How does this relate to fantasy and interesting stuff like that? The answer can be summarized in two letters and a symbol: D&D. Long story short (though it will be made longer later), I think the rules regarding range increments in 3.5 edition D&D are in places wrong and in places oversimplified.
Side note: I _think_ the rules for ranged weapons in 3.5 are the same as for 3rd edition. Please let me know if I'm wrong, and what the differences are. Also, can some web monkey tell me why my tables have so much white space above them? (See below)
Maximum Ranges
Ranged weapons in 3.5e are each given a "range increment". For example:
| Weapon | Range Increment |
| longbow | 100 ft. |
| composite longbow | 110 ft. |
| dagger | 10 ft. |
| throwing axe | 10 ft. |
| light hammer | 20 ft. |
| javelin | 30 ft. |
| hand crossbow | 30 ft. |
The range increment serves two purposes: first, for every multiple of the range increment that a target is away from a shooter, the shooter's chance of hitting is reduced by 10% (2 out of 20). (This is a slight oversimplification.) The other is that the maximum range of a thrown weapon (such as a dagger, axe, hammer, or javelin) is five times the range increment, while the maximum range of a projectile weapon (such as a bow or crossbow) is ten times the range increment. (Note that the penalties for such a shot are -50% and -100% (10 and 20 out of 20) respectively.)
Due to various elements of the rules encouraging fantastic and exciting outcomes (which are, after all, part of what the game is about), the maximum range limitations are necessary. Reducing the chances of a shot from a high-level character with magic arrows by 20 doesn't necessarily mean the shot will miss, but at the same time just being a crackerjack shot shouldn't make you able to shoot arrows a mile. I may post later about issues around constructing games (and stories in general) that manage this balance between fantastic and ridiculous.
Consider the maximum range for a longbow: 10x(100')=1,000'. This is actually a fine approximation for the maximum distance a longbow can be shot: the (unofficial) world record for distance with an English-style longbow is 306.33m, approximately 1005'. (This is in the Unlimited class; the record for a 50 lb. draw bow is, obviously, less.) The record for a recurve bow (a modern descendant of the recurve bow, or what D&D calls the composite longbow) is 485.27m, approximately 1592'. Considering the materials used (and game balance/simplification issues), the maximum range of 1100' is perhaps reasonable.
As a side note, I point out that the compound bow was invented in the 1960's (see this link instead if you're in England). Unless your D&D milieu has a motley of technology, compound bows (and their benefits in range) don't enter into a D&D campaign.
The problem arises when one considers the maximum range for thrown weapons. By comparison with bows, one would assume that the maximum range should be the physical limit: how far it is possible to throw a dagger or hammer or whatever. This indicates it's impossible to throw a dagger more than 50'. This strikes me as an unreasonably low limit. Not having a dagger or the desire to throw it as far as I can, I resorted to other measures.
Irregular weapons, such as flasks of oil, have a range increment of 10', as do daggers. I got a 500 ml bottle of water (so it weighs about a pound, which is what the 3.5e PH says a flask of oil weighs) and easily threw it 15 paces without serious effort. But clearly my ad hoc experiment is not enough to get an idea for the range of a thrown weapon. So, like the case of the bow, lets consider some world records for some thrown objects:
| Event | Record Distance |
| Shotput | 75'10-1/4" |
| Javelin | 323'1"(same link as above) |
| Hammer | 284'7"("") |
A shotput is a throw with one hand of a 16 lb. ball. The javelin is a spear (or giant metal toothpick) over 2m long and a little more than 1.75 lbs. The hammer is a 16 lb. ball at the end of line, thrown with two hands. These records and values are for men's events; the women's are different.
From the shotput alone, the idea of 50' for a physical limit on throwing just about any weapon smaller than a battering ram is unrealistic. Various websites about axe throwing vaguely suggest (but don't state) that throwing 50' is possible, and that a much more significant concern is choosing a range so that the axe rotates some whole number of times (actually, they say a whole number and a half, which I'd like someone to explain to me.)
As a simple initial fix, without adding complexity to the game, I would suggest that maximum ranges for all ranged weapons should be 10 times their range increments. Given the current range increments, this would allow for more logical maximum ranges for thrown weapons, and actually makes the rules simpler rather than more complicated.
People can argue at great length about whether the little dart-shooting hand crossbows, as they are usually depicted, should have as long a range as they do, or whether a throwing axe should have the same increment or better than a light hammer, but this seems to me to be more analysis and complication than it is probably worth for the time being.
