D&D 5E Latest D&D Errata: Drow, Alignment, & More

Sage Advice is a series of articles in which Jeremy Crawford, one of the D&D Studio’s game design architects, talks about the design of the game’s rules and answers questions about them.

Book Updates | Sage Advice | Dungeons & Dragons

This Sage Advice provides updates and errata for a number of books, as well as answers to rules questions.

dnd.wizards.com

D&D books occasionally receive corrections and other updates to their rules and story. This Sage Advice installment presents updates to several books. I then answer a handful of rules questions, focusing on queries related to Fizban’s Treasury of Dragons and Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos.

Official errata has been published for the following books:

• Curse of Strahd
• Dungeon Master’s Guide
• Player’s Handbook
• Storm King’s Thunder
• Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide
• Tales from the Yawning Portal
• Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything
• Tomb of Annihilation
• Volo’s Guide to Monsters

Here's some of the highlights.

• Alignment is removed from the Racial Traits section of races.
• Drow have undergone lore changes which reflect the different types of drow. The 'darkness of the drow' sidebar which portrays them as only evil has been removed.
• Storm King's Thunder alters references to 'Savage Frontier' and 'barbarians'; Curse of Strahd alters references to the Vistani.
• The controversial Silvery Barbs spell has been clarified.

As a drow, you are infused with the magic of the Underdark, an underground realm of wonders and horrors rarely seen on the surface above. You are at home in shadows and, thanks to your innate magic, learn to con- jure forth both light and darkness. Your kin tend to have stark white hair and grayish skin of many hues.

The cult of the god Lolth, Queen of Spiders, has cor- rupted some of the oldest drow cities, especially in the worlds of Oerth and Toril. Eberron, Krynn, and other realms have escaped the cult’s influence—for now. Wherever the cult lurks, drow heroes stand on the front lines in the war against it, seeking to sunder Lolth’s web.

 

[Bolares]

I agree with this reading, but was this actually clarified somewhere? This one was a big discussion in our group about how it works.

I doubt there is clarification on this specific case, but the wording and crawford later are pretty clear. Barkskin gives you a minimun AC. if at any point your ac is less than 16, it becomes 16. It doesn't change the calculation of your ac at any point. so cover, shields, shield, all add to your original AC, not to barkskins 16.



from sage advice https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf :

How does barkskin work with shields, cover, and other modifiers to AC? Barkskin specifies that your AC can’t be lower than 16 while you are affected by the spell. This means you effectively ignore any modifiers to your AC—including your Dexterity modifier, your armor, a shield, and cover—unless your AC is higher than 16. For example, if your AC is normally 14, it’s 16 while barkskin is on you. If your AC is normally 15 and you have half cover, your AC is 17; barkskin isn’t relevant in this case.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't think they are needed (and if they are we can always world build them back in) if the next edition (5.5/6/anniversary) just didn't include them I wouldn't even notice... it is calling out "Replace X with Y" that bugs me. it is a way of seeming to put your finger on the scale.

That’s just how errata works

 

[DEFCON 1]

Ah so we only penalise new players to the hobby with a lack of content and support. That sounds like a odd business plan.

Funny... here I was thinking that most of these changes were reflecting the current cultural opinions of today's young people, people who would more often than not be the ones who would be the "new players" in our example. So if we were to tell those young people that the game was removing a whole bunch of "problematic" words and descriptions that their moms and dads and grandparents still use much to your chagrin... I hardly think they would consider themselves "penalized".

 

[DEFCON 1]

So, sounds like mostly silly changes instead of useful stuff.

Yeah... it's almost like people are getting all bent out of shape here in this thread over absolutely nothing.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Funny... here I was thinking that most of these changes were reflecting the current cultural opinions of today's young people, people who would more often than not be the ones who would be the "new players" in our example. So if we were to tell those young people that the game was removing a whole bunch of "problematic" words and descriptions that their moms and dads and grandparents still use much to your chagrin... I hardly think they would consider themselves "penalized".

"Dungeons and Dragons, now with less Cringe"

 

[Blue]

I cannot fathom looking at the Realms or Eberron and thinking that though a player character's race doesn't determine culture Amn, Chult, the Dalelands, Sharn, Waterdeep, etc are all now the same.

Can you tell me what they removed that differentiated an dwarf from Waterdeep and an dwarf from the Dalelands? A halfling from Chult vs. a halfling from the Amn? Because I don't see where they removed anything where the character's race affected the culture for any of what you are claiming was removed.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I wonder if 5.5/6e/Anniversary Edition will change that. Maybe going forward it will be more GURPS and less WOD, with no setting just mechanics that can be melded into a setting.

That seems counter to Hasbro's general business practices: they bought DnD for the IP, they know how to monetize IP's, and their most valuable assets are ultimately IP's. They wouldn't want to dilute the brand... they do want to expand it, and make the game as popular as possible, but they really want to make a successful movie because they will never make a billion dollars selling rpg splatbooks.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

yeah that doesn't sound much better... so each merchant, each slave, most beat down children are evil... in a huge metropolis?

Yes. Exactly what I said.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If you look at the history of FR, Brothels don't have the same dark history as say Brothels during ancient Roman times did with the use of slavery (exceptions exist), in FR Brothels often have more religious element thanks to Sune, Sharess, Llirra, and Waukeen among other Gods, and they & sex workers aren't judged nearly as harshly as they are in the real world.

FR has an Renaissance aesthetic,but it's never really been a midevil or Renaissance world in terms of social dynamics, there really isn't a RL equivalent. Imagine the sexual revolution of the 60's happened back during the Renaissance, and that the idea that humans have races in the popular culture sense didn't exist, along with no rise of Monotheism, and ancient Egypt, Greece, and Mesopotamia but with access to Renaissance tech, still exist, and tons of wide and high magic then you get a step closer to FR.

Yeah, but a new player coming into the Forgotten Realms for the very first time has no idea about any of that stuff. All they know is what they know... and their ideas of what fantasy medieval-ish or Renaissance-ish sex-work is, is probably going to come from things like the Game of Thrones tv show. A show which does not portray sex, sex-work, and sexual relationships in the brightest of light, to put it lightly. LOL.

So if that is what our new players think of when they hear the word 'brothel' in a fantasy context... that's when they might more likely bounce off of D&D and what they might consider its total bullcrap attitudes towards sex. Whether or not that reaction is fair or not is another discussion entirely... but as they say you only get one chance to make a first impression. And we all know what the first impression of Tomb of Annihilation was by a whole bunch of people when that got released... and I don't think WotC is ever going to make that same mistake again. Even if they cull some things that really end up being innocuous in the long run, because better safe than sorry.

 

[pukunui]

Of course, what I'm most curious about is the decision to try and scrub the word Barbarian, which I would think makes it more interesting in terms of choosing classes in the future ...

I think it has less to do with removing the word “barbarian” specifically and more to do with changing the overall language used to describe the Uthgardt and such. They’re moving away from portraying an entire people as bloodthirsty savages.

It’s interesting that they haven’t changed the whole “raiding sacred burial mounds” thing, which has made people pretty uncomfortable, but I guess that would require too much effort at this point.