Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 2433513" data-attributes="member: 32740">It won't because the primary source is considered to be the correct one.  I believe there is a blurb like this at the beginning of ALL official errata documents:If MM3 modified the definition then it contradicts the primary source which would be either the DMG or MM(1) [the DMG is primary source for conditions, MM would be primary source for templates and monster abilities].Nope.  The DMG supercedes if you're talking about Incorporeal being a condition.  The MM supercedes if you're talking about a monster supernatural ability. Of course, that's just as far as OFFICIAL ERRATA is concerned and this is graphic evidence why you should not put too much stock in OFFICIAL errata.  If the modifed approach given in MM3 clears up problems that you find from the DMG or MM then there is every reason in the world why you should IGNORE the official errata.</blockquote>