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

[MonsterEnvy]

I was looking at possible uses from the new book for a game tonight and saw these posts on some entries- it seems like users on DDB aren't too happy either:

Cultist Hierophant MM25 entry
View attachment 395712

Mistakes happen ofc, but it was funny to see these sorts of complaints on the DDB entries themselves so I thought I'd share :')

Just a slight thing. I don’t think tiny errors like that matter much.

 

[the Jester]

Sure, it isn't a hard fix, but it really seems like something that should have been caught -- and almost certainly would have if they had had a monster playtest.

The lack of a real monster playtest has been a real issue for several editions now.

 

[MerricB]

The lack of a real monster playtest has been a real issue for several editions now.

The fact that the monster stats were massively changed for 5E from the D&D Next playtest led to quite a few weird monster choices in Hoard of the Dragon Queen (which was based on the playtest rules).

 

[Sacrosanct]

Can you post examples side by side? The new format is very clear to me, but I honestly don't remember how it used to be phrased.

It just reads less intuitively for me, with an assumption the person reading it knows the system lingo. Kinda like a technical doc. I.e., no complete sentences but snippets of data.

Paralyzing Tentacles. Dexterity Saving Throw: DC 12, one creature the carrion crawler can see within 10 feet. Failure: The target has the Poisoned condition and repeats the save at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success. After 1 minute, it succeeds automatically. While Poisoned, the target has the Paralyzed condition.

Where I think it's more intuitive language to say something like this:

Paralyzing Tentacles. One creature the carrion crawler can see within 10 feet must succeed on a DC 12 Dexterity Saving Throw or have the Paralyzed condition. A paralyzed creature can attempt a new save (does not automatically fail as per condition description) at the end of each of their turns to end this condition early, otherwise it ends on its own after 1 minute.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I mean, that's funny as hell. LOL

How I would resolve it, though, is that it seems to me that the carrion crawler ability is more specific than the more general paralyzation rules. It seems clear from the specific ability that you can continue to make dex saves that are possible to succeed at and break the poison/paralysis.

Edit: It would have made more sense as a con save in any case.

This is basically my reaction. People on Reddit in particular get so bent out of shape about these kind of things when in reality they're pretty easily solved by going, "Oh, this doesn't make sense... it's got to be an error. We'll do this instead." Like the problem with Contagion in 2014. Serious issue. Trivial fix. Instead they're banging on the desk screaming, "I deserve a perfect book for my $50! They're professional designers!"

Meanwhile real problems like 2014's, "Wait, why do the short rest classes always end up resource starved while the long rest classes completely dominate the flow of the game?" just get ignored or people blame the DM for it. I don't know why there's so much anger about minor mistakes which are easily fixed when major mistakes foundational to the structure that are nearly impossible to fix are somehow the DM's fault.

 

[dave2008]

It just reads less intuitively for me, with an assumption the person reading it knows the system lingo. Kinda like a technical doc. I.e., no complete sentences but snippets of data.




Where I think it's more intuitive language to say something like this:

OK, thank you for sharing the OG. I prefer the technical dock language / formatting of 2024 vs 2014, it reminds me a bit of 4e and I liked that streamlined format. However, I see how it might feel more natural to some in the 2014 version.

 

[Shardstone]

OK, thank you for sharing the OG. I prefer the technical dock language / formatting of 2024 vs 2014, it reminds me a bit of 4e and I liked that streamlined format. However, I see how it might feel more natural to some in the 2014 version.

I HATED 4E stat blocks, but 5R stat blocks are a great in-between of 4 and 5E IMO. They read very well.

 

[dave2008]

I HATED 4E stat blocks, but 5R stat blocks are a great in-between of 4 and 5E IMO. They read very well.

Yes, I think 5e, and particularly 5e24, stat blocks are a good compromise. I think 5e24 has moved more toward the technical aspects of 4e stat blocks that I liked. Still room for improvement though.

 

[Chaltab]

Yes, I think 5e, and particularly 5e24, stat blocks are a good compromise. I think 5e24 has moved more toward the technical aspects of 4e stat blocks that I liked. Still room for improvement though.

I'm weird in that I liked 4E but I'm honestly not a fan of the MM-25 changes to monster abilities that prompt saves. That may just be because I'm not used to it yet. I've spent 8 years adjusting to 5E statblocks only for them to change them.

But spells are usually just as wordy as they ever were in 5e! It feels incongruous.

 

[Chaltab]

If I were going for a more 4E style, I'd format it like this;

Paralyzing Tentacles.
One Target, Range 10 ft, requires sight
Dexterity Saving Throw: DC 12
Failure: The target has the Poisoned condition for one minute. While Poisoned, it is also Paralyzed.
Repeat Save: Constitution, End of Turn