To the Designers: May we please have the DDXP errata?

[OakwoodDM]

If implements aren't required to cast spells, what is the point of the implement keyword?

Well, given that implements can have enhancement and other bonuses, I would imagine it's to let you know which powers these bonuses apply to.

 

[Mentat55]

If implements aren't required to cast spells, what is the point of the implement keyword?

Skamos the tielfling wizard has a class feature called Arcane Implement Mastery: Wand of Accuracy that, once per encounter, adds a +2 bonus to your attack roll when wielding a wand. So coupled with your encounter or daily powers, this is a pretty good reason to have an implement.

EDIT: Er, I see that you were talking about the implement keyword, and not the implement itself. Oh well.

 

[Stalker0]

You know, that Careful Shot seemed too powerful when i looked at it. Bumping down the damage by 4 is a good change. I'll have to remember to scribble that in on the sheet. Heck, i wonder how many scribbles i'm going to have to make?

My guess is now your damage is [W] instead of [W] + dex to damage when using careful shot.

I would wager though that you get to add 2 x your dex to the attack roll, instead of just a straight up +4.

 

[The Little Raven]

Special: You can use divine fortune, power of Amaunator, or turn undead once per encounter, but not two or more of these in the same encounter.

To me, this should read "You can only use one Channel Divinity ability per encounter." It makes it much more concise, and covers all powers placed under the Channel Divinity heading.

 

[Falling Icicle]

To me, this should read "You can only use one Channel Divinity ability per encounter." It makes it much more concise, and covers all powers placed under the Channel Divinity heading.

You should work at WotC.

 

[ShinRyuuBR]

My guess is now your damage is [W] instead of [W] + dex to damage when using careful shot.

I would wager though that you get to add 2 x your dex to the attack roll, instead of just a straight up +4.

Yeah, it's like an inverted ranged Power Attack: you transfer your damage bonus to the attack roll.

BTW, shouldn't the cleric's Will be decreased as well? I figure it should be 15, not 17, for a base +1/+1/+1. It looks like base +1/+1/+3, like the paladin before the errata. Heck, the paladin made more sense, because he could be +1/+1/+0 and be adding BOTH Wis and Cha to Will, just like 3.x.

 

[Oldtimer]

- Tira the Half-Elf Warlock's Ray of Frost spell has changed from an At-Will Power to an Encounter Power.

Rather, it was put under the heading "Encounter Powers". The actual power desciption still says "At-Will".

 

[Spatula]

If implements aren't required to cast spells, what is the point of the implement keyword?

Yeah, I don't get it, either.

 

[Mentat55]

Perhaps there are feats that say "when wielding an implement and using a power with the implement keyword, you gain X bonus." Or perhaps +4 wands only apply their enhancement bonus to attack rolls when the power has the implement keyword.

 

[Stalker0]

I thought I would resurrect this thread.

The books are at the printers, and people continue to play many adventurers with the pregens.

To the designers, please, can we get the remaining errata for the pregens? We've heard that the paladin's mark is getting changed, even the fighter's perhaps.

For some, these pregen adventurers will be their first taste of 4e. Heck, for those trying to bring in new players, it may be their first time with dnd. It would be nice if the characters they played were as correct as possible. We aren't asking for new information, just the correction to the information you have already kindly provided us.