Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="77IM" data-source="post: 6618493" data-attributes="member: 12377">I'm going to be that guy who hops on the thread and points out that errata is really for typos, misspellings, and blatant errors (like contradictory statements, or the same thing being defined differently in multiple places). Errata is not really meant for actual content changes, and I'd rather those be delivered in some other fashion and not called &quot;errata.&quot; Errata is for mistakes in the 1st printing that you fix in the 2nd printing and nobody notices precisely because they don't affect the content....Now, to the question of &quot;which rules need fixing for me to play D&amp;D,&quot; the answer is, well none, really. I'm looking at my two-page house-rules document and almost everything on there reflects my personal preferences, rather than &quot;problems&quot; that need &quot;fixing.&quot;One glaring exception is the Ready an Action rules, which I find really finicky and confusing for the average player -- while I appreciate the elegance of &quot;Readying converts an Action into a Reaction,&quot; most players don't think in those terms. They think in terms of &quot;I want to take my turn later&quot; or &quot;I want to interrupt that guy's action,&quot; neither of which can be done with Ready. And I don't think this is a legacy mindset from previous editions, because I'm mostly talking about players for whom 5e is their first real RPG. So if I could rewrite one half-column in the PHB, it would be the one on Ready an Action (possibly split it into Ready and Delay, like in 3e). All that said, when I am a player in Adventurer's League games and we play it straight, the Ready rules work just fine (they just don't do quite what I want them to), so I'm not sure they &quot;need&quot; errata.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="77IM, post: 6618493, member: 12377"] I'm going to be that guy who hops on the thread and points out that errata is really for typos, misspellings, and blatant errors (like contradictory statements, or the same thing being defined differently in multiple places). Errata is not really meant for actual content changes, and I'd rather those be delivered in some other fashion and not called "errata." Errata is for mistakes in the 1st printing that you fix in the 2nd printing and nobody notices precisely because they don't affect the content. ...Now, to the question of "which rules need fixing for me to play D&D," the answer is, well none, really. I'm looking at my two-page house-rules document and almost everything on there reflects my personal preferences, rather than "problems" that need "fixing." One glaring exception is the Ready an Action rules, which I find really finicky and confusing for the average player -- while I appreciate the elegance of "Readying converts an Action into a Reaction," most players don't think in those terms. They think in terms of "I want to take my turn later" or "I want to interrupt that guy's action," neither of which can be done with Ready. And I don't think this is a legacy mindset from previous editions, because I'm mostly talking about players for whom 5e is their first real RPG. So if I could rewrite one half-column in the PHB, it would be the one on Ready an Action (possibly split it into Ready and Delay, like in 3e). All that said, when I am a player in Adventurer's League games and we play it straight, the Ready rules work just fine (they just don't do quite what I want them to), so I'm not sure they "need" errata. [/QUOTE]

Verification