D&D 5E New Errata & Advice For D&D Issued

WotC has issued an update to the 'Sage Advice' compilation, including new errata documents and amendments to racial attributes.

Compendium: October 2020 | Sage Advice | Dungeons & Dragons

This Sage Advice Compendium includes updates to Curse of Strahd, Ghosts of Saltmarsh, Storm King’s Thunder, Tomb of Annihilation, and Volo’s Guide to Monsters.

dnd.wizards.com

"The PDF contains answers to a collection of new questions. To find the latest answers, search for “[New]” in the PDF.

The compendium includes links to new errata documents for Curse of Strahd, Ghosts of Saltmarsh, Storm King’s Thunder, Tomb of Annihilation, and Volo’s Guide to Monsters."

Racial attributes have been altered (thanks to @dave2008 for pointing that out).

 

[Flamestrike]

I wonder if it was different in earlier printings of the PHB and, for some reason, that's what was referenced. I could have sworn it needed a melee weapon but looking it up on dndbeyond it just needed a melee weapon attack.

It's 'melee weapon attack' in my PHB and in all online sources I can find. That allows Divine Smite with unarmed strikes, because they're melee weapon attacks.

If they reworded it to 'an attack with a melee weapon' then that would rule out Divine Smite with unarmed strikes, because an unarmed strike is not a melee weapon.

Has there been an errata of Divine Smite I'm unaware of that changes it to 'attack with a melee weapon'?

 

[Jeff Carpenter]

Eh, no, I disagree. Firstly, because AL and OP have their own documents already for covering the rulings they have had to make affecting play. One of which at one point literally said, "You as the DM are empowered to make decisions." Secondly, this is the exact same game where the stealth and hiding rules are actually, "Eh, it works when your DM says it works? ¯\(ツ)/¯ " The same game can't care so much about familiar sequestering of objects and then turn around and be lax about the specifics of hiding from someone looking for you.

Honestly i dont know anything about Organized Play because I have always run home games. I have my own houserules document that i use to set my version of the rules that i give up front before play. Some of it disagrees with sage advice or the PHB. For example I dont allow familiar to aid another in combat

I agree that fixing the stealth rules would probably be a better use of thier time, but i don't see the harm in clarifying silly familiar rules as we are all free to ignore what we dont like. Maybe they just needed to pad the document with some low hanging fruit.

 

[cbwjm]

It's 'melee weapon attack' in my PHB and in all online sources I can find. That allows Divine Smite with unarmed strikes, because they're melee weapon attacks.

If they reworded it to 'an attack with a melee weapon' then that would rule out Divine Smite with unarmed strikes, because an unarmed strike is not a melee weapon.

Has there been an errata of Divine Smite I'm unaware of that changes it to 'attack with a melee weapon'?

Thats what I'm not sure about, could have sworn it required a melee weapon but until I check my PHB which was an early printing I won't know for sure if it was the old version or simply me not remembering correctly.

 

[Flamestrike]

We're worried at 11th level the Monk can get 4 attacks at 1d8+Dex+2d4 (14.5) with Elemental Weapon i

Elemental weapon requites a 'weapon', Which an unarmed Strike is not.

Divine Smite requires a 'melee weapon attack' which an unarmed strike is.

There is a difference between a 'melee weapon attack' (which does not need a weapon) and 'an attack with a melee weapon' (which does require a weapon).

 

[TheSword]

Well this is an errata so I guess Smite does require a weapon now. Arguing about the pre-errata rule to say the errata is wrong is kinda pointless.

 

[Flamestrike]

Thats what I'm not sure about, could have sworn it required a melee weapon but until I check my PHB which was an early printing I won't know for sure if it was the old version or simply me not remembering correctly.

The guys on reddit are saying that the ruling is possibly due to the text of Divine Smite later referring to 'adding the smite damage to the weapon damage'.

So even though it triggers on a 'melee weapon attack' (and thus an unarmed strike), because it only adds to the damage of a 'weapon' then it doesnt do any actual extra damage (because you're not using a weapon).

Hilariously natural weapons are still 'weapons', so Lizardfolk smiting with bites seems to still be legal.

I mean that's insane. All they needed to do is reword Smite to say 'When you hit a creature with a melee weapon...' - although that would allow thrown melee weapons to trigger Smites at range.

Maybe if they reworded it to: 'When you make a melee weapon attack with a melee weapon''.

As stupid as that sentence sounds, it looks like it reflects their intent.

 

[Flamestrike]

Well this is an errata so I guess Smite does require a weapon now. Arguing about the pre-errata rule to say the errata is wrong is kinda pointless.

This isnt errata, it's sage advice.

And in the exact same sage advice, unarmed strikes are expressly noted as being 'melee weapon attacks' and thus (by the wording of Divine Smite), legal delivery platforms for Smites.

Sage advice seems to contradict itself here.

 

[eayres33]

Well this is an errata so I guess Smite does require a weapon now. Arguing about the pre-errata rule to say the errata is wrong is kinda pointless.

You can look at it two ways.
1. Are you playing AL? If not you can ignore this because the DM of you game makes the final decision.
2. If you are the DM do you agree with this change if not you get to kick this to the curb.

 

[Ashrym]

I didn't realize use an object for SSI or PWK polymorph were in question.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I kind of expected Grovel, Cower, and Beg to be changed too.

Yeah I have a bigger problem with that feaure

Knew it.

As I've been saying for months, Orc of Eberron and Orc of Wildemount exist only in the minds of Wikia over at D&DB thinking that an errata should be considered a separate ancestry entry.

This is just solidifying evidence that nope, Orc, Triton, and Kobold were errata'd since Volo's. And that's fine.

Well, no. They were a different take.

And then feedback convinced them that no one liked the Volos version and they’d make people happier making all orcs like the later Orc writeups.

Nope.

Kobolds stay weak. Orcs stay stupid.

Sorry, folks.

Nah.