D&D (2024) Sage Advice Compendium Updated To 2024

The latest Sage Advice Compendium updates provide official rules clarifications for D&D 2024. Sage Advice is not errata, but acts more like a FAQ for common rules queries.

The Sage Advice Compendium collects questions and answers about rules interactions in Dungeons & Dragons. With the release of the new Core Rulebooks, Sage Advice has been updated to encompass the new material presented in these books. It will continue to be updated as more questions are brought up by the community.

 

[pukunui]

that sounds like it should be errata’d

Well, something does! Either the Stunned condition or Stunning Strike.

@LaTia J Could you please pass on some feedback that the 2024 monk's Stunning Strike feature is wonky with the new Stunned condition? It makes no sense that on a failure, you can freely move around (even if you can't do anything else), but on a success, you can act normally but only move at half speed. Either Stunned should still affect speed (either half speed or no movement) or Stunning Strike should do something else on a success (maybe "slowed" - i.e. one action or bonus action and no reaction for the next round)?

Can you also pass on feedback that the 2024 Otto's Irresistible Dance spell is similarly wonky ... in that a creature immune to being Charmed is only affected by the spell if they succeed on their saving throw! That makes no sense. The spell needs to have a caveat that creatures immune to being Charmed are unaffected by the spell at all.

 

[Charlaquin]

You aren't functionally transparent either.
Your back is essential always turned until they search or you reveal yourself.

Humanoids of infinite backs

That’s not meaningfully different from being transparent until they search or you reveal yourself. Hence why I’ve been saying functionally transparent.

 

[Charlaquin]

4e went through like 4 different variations over the course of the publishing history before they finally landed on that one. I agree it's better than this, but it sure didn't feel like a "fine" process at the time when they updated the friggen rule multiple times in a matter of weeks. I think they even changed the name of it from hide to stealth at some point.

They also rewrote the entire set of rules at one point. I've shared a screenshot in several recent threads ...

EDIT: Here we go! "Replace all text after the first paragraph ..."

Regardless of how rocky the process of getting there was, my point is that they did eventually land on pretty much perfect stealth rules. They could have just kept those for 5e, but decided something that more explicitly centered the conversation of play was more fitting for 5e’s design goals, and sure, that’s not unreasonable. But then for the 2024 revision they decided to go back to having more explicit rules, but instead of leaning on what they had already learned from past editions, they for some reason decided to completely re-write the rules again in what very well may have been the worst way they possibly could have.

 

[Charlaquin]

ChatGPT?

EDIT: I should have said Gleemax, lol.

Gleemax would have been the move, for sure

 

[evilbob]

Overall: I like it!

It's interesting that they specifically called out how Truestrike absolutely does not work as an attack action. Except that one of the biggest uses of Truestrike is the exception to this rule: Valor bard level 6.
You can attack twice instead of once whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
In addition, you can cast one of your cantrips that has a casting time of an action in place of one of those attacks.

Does this mean that I can’t attack the door with Guiding Bolt?​

...even though I know that a door is not a valid target and thus this advice is correct, I would still let someone shoot a door with that spell. Not disagreeing: just a RAF for me.

Re: stealth, my thoughts are here: D&D (2024) - Stealth Errata
And say that the more I read of the clarifications, the more it seems like "stealth" in 5.5 is intended to be where sneaking up on someone during combat you would remain hidden (I hid behind the boulder and now I'm sneaking out from behind it toward the goblin who doesn't know where I am to hit him over the head with a sap).

 

[Minigiant]

That’s not meaningfully different from being transparent until they search or you reveal yourself. Hence why I’ve been saying functionally transparent.

But its not that you are transparent.

5e works on not having dedicated facing.
5e stealth is based on you always facing away from anything hidden from you until they give away their position or you search for it,

It's less transparency and more like the old cartoons when the hider always jumps behind the guard's back.

 

[Charlaquin]

But its not that you are transparent.

5e works on not having dedicated facing.
5e stealth is based on you always facing away from anything hidden from you until they give away their position or you search for it,

It's less transparency and more like the old cartoons when the hider always jumps behind the guard's back.

Again, there is no FUNCTIONAL difference between those two things.

 

[dave2008]

So, dragon breath and most monster attack powers are not magical, at least as it relates to the rules.

Can you point me to the section where this is clarified? I looked for it, but couldn't find it.

 

[Reynard]

Can you point me to the section where this is clarified? I looked for it, but couldn't find it.

There was a question of "how do you know when something is magical" and the answer was "it will tell you." Neither breath weapons or most attacks from monsters say they are magical in the MM.

 

[dave2008]

I have always hated the notion that rogues can double dash. They're already incredibly mobile and I would prefer them to use their bonus action imaginatively. The cinematic tradition is pulling over a stall of melons to create difficult terrain, not sprint like Usain Bolt. There are other ways to get greater movement if you want to be super speedy. And I am unanimous in that.

So, Are You Being Served?!