D&D 5E XGTE Errata

mellored

Explorer
I don't see how this invocation can be read to do either of those things. For starters, eldritch blast does not have a material component, so the weapon does not serve as an arcane focus for that spell anyway.
True for EB.

But there other attack spells that can use it as an arcane focus. Like witchbolt.

2) your weapon gets +1 to its attack and damage rolls
That's the part in question.

You are making a (spell) attack roll, with the weapon (as the focus).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

"the weapon" - noun phrase, subject - What does the weapon do?

"gains" - verb - Okay, the weapon gains what?

"a +1 bonus" - noun phrase, direct object - The weapon gains a +1 bonus to what?

"its" - possessive pronoun - "The weapon" is pretty clearly the antecedent. "The weapon" possesses the coming indirect object.

"to its attack and damage rolls" - prepositional phrase, indirect object - The weapon's attack and damage rolls.

Thus, all together, "The weapon gains a +1 bonus to [the weapon's] attack and damage rolls." Unless you are using the weapon's attack and damage rolls when casting your spells--which is both not supported by the rules ("Attack Rolls," PHB 205) and a huge nerf a large majority of the time--you do not gain this bonus on spells.

If the authors had wanted to say, "While using your pact weapon as an arcane focus, you gain a +1 bonus to your spell attack and damage rolls," they very well could have--and that's exactly the kind of language that they used on, e.g., rod of the pact keeper and wand of the war mage. Instead, they made the +1 bonus to the weapon's attack and damage rolls as linguistically separate from the prior effect as they could, by placing it in a new paragraph and writing a transition which introduces it as a separate effect.
 


ad_hoc

(he/they)
Why can't we just have Healing Spirits only trigger when the character starts their turn in it?

This is the Moonbeam argument all over again.
 

Jonathan Bond

First Post
Just done a quick search of this thread, and can't see that it has been mentioned...

Eldritch Smite
Prerequisite: 5th level, Pact of the Blade feature
Once per turn when you hit a creature with your pact weapon, you can expend a warlock spell slot to deal an extra 1d8 force damage to the target, plus another 1d8 per level of the spell slot, and you can knock the target prone if it is Huge or smaller.

The PHB says similar about the Paladin's Divine Smite, but errata later removed the restriction to only Paladin Slots, allowing for Pallocks to smite all day on short rest spell slots.

Should the same not be true here?

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/25/paladin-slot-for-divine-smite/
 


Jonathan George

First Post
Not allowed outside combat

Just wanted to point out that the wording of the spell is very specific to turns. A creature must start or pass through the spirit each turn to heal 1d6. While we all agree a turn is 6 seconds, turns themselves do not exist outside of combat. Making this a combat cast only, unless specifically allowed by the DM.
 

5ekyu

Hero
Just wanted to point out that the wording of the spell is very specific to turns. A creature must start or pass through the spirit each turn to heal 1d6. While we all agree a turn is 6 seconds, turns themselves do not exist outside of combat. Making this a combat cast only, unless specifically allowed by the DM.

I am not sure i have seen anything that said elements referencing turns implies they can only be used in combat parts of scenes. It certainly is not overtly stated (RAW) but if it is RAI then a reference would be nice.

But i have yet to see a GM or reference (until now perhaps) that would rule you could not cast Healing Word out of combat to heal up members of your team because it requires a bonus action to cast and "You must use a bonus action on your turn..." is in the general rule for bonus actions.

But i am sure you probably have a good reference to support your position.

EDIT Oh and its a ROUND that is 6 seconds not a TURN.
 
Last edited:

pukunui

Legend
FWIW: I got a second printing. The only thing that got corrected in this printing is the ancestral guardian spirit shield damage. So I guess the mind spike and arcane archer errata will be in the third or fourth printings.
 

Asgorath

Explorer
FWIW: I got a second printing. The only thing that got corrected in this printing is the ancestral guardian spirit shield damage. So I guess the mind spike and arcane archer errata will be in the third or fourth printings.

Yeah I think the demand was so high that they did the second printing almost immediately, and it might take another round or two for all the errors to be corrected.
 

guachi

Adventurer
EDIT Oh and its a ROUND that is 6 seconds not a TURN.

I think in most (almost all) situations a turn might reasonably be considered to map onto a time span of six seconds or whatever the length of a round might be in your game. However, there are instances where a creature can have more than one turn in a round and, therefore, a turn couldn't be six seconds.

We don't often (ever?) consider how much time a player's turn actually takes. We just know that if they can do it in a turn it can't be more than six seconds. I know I don't care how long the actions a players takes actually last if the player can perform them in one turn. D&D maps simultaneous actions onto a sequential resolution system so things are inherently askew from the start.
 

gyor

Legend
Temple of the Gods only appears on the Cleric spell list. It affects Divine Soul and College of Lore if they really want to spend one of their known spells on it, but I don't see that happening often (I would actually posit that less than 1% of either archetype would choose it, but that's wild conjecture)

Even if they do, Wisdom is the closest thing we get to a "divinity" stat, and being a sort of consecrated ground, I think it's fine that the measure of its healing bonus is based on the caster's "divinity" rather than his aptitude at spellcasting. All this is to say, I don't think it's a typo. Regardless, I tweeted JC for clarification.

(Unfortunately he doesn't have a good track record of answering my tweets)

The cleric spell list is apart of the Divine Souls spell list.

Temple of the Gods is awesome, it's a magical, custiomizable , temple fortress, that can be made permanent, for any Divine Soul I make it's an automatic take, one of the best cleric spells.

Combat wise it's better then mighty fortress against everything, except for the disintegrate spell.

There are all kinds of clever uses for the spell.
 
Last edited:

Lillika

First Post
Feat: Second Chance Jeremy Crawford confirmed that you have to take the second roll (which completely prevents me from ever taking this feat as it has a 1/20 chance of turning a hit into a crit) https://www.sageadvice.eu/tag/xanathar-guide-everything/page/6/?ak_action=reject_mobile

Seriously why don't they let me balance things, then at least I would make things that would be used. These feat is 100% worse than Lucky and shouldn't racial feats actually be something that you might even chose a race to take the feat?

Edit-to be fair I might take this feat on a character that already had Lucky, as i can't find anything that says I can't rr that the rr if it was a crit, but I wish the feat would stand on it's own better and I'm sure there are people that would still take the feat on it's own, but I don't feel it's quite on the proper feat power lvl.
 
Last edited:

jgsugden

Legend
.... These feat is 100% worse than Lucky and shouldn't racial feats actually be something that you might even chose a race to take the feat?...
It is not 100% worse than Lucky. First, you get to improve an ability score by one. Second, it recharges when you roll initiative (or take a rest), which *potentially* allows more uses per LR than Lucky. I've had 8 encounters between long rests in a game.

Also, I'm not sure you want to see people taking a race just to get access to a feat - you should take a feat to enhance your racial tendencies. That was the stated goal of the racial feats. If a racial feat is so good that people will play the race just to get the mechanical benefit, I think we're giving too much benefit to the feat. A racial selection should be a role playing choice, not a mechanical choice.
 

Lillika

First Post
It is not 100% worse than Lucky. First, you get to improve an ability score by one. Second, it recharges when you roll initiative (or take a rest), which *potentially* allows more uses per LR than Lucky. I've had 8 encounters between long rests in a game.

Also, I'm not sure you want to see people taking a race just to get access to a feat - you should take a feat to enhance your racial tendencies. That was the stated goal of the racial feats. If a racial feat is so good that people will play the race just to get the mechanical benefit, I think we're giving too much benefit to the feat. A racial selection should be a role playing choice, not a mechanical choice.

That's nice logic and all, but I do see a lot of dps threads that are all about Half-Drow for Elven Accuracy.
 


Lillika

First Post
Not sure that helps your case

it does if my case is that I want Second Chance to be as powerful :)

but really I was just rage posting after finding the Crawford post about it, I was hoping it was a chose which dice reroll like similar rerolls in the game. I will still probably take it on my latest halfling character, which means it can't be all that bad.
 

Nevvur

Explorer
That's nice logic and all, but I do see a lot of dps threads that are all about Half-Drow for Elven Accuracy.

Keep in mind the optimization community has a tendency to make mountains out of mole hills when it comes to comparing relative power levels.
 

coolAlias

Explorer
On page 79 under Calligrapher's Supplies, it has an entry for "Decipher Treasure Map" that references activities listed in the Cartographer's Tools table.

I'm certain it was meant to go under the Cartographer's Tools, but that leaves Calligrapher's Supplies with only two listed benefits.

Also, Calligrapher's Supplies has "Spot forged text" and "Forge a signature" listed in its table of activities - should one or both of these not be under Forgery Kit?
 

Ristamar

Adventurer
Also, Calligrapher's Supplies has "Spot forged text" and "Forge a signature" listed in its table of activities - should one or both of these not be under Forgery Kit?

The "Spot forged text" entry under Calligrapher's Supplies supplies likely refers to spotting forgery directly related to works that specifically feature calligraphy. As per the text for the tool:

Calligraphers produce text that is pleasing to the eye, using a style that is difficult to forge.
My inference is that forging or spotting forgeries of general documents and text aren't covered by this proficiency, but it can apply to mimicking a signature or spotting forged calligraphy within a map, artwork, book, etc.

The Forgery Kit, IMO, would be applicable to mimicking basic handwritten texts, emulating writing styles or legalese, and being able to spot forgeries within those parameters.

I'd allow the two tool proficiencies to be used in conjunction to create very convincing signed documents. It may even be a required step if the signature is well known to the person examining the forgery.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top