WalterKovacs
First Post
A) Most thrown weapons are heavy, so they are already using Strength instead of Dex for MBAs.
B) If you are a class that has a mix of melee and ranged (rogue, ranger, artificer, bard) you don't just have the action economy to think about (switching between different weapons via Master at Arms), but also item economy (you can either purchase both a magic melee and magic ranged weapons, or you can have a single weapon that does both). There are also feats to consider (while Master at Arms also covers any weapons you use in melee or range, you also have things like weapon focus, and other weapon based bonuses, like making your axes high crit, that would only apply some of the time). Bows, and crossbows, don't exactly have a lot of feat support compared to blades, axes, hammers and spears.
The minor action to switch (Via master at arms) is still a minor action, not to mention switching to ranged does mean you either need to use a second minor, or wait a turn before going back to the melee (thus screwing up possible OA chances. With heavier crossbows, you also have the minor reloading (unless you take yet another feat to make it free).
Ultimately, it's a trade-off ... a thrown weapon isn't as good as a purely melee or purely ranged weapon because it's effectively both. Like a weapliment, or a dual-weapon, a big part of the benefit is not increasing the number of "mandatory" magic item slots for your character. If you aren't using it as a main or offhand weapon, it may not be as useful (but unless you have inherent ranged powers, or equal dex and str, you wouldn't really be deciding between ranged weapons and thrown weapons anyway).
Versatility has a drawback ... by being able to use a weapon in melee and at range, you get something not the best at either. If the weapon is only ever going to be used for ranged ... it's better to get an actual ranged weapon.
B) If you are a class that has a mix of melee and ranged (rogue, ranger, artificer, bard) you don't just have the action economy to think about (switching between different weapons via Master at Arms), but also item economy (you can either purchase both a magic melee and magic ranged weapons, or you can have a single weapon that does both). There are also feats to consider (while Master at Arms also covers any weapons you use in melee or range, you also have things like weapon focus, and other weapon based bonuses, like making your axes high crit, that would only apply some of the time). Bows, and crossbows, don't exactly have a lot of feat support compared to blades, axes, hammers and spears.
The minor action to switch (Via master at arms) is still a minor action, not to mention switching to ranged does mean you either need to use a second minor, or wait a turn before going back to the melee (thus screwing up possible OA chances. With heavier crossbows, you also have the minor reloading (unless you take yet another feat to make it free).
Ultimately, it's a trade-off ... a thrown weapon isn't as good as a purely melee or purely ranged weapon because it's effectively both. Like a weapliment, or a dual-weapon, a big part of the benefit is not increasing the number of "mandatory" magic item slots for your character. If you aren't using it as a main or offhand weapon, it may not be as useful (but unless you have inherent ranged powers, or equal dex and str, you wouldn't really be deciding between ranged weapons and thrown weapons anyway).
Versatility has a drawback ... by being able to use a weapon in melee and at range, you get something not the best at either. If the weapon is only ever going to be used for ranged ... it's better to get an actual ranged weapon.
