D&D 5E XGTE Errata

5ekyu · Nov 30, 2017

Why, why, why would they do that when so many know its fine as is, was, and may soon be otherwise? Always the same for some... Raw is fine, Raw is fine, erratta, new Raw is fine, New Raw is fine.

Sent from my VS995 using EN World mobile app

werecorpse · Nov 30, 2017

Sacrosanct said:
But it's more probable that it is incorrect. We have a precedence to go by to tell us what to expect. From ranger issues to the goodberry issue. Or nonissue rather. Speculating that it may be a big problem that may never actually occur in games because everyone who doesn't like it just won't use it is pretty implausible, based on existing examples. Not only that, but in AL you don't get to just remove spells or combos willy nilly, so at the very least, if it were a problem, it would show up in AL games.

My comment was speculating about how the precedent may be unreliable - not sure you can then quote the precedent as evidence that it isn't unreliable.

AL as I understand it is a particular sort of play - short adventures, mostly low to mid level, where at the end the characters all "go back to base" and fully recover It is the style of gameplay that this spell will have a less significant effect. That is not evidence that the spell does not have a significant effect in other styles of gameplay.

But as I say we can agree to disagree on the weaksauce or not of the design philosophy of "let's see what happens".

werecorpse · Nov 30, 2017

I don't follow all the UA. Do they open play test spells?

Sacrosanct · Nov 30, 2017

werecorpse said:
My comment was speculating about how the precedent may be unreliable - not sure you can then quote the precedent as evidence that it isn't unreliable.

AL as I understand it is a particular sort of play - short adventures, mostly low to mid level, where at the end the characters all "go back to base" and fully recover It is the style of gameplay that this spell will have a less significant effect. That is not evidence that the spell does not have a significant effect in other styles of gameplay.

But as I say we can agree to disagree on the weaksauce or not of the design philosophy of "let's see what happens".

This isn't an agree to disagree thing. It's not a matter of opinion. It's objective, and measurable.

Firstly, we have lots of examples (literally every issue brought up) and can tell by this large sample size that what someone might consider an issue turns out not to actually be one. What is pure speculation and opinion is your claim that we'll never know because people who don't like it wont' use it.

Secondly, that's not what AL is. AL is actually mostly playing all of the long campaigns that have been out (ToD/RoT, SKT, ToA, PoA, Ravenloft, etc, etc). There are many other smaller one session modules that are played in the AL, but the majority are the actual campaigns. Your assumption here too is incorrect. And since an AL DM can't just ignore the spells/abilities/combos they don't like like you are arguing, then if in fact this is a problem, we'd definitely see it in AL play.

pukunui · Nov 30, 2017

werecorpse said:
I don't follow all the UA. Do they open play test spells?

They put out some of the spells ... just the cantrips and 1st level spells, iirc.

EDIT: UA - Starter Spells

werecorpse · Nov 30, 2017

Sacrosanct said:
This isn't an agree to disagree thing. It's not a matter of opinion. It's objective, and measurable.

Firstly, we have lots of examples (literally every issue brought up) and can tell by this large sample size that what someone might consider an issue turns out not to actually be one. What is pure speculation and opinion is your claim that we'll never know because people who don't like it wont' use it.

Secondly, that's not what AL is. AL is actually mostly playing all of the long campaigns that have been out (ToD/RoT, SKT, ToA, PoA, Ravenloft, etc, etc). There are many other smaller one session modules that are played in the AL, but the majority are the actual campaigns. Your assumption here too is incorrect. And since an AL DM can't just ignore the spells/abilities/combos they don't like like you are arguing, then if in fact this is a problem, we'd definitely see it in AL play.

Ok so it's objectively not a weaksauce design philosophy to "let's see what happens" because on other occasions they have put out rules which people thought were bad that turned out to not be bad. Got it. Can't say I agree with you.

Wasn't aware AL included all styles of gaming. That does make it a better test than I thought.

CapnZapp · Nov 30, 2017

pukunui said:
Jeremy just posted this on Twitter:

View attachment 91603

That sounds like he's getting past the Denial stage.

Hopefully a full errata is forthcoming.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

Shiroiken · Dec 2, 2017

http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=91603&d=1512076198

Not a fan. It limits the spell to at most 10 uses, which is significantly less than what can be expected from Prayer of Healing. Yes, it requires only a minute instead of 10 (as well as use in combat), but it's also Concentration, preventing other spells from staying active. I think limiting it to 2-3 times per round is a better House Rule.

Chaosmancer · Dec 2, 2017

Shiroiken said:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=91603&d=1512076198

Not a fan. It limits the spell to at most 10 uses, which is significantly less than what can be expected from Prayer of Healing. Yes, it requires only a minute instead of 10 (as well as use in combat), but it's also Concentration, preventing other spells from staying active. I think limiting it to 2-3 times per round is a better House Rule.

Yeah, my first impulse was that it was a decent houserule, but then I realized it was a max of 10 and more likely only 8 or 6 uses of it, which is a little too weak for my taste.

Cognomen's Cassowary · Dec 2, 2017

Nevvur said:
[*] Improved Pact Weapon (p 57): Does this give +1 to hit and damage for spells (eldrich blasT) as well as weapon attacks? Does it allow Lifedrinker and Eldritch Smite to work with eldritch blast?
[/LIST]

I don't see how this invocation can be read to do either of those things. For starters, eldritch blast does not have a material component, so the weapon does not serve as an arcane focus for that spell anyway. Then, the invocation is pretty clearly giving three different benefits, written as three separate paragraphs. 1) You can use your pact weapon as an arcane focus, 2) your weapon gets +1 to its attack and damage rolls, and 3) you can conjure a ranged weapon. The second effect is even introduced with "In addition," as in "This invocation also does this other thing." And finally, it's a pretty big leap to say that spell attacks cast with an arcane focus use that focus's attack and damage rolls--that would seem to necessitate that any spell attack made with, say, a crystal orb for a focus would deal the damage of, and have the range of, an improvised weapon, and the caster would only be proficient at the DM's discretion. That's saying nothing of the awkward complication of losing the +1 on spell attacks if the warlock gets a +1 magic weapon.

This question doesn't need errata, just a wishful-thinking check.

D&D 5E XGTE Errata

5ekyu

Hero

werecorpse

Adventurer

werecorpse

Adventurer

Sacrosanct

Legend

pukunui

Legend

werecorpse

Adventurer

CapnZapp

Legend

Shiroiken

Legend

Chaosmancer

Legend

Cognomen's Cassowary

First Post

Similar Threads