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)”.

 

[DarkCrisis]

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.

Im sure PDFs will pop up somewhere.... somehow....

The real secret is not being real bothered by losing access to 5.5 ed if DDB goes out someday because other eds and other games exist.

DDB seems backed pretty well so I dont see them shutting it down for a good long while. digital is the future etc etc etc

Besides, im just getting the core 3 digital. Any adventure books would be physical so i can sell them after use.

 

[Blue]

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

I look forward to your supported reasoning why.

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

It seems this we agree on.

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

Sorry, your "No. Just no." does not provide any support trying to dispel my statements about Day 1 errata being indicative of a rushed project. And since you also agree that it's a rushed project, it doesn't even need that support. Without any more than an attempt to handwave it away I'll consider that MM 2025 was rushed to be an standing point.

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.

"What are you even talking about?" - as explained, the error rate between a project rushed out the door and an one that wasn't.

Sheesh.

Ah, you admit that you don't understand what is being talked about and then "sheesh" it. What an emotional response.

If you feel need to respond, please do so with substantive support for why a rushed project won't have more errors than one that wasn't rushed, my point, instead of just trying to handwave it away or make an emotional argument.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That's honestly really good for a D&D book, and most of them are a clarity issue (1/d Each) and not a mistake (I read many of those entries and didn't notice it - I assumed that it meant each).

It's missing the one we found on another thread, though! (The cultist that has both Mage Armor included AND is wearing a Breastplate) but still... none of these are very big issues.

 

[Blue]

Im sure PDFs will pop up somewhere.... somehow....

I'd be interested in WotC selling them, or other digital media that doesn't rely on their goodwill.

The real secret is not being real bothered by losing access to 5.5 ed if DDB goes out someday because other eds and other games exist.

Sure, not caring is a good way not to be bothered. However, I've been burned by this in the past. I was in the middle of running a 3.5 campaign that lasted for 7 years when WotC removed everything digital it had for that edition. Forums, articles, inspiration from Perkin's Iomedra campaign -- all gone. It was worse in 4e, as I had the rules and the online character builder, and the two games I was playing in all I had left were the unerrata'd core rules I bought before they offered the online and printouts of my characters that I needed to reverse-engineer to level up.

So if you are willing to drop all campaigns when WotC pulls support and truthfully will not be bothered by doing so, you're made of a different stuff than I am.

DDB seems backed pretty well so I dont see them shutting it down for a good long while. digital is the future etc etc etc

You mentioned DDB before, and I really don't approve of you moving the goalpost. I talked about removing everything digital when a new version came out so as to promote the new version. They kept the D&D website, just removed the content. DDB as a platform will probably continue to exist, so that's never been what I've been talking about. It's the content for a particular version that I am worried about.

Just think about how when the 2024 rules were coming out they were defaulting to updating a number of character options on existing 2014 characters to 2024 rules regardless. And they're reduced functionality for 2014 games by making all the tool-tips 2024. Even with a "it's the same edition!" cry for several years, they try to push everyone into purchasing the latest.

 

[Mistwell]

Sure, not caring is a good way not to be bothered. However, I've been burned by this in the past. I was in the middle of running a 3.5 campaign that lasted for 7 years when WotC removed everything digital it had for that edition. Forums, articles, inspiration from Perkin's Iomedra campaign -- all gone. It was worse in 4e, as I had the rules and the online character builder, and the two games I was playing in all I had left were the unerrata'd core rules I bought before they offered the online and printouts of my characters that I needed to reverse-engineer to level up.

I'm confused Blue. WOTC gave a lot of warning about the imminent shut down of the 4e tools. They published errata that you could print and download. They told you to print and download stuff before the shut down. It wasn't just suddenly unexpectedly pulled one day. There was a good long run-up to the end of those tools. So did you just not do what they suggested, and failed to print the errata?
In fact, I believe WOTC Still hosts the collected 4e errata on their site? Not sure about that link. It used to work.

 

[pukunui]

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

Yes, but with the PHB, they didn't announce the updates like they have with the MM.

As much as I liked the special edition covers, I have decided not to get first printings of any of the revised core rulebooks. I'm waiting for the inevitable slipcase version, which I expect they'll release in time for Christmas this year - and will hopefully have all the errata incorporated into the text.

 

[Blue]

I'm confused Blue. WOTC gave a lot of warning about the imminent shut down of the 4e tools. They published errata that you could print and download. They told you to print and download stuff before the shut down. It wasn't just suddenly unexpectedly pulled one day. There was a good long run-up to the end of those tools. So did you just not do what they suggested, and failed to print the errata?
In fact, I believe WOTC Still hosts the collected 4e errata on their site? Not sure about that link. It used to work.

I had the printed errata, which considering how much they changed with 4e -- whole subsystems like flying got ripped out an replaced. What I didn't have was the collection of books I had been cheerfulyl subscribign to, nor access to the online tool because they took the offline tool away.

You're focusing on the smallest, least important piece, as if that forgives everything.

The fact that they gave notice that they were taking away all of my books (except the few I purchased before going digital) and tools does not make the 4e campaign I was in end any faster.

 

[Queer Venger]

Its not a true game book if it does not have a 1st printing errata, this is as old as D&D LOL
plus first printings are what sell for most!

 

[Dire Bare]

If you feel need to respond, please do so with substantive support . . .

Adorable.

You feel the Day 1 errata means an overly rushed product and is unacceptable . . . if I am understanding you correctly.

I feel that is a ridiculous take.

 

[ECMO3]

To me it seems the 2024 rules both has far more errors and far more mechanical problems than 5E did.