Light blade requirement

[Halberd]

I have noticed that most rogue powers require the character to be wielding a light blade, but nowhere does it say that the attack must be with the dagger. Therefore, is it possible to wield a waraxe in one hand, and a dagger in the other (or parrying dagger if you don't mind using a feat)?

[Silma]

This has been an argument in many threads. I don't think you can. Because if you could then this feat Versatile Duelist
Heroic Tier
Prerequisite: Rogue
Benefit: You gain proficiency with all one-handed, military heavy blades. If a rogue power requires you to wield a light blade, you can use that power with a one-handed heavy blade and can also deal your Sneak Attack damage while using a one-handed heavy blade with that power. would be useless.

[vasharanpaladin]

Nope. Rogue attacks require you to use small weapons, because otherwise you break Sneak Attack! Certain feats exist to help you out a bit. I ran a dwarf rogue with Tunnel Stalker recently. :smallwink:

[Kurald Galain]

"Wield" means to use it for the attack - not to hold it in your off-hand while you attack with something else.

[vasharanpaladin]

"Wield" means to use it for the attack - not to hold it in your off-hand while you attack with something else.

In his defense, no, "wield" is not that well-defined in the game. :smallfrown:

[Blackfang108]

In his defense, no, "wield" is not that well-defined in the game. :smallfrown:

But it HAS been well defined by Customer service and FAQs. All questions directed at Wizards regarding this have come back as: In a power block, Wield means using in the attack.

[vasharanpaladin]

But it HAS been well defined by Customer service and FAQs. All questions directed at Wizards regarding this have come back as: In a power block, Wield means using in the attack.

CustServ isn't to be considered a valid argument; you can ask the same question twice and get three different answers. The point is, it is implied that there is no difference between "you must be wielding a light blade" and "you must make this attack with a light blade," but as written the actual word "wield" tends to mean something along the lines of "must be holding in one hand" lately. :smallfrown:

So no, not his fault for getting confused when Wootsie waffles on it a bit themselves. Kinduva pain, that. :smallyuk:

[Blackfang108]

CustServ isn't to be considered a valid argument; you can ask the same question twice and get three different answers. The point is, it is implied that there is no difference between "you must be wielding a light blade" and "you must make this attack with a light blade," but as written the actual word "wield" tends to mean something along the lines of "must be holding in one hand" lately. :smallfrown:

So no, not his fault for getting confused when Wootsie waffles on it a bit themselves. Kinduva pain, that. :smallyuk:

The actual word in English has one meaning.

The word IN TERMS OF POWER BLOCKS has another meaning.

[vasharanpaladin]

The actual word in English has one meaning.

The word IN TERMS OF POWER BLOCKS has another meaning.

Yes, that. I'm glad one of us is on the ball. :smallredface:

[Kurald Galain]

CustServ isn't to be considered a valid argument; you can ask the same question twice and get three different answers.

Maybe so, but neither is it a valid argument that if two powers use slightly different language, they must therefore mean something else entirely. I'll grant that 4E is the only game where you can roll damage without having a damage roll, but that doesn't mean that the designers intended a functional difference between "moving into" and "entering" when those are synonyms in a dictionary (and no, there isn't; WOTC has specifically confirmed this).

[vasharanpaladin]

Maybe so, but neither is it a valid argument that if two powers use slightly different language, they must therefore mean something else entirely. I'll grant that 4E is the only game where you can roll damage without having a damage roll, but that doesn't mean that the designers intended a functional difference between "moving into" and "entering" when those are synonyms in a dictionary (and no, there isn't; WOTC has specifically confirmed this).

Heh, try reading some of the CharOp handbooks, you'll have a blast. The current assassin handbook, in particular, argues that one encounter power can deal up to 6[w]+3*Dex damage based on use of the word "and," among other things. :smallamused:

[Kurald Galain]

Heh, try reading some of the CharOp handbooks, you'll have a blast. The current assassin handbook, in particular, argues that one encounter power can deal up to 6[w]+3*Dex damage based on use of the word "and," among other things. :smallamused:

Yeah, on the WOTC forums, the term RAW seems to mean "any obscure interpretation of the rulebooks that makes my character more powerful" :smalltongue:

[vasharanpaladin]

Yeah, on the WOTC forums, the term RAW seems to mean "any obscure interpretation of the rulebooks that makes my character more powerful" :smalltongue:

Hey, at least it's justified in the assassin's case! That one needs all the help it can get! :smalleek:

[SpaceYeti]

I have noticed that most rogue powers require the character to be wielding a light blade, but nowhere does it say that the attack must be with the dagger. Therefore, is it possible to wield a waraxe in one hand, and a dagger in the other (or parrying dagger if you don't mind using a feat)?

It is possible to be wielding a light blade in one hand and your waraxe in the other, but any power used which specifies being used with the light blade must be made with the equipped light blade, not the axe.