Wizards of the Coast Releases Day 1 Errata for Monster Manual

Wizards of the Coast has released errata for the Monster Manual ahead of its official release. Today on D&D Beyond, Wizards released a series of small changes to the new Monster Manual, which is now available in early access and will be available in wide release in two weeks. Most of the changes are tied to spellcasting, with specifications that any spell in a monster's spell list can be each cast a specific amount per day. The previous spell list implied that players could choose a certain number of spells to cast from that list per day.

The full list of errata can be found below:

• Ancient Red Dragon (p.256). In the Spellcasting section, "1/Day" has changed to "1/Day Each".
• Ancient White Dragon (p.330). The Ancient White Dragon's Charisma score has changed to 18.
• Arcanaloth (p.19). The Arcanaloth's AC is now 18.
• Balor (p.26). The balor's HP is now 287 (23d12 + 138).
• Cloaker (p.73). In the Attach action, in the sentence that begins with "While the cloaker is attached...", "Bite attacks" is now "Attach attacks".
• Cyclops Sentry (p. 88). Both instances of “Greatclub” have changed to “Stone Club”.
• Death Knight (p. 92). In the Spellcasting action, “2/Day” has changed to “2/Day Each”.
• Death Knight Aspirant (p. 93). In the Spellcasting action, “1/Day” has changed to “1/Day Each”.
• Fomorian (p. 123). Both instances of “Greatclub” have changed to “Stone Club”.
• Galeb Duhr (p. 127). The Initiative entry has changed to “+2 (12)”.
• Giant Frog (p. 357). In the Bite action, the Melee Attack Roll modifier has changed to “+3”.
• Githyanki Warrior (p. 134). In the Spellcasting action, “2/Day Each” has changed to “2/Day”.
• Goblin Boss (p. 143). The range for the Shortbow action is now “80/320 ft.”
• Green Slaad (p. 286). In the Spellcasting action, “1/Day” has changed to “1/Day Each”.
• Ice Devil (p. 176). In the Senses entry, “Blindsight 60 ft. (unimpeded by magical Darkness), Darkvision 120 ft.” has changed to “Blindsight 120 ft.”
• Kraken (p. 187). In the Fling action, “Large” has changed to “Large or smaller”.
• Performer Legend (p. 237). The Initiative entry has changed to “+9 (19)”.
• Performer Maestro (p. 237). The Initiative entry has changed to “+7 (17)”.
• Swarm of Lemures (p. 194). The swarm’s Dexterity score is now 7. In the Swarm trait, “Small” has changed to “Medium”.
• Violet Fungus (p. 126). The Initiative entry has changed to “–5 (5)”.

 

[Divine2021]

Did they add orcs?

 

[Shardstone]

I have to applaud. Some people don't admit that they've made mistakes.

Sometimes it feels like people think that professionals shouldn't ever make mistakes. An idealist fantasy, that one. Anyone whose ever written hundreds of pages knows that there have to be typos within.

 

[Dire Bare]

Wish they would include both the original and revised text.

Why?

 

[Dire Bare]

Sigh. Most of the responses so far are rich.

What book goes to print without errata? None. From no publisher. Ever.

The current list is small. Impressively small. Will it grow? Probably. So?

I get so frustrated with how toxic fandom can be sometimes.

 

[Blue]

I love that I ditched physical for digital this edition. Bring on the errata!

I did that for 4e. But WotC has a habit of going scorched earth on prior editions, even doing things like deleting the Gleemax forums with a huge amount of 3.x stuff from the players on them, and they did the same for 4e. At every chance they get, they have demonstrated to me that anything digital, even if I pay for it, will to be supported when they turn the crank. 100% failure rate. Not a way you could convince me to spend a red cent for a WotC digital product unless they go back to PDFs that I can download and host on my computer, reading with an app that they don't control.

 

[sevenbastard]

My kid found one on the Mummy.

I went page by page on Wednesday night with my three year old. They asked every page what the monster picture was. For the Mummy they quickly pointed out it wasn't wrapped.

 

[Blue]

Sigh. Most of the responses so far are rich.

What book goes to print without errata? None. From no publisher. Ever.

The current list is small. Impressively small. Will it grow? Probably. So?

I get so frustrated with how toxic fandom can be sometimes.

Please understand there's a big difference between a book that's been out and fans have noticed errata, because there are a lot more fans than editors, and a book with day one errata which usually means that they rushed it to printing and found more errors either in-house or from a rather small sample size sent to reviewers and such -- in other words, things they should have caught.

And realize that the total rate of errors, both the ones they correct and the conceptual ones that never get adjusted are quite different for those two situations. You're conflating the two.

 

[Dire Bare]

Please understand there's a big difference between a book that's been out and fans have noticed errata, because there are a lot more fans than editors, and a book with day one errata which usually means that they rushed it to printing and found more errors either in-house or from a rather small sample size sent to reviewers and such -- in other words, things they should have caught.

And realize that the total rate of errors, both the ones they correct and the conceptual ones that never get adjusted are quite different for those two situations. You're conflating the two.

No, I really don't see it that way.

Were the 2024 books rushed? Probably. Big projects like this often are.

Is Day 1 errata a problem? Of any sort? No. Just no.

Total rate of errors? What are you even talking about? That's a small list of minor errors in the OP. Will it grow? Undoubtedly. When the errata document balloons to an enormous size . . . which it won't . . . I'll take seriously the "total rate" of errors.

Sheesh.

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Please understand there's a big difference between a book that's been out and fans have noticed errata, because there are a lot more fans than editors, and a book with day one errata which usually means that they rushed it to printing and found more errors either in-house or from a rather small sample size sent to reviewers and such -- in other words, things they should have caught.

This logic doesn’t hold vs. the last fifty years of D&D’s existence.

 

[Storyteller Hero]

Day 1 Errata is fine. It's day 100 Errata that breaks the camel's back.

I decided to hold off on the first printing after remembering what happened with the 2014 books.

I hear the digital versions on DnD Beyond get updated promptly though.