Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MothMayI" data-source="post: 9627118" data-attributes="member: 7051957">I dislike the 2024 edition, yes, and no small part of that is down to the writing approach versus 2014 5e's.To say that 2014 didn't use keywords is inaccurate. It used keywords, and defined terms as necessary, but didn't feel the need to define terms that didn't need to be defined. There isn't any meaningful difference between &quot;melee weapon&quot; in 2014 5e and &quot;Melee weapon&quot; in 2024 5e. (Or at least shouldn't be, but editing issues ahoy.)I'll give a perfect example of my own because it was really glaring when the late 2014-era books started using it: going from &quot;is blinded/knocked prone/etc.&quot; to &quot;has the Blinded/Prone/etc. condition&quot;. The former makes clear that the condition is the result of the triggering effect, whereas the latter sounds passive and uncorrelated. Even if it used &quot;receives the condition&quot;, that would sound better.Nick (and literally everything related to two-weapon fighting) might just be one of the worst-written things in the 2024 rules. Doubly so when you consider that the wording of the rule doesn't actually prohibit you from making another attack with a Light weapon as a bonus action, because the &quot;You can make this extra attack only once per turn&quot; line applies only to an attack made with Nick and no such limitation exists on an attack made via the Light property without such.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MothMayI, post: 9627118, member: 7051957"] I dislike the 2024 edition, yes, and no small part of that is down to the writing approach versus 2014 5e's. To say that 2014 didn't use keywords is inaccurate. It used keywords, and defined terms as necessary, but didn't feel the need to define terms that didn't need to be defined. There isn't any meaningful difference between "melee weapon" in 2014 5e and "Melee weapon" in 2024 5e. (Or at least shouldn't be, but editing issues ahoy.) I'll give a perfect example of my own because it was really glaring when the late 2014-era books started using it: going from "is blinded/knocked prone/etc." to "has the Blinded/Prone/etc. condition". The former makes clear that the condition is the result of the triggering effect, whereas the latter sounds passive and uncorrelated. Even if it used "receives the condition", that would sound better. Nick (and literally everything related to two-weapon fighting) might just be one of the worst-written things in the 2024 rules. Doubly so when you consider that the wording of the rule doesn't actually prohibit you from making another attack with a Light weapon as a bonus action, because the "You can make this extra attack only once per turn" line applies only to an attack made with Nick and no such limitation exists on an attack made via the Light property without such. [/QUOTE]

Verification