We just ran into an issue where a friend new to DND Beyond was very confused why they are not proficient with a "Heavy Crossbow", when their sheet says they are proficient in crossbows.
Proficiency in light crossbows (and other specific types) look like two separate proficiencies (In this case, "Crossbow" and "Light", and in the case of Hand Crossbows, "Crossbow" and "Hand")
Please, make the sheets more readable for new players' sake.
That's how they're presented in the players handbook, Crossbow comma type. As such, D&D Beyond has to present them in the same way. However, the type part is lowercase so I'll pass that along as it might improve readability
The issue with this is it would be grammatically incorrect as Light; Dagger implies a light dagger. A semicolon is used for connecting two premises that could be equally separated by a comma or a colon
They could separate the items in the list by a semicolon as that is another appropriate use of a semicolon and WotC has not indicated any “RAW” about how such items should be separated on a character sheet. So it could (and grammatically should) read as “Crossbow, Light; Daggar; Dart; Quarterstaff; Sling” in that list. It would:
The PHB actually uses both versions of the wording. Yes, the weapon table uses "crossbow, light," but the class proficiencies listing, which is where this confusion most occurs, uses "light crossbow." The races that get weapon training (eg, drow weapon training) also use this latter form. To use this is perfectly legitimate and in sync with what WotC uses.
We just ran into an issue where a friend new to DND Beyond was very confused why they are not proficient with a "Heavy Crossbow", when their sheet says they are proficient in crossbows.
Proficiency in light crossbows (and other specific types) look like two separate proficiencies (In this case, "Crossbow" and "Light", and in the case of Hand Crossbows, "Crossbow" and "Hand")
Please, make the sheets more readable for new players' sake.
That's how they're presented in the players handbook, Crossbow comma type. As such, D&D Beyond has to present them in the same way. However, the type part is lowercase so I'll pass that along as it might improve readability
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Then another way to make it more readable is to separate different proficiencies with ";" instead of a comma.
Then it would say:
WEAPONS
Crossbow, Light; Dagger; Dart; Quarterstaff; Sling
Which removes the confusion
The issue with this is it would be grammatically incorrect as Light; Dagger implies a light dagger. A semicolon is used for connecting two premises that could be equally separated by a comma or a colon
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
They could separate the items in the list by a semicolon as that is another appropriate use of a semicolon and WotC has not indicated any “RAW” about how such items should be separated on a character sheet. So it could (and grammatically should) read as “Crossbow, Light; Daggar; Dart; Quarterstaff; Sling” in that list. It would:
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The PHB actually uses both versions of the wording. Yes, the weapon table uses "crossbow, light," but the class proficiencies listing, which is where this confusion most occurs, uses "light crossbow." The races that get weapon training (eg, drow weapon training) also use this latter form. To use this is perfectly legitimate and in sync with what WotC uses.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep