Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 4645711" data-attributes="member: 12731">No, what I mean is that I can't imagine that any power is ever meant to be usable with mundane weapons only. Equally, I can't imagine that the rogue is meant to be forced into buying three or six copies of his preferred magic weaponry (thus emptying his pockets) just to be able to use his standard powers.The only way I can grok this power is if you stop trying to make sense of it for a mo' and simply start out with the assumption one magical weapon is enough.Working "backwards" from there, I arrive at the conclusion the way magic thrown weaponry works needs errata to include all kinds of attacks, including close blasts.(Basically, all other alternatives suck. Either they make the power suck, the rogue suck or they just plain suck <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />)This is what I consider "clear" in this context: there is only one explanation that does not suck nearly as heavily as the rest. In fact, as you mention, allowing a single weapon does not make the power break. It just rescues it from being unusably weak... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification