D&D 5E Throwing Weapons is Cool! So why is it weak?

[Rune]

I must be missing something. Isn't the issue here that there's No dedicated thrown weapons, only weapons that do both melee and ranged, not that the entire mechanics of throwing are broken.

Therefore, wouldn't the easiest fix be just adding in a dedicated throwing weapon, that operates mostly like a ranged weapon, but keys off STR?

That already exists in the dart. It is a ranged weapon (uses Dex) with the thrown property* that has the finesse tag (allows choice of Str or Dex).

*I've seen it argued that the thrown property is what allows the dart to make a ranged attack using Str, but that's not what the rules actually say. They say that a melee weapon with the thrown property uses Str. The dart, a ranged weapon, requires the finesse property to make that happen. Not that it matters, of course -- the end result is exactly the same.

 

[Voi_D_ragon]

Hang on - So you like that they are hybrid (Range & Melee)? But dislike they are not as good at melee as dedicated melee weapons, nor that they are as good at range as dedicated range weapons?

I think you are taking a feature (can attack in both melee and at range) but thinking it's a bug.


Also see Vax'il'don in Critical role for a knife thrower rogue......

What I don't like is that they're too much of a "fallback option" right now, when it would be cool (not that they should be to make the game better, just rule of cool) if you could, if you so desired, build a PC that focuses exclusively on chucking stuff. (Or we could say a [short] ranged fighter that doesn't have to switch weapons when [if] he gets to melee)

What I'm saying, I guess, is to make them competitive to ranged weapons, with the extra range from dedicated ranged weapons making them better to stay out of harm's way or to stay hidden (also, in a 1v1 vs an archer, the thrower is in for a world of hurt). They shouldn't be on par with "big" melee weapons, like greatsword, glaive, etc in melee, but the added damage in the rounds spent closing the distance (which, if you run around, may be quite a few) should even that out. Once you get close though, the difference becomes apparent, with the dedicated melee being clearly superior.

I'm going to think about this though, since it's a really good question; I'm hesitant to even post this since I haven't thought all the way through, but these are my surface thoughts on the matter.

 

[Hillsy7]

Ooops - forgot about that. However, with the range and damage dice - you might as well carry daggers as they are identical to darts AND have melee use. (Actually, darts would too under the improvised weapons rules I believe - not sure)

From what I gathered form the OP was that there lacks a scaling for thrown weapons to bring them up to enough damage to centre a build around. My point was in order to do that, building weapons would be a better choice rather than trying to get something not designed to be a dedicated thrown weapon, up to speed using feats.

Of course the easiest solution is probably just to reskin/reflavour a bow/crossbow as throwing knives and not change anything at all.....

 

[MrHotter]

Hang on - So you like that they are hybrid (Range & Melee)? But dislike they are not as good at melee as dedicated melee weapons, nor that they are as good at range as dedicated range weapons?

I think you are taking a feature (can attack in both melee and at range) but thinking it's a bug.


Also see Vax'il'don in Critical role for a knife thrower rogue......

The pro/con for thrown weapons vs. ranged weapons is built into the weapon. With no feats you get more range and damage from a ranged weapon, but you have disadvantage in melee.

The feat support is what the OP was talking about. Vax'il'don took sharpshooter and dual weilder for his dagger build. If he wanted to focus on the ranged fighting he could have kept sharpshooter and gotten crossbow expert so he could still use his crossbow at point blank without disadvantage.

I don't think it is unreasonable to try to come up with a feat for a thrown weapon expert. I'm sure many DMs have house ruled a feat to cater to the weapon choice/fighting style of a player.

 

[Hillsy7]

What I don't like is that they're too much of a "fallback option" right now, when it would be cool (not that they should be to make the game better, just rule of cool) if you could, if you so desired, build a PC that focuses exclusively on chucking stuff. (Or we could say a [short] ranged fighter that doesn't have to switch weapons when [if] he gets to melee)

What I'm saying, I guess, is to make them competitive to ranged weapons, with the extra range from dedicated ranged weapons making them better to stay out of harm's way or to stay hidden (also, in a 1v1 vs an archer, the thrower is in for a world of hurt). They shouldn't be on par with "big" melee weapons, like greatsword, glaive, etc in melee, but the added damage in the rounds spent closing the distance (which, if you run around, may be quite a few) should even that out. Once you get close though, the difference becomes apparent, with the dedicated melee being clearly superior.

I'm going to think about this though, since it's a really good question; I'm hesitant to even post this since I haven't thought all the way through, but these are my surface thoughts on the matter.

OK, lets just say, 3 weapons do 1d8 damage (Longbow, longsword, spear). Now look at what they can't do. The Bow is hampered by being useless in melee and requiring 2 hands, and the Longsword can't be used other than melee. Now what can't the spear do? well it can do what the bow does (attack from range), and it can do what the longsword does (Attack in melee). Therefore, it's demonstrably better because you don't need two weapons. Therefore, it makes sense to dial down the melee damage (because it's not dedicated melee), and dial down the range (not dedicated range), BUT it still keeps its main USP of attacking in both situations, which the others can't do. As I said, it's a feature, not a bug.

If you were to "Bring the damage" up in line with a ranged weapon, that balance is broken, because now you have a hard hitting ranged weapon you can use in melee. And as you pointed out, your additional options bring your damage output up to a big 2-handed weapon level, but now you can carry a shield at the same time. So why take a longsword?

IF, however, you want to be a cool dude chucking knives/chakrams/javellins about, then either reskin/reflavour/build a standard ranged weapon and take all the penalties associated with balancing it (crap in melee), let the long range sharpshooter feat apply to thrown weapons.

Hell, if you wanna go mental, get a barbarian class with Sharpshooter, Two-Weapon Fighting (draw two weapons), and let them dual wield javelins. Reckless attack at 120ft? Yes please. (RAW states 'melee weapon attack' - javelin is a melee weapon).

My point being, yes it may well be cool, but you'd be breaking the core balance between range, melee, and thrown weapons. And if you want the cool imagery of being a knife thrower, then just design a new weapon that works like a hand crossbow if you ain't going to melee much.

 

[Hillsy7]

The feat support is what the OP was talking about.

.......

I don't think it is unreasonable to try to come up with a feat for a thrown weapon expert. I'm sure many DMs have house ruled a feat to cater to the weapon choice/fighting style of a player.

AH, I see....Sorry, the first post was about thrown weapons being broken, and I lost the switch over throughout the posts.....so clearly I did miss something....

The yes, feat support is OK I guess, though just to bring the damage up when CE, SS and Dual Wield would do that seems a bit overkill. But if you would want it to do something that enhances the versatility (Namely, why you picked it in the first place), then I guess that might work. However, if the feat just makes it a Gunblade, or a SwordBow....It feels like there's loads of options already in the rules to cover that, and simpler fixes.

Having said all that, however, play the game how you want.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

What I don't like is that they're too much of a "fallback option" right now, when it would be cool (not that they should be to make the game better, just rule of cool) if you could, if you so desired, build a PC that focuses exclusively on chucking stuff.

You can already do that. I think the question is: what is the magic number DPR that you would regard as the break point at which such a character becomes what you would regard as 'viable'.

Ooops - forgot about that. However, with the range and damage dice - you might as well carry daggers as they are identical to darts AND have melee use. (Actually, darts would too under the improvised weapons rules I believe - not sure)

Darts (which could represent dedicated throwing knives) have the advantage of getting full effect of the Sharpshooter feat however. Daggers only benefit from the first two components.

Hell, if you wanna go mental, get a barbarian class with Sharpshooter, Two-Weapon Fighting (draw two weapons), and let them dual wield javelins. Reckless attack at 120ft? Yes please. (RAW states 'melee weapon attack' - javelin is a melee weapon).

Unfortunately, "melee weapon attack" means an attack with a weapon in melee. In the same way that the "ranged weapon attack" components of Sharpshooter feat work with any thrown weapon, but the "attack with a ranged weapon" requirement for the -5 hit +10 damage only works with darts.

 

[MrHotter]

You can already do that. I think the question is: what is the magic number DPR that you would regard as the break point at which such a character becomes what you would regard as 'viable'.

Darts (which could represent dedicated throwing knives) have the advantage of getting full effect of the Sharpshooter feat however. Daggers only benefit from the first two components.

Unfortunately, "melee weapon attack" means an attack with a weapon in melee. In the same way that the "ranged weapon attack" components of Sharpshooter feat work with any thrown weapon, but the "attack with a ranged weapon" requirement for the -5 hit +10 damage only works with darts.

After thinking of darts as tiny spears or a bar room game for the longest time, I looked up some pictures of darts online. The ones that look like little throwing daggers would be the perfect fit for a throwing weapon expert.

 

[discosoc]

I've played a "dagger thrower" type character in every edition since the "fastest dart thrower in the west" kicked my butt in BG1. 5e is no exception, although I didn't get to play him to the higher levels.

A couple of basic options are fairly viable out of the book, and more if your GM is open to houserulling thrown finesse weapons to act like ammunition for the purpose of drawing. Still, the build I've enjoyed the most in the odd chance I get to play is this...

Play a Thief Rogue and let your single sneak attack deal solid damage each round before dashing out of range. If they manage to close in on you, pick pocket (cunning action) their sheathed dagger (extra ammunition!) or place a your pet snake in their pack and watch them spend a turn trying to get the Fake-Death-Adder off (assuming your DM is OK with such tactics). Sharpshooter is obviously the feat of choice for the build, but it's not really important until later (level 8+) since your natural mobility makes the range bonus less important. The nice thing is you don't have to carry around dozens of weapons to throw, so you aren't limited to just darts. You can play this character as a highly mobile pain in the butt who does solid damage and still brings a lot of utility and options for creative gameplay to the table. It's not a character that's meant to simply hang back with the archers and throw stuff each round.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

The issue is that people also want high sustained DPR with them as well, which currently isn't supported as well unless you're a Rogue or Battlemaster.

Yes, that's what I'm seeing in this thread as well.

Put simply - big damage and/or big range comes from big weapons. Small weapons do small damage at small range, but have advantages of concealment and versatility. You can't have it both ways.

I do understand the frustration with the short range, though. Why throw a dagger at a foe 20 ft away when you can move to them and smack them with a melee weapon? In my games, if you have extra attack (say 3 attacks) and you have 3 darts (AKA throwing knives) sheathed somewhere easy to get to then you can attack 3 times. I also point out that moving to someone, attacking them in melee, then moving back provokes an attack of opportunity. Throwing a javelin at them from 10 feet away does not.

As an aside, why does anyone ever buy a dagger? A dart is ¼ the cost and ¼ the weight but has the same attack, damage, and range.