D&D (2024) Toward a Theory of 6th Edition

[Tony Vargas]

Nope. Blinding Barrage requirement is: "You must be wielding a crossbow, a light thrown weapon, or a sling." So as long as you were holding a single dagger you were good to go. .

Yes, it was limited to those weapons, but it didn't negate the rules that applied to them. Without magic or the right feat, you could use the power with a lone non-magical dagger - but you'd only get to attack one target in the blast... if you're holding a bunch of 'em, though, go to town...

 

[Oofta]

Yes, it was limited to those weapons, but it didn't negate the rules that applied to them. Without magic or the right feat, you could use the power with a lone non-magical dagger - but you'd only get to attack one target in the blast... if you're holding a bunch of 'em, though, go to town...

That's not what the power says. The only requirement is a single dagger. No mention of multiple daggers or even ammunition.

But I'm done, you will never agree so there's no point.

 

[Tony Vargas]

That's not what the power says. The only requirement is a single dagger. No mention of multiple daggers or even ammunition.

Using a crossbow or sling required ammunition. Making an attack with a light thrown weapon required you throw it. If it's magical, it came right back, if not, better've had some more handy, 'cause you're not wielding it anymore.

Powers did let you make multiple attacks by loading all the ammo you needed as part of the power, or throwing all the weapons you're holding, but they didn't make either appear from nowhere...

...well, unless they explicitly said they did - exception-based design, and all...

...or, you had Bracers of Infinite Blades, which, actually, well, magically conjured up daggers for you...

 

[corwyn77]

/Originally/ there was no Thief. Just say'n.

But, yeah, in AD&D, they were the 4 classes, and the others ('cept the oddball Monk & Bard) were sub-classes of 'em.
And, that didn't really change much in 2e (they became four class groups: Warrior, Wizard, Priest, & Rogue), so for about 25 years, that was just the way it was, and... ...it became a tradition.

But, what the traditional cleric & magic-user do - cast spells - is essentially not that different. And what the traditional fighter and thief do - use mundane skill (fighting's a skill) - is really not that different, either.

You could probably take D&D down to just those two 'classes' - magic-user and skill-user; Mage & Hero, perhaps - and get all the remaining PH-in-some-edition classes and sub-classes and one-off-class-in-one-supplement-one-time classes by just applying various Templates to them.

You know, there are plenty systems out there with only one class - Hero, GURPS, Savage Worlds.

More seriously, way back in the D20 days, Green Ronin came out with True 20 - three classes, Warrior, Expert, and Adept. Everything was a combination of those three.

 

[Oofta]

Using a crossbow or sling required ammunition. Making an attack with a light thrown weapon required you throw it. If it's magical, it came right back, if not, better've had some more handy, 'cause you're not wielding it anymore.

Powers did let you make multiple attacks by loading all the ammo you needed as part of the power, or throwing all the weapons you're holding, but they didn't make either appear from nowhere...

...well, unless they explicitly said they did - exception-based design, and all.

I quoted the specific rule. Specific overrides general.

Blinding Barrage
Requirement: You must be wielding a crossbow, a light thrown weapon, or a sling.
Target: Each enemy in blast you can see

And now you've made me pull my 4E PHB from it's shelf of shame.*

*I literally have my 4E books on a different bookcase hidden away in a corner, far far away from my other D&D books. Wouldn't want to contaminate them.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In order for specific to override general, it actually has to conflict in some way.

 

[Oofta]

In order for specific to override general, it actually has to conflict in some way.

It specifically states you hit everybody in an area of effect with no mention or limitation on how many weapons you have. I don't know of anyone who ever read it the way you do, and I played a lot of LFR with 4E so I played with a wide variety of players and DMs.

Anyway, I don't care enough to continue the conversation.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It specifically states you hit everybody in an area of effect

It targets enemies in the blast you can see. You still have to resolve attack rolls to hit each of them, and ranged and thrown weapons have simple, clear, rules on how to do that - which include needing enough ammunition or non-magical thrown weapons (or one magical thrown weapon that conveniently returns to your hand after resolving each one).

with no mention or limitation on how many weapons you have.

It doesn't have to repeat the light thrown and load properties to avoid contradicting them. If it were meant to override the normal reading of powers and weapons it would have had a 'Special' line spelling that out.

4e had it's issues, and, really, one of them /was/ how dreadfully precise it was.

I don't know of anyone who ever read it the way you do, and I played a lot of LFR with 4E so I played with a wide variety of players and DMs.

It was a question settled, officially, within months of publication, though it rarely came up: it wasn't hard to carry plenty of ammo, and magic weapons were assumed. I was in some games with lower magic, so it mattered, rarely - in a trivial, 'oh, you're going to have to use your sling,' way.

Though, to be fair, C&GI and BB were about as gonzo as heroic tier martial powers got - just not supernatural.

 

[Stalker0]

By the laws of all that is holy can we please get this thread back on topic.

 

[Guest 6801328]

By the laws of all that is holy can we please get this thread back on topic.

Probably not. It's a general rule of the forums that all threads longer than 5 pages become debates about either metagaming or warlords. Sometimes both.