D&D 5E They Broke Arcane Archer!!!

[IchneumonWasp]

Actually, you don’t have to expend a use of Arcane Shot until after you hit.


That’s how pretty much every ability that lets you expend a limited resource to enhance a single attack works in 5e. Ki, Smite, etc.

Thanks, I had missed that. This does change my opinion on the sub-class in a more favorable direction.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You think it's anything to do with safety? I'd poke fun if the guy responsible for that one if he was sitting right beside me. It's terrible and unprofessional that it came out the way it did. That's the bottom line.

Are you being serious right now? They made a minor mistake, immediately owned it and issued errata, and then took a very costly step to correct the issue in print as soon as possible. Calling that terrible and unprofessional is really, really abusing those words.

 

[Mistwell]

Someone sounds upset. But it is lazy editing when they are literally copy and pasting, then decides to move things around and not look at how it effects the class, in this case, it breaks it. When it's one of your DM guild free non AL legal unbalanced home brew classes then, whatever, but when people pay $50 for a book and play in organized play, then it actually becomes a big deal. It's like if I were your boss, and made a "typo" and paid you $1.00 instead of $100, you'd be upset wouldn't you? Now I found the errata that corrects this mistake, and downloaded it, but I am still entitled to my opinion.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

You know what's lazy? Just calling things lazy which are more complex than that. Not taking the time and thought to really grapple with the issue you're talking to, and just substituting the accusation of "lazy" to anything which irritates. Assuming the thing that irritates you was "easy" to avoid, without considering all the steps that go into that thing, without imagining all the possible scenarios which might have caused the issue. That's what's lazy.

One thing we do agree about however. We both agree you're entitled. Though we might disagree about what you're entitled to

{And yes I am aware I called you lazy while calling claims of laziness lazy. The irony is intended.}

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Someone brings up an error in a book they bought since it could affect AL play and holy crap do the claws come out quick.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Someone brings up an error in a book they bought since it could affect AL play and holy crap do the claws come out quick.

If that's all the OP did, then I suspect there would be no claws. However, he led off with "How could happen!" and then proceeded to insult the designers.

 

[dropbear8mybaby]

When people think there are no repercussions, some of them are truly horrible people.

Yes, people really shouldn't be allowed to play gnomes.

 

[pukunui]

Yes, people really shouldn't be allowed to play gnomes.

I felt that way once upon a time too. I even went so far as to ban them. But I got better.

 

[Satyrn]

Yes, people really shouldn't be allowed to play gnomes.

Gno, they shouldn't. They gneed to be forced to play gnomes. The best race ever!

 

[Inchoroi]

The truth is that this happens in all game books. I've seen perhaps two or three perfectly edited non-simple games in my life.

As a writer in this industry, you would be 100% correct. It happens all the time. Human nature.

 

[Mistwell]

Someone brings up an error in a book they bought since it could affect AL play and holy crap do the claws come out quick.

Nope. I have no issue with bringing up the flaw. I don't think anyone here does. The issue is with the whiny entitled attitude accusing professionals of being "lazy" in their jobs because of a single error he found that was immediately corrected. Expect claws when you're rude and nasty like that for no reason. If he had been polite, I doubt anyone would have batted an eye and he would likely have gotten a polite response back. He still got helpful responses though.