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

Status
Not open for further replies.
E987FCF6-1386-4E95-9272-C02BF782C442.jpeg


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.


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:
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
except this isn't 'finding it's way it' it's been here for longer then I have been alive. in 5e alone it is being removed going on the 10 year mark... what reason could possible be to remove it now?
They’re reviewing the game for things that wouldn’t have been included in the books had they not been catering to nostalgia, or wouldn’t be in if they were publishing it right now. 🤷‍♂️
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Remathilis

Legend
I think that will happen where there is another adequate word to represent the concept, but not otherwise (I don't think double-barrelled class names will ever be a major thing, to be clear).

The trouble is, with Druid and Warlock (both of which are about equally culturally-specific, and neither of which is offending anyone but perhaps some neo-pagans who themselves dealing with issues re: being "problematic"), they've evolved into highly-specific concepts that are quite accessible via pop-culture, but which there aren't other words for which are more acceptable. Something like "Greenpriest" is never going to fly.

Paladin likewise. I don't see that going anywhere. It's an increasingly well-established archetype in pop-culture, thanks in part to video games.

I feel like you're looking at this from an approach to progressive-ness which was popular in the '90s and part of the '00s, but which is now passé. Where cultural specificity and authenticity (as channelled by white people, usually) were everything. Where renaming a class for a specific culture was moving things forwards. But that idea is no longer really relevant. So long as the name isn't actively damaging, it's likely to be retained, because these are peculiar D&D concepts. A Paladin isn't just a "Holy Warrior" or whatever. A Druid isn't just a "Nature Cleric". A Warlock isn't just "Bargaining Caster", and none of those names would work. even.

The only way I see this happening is if 7E or whatever decides to go thermonuclear and make the classes basically be Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, Cleric, with everything else as a variant of them. But that'll be the end of D&D, frankly.

I do think Monk will probably go sooner rather than later, note, because "Martial arts warrior" is a huge archetype, and Monk is a terrible way of approaching it which blocks more concepts than it enables, and the name is part of the problem.


Sorry, but that's a very lazy and imho intellectually bankrupt response. You have no apparent valid criticism here, and are merely grousing that you don't like an reasoned assessment of the threats D&D faces. If you think any of those threats aren't real, then please name them, don't just namecall.
Eh. Druid, monk and paladin are probably the biggest examples after barbarian of classes/archetypes that are too narrow or culturally specific. Druid gets some blast not necessarily for it's Celtic name but for being too narrow to represent a wide variety of shamanistic or naturist archetypes. Monk ditto for aesthetic or unarmed combatant, and paladin for divine champions. Maybe they're won't be a cry out for druids as being culturally appropriated, but by trying to keep to the thin eurocentric archetype it classically represented it eliminates the ability to emulate other non-European style nature religions.

I wouldn't be surprised to one day see a new more generic "nature priest" class one day that could emulate druids, shamans, witches, clever people, or other similar concepts. The same for barbarian, monk, paladin and maybe warlock and bard.
 

Eh. Druid, monk and paladin are probably the biggest examples after barbarian of classes/archetypes that are too narrow or culturally specific. Druid gets some blast not necessarily for it's Celtic name but for being too narrow to represent a wide variety of shamanistic or naturist archetypes. Monk ditto for aesthetic or unarmed combatant, and paladin for divine champions. Maybe they're won't be a cry out for druids as being culturally appropriated, but by trying to keep to the thin eurocentric archetype it classically represented it eliminates the ability to emulate other non-European style nature religions.

I wouldn't be surprised to one day see a new more generic "nature priest" class one day that could emulate druids, shamans, witches, clever people, or other similar concepts. The same for barbarian, monk, paladin and maybe warlock and bard.
What do you do here though? These things are basically brand identity.

As long as D&D is set in generic D&D fantasy land there isn't really anyway out of this kind of situation, especially since so much of 5e was based on the premise of making D&D feel like D&D again.

I agree with you about the Monk and the Druid, but there's a central tension here between a fanbase that wants a specific identifiable thing to be a fan of and the desire for change. After all there are plenty of other games out there to play, but people want to play D&D.

It seems that what many fans want is for D&D to be recognisably D&D except for these few particular things that they personally would want to change.
 


DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I don't understand the stupid spellcasting attack crap.

With the spell slots at least I could have a monster use a stronger form of a spell when it used a higher slot.

How the hell am I supposed to do that now with this "1/day can use this spell" nonsense? Where are the number of slots per spell level? This doesn't make any DMs job easier, just worse.
Uh... you use the book you currently own rather than this new one if/when it comes out?

Or you just add some spells to whatever monster statblock you decide to go with?

If your job as a DM so fraught that the idea of just scribbling on a sheet of paper for the Mage statblock when you write an encounter 'fireball - 8d6 fire, +1d6 per level, DC 15 DEX save for half' is such a hardship for you... you might want to take a break for a little while. ;)
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
It seems that what many fans want is for D&D to be recognisably D&D except for these few particular things that they personally would want to change.

That's right. Just incorporate things that everyone should agree on.

Like ... no bards.

f5cce83d-3082-47c1-ad5f-3d50c8b14d38_text.gif


Now we don't have to hunt them down either... we can just errata the whole lot of 'em! That's, what, a ninth level spell?
 


Sorry to interrupt everyone's fun, but has anyone figured out what is supposed to have been changed about the Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan map? I have a first printing of TftYP and my map looks precisely identical to the "new, more readable" map in the errata—unless I'm overlooking something.
 



Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top