Dungeons & Dragons 2024 Player's Handbook Is Already Getting Errata

The 2024 Player's Handbook on D&D Beyond contains several updates to the new revised 5th edition ruleset. Early access users of D&D Beyond who have also obtained a physical copy of the 2024 Player's Handbook have noticed several minor differences between the digital and physical copy, assumably due to soon-to-be-released errata. Notably, the following changes have been spotted:

• Giant Insect spell contains a clarification on its HP (the physical edition states that the summoned insect has an HP of 30+10 for each level in the spell slot used to cast the spell; the digital version states 30+10 for every level above 4th level),
• Shields now require the Utilize action to don or doff
• Goliath's Powerful Build now specifies that it grants Advantage on ability checks to end the Grappled Condition instead of saving throws.
• True Polymorph's spell description no longer states that the spell effects end if its target's temporary hit points run out.
• The Telekinetic feat now specifies that it grants an increased range to the use of Mage Hand instead stating that you can cast Mage Hand at a further distance away.

Notably, Wizards of the Coast has not released an official errata document for the Player's Handbook, although they may be holding out until the book's full release on September 17th.

 

[Azzy]

Lol. I'm not anti-5.24e, but damned am I filled with confidence.

 

[pukunui]

Lol. I'm not anti-5.24e, but damned am I filled with confidence.

Really? 2014 5e needed errata from day one as well. This isn't anything new.

 

[Azzy]

Really? 2014 5e needed errata from day one as well. This isn't anything new.

True. Really, I guess this has a long tradition in D&D. My first printing of the 2e PHB was borked, too.

 

[Belen]

Unfortunately, this boat has sailed. The addition of clearly defined actions like "Study" and "Influence" clearly communicates that they're trying to strip away all the need for DM adjudication and turning the skills system into some kind of predefined buttons for the players to push.

I am not sure how you get that from the Study action. The DM still has to give the info and determines what to give.

 

[Stalker0]

Really? 2014 5e needed errata from day one as well. This isn't anything new.

There is always going to be some errata. I think the biggest ones are those that were found in the playtest the day those documents came out. That's the stuff that's really disappointing.

 

[Mistwell]

Which is why I'm extremely disappointed they made feats baseline with no option to play without that bs.

Other than your background, all feats can just be defaulted to an ability score improvement.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't want every party to dip rogue and have pass without trace.

Like for some parties, sure. But it shouldn't be the dominant strategy.

What now? What's the rogue ability being referenced here?

 

[Maxperson]

It also say nothing about becoming inaudible. All it does is making you "invisible while nobody is looking at you".

It's virtually the same invisibility as the invisibility spell, though. The only difference is that invisibility adds a few more find conditions. That's it. All these posts suggesting that there are different kinds of invisibility are wrong. The game RAW only does what it says it does and nothing more, and both hiding and the invisibility spell give you the exact same invisible condition. That means that if you can't see someone standing right in front of you who is invisible due to the spell, under those same conditions you also cannot see the person who became invisible from hiding. Unless the person hiding violates the hide conditions(making noise or attacking).

That's by RAW at least. By common sense, it would be different and DMs would house rule that piece of idiocy in 2 seconds.

 

[Imaro]

It's virtually the same invisibility as the invisibility spell, though. The only difference is that invisibility adds a few more find conditions. That's it. All these posts suggesting that there are different kinds of invisibility are wrong. The game RAW only does what it says it does and nothing more, and both hiding and the invisibility spell give you the exact same invisible condition. That means that if you can't see someone standing right in front of you who is invisible due to the spell, under those same conditions you also cannot see the person who became invisible from hiding. Unless the person hiding violates the hide conditions(making noise or attacking).

That's by RAW at least. By common sense, it would be different and DMs would house rule that piece of idiocy in 2 seconds.

Nothing in the Invisibilie condition actually says you're invisible by RAW.

 

[Maxperson]

Nothing in the Invisibilie condition actually says you're invisible by RAW.

Then the same holds true for the spell, and makes the whole thing doubly stupid. You aren't invisible, you just have the invisible condition! You don't have cancer, you just have the cancer condition! You aren't really flying, you just have the fly condition!