No, it is not a weird question. The fact that you see it as strange tells me how little you actually understand the issue.
Martials have an explicit rule defining how many attacks they get in a turn.
Unless you're saying you're confused by how Extra Attack works, it is in fact a weird question to ask, unless of course you're going out of your way to try and say no to the 11th level Fighter when they want to Pocker Sand the three goblins they stab.
Like you just said though, improvised action won't allow me to do that
It will.
There is absolutely no "improvised action" which would allow me to restrain multiple targets.
If your character has a rope or a really strong kneecap-breaking stick I beg to differ.
You wouldn't allow my character to improvise an attack that any equivalent level caster could do.
Did I ever say this or are you just assuming what I think in lieu of, idk, asking me?
And yes, I would allow it. See the rope and/or kneecap stick comment.
draws the line at limiting effects to the number of attacks you have - thus a fighter can never, ever blind as many targets as a wizard could, no matter what he does.
The Fighter doesn't have to rely on a saving throw.
Almost like I explicitly said "no saving throw" for a reason.
You don't mind the blinding effect, but, a fighter can't "jump a building" which a 1st level caster can do.
Acrobatics. Ropes. Grappling hook. Etc.
Its more than a little strange that you keep trying to skip over having an actual conversation with me to make some pretty big assumptions about what Id say or do.
Like, even if you're that hesitant to just
talk to me, Im on record in this topic homebrewing DCC's Mighty Deed to completely remove the GMs input on whether or not a player gets to do their Deed. That alone disproves the assumptions you're making about what I would and wouldn't allow.
i get your point that it is technically a rule but it's like the barest shadow of an outline of a rule, 'maybe your GM will ask for a skill check to see if you're successful at your action', that's nothing, it provides no player leverage to do anything worth anything with any degree of reliability or even the security that you'll be allowed to be able to attempt it in the first place, and even if you do suceed your effects most likely won't be powerful or long-lasting.
Hence, again, why Ive stated
multiple times in this topic that it can be better integrated and provided two examples of how it can be done.
I think most people would feel a 7th level slot to maybe blind 3 characters for 1 round with a save every round would be mediocre at best
Indeed which is reasonably balanced against a flat 1d6 duration with no saves.
Yet again, its almost like I said what I said very deliberately for a reason.
Except for spells. Then it is rules over rulings
Sure, because as said, without more substantive guidelines its too easy to just turn your brain off and use "its magic" to justify eliminating the game entirely. You don't need to have a bajillion codified buttons like 5e does, but you do need structure, and much more than mundane approaches do (and ideally you'd have a mix of both for both sides, as Im trying to do with LNO)
