Collected Core Handbook Errata

[NMcCoy]

Page 55, under "keywords", oddly enough:

Stance: A stance power lasts until the end of the encounter, for 5 minutes, or until you use another stance power.

At the start of an adjacent enemy's turn, if you are currently capable of making opportunity attacks, that enemy takes 1[W] damage. That's really all there is to it.

Can we please keep this thread to errata, and have the rules questions in other threads?

exodus747 seemed to think there was some error in this power, for some reason ("this is just one of the errors i noticed reading the book"). But yes, I second this request.

 

[Flazzy]

DMG page 188 - Warlord's weapon proficiency: military ranged should be simple ranged.

 

[Kingskin]

MM - Page 278. Orcs don't have a line for skill bonuses.

I've checked all the other races in the PHB and MM and they all have at least one +2 bonus so I'm assuming it's a typo rather than intended. In my game we went for +2 Endurance and +2 Intimidate which seemed appropriate.

 

[Particle_Man]

PHB page 7 "Throughout the 1980s, the game experienced remarkable growth. Novels, a cartoon series, computer games and the first campaign settings (Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance) were released,"

Does not mention the Greyhawk campaign setting, which I am pretty sure was released (as a boxed set) before Forgotten Realms and am certain was released before Dragonlance.

Was I wrong, or does this not count as errata?

 

[Damador]

its intentionally omitted (like ravenloft etc ) thay only named settings that they want to update to 4th edition ( FR eberron dragonlance and new one not yet discovered)

 

[Falchieyan]

PHB 179(typo): The second paragraph under the heading Knowledge Skills starts,
"The check DC increases based on the specific topic and how common the knowledge is. The check DC increases based on the specific topic and how common the knowledge is."

 

[Lucas Blackstone]

Reliant Keyword pg. 55 of the PHB

" If you miss when using a reliable power, you don't expend the use of that power. "

Should read as....

" A reliable power is not expended unless it hits. "

Reasoning: A power like Thicket of Blades is reliable and attacks multiple targets. It is not intended to do 3w damage for multiple rounds, which the fighter could control by choosing to miss targets or imposing penalties on his attack rolls to ensure a miss.

 

[Underage AOLer]

I think Sleep is missing an important clause.

I'm not entirely convinced either way, but I'll add it to the list. Garrote Grip seems like a pretty lame power, by the way. You have to hold a grab for three rounds before they fall unconscious? I suppose you get cover and such... but still.

Was I wrong, or does this not count as errata?

Oh, sorry. I meant to comment on that but I must have forgotten. I'll just echo Damador in saying that I believe it was intentional, not an oversight (even though it may be not entirely accurate).

 

[Prodigal_Sun]

Hi,
thanks for the good work since your errata seems to draw Wotc's attention. Maybe you could add this to the list?

PHB p.111 Under the daily exploit cruel cage of steel; A target hit three times is weakened and stunned until the end of your next turn.

Stunned doesn't grant the target any actions, so what's the benefit of having it weakened?

 

[silentounce]

Hi,
thanks for the good work since your errata seems to draw Wotc's attention. Maybe you could add this to the list?

PHB p.111 Under the daily exploit cruel cage of steel; A target hit three times is weakened and stunned until the end of your next turn.

Stunned doesn't grant the target any actions, so what's the benefit of having it weakened?

Perhaps certain creatures are immune to one of those two effects? Then only the other would apply.

 

[Prodigal_Sun]

Perhaps certain creatures are immune to one of those two effects? Then only the other would apply.

Good call, still my hart would rest easier if WotC clarified the intent of this power.

 

[Gladius Legis]

I got an official Customer Service response for Blade Ward's missing damage figure:

Blade Ward, 4e

Discussion Thread
Response (Support Agent) 06/15/2008 01:41 PM
xxx,

This is a 1[W] damage power.

Good Gaming!

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

xxx
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST

1[W], eh? Pretty disappointing, actually. It doesn't seem that much better than the 3rd level power Disruptive Strike, but there you go.

 

[Underage AOLer]

Hi,
thanks for the good work since your errata seems to draw Wotc's attention. Maybe you could add this to the list?

PHB p.111 Under the daily exploit cruel cage of steel; A target hit three times is weakened and stunned until the end of your next turn.

Stunned doesn't grant the target any actions, so what's the benefit of having it weakened?

I agree that having both effects is redundant, but (as already noted) if a creature is immune to stun, they could still be weakened.

Someone should ask WotC Customer Service if that is what they intended, or if there is something that actually needs errata. Until then I shan't put it in the first post.

In fact, maybe I should submit all the ones in blue and see what customer service says, we already got clarification on the Lay on Hands one from them...

Perhaps after class.

 

[OakwoodDM]

Does the Needlefang Drake Swarm qualify as something requiring errata? Cos the way it is at the moment, it far outstrips any other level 2 monsters. There's no way that thing's an appropriate challenge for anyone lower than about 7th level! It's not even Elite or Solo!

 

[MeMeMeMe]

I think you may be over-rating it. My 4 player group (Warlock, Paladin, Cleric, and Fighter) took on an encounter including needlfang drake swarm, 2 rat swarms, and the weakest flying drake and survived. They took out the needlefangs, one rat swarm, and the flying drake, and fled the remaining rat swarm.
If they'd had any burst or area effect attacks, they wouldn't have needed to run. A wizard would have been very handy.

 

[OakwoodDM]

What level were they? I only ask because my pair of players (Cleric and Rogue) got ripped apart by it in 2 rounds, having not hit it once. The encounter was with it, a Kruthik Hatchling (which went down first round without doing anything) and a Spiretop Drake. 256XP, should have been well within their capabilities, and would have been if they weren't subject, when the Needlefang had a go, to a knock prone attempt, followed by an attack for 2d10+4, followed at the start of their turn by another 2d10+4. Not many 1st level characters can survive if all that hits, and it's pretty likely to hit. The average damage for that's 30, which you have to be a fairly Con heavy fighter to have.

 

[Keenath]

Probably not. Mearls ran a DDXP session where the PCs put his black dragon to sleep, and he didn't wake it up on the first hit.

I don't know about that, but my friend informs me that the wizard character from the Game Day game had the sleep spell with the text "..the target falls asleep" rather than "..the target falls unconscious", and that the DM guide defined the sleep condition as ending with damage.

Honestly, I rather think Mearls' example should be telling; no party could beat the dragon unless they successfully Sleep'd it, and it was (as I recall) four levels higher, an overwhelming encounter... That suggests the way he was running Sleep was overpowered, doesn't it? If it can allow the party to defeat a monster that could be defeated no other way?

 

[deleteme123456]

What level were they? I only ask because my pair of players (Cleric and Rogue) got ripped apart by it in 2 rounds, having not hit it once. The encounter was with it, a Kruthik Hatchling (which went down first round without doing anything) and a Spiretop Drake. 256XP, should have been well within their capabilities, and would have been if they weren't subject, when the Needlefang had a go, to a knock prone attempt, followed by an attack for 2d10+4, followed at the start of their turn by another 2d10+4. Not many 1st level characters can survive if all that hits, and it's pretty likely to hit. The average damage for that's 30, which you have to be a fairly Con heavy fighter to have.

As long as monsters with wildly inappropriate stats for their level are on the list, what about Zombie Rotters? Weaker than any 1st-level minion, and yet it's worth 1.5x the experience since it's level 3. At what point here are we straying too far from "clearly wrong or misleading" and into "possibly wrong", which we probably don't want to open up (yet) or at least not in this thread.

 

[Henrix]

I think the thread should keep to the errata - i.e. printing errors and obvious mistakes.

Discussions of whether monsters and powers are suitable for their level and such is not errata.

 

[Tarril Wolfeye]

Well, the Zombie Rotters are on my list of Minions with wrong math. A level 3 minion should have a +1 to all ability score modifiers. It's not there.
My list:
Cyclops Guard
Horde Ghoul
Abyssal Ghoul Myrmidon
Hobgoblin Grunt
Hobgoblin Warrior
Grinlock Minion
Grimlock Follower
Human Rabble
Kruthik Hatchling
Orc Drudge
Orc Warrior
Troglodyte Warrior
Vampire Spawn Fleshripper
Yuan-ti Snaketongue Zealot
Zombie Rotter

There are Minions with working math, so it can't be exception-based design. (Also MM p. 7, Ability Scores: the adjusted ability score modifier includes one-half the monster's level)

Except for the Abyssal Ghoul Hungerer and the Halfling Stout all Minions in MM with working math have these numbers as half their level: 0, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13.
It all would make sense if initially all minions were levels 1, 6, 11, 16, 21, 26 and they just changed level, but not adjusted ability score modifiers. There ARE a lot less minions in-between these levels.