D&D 5E Recent Errata clarifications

[Bolares]

I think where in the books an information is placed is just as important as if that information is in the book at all. If you bury it in a place no one will look for it, you did a shoddy job.

 

[Scribe]

They do in D&D.

You talking about the Alignment section on page 122 of the PHB?

 

[Charlaquin]

I think where in the books an information is placed is just as important as if that information is in the book at all. If you bury it in a place no one will look for it, you did a shoddy job.

I think the fact that there are places in a rulebook no one will look when learning to play the game is itself a sign of a shoddy job.

 

[Cadence]

I'm not. That's why I cited all of the articles over the years that dealt with the issue. Regardless of your experience never seeing it, or my experience having seen it, certainly you can agree that if it's a repeated topic in articles of the years in how to deal with, then certainly it exists, right?

In some articles != issue for most people.

Issue for decent number of people? Non-trivial number? Sizeable number? Apparently common issue?

 

[Bolares]

I think the fact that there are places in a rulebook no one will look when learning to play the game is itself a sign of a shoddy job.

I don't know. People will act like people. If you tell them the most important part of the book is the monster entry, that's what most of them will read. Designers end up having to understand that and design around human behavior.

 

[Sacrosanct]

So do people read it and understand, or do they not?

It seems pretty clear.

I'm saying most people don't see that disclaimer (especially in digital products) or don't remember it. They see how monster X is chaotic evil, and that's how they play it.

You know this already. You're basically arguing that every person reads the entire disclaimer for every software program they get. And I'm arguing that most do not, but go right to what they are looking for. Which of the two is more accurate?

I also see no reason why monsters have to default to a certain alignment. You're arguing that people aren't reading, but if people read the flavor text, then alignment in the stat block isn't even needed, right?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Animorphs is also explicit that the controller (the term the protagonists use for a person being controlled by a yeirk) is conscious and aware of its surroundings and the actions the yeirk makes it do. It was pretty disturbing stuff.

Yep. It's kind of like D&D's Intellect Devourers, but if your brain wasn't eaten when they took over your mind, but instead you were a prisoner inside your own body that was endlessly tormented by the parasite that resided inside your brain.

It would actually be an interesting monster to add into D&D, but also probably way too powerful for what CR they would end up being.

 

[Cadence]

I think the fact that there are places in a rulebook no one will look when learning to play the game is itself a sign of a shoddy job.

People don't look at the start of the chapter that has ideals, bonds, flaws, and backgrounds?

Edit: Oh, the disclaimer in the MM, not the write-up in the PhB.

 

[Sacrosanct]

In some articles != issue for most people.

Issue for decent number of people? Non-trivial number? Sizeable number? Apparently common issue?

I'm saying because of the articles, the issue exists. I'm not saying most people have the issue. When I talked about "most people", it was in the context that most people will see a rule as defined as X, and treat it as the default without automatically wanting to modify the rule. That's how rules work.

Do you think most people see a rule, and change it? Or do you think most people read a rule and implement it as it was defined? Because the latter is what I'm arguing.

 

[Scribe]

I'm saying most people don't see that disclaimer (especially in digital products) or don't remember it. They see how monster X is chaotic evil, and that's how they play it.

You know this already. You're basically arguing that every person reads the entire disclaimer for every software program they get. And I'm arguing that most do not, but go right to what they are looking for. Which of the two is more accurate?

I also see no reason why monsters have to default to a certain alignment. You're arguing that people aren't reading, but if people read the flavor text, then alignment in the stat block isn't even needed, right?

No, its still needed.

You dont change things retroactively, just because people for any number of reasons either.

1. Never read the product.
2. Dont understand the product.
3. Cannot fathom that they are free to update the product in a way that suits them.

If you get no value from Alignment, fantastic, do without it. Its FAR easier to ignore a single line, that it is to go through and add it back every time.