D&D (2024) Is anyone at WOTC paying attention to what they print any more?

[ECMO3]

So if the person ends the paralyzed, and not the poison that takes the paralysis with it, he gets a save?

Yes obviously. He gets a save whether or not he is Paralyzed. He just automatically fails it if he is Paralyzed.

Also I will note that Carrion Crawler mucus is a Constitution save in the DMG, not a dex save. This further reenforces my opinion that this is a mistake and not intended.

100% they did not write that sentence into the ability for this non-starter, or any other corner case. You're wasting your time trying to come up for one in order to ignore the RAW that allows it anyway.

I am not the one advocating to ignore RAW, you are.

RAW you automatically fail dexterity saves while Paralyzed and nothing in the Carrion Crawer section changes this during the first minute of being poisoned by a Carrion Crawler.

You still have not overcome the RAW that in plain English means you get a save anyway. Specific beats general.

Sure you get save. I never said you didn't.

You get a save every single turn and you automatically fail that save if you are Paralyzed, Stunned or Unconscious.

I think the main problem is you see automatically failing a save to be the same as not getting a save and those are not the same thing.

 

[Autumnal]

It may even be the case that at the moment it was written, the carrion crawler’s stats didn’t contain a strange loop. Then something changed on the condition description end, and now it did. I have had that experience more than once when working on early supplements for a new game or new edition.

In any event, like others, I find it a weird thing to get so intense about. If I disliked that came that much, I wouldn’t buy it.

 

[MerricB]

It may even be the case that at the moment it was written, the carrion crawler’s stats didn’t contain a strange loop. Then something changed on the condition description end, and now it did. I have had that experience more than once when working on early supplements for a new game or new edition.

Nope, Paralyzed has worked that way for 10 years.

 

[Autumnal]

Thanks for the reality check.

 

[MerricB]

Thanks for the reality check.

Yeah, I think it's just they forgot about the interaction. It's dangerous hiding stuff in conditions!

 

[Maxperson]

Yes obviously. He gets a save whether or not he is Paralyzed. He just automatically fails it if he is Paralyzed.

Also I will note that Carrion Crawler mucus is a Constitution save in the DMG, not a dex save. This further reenforces my opinion that this is a mistake and not intended.

I also agreed very early on that it was likely a mistake. I just understand the English as written, means that you get a save that you can succeed at since specific beats general.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

So if the person ends the paralyzed, and not the poison that takes the paralysis with it, he gets a save? So a corner case that will never happen even as a corner case, because no one is that dumb.

No one should be dumb enough to write a rule that requires a DEX save to end paralysis, yet here we are.

Proficiency in basic logic is not exactly common....

 

[FrozenNorth]

First off I don't. The mechanics are clear if you know the rules and there is no contridiction.

Further I am not sure the 5E "specfic beats general" principle still applies since I don't even think this is in the 2024 rules.

Where in the book does it states the RAW principle applies?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Further I am not sure the 5E "specfic beats general" principle still applies since I don't even think this is in the 2024 rules.

Exceptions Supersede General Rules - 2024 PHB p8​

General rules govern each part of the game. For example, the combat rules tell you that melee attacks use Strength and ranged attacks use Dexterity. That's a general rule, and a general rule is in effect as long as something in the game doesn't explicitly say otherwise.

The game also includes elements—class features, feats, weapon properties, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and the like—that sometimes contradict a general rule. When an exception and a general rule disagree, the exception wins. For example, if a feature says you can make melee attacks using your Charisma, you can do so, even though that statement disagrees with the general rule.

 

[Maxperson]

No one should be dumb enough to write a rule that requires a DEX save to end paralysis, yet here we are.

Proficiency in basic logic is not exactly common....

I think ending the paralysis instead of the poison if further along that scale, though. As I mentioned at one point earlier in the thread, there's at least a logic to the dex save. Paralysis inhibits movement and dex is movement, so you can kinda make the connection between the two being in opposition to one another.