Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazydwarf" data-source="post: 4447168" data-attributes="member: 73982">Well I never said it wasn't. <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=":)" />Since ALL ways of reading it bug me in one way or other I simply took the one that bugged me the least. It has a goldylocks syndrome going here..2-4 attacks seems like too much.1-2 attacks seems like too little.2-3 attacks seems just right. Doesn't that leave the damage of the second primary attack unspecified instead, or at best assumed to be identical to the first ?That seems a bit inconsistent to me, with how other powers are written. But that would indeed then grant 4 attacks as a maximum.Problem then is that this seems like way too much for a level 3 power, but meh...I like my fighters striker:ish anyway. <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" /> @Hypersmurf:Posted while I was typing heh.Well it makes sense then I guess, we must assume the primary attacks are equal and wasn't typed out because of that.(other powers I have been comparing with that grants more attacks has different damage values on them) 4 it is then !</blockquote>