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.

 

[Professor Murder]

It's a pointless binary to have the only choices be 'Perfection" and "Anything else". There is no perfect. There is a professional product being released at a significant price point by a multi-billion dollar industry leader. I will save my forgiveness for sloppy products for the indie projects made by a small team on a nothing budget. It's not going to stop me grabbing my copy today, but it is disappointing.

 

[Zaukrie]

It's a pointless binary to have the only choices be 'Perfection" and "Anything else". There is no perfect. There is a professional product being released at a significant price point by a multi-billion dollar industry leader. I will save my forgiveness for sloppy products for the indie projects made by a small team on a nothing budget. It's not going to stop me grabbing my copy today, but it is disappointing.

I mean, planes crash, and they spend more time and effort on that....mistakes happen. Gonna happen. Every time. You can choose to not forgive them, but I'm not sure why we should expect anything else to happen, and set ouselves up for disappointment*

*I'm only quoting you because you're last, and I am not implying you are wrong here....

 

[Professor Murder]

I mean, planes crash, and they spend more time and effort on that....mistakes happen. Gonna happen. Every time. You can choose to not forgive them, but I'm not sure why we should expect anything else to happen, and set ouselves up for disappointment*

*I'm only quoting you because you're last, and I am not implying you are wrong here....

Let's avoid hyperbolic exaggeration of harms as a means to belittle concerns. No one is claiming that buying a bad produce is equal to dying in a plane crash. I know it's the internet. Try to read scale.

 

[gban007]

Let's avoid hyperbolic exaggeration of harms as a means to belittle concerns. No one is claiming that buying a bad produce is equal to dying in a plane crash. I know it's the internet. Try to read scale.

I don't believe was intent, my read was that was trying to pull out an example of industries where perfection should be paramount, errors eliminated completely if possible, and that even in businesses that may spend millions a year in eliminating such things (for the sake of point here, ignoring Boeing's antics of late which runs counter to this) - and if it is impossible to eliminate in places like that, is hard to expect that in businesses that won't have such a keen focus / budget for eliminating mistakes that they can do better.
Thus I think it is reasonable to expect that any product was likely to have some issues slip through - question is how many an individual may feel is reasonable, and how many would be indication of undue lack of care as such. Here I'm not sure, things like Goliath issue, shield donning, giant insect and poisoner feel like maybe one or two wouldn't be so bad, but at least 4 suggests not as good a process as could the case.

 

[Maxperson]

Wait, what?

My players ask to make checks all the time.

DM: You seen an ancient marble statue.

Player: Cool. Can I make a history check?

DM: Sure!

That's not how 5e is written to work, though. The 5e rules say that the player describes to you what he is doing, "I'm examining the statue to see if I recognize anything about it." and then the DM calls for an ability check if necessary, "Okay, make a history check."

If a player asks for a check, the DM is more likely(even if not consciously) to grant the ability check rather than just saying yes if it's an easy thing to know for that PC. The player is gimping himself by asking.

 

[Maxperson]

To be fair, diseased was a half-baked set of rules that didn't follow any structure and didn't come up all that often regardless. Most disease/sickness effects already did that, save for those weird curse diseases (mummy rot or lycanthropy) , the contagion spell, and a few underdeveloped ideas in the DMG.

So the "disease poisons" of 5e have an incubation period, symptoms, and can last days or weeks?

 

[Nefermandias]

It's a bit weird, but there's this divide between those who think  only the DM should call for skill checks and those who are fine with either the DM or player doing so. My group is firmly in the latter camp.

The DM calls for checks in the 2014 ruleset. Ability checks are a tool for the DM.

 

[Demetrios1453]

That's not how 5e is written to work, though. The 5e rules say that the player describes to you what he is doing, "I'm examining the statue to see if I recognize anything about it." and then the DM calls for an ability check if necessary, "Okay, make a history check."

If a player asks for a check, the DM is more likely(even if not consciously) to grant the ability check rather than just saying yes if it's an easy thing to know for that PC. The player is gimping himself by asking.

Of course that's not how it's written. At no point was I insinuating it was. But that's how we (and others) do it.

 

[Remathilis]

So the "disease poisons" of 5e have an incubation period, symptoms, and can last days or weeks?

So far, the only ones we have seen are spell based ones in the PHB. Ask again when the DMG and MM come out.

 

[Superchunk77]

Is there errata for that awful art?