon makes it a "Ranged Weapon."

The examples I cited are only a few of the examples where it's pretty clear those rules are intended to apply to any ranged attack a character makes.

This last post by you makes me question whether or not we are saying the same thing.

If you throw a Greatsword or shutdown, it's a ranged weapon while adjudicating that attack.
Anything that adds to ranged weapons will add to that ranged Greatsword attack.


Arcwin wrote:

Actually under melee and ranged weapons (CRB pg.141) you'll see they've defined "Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."

That's kind of a terrible definition. By that definition, a spear, dagger, throwing shield, or sword with the returning property wouldn't be ranged weapons, because all of them are effective in melee.


Scythia wrote:
Arcwin wrote:

Actually under melee and ranged weapons (CRB pg.141) you'll see they've defined "Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."

That's kind of a terrible definition. By that definition, a spear, dagger, throwing shield, or sword with the returning property wouldn't be ranged weapons, because all of them are effective in melee.

^This

By the definition offered, any weapon that is effective in melee in NOT classified as a ranged weapon when thrown.


Cevah wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

There is some confusion in another thread about whether or not all ranged attacks suffer the -4 penalty for when someone is in melee.

There is also confusion about whether or not the precise shot feat applies to removing penalties that apply to all ranged attacks because it uses the "ranged weapon" verbage.

What about ammunition? If you range attack with shuriken (which is not a weapon but ammunition), does it get the -4 into melee? Does it benefit from Precise Shot / Weapon Focus?

/cevah

This is incorrect, shuriken only counts as ammunition for crafting, drawing and what happens when they hit. Also they specify that shuriken cannot be used as a melee weapon.

The Concordance

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Arcwin wrote:

Actually under melee and ranged weapons (CRB pg.141) you'll see they've defined "Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."

That's kind of a terrible definition. By that definition, a spear, dagger, throwing shield, or sword with the returning property wouldn't be ranged weapons, because all of them are effective in melee.

^This

By the definition offered, any weapon that is effective in melee in NOT classified as a ranged weapon when thrown.

Eh, it's poorly written. I've always interpreted it as...

Ranged weapons are:
•thrown weapons
•projectile weapons that are not effective in melee

Its describing only the projectile weapons as being ineffective in melee, not both.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

I've always interpreted it as...

Ranged weapons are:

  • thrown weapons
  • projectile weapons that are not effective in melee
  • spells and supernatural abilities using ranged touch attacks


Scythia wrote:
Arcwin wrote:

Actually under melee and ranged weapons (CRB pg.141) you'll see they've defined "Ranged weapons are thrown weapons or projectile weapons that are not effective in melee."

That's kind of a terrible definition. By that definition, a spear, dagger, throwing shield, or sword with the returning property wouldn't be ranged weapons, because all of them are effective in melee.

Agree with the above, that's only if you parse it as (thrown weapons or projectile weapons) that are not effective in melee.

Seems like (thrown weapons) or (projectile weapons that are not effective in melee) makes more sense though.

James Risner wrote:


  • spells and supernatural abilities using ranged touch attacks[/list]
  • I have to disagree with this one. There are certain spells that are called out as 'weaponlike', such as rays, but I can't find anything to support the idea that say, acid splash or snowball is a weapon.

    Sorta strange that the FAQ on rays doesn't touch that at all.


    ShieldLawrence wrote:


    Eh, it's poorly written. I've always interpreted it as...

    I agree, both with the poorly written and the intended interpretation.

    It's just a word of warning for the overly pedantic trying to argue spells like Acid Splash should suffer from penalties, but are unable to benefit from feats.

    The repercussions from an overly pedantic reading extend far beyond spells, and not in the direction intended.

    The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

    Snowlilly wrote:
    Acid Splash should suffer from penalties, but are unable to benefit from feats.

    That doesn't make sense.

    Past developer comments (now rendered "unofficial" by the SRM post) made it clear that if you roll an attack and you deal damage, that spell or ability would be considered a ray and as such a weapon.


    James Risner wrote:
    Snowlilly wrote:
    Acid Splash should suffer from penalties, but are unable to benefit from feats.

    That doesn't make sense.

    Past developer comments (now rendered "unofficial" by the SRM post) made it clear that if you roll an attack and you deal damage, that spell or ability would be considered a ray and as such a weapon.

    Can you provide any of these commentS that are not the one where SKR said that the Sound Striker's Weird Words should be a ray. But any of these many posts you say that say all of them should be rays?

    The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Chess Pwn wrote:
    Can you provide any of these comments

    I could provide 50 posts, if I felt the time was needed or would be appreciated. I'll provide one more post:

    Any spell or ability takes the penalties and provides the benefits, so long as it takes an attack roll and deals hit point damage.

    Edit: Since this was the post right after on my search, I'll Mark Seifter saying that it is intentional that wizards must have Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot to avoid the penalties.

    1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Ranged Attacks VS Ranged Weapons All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.