5E Bug reports (2020)

[Paperclipkiller]

Engine Issue

Just to mention it, I noticed when opening the Expanded Spell lists on say the Celestial Warlock, it opens up the one in Rising from the Last War and not the PHB. I imagine nothing can be done for that easily but mentioning just in case.

Xanathars Guide

This will apply to any class with Expanded spell lists. I will be using Celestial Warlock as an example.

If I open up the expanded spell list on say "Cure Wounds" in the Celestial Warlock I can see the list of spells they can learn. However I can't search those easily on the Spells List as a whole by Source like say the "Cleric Knowledge Domain". The obvious reason being the Cleric Knowledge Domain is in the same book as the spell so it is allowed that easy searching. However If I don't have the PHB, I can't find it. I can't build a Celestial Warlock without it (I know the Basic Rules would have it but the Basic Rules may not have every single spell on a list in the future). On the flipside, the Artificer can be built without needing the PHB, since every spell needed is in that book on Fantasy Grounds. Why can the Artificer be built with all its spells available without needing the PHB but the Celestial Warlock can't? It just seems odd.

Now I know the reasoning could be bloat. That would be pretty fair, most people with Xanathars have the PHB. And I imagine you can't say "Celestial Warlock" on the spells in the PHB like you can't say Artificer on them as well. It's basically a lose/lose in that situation I think. Am I right in presuming it is about bloat? I only mention this all since I noticed Cleric/Druid/etc all have their domains listed but later Warlock ones in Xanathars don't.

[rob2e]

Typo have instead of half in this spell in EGtW.

unknown.png

[rob2e]

Typo have instead of half in this spell in EGtW.

unknown.png

That is a WotC error btw.

DA53AC5E-858A-4AC1-8639-057A6A02C1E4.jpeg

[Zacchaeus]

Xanathars Guide

This will apply to any class with Expanded spell lists. I will be using Celestial Warlock as an example.

If I open up the expanded spell list on say "Cure Wounds" in the Celestial Warlock I can see the list of spells they can learn. However I can't search those easily on the Spells List as a whole by Source like say the "Cleric Knowledge Domain". The obvious reason being the Cleric Knowledge Domain is in the same book as the spell so it is allowed that easy searching. However If I don't have the PHB, I can't find it. I can't build a Celestial Warlock without it (I know the Basic Rules would have it but the Basic Rules may not have every single spell on a list in the future). On the flipside, the Artificer can be built without needing the PHB, since every spell needed is in that book on Fantasy Grounds. Why can the Artificer be built with all its spells available without needing the PHB but the Celestial Warlock can't? It just seems odd.

Now I know the reasoning could be bloat. That would be pretty fair, most people with Xanathars have the PHB. And I imagine you can't say "Celestial Warlock" on the spells in the PHB like you can't say Artificer on them as well. It's basically a lose/lose in that situation I think. Am I right in presuming it is about bloat? I only mention this all since I noticed Cleric/Druid/etc all have their domains listed but later Warlock ones in Xanathars don't.

Essentially yes. The PHB when it was developed was the only module that contained classes and archetypes and the developer included in the spell lists all of the spells for each of the archetypes such as Cleric Domains, Druidic Circles etc. This is fine but there are now many more archetypes and so if I were to include the spells in each of the books then someone who had a number of modules open would be seeing possible a dozen copies of the same spell being listed. Additionally all of the spells are linked in the expanded spell lists anyway so they're easy enough to find there. I agree it might be useful to also have them in the spell list but I suspect I'd be getting complaints about the number of duplicates.

The Artificer was a special case in that it is a new class with a very long list of spells pulled from all sorts of spell lists. Simply linking those would have been too much so I created a spell list for it.

[sciencephile]

Just checking in to acknowledge that I'm working on the fixes for what's being posted for Wildemount. Thanks for reporting. -Danny


UPDATE:

All Explorer's Guide to Wildemount errors reported above this post have been fixed and checked back in for future update.

[FilippoC]

Gas Spore (from any sourcebook) shows 1d10+4 at Hit Points, while it should be 1d10-4 according to the CON modifier.

[Zacchaeus]

Gas Spore (from any sourcebook) shows 1d10+4 at Hit Points, while it should be 1d10-4 according to the CON modifier.

And how has that been around for the last 4 years, eh?

Thanks for the report.

[LordEntrails]

And how has that been around for the last 4 years, eh?

Some of us like our gas spores like we like our Book Worms, tougher than usual!

[bmos]

I'm not sure if this qualifies as a bug, but the Out of the Abyss module contains no defined quests despite a number of bonus XP rewards scattered through the book.

[Zacchaeus]

I'm not sure if this qualifies as a bug, but the Out of the Abyss module contains no defined quests despite a number of bonus XP rewards scattered through the book.

Those aren't really quests but just bonus XP. A quest is something that would be shared with the players giving them a goal together with perhaps some reward in the form of XP or treasure. I can't see anything that would qualify under that criteria really. So I don't think it's anything that is missing from the module.