So, a few folks in my discord were discussing the viability of thrown weapon ranger builds the other night, and we stumbled on an interesting area of the rules.
The Thrown trait (post-Errata) states in it's first line that: "You can throw this weapon as a ranged attack, and it is a ranged weapon when thrown."
So great, Hatchets and Daggers (as an example) are melee weapons, but are ranged weapons when thrown. But then we started to look and work out what feats that qualifies a thrown weapon ranger to use:
___________________________________________________________________________ __
Twin Takedown states in it's requirements line: You are wielding two melee weapons, each in a different hand.
This is unquestionably true when you're holding two daggers, as they are melee weapons- wield's definition is: "You’re wielding an item any time you’re holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively."
The rest of Twin Takedown only instructs you to make strikes with the required weapons, I'm trying to work out if that means you cannot leverage the thrown trait when using Twin Takedown, or if its fine because they were still melee weapons when you were wielding them.
___________________________________________________________________________ __
Penetrating Shot meanwhile has this line in it's requirements: You are wielding a ranged weapon. Now when you're throwing a dagger, it becomes a ranged weapon, does it qualify for this requirement?
In it's description: Make a single ranged Strike with the required weapon against the chosen target and your hunted prey.
Obviously the "make a single RANGED Strike" means you have to throw the dagger if you're allowed to use it in the first place.
___________________________________________________________________________ ___
So I've got a few interpretations, and I'm the GM, and I can't decide which to go with, I'd love RAW overall, and RAI a close second, but I can't decide what either of those are:
#1 is that when you trigger the Twin Takedown feat, they are explicitly melee weapons as listed in the requirement. If this is true Twin Takedown works only so long as you make melee strikes with your daggers, as the text says to make a strike with the required weapon (which includes the word melee.) This might also allow penetrating shot to work under the same logic- since it can be a ranged weapon, you can use the feat and are locked into the corresponding type, but it also might not because you hadn't thrown the dagger and therefore you were still wielding a melee weapon not a ranged one.
#2 is that when you trigger the Twin Takedown feat, they are melee weapons at the time you're wielding them, but since the strikes don't specify melee strikes, you can use the required melee weapon you were wielding to make ranged strikes instead, because the required weapon is capable of that. This would provide Thrown Weapon Rangers with some currently needed support. Penetrating shot however definitely ceases to work because it can't become a ranged weapon until after the feat is triggered, and therefore can't fulfill the wielded line.
Obviously this whole mess hinges on order of operations for requirements- does it being a ranged weapon when it's thrown, make it a ranged weapon when your GM is deciding whether you can use the feat? Does it being a melee weapon when you're "wielding it ready to use" allow you to make strikes of any kind with it since it was still the required weapon, or does it still have to fulfill all the requirements at time of attack resolution (even though "attacking with something" and "wielding something" are different timepoints)
Yes, the nebulous state of thrown weapons bothers me too. You can have an unused bow (perhaps even broken!) in one hand to activate Point Blank Shot stance for throwing with your other hand!
Javelins, simple weapons, become great weapons simply for bypassing argumentation!
Going by intent, I'd say Paizo wants ranged weapon feats (et al) to work with ranged weapons, with the errata clarifying that yes, melee/thrown count as ranged when thrown. Some RAW conflicts with this, i.e. PBS stance ends when you're not holding a ranged weapon...which happens when you throw.
I'd say Twin Takedown only works when making melee strikes, but with Hunted Shot needing a Reload: 0, I'm not sure that's fair. There's an awkwardness since javelins definitely wouldn't work.
Which is to say, I think RAW does a disservice to throwers, and PF2's sensibilities too. Unless there's wording about reload or some element beyond "ranged", I'd say thrown weapons work fine as long as you're throwing. So if you used a melee Strike while in Point Blank Shot, I'd end the stance. Funnily enough, that guy still holding the broken bow wouldn't have to worry about this...which is lame and why we need GMs to adjudicate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely lean towards interpretation 2.
As I read it a dagger is a melee weapon and only "counts as" a ranged weapon when actively being thrown. So you could absolutely throw a dagger using Twin Takedown; there is no action required to change how you are holding the dagger before you throw it. Twin Takedown says to perform a strike with each weapon; throwing the dagger is a method of striking with it.
This does mean that daggers would not however enable Penetrating Shot, as you are wielding a melee weapon and not a ranged one. Because the dagger is only considered a ranged weapon when being thrown, you would never have a window of opportunity to use Penetrating shot with them.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This does mean that daggers would not however enable Penetrating Shot, as you are wielding a melee weapon and not a ranged one. Because the dagger is only considered a ranged weapon when being thrown, you would never have a window of opportunity to use Penetrating shot with them.
You must wield a weapon to use it hence you must have a ranged weapon wielded to use it, or in this case throw it: it might only be for the action you actually throw it but for that action, you're wielding it as a ranged weapon. As such, Penetrating Shot seems fine IMO. If it's wasn't wielded, it couldn't be thrown...
This is pretty much the same debate we had over the Thief rogue and the answer from on high was Interpretation 1.
This is pretty much the same debate we had over the Thief rogue and the answer from on high was Interpretation 1.
Do you have a link by chance? I don't remember that one.
Basically a lot of talk about whether or not you treated ranged attacks with melee weapons still as using melee weapons or not.
The answer was or not (though not said as explicitly as I would have liked).
Thanks for the responses everyone! It sounds like you need to use the feat for the specific activity you're trying to do with thrown- e.g. a character who expects to be able to really use thrown weapons is meant to either wait for additional support, or take a combination of ranged and melee weapon feats and use them separately?
I might house rule this a little until we have better feat support in place myself, but this thread has helped me make a more informed decision, still happy to take more input if anyone has thoughts on the matter.
I think it would become far too unwieldy and unrealistic for throwing weapons to be constantly deciding if you're wielding them as melee or as ranged weapons. Since they're clearly equipped with the intent and capability of both options, I think both feats should work fine with thrown weapons. I'm not going to spend the time reading it like a criminal code to determine if that's true RAW or not, but I would bet money that RAI that's the case.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it would become far too unwieldy and unrealistic for throwing weapons to be constantly deciding if you're wielding them as melee or as ranged weapons. Since they're clearly equipped with the intent and capability of both options, I think both feats should work fine with thrown weapons. I'm not going to spend the time reading it like a criminal code to determine if that's true RAW or not, but I would bet money that RAI that's the case.
With the one case we know of, no Dex-to-damage w/ Thief Rogues throwing melee weapons, this is explicitly untrue. The weapons may be built to alternate between both options (as the errata semi-clarified), but it seems not to have both traits at the same time.
Rule as you like of course, but I find it simple to know when my melee+thrown weapon is being used w/ a melee feat in melee or as a ranged weapon w/ a ranged feat. The versatility is still remarkable, even if it means having two sets of feats that don't interact w/ each other.And if somebody used a javelin (which is only a ranged weapon) as an improvised melee weapon w/ a PC's melee ability, that'd be fine to me.
However, using your weapon for melee strikes will very likely end the stance since you would effectively be using a melee weapon.
By the same logic, melee stances that require the use of a melee weapon would end as well with a throw
Well that depends: if you have 2 hands and 2 weapons you can be in a ranged stance that requires wielding a melee weapon and still throw a dagger without dropping out. Same the other direction: for instance, wielding a Spiked Gauntlet doesn't drop you out of Point-Blank Shot or Multishot Stance as long as you have a bow or Shuriken in the other hand. It's just the dual weapon strikes that require both to be the same.
The description of the thrown trait makes this quite explicit:I think it would become far too unwieldy and unrealistic for throwing weapons to be constantly deciding if you're wielding them as melee or as ranged weapons. Since they're clearly equipped with the intent and capability of both options, I think both feats should work fine with thrown weapons. I'm not going to spend the time reading it like a criminal code to determine if that's true RAW or not, but I would bet money that RAI that's the case.With the one case we know of, no Dex-to-damage w/ Thief Rogues throwing melee weapons, this is explicitly untrue. The weapons may be built to alternate between both options (as the errata semi-clarified), but it seems not to have both traits at the same time.
Rule as you like of course, but I find it simple to know when my melee+thrown weapon is being used w/ a melee feat in melee or as a ranged weapon w/ a ranged feat. The versatility is still remarkable, even if it means having two sets of feats that don't interact w/ each other.And if somebody used a javelin (which is only a ranged weapon) as an improvised melee weapon w/ a PC's melee ability, that'd be fine to me.
You can throw this weapon as a ranged attack, and it is a ranged weapon when thrown. A thrown weapon adds your Strength modifier to damage just like a melee weapon does. When this trait appears on a melee weapon, it also includes the range increment. Ranged weapons with this trait use the range increment specified in the weapon’s Range entry.When it comes to ranged stances that require wielding a ranged weapon, unless your campaign is extremly stingy in treasure, returning runes are available fairly early and make your thrown weapons return to your hands almost instantly, then you wouldn't lose the benefit of the stance after a single attack. However, using your weapon for melee strikes will very likely end the stance since you would effectively...
Since the errata, everybody seems to agree that a thrown weapon is ranged when thrown. Hopefully that's not an issue, and feats that require you to perform a ranged Strike should be okey-dokey.
But is it melee while thrown? Judging from the Dex-to-damage ruling, no, it's not, so other abilities requiring you to use/hold a melee weapon would also not function.
And is a melee/thrown weapon a ranged weapon between throws?
Point Blank Shot needs us to know because your stance ends if you're not armed with a ranged weapon (since you fail to meet the prereqs).
I'd say yes, much as I think you would: the stance remains active, at least while you're busy throwing.
But a (too) rigorous reading would say no: Your thrown weapon isn't a ranged weapon in between throws. And that split second when the weapon's in the air? You're also not equipped with a ranged weapon.
Remember, I don't agree with that strict interpretation, but I also play some PFS (with at least one overzealous rules-idolator in leadership) so I'd like a clear paragraph re: thrown.
Right now it's wonky. Like I mention above, you could carry a broken bow to bypass the prereq. And for many of the melee stances, gauntlets remove the troubles re: melee/thrown, though you wouldn't gain the stances melee benefits on the thrown attacks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then if it's that wonky and impractical, use anything else but a thrown weapon for ranged stances. Problem solved. It's not as if they were some rare treasure either.
Demanding the rules bend to your will so that one specific build you're trying to make works is pure entitlement. Weapons of different types have their own limitations and it has never been a bad thing.
The funny thing is, your RAI mirrors mine so I guess you too must be "demanding the rules bend to your will" due to your entitlement.
Asking for clarity on the intended breadth/limits of an ability is not "demanding" nor is interpreting a rule in good faith so it makes sense (as advised in the CRB) "bending".
Given that you're a mind reader, FlashRebel, I think I'll withdraw from conversing with you. You obviously are content having a conversation with a straw golem and/or mirror golem of your own making.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the simplest way to rule it is to treat it as whatever type matches the attack you're making and while you're wielding it it counts either way.
So yes to point blank shot or any other weapon stance, but it's only ever going to benefit from melee weapon abilities when making melee strikes and ranged abilities when making ranged strikes.
Still has a little bit of weirdness, but it's in line with what Mark said in the other thread, downplays shenanigans and isn't too technical.
So yes to point blank shot or any other weapon stance, but it's only ever going to benefit from melee weapon abilities when making melee strikes and ranged abilities when making ranged strikes
What makes things weird, IMO, is stances that require ranged weapons and reload. Reload 0 means that drawing ammunition and firing the weapon are part of the same action while “—” must be drawn to be thrown, which usually takes an Interact action just like drawing any other weapon. Taking that into account with thrown weapons [both of the melee and ranged type], this means that if only wielding a single thrown weapon, you are automatically knocked out of the stance after an attack with it as you're without a weapon wielded at the start of your next action... Returning fixes it, but you shouldn't need a magic item to make a ranged weapon [or have to hold a sling or some other ranged weapon in your other hand but not use it], like a Javelins or Darts, in a ranged stance IMO. For myself, it fits the description of "clunky".
Demanding the rules bend to your will so that one specific build you're trying to make works is pure entitlement.
Um... I find it hard to see how expecting a weapon that is ALWAYS a ranged weapon to actually work in a ranged stance as entitled: It more sounds like expecting keywords to work fairly and equally no matter what they are attached to and not have them work differently just because you picked the incorrect one. It shouldn't come as a surprise when you pick a weapon from the required type on the list that it then doesn't work well with the stance you just took.
So yes to point blank shot or any other weapon stance, but it's only ever going to benefit from melee weapon abilities when making melee strikes and ranged abilities when making ranged strikesWhat makes things weird, IMO, is stances that require ranged weapons and reload. Reload 0 means that drawing ammunition and firing the weapon are part of the same action while “—” must be drawn to be thrown, which usually takes an Interact action just like drawing any other weapon. Taking that into account with thrown weapons [both of the melee and ranged type], this means that if only wielding a single thrown weapon, you are automatically knocked out of the stance after an attack with it as you're without a weapon wielded at the start of your next action... Returning fixes it, but you shouldn't need a magic item to make a ranged weapon [or have to hold a sling or some other ranged weapon in your other hand but not use it], like a Javelins or Darts, in a ranged stance IMO. For myself, it fits the description of "clunky".
Demanding the rules bend to your will so that one specific build you're trying to make works is pure entitlement.Um... I find it hard to see how expecting a weapon that is ALWAYS a ranged weapon to actually work in a ranged stance as entitled: It more sounds like expecting keywords to work fairly and equally no matter what they are attached to and not have them work differently just because you picked the incorrect one. It shouldn't come as a surprise when you pick a weapon from the required type on the list that it then doesn't work well with the stance you just took.
Just FYI your second quote is attributed to squggit but was actually said by FlashRebel.
Just FYI your second quote is attributed to squggit but was actually said by FlashRebel.
Yep, you're right: sorry for the misplaced quote guys. ;)
This is pretty much the same debate we had over the Thief rogue and the answer from on high was Interpretation 1.
Yea. A bunch of people were saying they could flank with a cantrip from 10 feet away because all it says is you're "wielding" a melee weapon or able to make an unarmed strike. So someone decided that they could just hold a dagger and get flank from 10 feet away with acid splash since, they were technically wielding a weapon.
I side in the "nope" camp with that one.
I feel like Quick Draw should allow you to treat Thrown Weapons as reload 0 then.
|
So Penetrating Shot has the Open trait, costs two actions, and only works on the first salvo of each round; in this case it would be the first ranged strike you are going to make with a drawn ranged/thrown weapon. This counts as two strikes for your MAP.
Twin Takedown requires two drawn melee weapons, one in each hand. It may be that this is supposed to be a melee-only feat, but according to RAW it works fine with thrown weapons as well.
I don't see a problem here. It's true that you need to have a drawn weapon (or two weapons, to use TT) in hand, and as PS has the Open trait, that double-action has to be to be your first attack of the round. I just don't think either of these feats are good choices to use with thrown weapons.
I feel like Quick Draw should allow you to treat Thrown Weapons as reload 0 then.You mean it would help getting thrown weapons onto the Hunted Shot track?
And other feats with a similar prerequisite like Double Shot for Fighter.
I read the the thread and find interesting arguments for both sides - concerning Twin Takedown.
I'd lean in to the camp that would allow melee weapons with the thrown trait to be thrown; the reason is the wording of other feats that specifically say make a "ranged strike" or a "melee strike", even after specifying what kind of weapons you have to be wielding in the requirements.
Twin Takedown:
Requirements: "You are wielding two melee weapons, each in a different hand."
Text: "(...) Make two Strikes against your hunted prey,(...)"
Penetrating Shot:
Requirements: "You are wielding a ranged weapon."
Text: "(...) Make a single ranged Strike (...)"
Resounding Blow:
Requirements: "You are wielding a melee weapon that deals bludgeoning damage."
Text: " (...) Make a melee Strike. (...)"
There may as well be examples that give credit to the other side of the argument. And maybe it was an oversight, but this is somehow hard to believe, because there are so many instances where the strike is specified and where it is not specified.
|
It would make sense to count a melee weapon that can be thrown as both a ranged weapon and a melee weapon at all times. Unfortunately, it looks like things need to be complicated for some reason.
It's 'Complicated' either way: When the game has 'melee only' and 'ranged only' abilities, it is inevitable that anything 'blurring' the distinction between those two styles is going to be messy...
Personally, I'd go with intent: The moment you start to throw a weapon, it becomes a 'ranged weapon' because you are now handling it completely differently (melee and throwing grips are often quite different).
|
This rules it out:
Make two Strikes against your hunted prey, one with each of the required weapons.
If you make a thrown strike, the weapon doesn't meet the requirement. And in general, it's playing dubious games with RAI to say that any ability that goes out of its way to require that it be used with a melee weapon also allows throwing.
I'm now imagining GMs watching a knife thrower like NFL officials trying to determine if a quarterback was making a forward pass. Does Pathfinder have a 'tuck rule'?
Seriously, though, I'd go with the more lenient interpretation as far as 'are you wielding a melee/ranged weapon', unless you DO have those cameras on the sidelines of the battlefield. ('The rogue was able to throw his dagger before his knee touched the ground. THerefore ... ')