Size, Natural Reach, and Ranged/Thrown Weapons

[liquidformat]

So from my understanding of the rules there is no interaction between natural reach and range of a thrown weapon nor increasing the size of a ranged weapon and its range. Let me know if there are rules that deal with this and I just haven't stumbled across them. Anyways it seems weird that there isn't any interaction between these and especially in the case of thrown weapons you quickly come into situations where a creature can reach further than they can throw which is just stupid.

I was wondering if any one had made house rules to address this and how they work.

I was thinking an easy fix for thrown weapons might be giving them a range multiplier based on the reach of a normal sized character rather than a concrete range. So a dagger would be 2x natural reach, short spear would be 4x natural reach, javelin would be 6x natural reach.

For ranged weapons I was thinking either change them by 1/4 or 1/2 their range increment for each size category they change; but not completely sure if this is a reasonable number. In both cases this would also adjust down the range increment of weapons as the monster gets smaller which also seems reasonable.

Probably the oddest case is a sling which is kind of a bastard between ranged and thrown so I could see an argument for 10x natural reach and for 1/4 or 1/2 range increment.

Anyways just spit balling so let me know the communities thoughts!

[Gruftzwerg]

While I get what you mean it is not that simple, even in real life.

The square-cube law and everything that comes after that is the reason for it.

Strength and Agility don't increase 1:1 with your size. In fact the ratio get worse with size. This is the reason why an ant can lift easily 10x of their own weight. While an elephant has problems to lift even his own weight.

Conclusion, while your ranged reach should increase with size it is not a linear increase.

If you want to reflect this within the rules, I would suggest to add your natural reach to your ranged attacks. Either as single value on top or if you want it to be stronger as bonus on the range increment of the weapon (I would lean to the first option to keep it balanced and only go for the other option if it still feels to odd for you).

[Thurbane]

I think 3.0 had rules about size of the attacker increasing a missile weapons range, but that was dropped in 3.5?

[liquidformat]

While I get what you mean it is not that simple, even in real life.

The square-cube law and everything that comes after that is the reason for it.

Strength and Agility don't increase 1:1 with your size. In fact the ratio get worse with size. This is the reason why an ant can lift easily 10x of their own weight. While an elephant has problems to lift even his own weight.

Conclusion, while your ranged reach should increase with size it is not a linear increase.

If you want to reflect this within the rules, I would suggest to add your natural reach to your ranged attacks. Either as single value on top or if you want it to be stronger as bonus on the range increment of the weapon (I would lean to the first option to keep it balanced and only go for the other option if it still feels to odd for you).

I mean we are talking about a universe inundated with magic where gargantuan sized insects are a thing and can actually move under their own weight so I am not sure how relevant the cube law actually is. Especially when by raw elephants have no issues climbing trees or other such silly things... I am more looking for if these changes are reasonable inside the game and won't break anything too bad more than does this make sense in real world physics.


I think 3.0 had rules about size of the attacker increasing a missile weapons range, but that was dropped in 3.5?

I do have some of the old 3.0 books do you know which one/s went over that?

[Thurbane]

I do have some of the old 3.0 books do you know which one/s went over that?

I thought it was in the PHB section on combat, but not having any luck finding it.

Maybe it was Arms & Equipment Guide, or Savage Species?

[Gorthawar]

I don't quite see how more reach would affect how the weapon flies or hurls. As such I would just add the reach to the overall distance you can throw. If you have 10ft reach you can throw a dagger 60ft and if you have 100ft reach you can throw it 150ft.

[liquidformat]

I thought it was in the PHB section on combat, but not having any luck finding it.

Maybe it was Arms & Equipment Guide, or Savage Species?

Oh nice A&EG says each size change of a ranged weapon has a 25% change to the range, that seems within what I was saying.


I don't quite see how more reach would affect how the weapon flies or hurls. As such I would just add the reach to the overall distance you can throw. If you have 10ft reach you can throw a dagger 60ft and if you have 100ft reach you can throw it 150ft.

A good example of how this would change the range is looking at the difference between a sling and different sized trebuchet. A trebuchet functions pretty much the same way as a sling does, you have a ridged moment arm with a length of cord to launch a projectile. The longer your ridged moment arm the further you can launch the projectile. Using that same logic having a longer arm will let you launch a bullet from a sling further. Similarly given the way d&d treats size you gang longer limbs and more strength which would allow for longer throws.

[Gorthawar]

A good example of how this would change the range is looking at the difference between a sling and different sized trebuchet. A trebuchet functions pretty much the same way as a sling does, you have a ridged moment arm with a length of cord to launch a projectile. The longer your ridged moment arm the further you can launch the projectile. Using that same logic having a longer arm will let you launch a bullet from a sling further. Similarly given the way d&d treats size you gang longer limbs and more strength which would allow for longer throws.

Fair enough but if you follow that logic wouldn't higher strenght also give you more range? Seems overly complicated to me but play it as you like.

[Darg]

Fair enough but if you follow that logic wouldn't higher strenght also give you more range? Seems overly complicated to me but play it as you like.

Strength plays a surprisingly small role. It's more about speed and leverage to increase velocity. Of course you always need the minimum amount of strength to control your throw.

Spear-throwers (http://https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spear-thrower) were invented take advantage of extra length and leverage to increase the velocity of spears. Slings and trebuchets work on the same principle by increasing the length of the throwing arm.

[ShurikVch]

Note: Ballista (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/wilderness.htm#siegeEngines) have the same range increment as Heavy Crossbow (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions) - 120'

Thus - size doesn't matter

And, since somebody in the past argued "but Ballista bolts are heavier!" - no, they're lighter: 6 lbs. for Ballista bolt (Heroes of Battle), but 16 lbs. for Colossal Heavy Crossbow

[liquidformat]

Note: Ballista (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/wilderness.htm#siegeEngines) have the same range increment as Heavy Crossbow (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions) - 120'

Thus - size doesn't matter

And, since somebody in the past argued "but Ballista bolts are heavier!" - no, they're lighter: 6 lbs. for Ballista bolt (Heroes of Battle), but 16 lbs. for Colossal Heavy Crossbow

I mean that seems more like an issue with the design of the ballistas than an argument against increasing the range as size increases. A gargantuan Bolt weighs 16lb costs 16gp and the gargantuan Heavy Crossbow weighs 128lb and does 6d8 damage and costs 800gp. The ballista bolt weighs 6lb costs 1gp the heavy ballista weighs 2,000lb does 5d8 damage and costs 1,000gp. Clearly the people build 'heavy ballista' need to be shot with their work then higher a second craftsman to build colossal heavy crossbows with a couple of supports...