Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 6643486" data-attributes="member: 23484">This is almost the right story. Problematically, and perhaps as a holdover of an earlier version f the rules, had crossbows have been given the property &quot;light&quot; and &quot;light is defined exclusively in terms of using two melee weapons. Now it could be that it was given that property so that one could use the crossbow expert feat and no one could say &quot;hey, that character also needs the Dual Wielder feat since it's not a light weapon, but that's not clean either: if that were the case the third bullet point of Crossbow Expert would indicate &quot;a one-handed light melee weapon&quot; and it doesn't. The light property of hand crossbows has not been explained, and I think it shows that there are still wrinkles in these rules. That doesn't stop the necessary implications of the erratum, though, which is the point of the thread.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Stew, post: 6643486, member: 23484"] This is almost the right story. Problematically, and perhaps as a holdover of an earlier version f the rules, had crossbows have been given the property "light" and "light is defined exclusively in terms of using two melee weapons. Now it could be that it was given that property so that one could use the crossbow expert feat and no one could say "hey, that character also needs the Dual Wielder feat since it's not a light weapon, but that's not clean either: if that were the case the third bullet point of Crossbow Expert would indicate "a one-handed light melee weapon" and it doesn't. The light property of hand crossbows has not been explained, and I think it shows that there are still wrinkles in these rules. That doesn't stop the necessary implications of the erratum, though, which is the point of the thread. [/QUOTE]

Verification