D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
Could you explain this a bit more so that I can add the correction to the list? My previous corrected values were 3.X thinking with the Strength modifier determining damage... silly me.
The Death Knights damage 1d8+x does not comply with the rules for strength bonus. But as both longswords are soulswords I doubt it is an error just another example of monsters don't follow the same rules as PCs. The DMG damage by level table gives 2d8+7 (average 16) for a 17th level at will, and it is 1d8+12 (average 16.5) for the 17th level DK. Close enough for me
Regarding the illustration on page 281 in PHB, it was debated and not resolved in the errors thread. As the one who debated against it being an error, I think it shouldn't be included. However, some statement on how to calculate the area of a burst in the presence of obstacles would be nice. In the absence of such a statement, I've assumed you use the same method as for movement (expect that it's stated that the first square counted can be around a corner). Using movement rules, the illustration of the burst is correct.
One PHB error to add:
pg 295: The words "expressed as a negative number" have been accidently copied into the very last sentence of the block Death Saving Throw. They should be deleted.
__________________ Mikael Borjesson, Sweden
The Titan of Titan Games
Keeper of the swedish D&D translations
I have a fairly major error...surprised no one else has noticed ( or that I haven't seen a thread).
Spears have no range, cannot be thrown, according to the weapons list, But on pg.232 PHB it mentions +6 perfect hunter’s spear under Thrown Weapons. How can spears not be thrown??
Typo: Pg 241 Describes Staff of Fiery Might crit damage as +3d10, when according to the stats on the same page, it should be +3d8
Good work everybody....
seriously, how do some of these errors make it through editing??
Player's Handbook:
p.87 Heading Level 29 Daily Powers should be Level 29 Daily Exploits
p. 295 Death Saving Throws, 20 or higher: remove expressed as a negative number
I have a fairly major error...surprised no one else has noticed ( or that I haven't seen a thread).
Spears have no range, cannot be thrown, according to the weapons list, But on pg.232 PHB it mentions +6 perfect hunter’s spear under Thrown Weapons. How can spears not be thrown??
I suspect the error will be page 232 since there is no mention of throwing a spear in the fluff either. I suspect they were simply trying to differentiate between the spear and javelin. There are many examples in history where the spear was considered a melee weapon only.
I agree that you should be able to throw a spear, but I think this is a casualty of the oversimplification of some aspects of 4e. It is a simple matter to HR a range of 5/10 to simply bring it line with the dagger as it has been in previous editions.
I have updated the main post with the new errors, as well as adding a "Debated Errors" section where I'll put things that could land on either side of the error/intentional fence.
Bumping to make sticky AND suggest that perhaps the correction to the Serpent Steel Strike/Dance of Steel is to turn down the damage on the former to 1(W). It does basically turn the target into slow moving OA bait, after all.
I don't think so, the slowed for DoS is only on a hit. The 'weapon' entry is under hit and not 'effect; which would be hit or miss.
So SSS: on a hit does damage, slows and stops target shifting
DoS: does the same damage and slows only with the listed weapons (no stopping shifting)
I'm still not sure that you're right.
The rules on power descriptions don't tell us how to interpret the "weapon" entries in the Fighter powers: all we have is the brief remark on p 77, that "The choice of weapon you make also provides benefits to certain fighter powers."
So we have to go on the text of the powers. On a quick read through, nearly all of the Weapon entries either adjust attack rolls or crit ranges, and appear indented after the Attack entry, or adjust damage and appear indented after the Hit entry, or modify a condition imposed by a hit and appear indented after the Hit entry, or modify an Effect and appear indented after the Effect entry.
Dance of Steel seems to be unusual in that the Weapon text is not modifying damage, nor an existing consequence of a hit, nor an existing Effect (that is, there is no "Effect" entry for it to appear under).
So I don't think my reading is excluded by layout or labelling considerations. I don't think it makes the power overpowered (Sleep gives auto-slow vs multiple targets as a 1st level Daily). It makes the power different from, and (at least plausibly) better than Serpent Steel Strike.
Another power with a complicated Weapon entry is Rain of Blows, which some have read as overpowerd on the basis that it gives a secondary attack for each hit. If it is read in the same way as I am suggesting that Dance of Steel be read (namely, as an effect independent of a hit, but not qualifying an existing Effect entry) then it becomes non-overpowered.
So I think that there is good reason to prefer my reading of the rules.
I am also trying to make the post more readable by underlining headings, italicizing powers, and other stuff... does it help? or am I just too particular for my own good?
I am also trying to make the post more readable by underlining headings, italicizing powers, and other stuff... does it help? or am I just too particular for my own good?
Using bold, italics and (especially) underlining helps IMO. An idea might be to give a key to each type of text i.e. underlined means incorrect wording or somesuch.
Using bold, italics and (especially) underlining helps IMO. An idea might be to give a key to each type of text i.e. underlined means incorrect wording or somesuch.
I went with underline to highlight the errors, italics around powers/feats, and 's around headings.
Not sure if this requires errata or not, but it could--and it definitely needs some clarification, in either case.
Page 25, PHB, it says that you cannot learn Abyssal or Supernal as a 1st-level character. Does this apply even to people who take the Linguist feat, or does it refer only to those languages you automatically gain at 1st level? (Some races, such as humans and halflings, gain "Common plus one other.")
It seems to me that, once you've gone through the "expense" of the feat, you should have the option of taking those languages, since they won't break anything at 1st that they wouldn't at 2nd. (And since I'm pretty sure the point of the 1st-level restriction is to make sure you have to spend a feat to gain those languages.) But by a RAW reading, that's not what it says; the strictest interpretation would have it that, if you buy the Linguist feat at 1st level, you still can't learn 'em.
__________________ Ari Marmell
aka
Mouseferatu
--Rodent of the Dark
"Paragon Tier adventurers ... are able to use magic rings" - Page 146, DMG.
Nothing anywhere else mentions anything like this. I assume it's been left in from when Heroic tier characters couldn't use rings.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
