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.

 

[Pauln6]

If you interpret the invisible condition in this way, you must also accept that the invisibility spell doesn’t prevent you from being seen either.

This is the problem. The invisibility condition defines that you can't be seen. All they needed was some description in the spell.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is the problem. The invisibility condition defines that you can't be seen. All they needed was some description in the spell.

Or a different condition for mundane hiding, or for the Hide action to specify that you lose the condition if you end your turn within an enemy’s line of sight… there are so many ways they could have fixed this problem, and yet none of them were ever playtested or included in the day 0 errata. Which just leads me to think it’s completely intentional. They clearly just want hiding to work like Skyrim where you walk behind a rock and push the crouch button and all the enemies conveniently forget you exist and can’t find you unless you attack or make a bunch of noise.

 

[DEFCON 1]

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.

Actually, I disagree. Because I think WotC fully expects experienced DMs to run and play the game the way they want regardless of what the rules say and who won't hamstring themselves using the rules that they don't like.

'Study' and 'Influence' actions (like Skill Challenges were in 4E) are a way for WotC to begin to instruct new players on how to understand and learn how to run ability score checks (plus skill proficiencies), and in which ways those checks succeed and fail. They are simplistic, not very detailed, and are very easy for a new player to follow along and interpret. Which is what you'd want for rules when trying to teach them to someone new.

But for anyone who has actually run the game before and knows of all the different ways their players might circumvent these simplistic scenarios that these actions detail... WotC knows none of those DMs will actually use these rules. Because why would they? Especially if they don't think the rules are useful to them. Which is why I believe they ARE this simplistic... to make it even more obvious to experienced players that you don't have to use them and that you shouldn't use them and that you don't want to use them. Because these rules are not here for us-- they're here for new DMs and new players. Everyone else should just keep running their game the way they want, how they want to, using whatever methods they have developed for themselves over the years. And if there are new ways in these 5E24 books you want to bring into how you run your game, go right ahead.

And any DM who thinks that these rules are dumb but still uses them because that's what the book says the rules are? In other words... "Playing RAW"? They are cutting off their nose to spite their face. And WotC can't do anything to help those people and doesn't even try. Because every single one of those people will think the "right rules" the game should have and use will be completely different than any other set of "right rules" another one of those people will believe. And thus it is statistically impossible for WotC to write a rulebook that every one of those people could use RAW and be happy with. And that's why they don't do it.

And if someone then asks "Why am I buying these new books then?"... the answer is "I don't know, why are you?" If you don't need these rulebooks because you are happy running the game you have with whatever personalized rules you have come up with from whatever edition or system you chose... you don't need to change. And WotC doesn't care if you don't. Play the game you want as you want it. That's all they care about on a personal level.

 

[DEFCON 1]

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

It is inevitable. Because the people who edit these tomes have been seeing things over and over for months on end with the barest hint of changes showing up here and there throughout these documents. Even their internal playtesters probably see the same documents so many times with just the slightest of revisions that everyone just becomes blinded to how one sentence over here interacts with another sentence over there when the second sentence was re-written six times over the course of four months leading up to publication.

But once you put the document in front of thousands of people all at one time... of course they as a massive group are going to easily notice each 't' that didn't get crossed or each 'i' that wasn't dotted because they haven't been staring at these words for so long that they all run together.

The only way to really solve this situation would be to hand the "finished" document out to the entire world as a 'beta test realm' (to use video game parlance) for them to find every single mistake or misinterpretation, and then gather all of that once more and try to "fix" these things right before going to the printers. But of course... you then have an entire book out in the wild (just missing art and binding) that pretty much renders the need for people to buy the real book nil. And that's why they don't do that.

As far as players themselves are concerned with how things are done now... they either need to wait a few months for a "second printing" to get made so they can get a version with any errata added to it... or they just have to accept that 99.99% of the book is completely fine and useable, and be okay with checking an errata document for that one thing that they actually come across whose wording has changed and that they actually use. Because goodness knows most of an errata document won't ever come up for any one player as it just never applies to their game.

Heck, I know for me I downloaded every single updated errata document for 5E14 as they got released... and yet never once did I ever actually refer to it. Because I just used "common sense" interpretation on every rule I came across when there might have been an issue regardless of how the grammar might have made things squiggly.

 

[Remathilis]

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!

Contagion gives you the poisoned condition despite inflicting you with a disease, not a poison.

 

[Demetrios1453]

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'm 100% opposite on this than you. As a DM, I was mentally cheering when I saw how the Study and Influnce actions work. They're great, clarifying additions.

 

[Maxperson]

Contagion gives you the poisoned condition despite inflicting you with a disease, not a poison.

Out of curiosity, is there a diseased condition in 5.5e?

 

[Nefermandias]

I'm 100% opposite on this than you. As a DM, I was mentally cheering when I saw how the Study and Influnce actions work. They're great, clarifying additions.

Having the players actively choosing to make an Ability Check doesn't make any sense. This isn't how the gameplay loop should work.

 

[Charlaquin]

Out of curiosity, is there a diseased condition in 5.5e?

No. The Poisoned condition seems to serve as a catch-all for illness, be it induced by toxin or pathogen (or magic).

 

[SteveC]

I was wondering about this with all the discussion of online integration. During the 4E era, constant updates were made online since the resources were virtual. I thought they'd do this, and it makes sense. The important thing is to put a process in place so that all changes are easily accessible to everyone.

It would be useful to have a change process in place for this, and WotC is one of the only companies who have the resources to do it.