You’re allowed one errata, what is it?

[AHF]

If you're wanting to get around the whole "if x then y" debate, a better way to go about that change is just make shield master grant the bonus action shove without any dependence on the Attack Action,
do whatever you want with your action, before or after, Shield Master is doing its own thing.

I think the best approach on this is to make it so someone with Shield Master uses their action to shove per normal if they haven’t elected to use the attack action yet but it converts to a BA if they choose to use the attack action in their turn. Thus they can shove before or after the attack action and if they don’t use the attack action then the shove consumes their action and they can use whatever other bonus action is available to them.

[LordCdrMilitant]

I honestly don't have much experience with high level 5e. However at level my players are currently at (11th), everyone seems to die rather quickly. Players included. Pretty much every combat one player will roll death saves.

I think our expectations of lethality might be different. I have at least one player down and up again in almost every combat I set up, but I consider the fact that it takes like 4 rounds of exposure to fire to get them there to mean that it's pretty non-lethal.

I expect combat to be fast and dangerous. Walking into the line of fire & ignoring cover should result in immediate effect. Wading through a hail of arrows or something should not be something somebody does. And in a close up melee fight, the fight should be resolved with but a few connecting blows, if not just one solid one. Spending 5, 6, 7 turns wailing on a guy just shouldn't happen.

[Mikal]

Less errata and more clarification but I’d make it clear that an improvised weapon loses all its original qualities when it becomes an improvised weapon so stupid things like “you can GWM with a longbow!” won’t appear anymore

[Skylivedk]

Errata: "Nifft's house rules (sold separately) are now 100% official."

In related news, I would post my house rules for sale somewhere online.

+1 for the entrepreneurial mindset.

I still fail to see why a level 20 PC being dropped by a crit is "less fun" than a level 1/2 PC being dropped by a crit. Like, being unlucky always sucks, and I don't see why it would suck more at level 20 besides potentially requiring a lot worse luck for it to happen, which wouldn't be the case if HP didn't scale or scaled slowly.


As for "why am I playing D&D at all?" Because it's what people run, and I don't dislike it as a whole. I just dislike combat in D&D because it's very slow and very attritive, which is also very boring as I've expressed before.

I think, short of entirely re-doing how levelling up and combat works, turning D&D into a rocket tag would be a net system improvement.



But okay, changing the subject. Maybe changing hitpoints would require changing too much to be an "Errata" and we should stick to smaller changes, then I'll second a advantage disadvantage tweak.
Maybe:
For each instance of advantage, roll an extra die and discard the lowest result.
For each instance of disadvantage, roll an extra die and discard the highest result.
If you have, for example two advantages and one disadvantage, you would roll four dice, discarding the two lowest and one highest, for the final result.

That way, having multiple sources of advantage and disadvantage can stack, and they interact beyond just cancellation.

I'm willing to test the new stacking of advantage and disadvantage rule. I like it.

I don't understand the hp problem though. From level 2 (we usually skip level 1) to 16 (one or two encounters from 17), combat has effectively taken 2-4 rounds on average. This includes 2-3x deadly encounters.

Maybe your group don't set up each other for the big hits? LudicSavant has a couple of builds in his thread that don't have issues dealing out hundreds of points of damage in a turn. In the Throwdown #1:Gish thread, I posted a (super meme) build that was at 800 something in the second round. If anything I find that the amount of options you can piece together allows for increasingly zany numbers and combos.

Rebalance the stats in two main ways:

1. Your +Int score gives you those many more proficiencies. Don't penalize on negatives though.
2. Sorcs are CON casters, Warlocks are INT casters. Rebalance linked stats in subclasses (if necessary) accordingly. Closes some multiclasses, opens others.

One main ability/stat change: Change Acrobatics and Athletics to be one skill, keyed off of the greater of strength or dex. Somebody can be athletic either way, so let them. Then introduce some type of "bash, shove, break" skill for pure strength (shove stuff, break down doors, pull that stuck/rusted lever). Dex doesn't need help with skills/usefulness.

+1 on the int proficiencies. Also the warlock.

Rather than your suggestion, I'd like WotC to remove the associated ability score. I don't want Barbarians to feel like they have to ask for permission to use strength for an intimidation check involving brute force. It has no connection to real life either. Someone completely void of force of personality can still be highly intimidating.

No offense, but I never cared much for this explanation. It sounds arbitrary because D&D has several health trackers and layers of defenses, so why are hit points the 'could've been messy' stat? Why does a level 10 Fighter with 20 CON / 12 DEX 'dodge' more attacks than a 14 CON / 14 DEX fighter?

None taken. I let my players choose if they want the hp to be stamina/heroic luck or walking with twenty arrows to the chest.

AC is already a narrative mess/playground (would change that one!), so that doesn't bother me much.

[/QUOTE
And for the people who categorically object to the idea of high-level martials taking dozens of orc axes to the side and keeping-on keeping-on, the attempt to explain the disconnect in that way is always going to come across as disingenuous. It does to me at least, and I'm inclined to say 'you don't like the idea of a rogue taking a dozen axes to the face and kicking butt? Maybe Warhams or Torchbearer is more your speed'.[/QUOTE]
I don't know Torchbearer, but I honestly don't care how other people co-create stories and tactical puzzles in their own magic elf games. I have a hard time seeing how it changes my experience if a table across the Atlantic like a narrative where their characters just don't get touched. Both types of hp can also co-exist (reference Berzerk) in the same narrative.

Yeah, it was cool that one time. But that wasn't a one-time thing. Batman not only has to dodge the Omega Beam, he has to literally dodge any kind of eye beam or face instant death, even much less powerful ones like Cyclops's. As far as Batman and thus the audience is concerned, Batman has to react the same way to an eye beam from Dio Brando, Shiva, Medea, and of course Superman: dodge or die, even though Dio Brando's eye beams are laughable to most major comic heroes.

I much prefer the squishes to dodge. Never read much DC outside of Frank Miller, but I disliked heavily in Marvel fights when Cyclops could take a bit from bruiser. If the writers want that, then give him super toughness. Don't let him take a bunch from someone causing an earthquake if he's careless picking up a quarter. Worse: if a character who has been in such a fight and taken a punch of that strength gets shot in the head, they die.

Now repeat that dynamic for literally every kind of attack, whether we're talking about swords the size of sedans, giant thrown boulders, clouds of acid, machine-gun fire, WHATEVER and you can see why it's a genre violation for warriors not to get super-toughness as part of the package. The only consistent exception I can think of are super-speedsters, and that's more to balance how strong their powers are than any real dramatic weight.

No, I can't. You can easily built that narrative around something else. Battle awareness, stamina, luck, etc.

I very deeply recommend the web serial called worm (search for parahumans). There is massive threat scaling, but the heroes without super toughness find other ways to deal with damage. They tend to dislike guns.

If we can just wish for things:

Battlemaster Maneuvers become a base fighter feature instead of the extra ASIs/Feats that fighters get. You get a few maneuver selections at second level (starting at a d6 die), your subclass gives you another subclass-specific maneuver, and both the die increase and you get another maneuver selection at 6 and 14.

This would allow them to expand the pool of maneuvers with each book that comes out as well, if they wanted to. Replace Battlemaster with a Tactician subclass or something else that can help teammates move around or do their things better, and we're off!

Tons of love for this suggestion!!! +10

Snip

It's not great. It's all in the head, but I wish that martial combat was as intricate and detailed as magic to make the crossing of swords more inherently interesting. But without a lot of homebrew far more than we can get from one allowed errata.

+1. I've looked at other systems for this very reason. Both Warhammer, Zweihander, nWoD and a few more.

"If a creature cannot see its target, it cannot have advantage against that target."

"See" in this rule includes perceiving a target via blindsight or other similar effects.

The net effect of this would be to make Fog Cloud and similar opaque obscuring effects impose disadvantage on everyone trying to attack through the effect, rather than equal out to "no effect" because you cannot see the target and cannot be seen by the target.

It would also mean that if you are Blinded, you don't get to balance that out by attacking a prone target. That's a bit more debatable as to whether it's desirable, but it's a trade I'd be willing to make for an elegant correction to the Fog Cloud problem.

I don't like the current rules in regards to ranged combat. Based on real life experience, I find it more than fine that the advantage/disadvantage from two people melee cancel each other. It is much harder to block without vision than it is to attack based on sound.

[Skylivedk]

I think our expectations of lethality might be different. I have at least one player down and up again in almost every combat I set up, but I consider the fact that it takes like 4 rounds of exposure to fire to get them there to mean that it's pretty non-lethal.

I expect combat to be fast and dangerous. Walking into the line of fire & ignoring cover should result in immediate effect. Wading through a hail of arrows or something should not be something somebody does. And in a close up melee fight, the fight should be resolved with but a few connecting blows, if not just one solid one. Spending 5, 6, 7 turns wailing on a guy just shouldn't happen.

What are you basing this on? You do know that characters are not standing still in combat even if they don't spend movement, right? With that in mind: skirmishes across time have normally not been over in 18-24 seconds. Not today, not in the dark ages

[LordCdrMilitant]

What are you basing this on? You do know that characters are not standing still in combat even if they don't spend movement, right? With that in mind: skirmishes across time have normally not been over in 18-24 seconds. Not today, not in the dark ages

Skrimishes usually tend involve more than 4 guys, and involve a lot of time not shooting at each other or shooting to suppress, because the space to cover in maneuver is like the size of a small farm, not the size of a small room.

In addition, a firefight doesn't include shooting someone in the chest for 30 seconds continuously until they die. It includes a lot of bullets fired in his general direction to pin him down while other elements get into position to take a shot that will kill him, and then they're dead after 1 or 2 shots. [Disclaimer: Katherine is/was not Combat Infantry [or at any time a member of the armed services], and probably never will be. But I do know that it doesn't take shooting someone repeatedly for 30 seconds [5 rounds] to kill them.]


And, for reference, it took 38 minutes to clear Osama Bin Laden's compound including entering the compound, clearing all the rooms and restraining surrendering people, checking the entire compound over, seizing things in the compound, destroying the crashed helicopter, and boarding the evacuation helicopter. That doesn't leave a lot of time for the actual firefights between the individuals.

[Evaar]

Skrimishes usually tend involve more than 4 guys, and involve a lot of time not shooting at each other or shooting to suppress, because the space to cover in maneuver is like the size of a small farm, not the size of a small room.

In addition, a firefight doesn't include shooting someone in the chest for 30 seconds continuously until they die. It includes a lot of bullets fired in his general direction to pin him down while other elements get into position to take a shot that will kill him, and then they're dead after 1 or 2 shots. [Disclaimer: Katherine is/was not Combat Infantry [or at any time a member of the armed services], and probably never will be. But I do know that it doesn't take shooting someone repeatedly for 30 seconds [5 rounds] to kill them.]


And, for reference, it took 38 minutes to clear Osama Bin Laden's compound including entering the compound, clearing all the rooms and restraining surrendering people, checking the entire compound over, seizing things in the compound, destroying the crashed helicopter, and boarding the evacuation helicopter. That doesn't leave a lot of time for the actual firefights between the individuals.

Surely you aren't looking to D&D to realistically recreate combat situations.

Don't look to actual military action. Look to the Captain America: Civil War airport battle scene. That's what we're doing. I don't think this is the right system to try to execute the former.

[LordCdrMilitant]

I'm willing to test the new stacking of advantage and disadvantage rule. I like it.

If it works, tell me. I might try it myself in a one shot on sunday.

It always stuck me as odd that having multiple sources of advantage didn't make it any easier to hit, or that having many things that give you advantage but one this giving you disadvantage didn't result in a net positive to hit.

Surely you aren't looking to D&D to realistically recreate combat situations.

Don't look to actual military action. Look to the Captain America: Civil War airport battle scene. That's what we're doing. I don't think this is the right system to try to execute the former.

Uh...

I actually haven't seen Captain America: Civil War. But even in movies, once battle it joined, it doesn't take extended amounts of time and dozens of hits to kill someone; even in like Lord of the Rings it only takes one or two connecting hits for anybody to be incapacitated. Even when Boromir dies in the films ["an arrow may slay any many, Boromir was pierced by many"], he's definitely "down" after three hits and the archer spent his sweet time aiming, shooting, and walking in slow motion between those shots, and no Orcs surge to attack him when he's reeling from the first one until after he's recovered.

[MrCharlie]

If it works, tell me. I might try it myself in a one shot on sunday.

It always stuck me as odd that having multiple sources of advantage didn't make it any easier to hit, or that having many things that give you advantage but one this giving you disadvantage didn't result in a net positive to hit.





Uh...

I actually haven't seen Captain America: Civil War. But even in movies, once battle it joined, it doesn't take extended amounts of time and dozens of hits to kill someone; even in like Lord of the Rings it only takes one or two connecting hits for anybody to be incapacitated. Even when Boromir dies in the films ["an arrow may slay any many, Boromir was pierced by many"], he's definitely "down" after three hits and the archer spent his sweet time aiming, shooting, and walking in slow motion between those shots, and no Orcs surge to attack him when he's reeling from the first one until after he's recovered.

I'll just drop in to say that armor isn't useless in real life either, and you can easily argue that DnD could be modeling hits that don't affect the target with "HP". LOTR is pretty awful about armor actually doing anything in combat, with two major exceptions; in the movies Theodens armor takes a spear and he keeps fighting, and ofc Frodos chain shirt takes a stab from orc/troll and he lives.

Aside over.

I'd argue that the captain america fight is far too long for a DnD battle too, even thematically. It's not a perfect fight scene, and some attacks lack impact due to how long it takes.

[Moxxmix]

Totem Barbarian, Eagle Spirit, can Dash as part of activating Rage.

Under current rules, both require a bonus action, and thus you can't use the Dash on the same turn that you Rage. Every other Totem Spirit's ability is usable on the turn that you Rage.

[Skylivedk]

Skrimishes usually tend involve more than 4 guys, and involve a lot of time not shooting at each other or shooting to suppress, because the space to cover in maneuver is like the size of a small farm, not the size of a small room.

In addition, a firefight doesn't include shooting someone in the chest for 30 seconds continuously until they die. It includes a lot of bullets fired in his general direction to pin him down while other elements get into position to take a shot that will kill him, and then they're dead after 1 or 2 shots. [Disclaimer: Katherine is/was not Combat Infantry [or at any time a member of the armed services], and probably never will be. But I do know that it doesn't take shooting someone repeatedly for 30 seconds [5 rounds] to kill them.]


And, for reference, it took 38 minutes to clear Osama Bin Laden's compound including entering the compound, clearing all the rooms and restraining surrendering people, checking the entire compound over, seizing things in the compound, destroying the crashed helicopter, and boarding the evacuation helicopter. That doesn't leave a lot of time for the actual firefights between the individuals.

Ok.
A) just pretend the hp isn't actually flesh wounds before a certain threshold (maybe level 1 hp + con mod*lvl). My brother loves the flavour of his characters being filled with arrows. I don't. We just describe the state of our character differently and work with the DM to make that our magic world.

B) as mentioned, I'm not sure I understand why you have so long rounds/combats.

C) taking a compound is closer in intensity to an ambush than a skirmish (esp if the compound isn't prepared)

D) I'm commenting because I loved one of your suggestions and didn't understand the hp at all. Have you tried dungeon world? There is no hp on level up

[Sception]

I'd move hex warrior from hexblade to bladelock. Leave hexblade as is otherwise, it's still fun & edgy even if the fluff is poorly defined.

[Dienekes]

Skrimishes usually tend involve more than 4 guys, and involve a lot of time not shooting at each other or shooting to suppress, because the space to cover in maneuver is like the size of a small farm, not the size of a small room.

In addition, a firefight doesn't include shooting someone in the chest for 30 seconds continuously until they die. It includes a lot of bullets fired in his general direction to pin him down while other elements get into position to take a shot that will kill him, and then they're dead after 1 or 2 shots. [Disclaimer: Katherine is/was not Combat Infantry [or at any time a member of the armed services], and probably never will be. But I do know that it doesn't take shooting someone repeatedly for 30 seconds [5 rounds] to kill them.]


And, for reference, it took 38 minutes to clear Osama Bin Laden's compound including entering the compound, clearing all the rooms and restraining surrendering people, checking the entire compound over, seizing things in the compound, destroying the crashed helicopter, and boarding the evacuation helicopter. That doesn't leave a lot of time for the actual firefights between the individuals.

At this point I think I have to suggest you give Riddle of Steel a try. I think it’s more what you’re looking for.

[sambojin]

"It turns out, Hexblades aren't a thing in 5th edition any more. They don't exist. Strangely enough, it turns out that the UA Mystic class *is* a thing, and will be totally AL legal after a few discipline rewrites and edits."

[sambojin]

Every race gets an extra feat at lvl 1.

Oh, and this too. It makes things a lot more fun to play at any level.

[micahaphone]

If your average run of the mill combat is 3-5 rounds, that's only supposed to be 18-30 seconds of in game time. Even a boss fight of 15 rounds is a minute and a half.

[Theodoxus]

Rebuilt ASIs to be more frequent and in different trees (close to PF2's model)

In a game I was in, just before the Covid stupidity killed it, the DM decided on the fly that ASIs provided both the Stat improvement, and a feat. Hadn't ever thought of doing that (my own homebrew, I offer feats (really, half feats) every odd level, and ASI at the core levels). But it actually really took away the analysis paralysis and let me explore character options I never got to in AL (that I mostly play).

I'm not sure if granting racial (ancestry) feats on a separate track would be overly useful - especially since most races don't have a ton to choose from... But maybe granting a race only feat at 1st level wouldn't be horrible (though you'd need to make a few more for humans - everyone getting Prodigy is up there will every (half)elf taking Elven Accuracy (because seriously, why wouldn't you, for free?)

[Chronic]

"Everytime a creature drop to 0 hp, it takes a level of exhaustion."
And/or add a line to healing word
"this spell cannot be used on creatures with less than 1 hit point".

I use those two house rules in my game and I'm really satisfied with them, the exhaustion gives a cumulative penalty, encouraging people not to drop before being healed, while creating somewhat lasting but not too crippling long term effect, while the nerf to healing word gives a purpose to cure wound and force the players to make tougher choices.

[Skylivedk]

"Everytime a creature drop to 0 hp, it takes a level of exhaustion."
And/or add a line to healing word
"this spell cannot be used on creatures with less than 1 hit point".

I use those two house rules in my game and I'm really satisfied with them, the exhaustion gives a cumulative penalty, encouraging people not to drop before being healed, while creating somewhat lasting but not too crippling long term effect, while the nerf to healing word gives a purpose to cure wound and force the players to make tougher choices.

I can cosign the first part. I've used that houserule for years, and it really adds to the feeling of being beaten and battered. It allows you to recreate the feel of some Gauntlet battles (Spider-Man and the Sinister Six, Worm, Ward) plus prevents yoyo-ing. I would probably run minus hp rather than the healing word nerf. Have you tried both?

[Katzekerl]

Spears and tridents work with polearm master feat.

[MrCharlie]

Spears and tridents work with polearm master feat.

Spears were errata'd in a little bit ago already. No idea on tridents, but I think they are still the black sheep of the family whose only difference is not benefiting from polearm master and weighing an extra pound while costing 5 times as much, presumably so they can weigh you down in the water and drown you for spending extra money that could have fed some poor starving commoner.

[Tanarii]

Spears were errata'd in a little bit ago already. No idea on tridents, but I think they are still the black sheep of the family whose only difference is not benefiting from polearm master and weighing an extra pound while costing 5 times as much, presumably so they can weigh you down in the water and drown you for spending extra money that could have fed some poor starving commoner.

I feel like Tridents are only there so you know how to handle the 2 or whatever magic Tridents if they show up in your game.

[Dienekes]

I feel like Tridents are only there so you know how to handle the 2 or whatever magic Tridents if they show up in your game.

Apparently they were added in because of sahuagan and other oceanic species that were tied to the trident through the years.

Personally, if you have to have it at all I’d have just made a rule that attacking with melee weapons that aren’t light or tridents in water suffers Disadvantage.

[MrCharlie]

I feel like Tridents are only there so you know how to handle the 2 or whatever magic Tridents if they show up in your game.

They could literally have been spears and no one would have noticed the difference. But I suppose there are like, 14 weapons that have basically no mechanical difference from each other on the weapon list, including two swords (scimitar, short-sword), three one-handed polearms (spear, javelin, trident), three two-handed polearms (glaive, halbred, pike), and six one-handed strength weapons (battleaxe, longsword, warhammer, morningstar, flail, war pick) so there are worse things to complain about. Even if you consider damage types a mechanical difference-which is almost laughable-the battleaxe/longsword, warpick/morningstar, flail/warhammer ('cept versatile), spear/trident, and glaive/halberd-are all identical. Heck, the glaive and halberd have identical costs and weights!

Hell, I'm changing my answer-my one errata is to make the weapons at least somwhat unique from each other!

Edit: hilariously, this makes the war-pick one of the best weapons in 5e, because it's got the same stats as a longsword except isn't versatile, and costs 1/3 as much. People are overpaying for a one-handed 1d8 STR weapon because of tradition.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Halfcasters and less can change their casting stat during character creation as long as they have a good concept behind it (and it is still a mental stat).

I should probably pick something all players benefit from, but I tend to go just for what I'm currently thinking about with threads like these.

[jmartkdr]

1. Flatten out the experience table so that levels 1 and 2 are not accelerated. Or, alternatively, change the levels so that the current level 1 is the new level 3. Then build in levels 1 and 2 which bridge to the power level of a current level 1 character (but now with 3 hit dice).

2. Don’t let wizards simply pick their spells on level up. Either let them pick, but require an Arcana check to learn the chosen spell, and if they fail they have to try another; or just make them go out there into the world and find the spells they want.

I've played with way too many dm's who don't put spells in the world to make #2 a good idea.

[BurgerBeast]

I've played with way too many dm's who don't put spells in the world to make #2 a good idea.

I get that. I will say that it may be a cart before the horse situation... uh... chicken or the egg situation?

What I mean is, if every wizard just picks two of the best 3-5 spells available at every level anyway, DMs probably feel less need to hand out scrolls as loot.

Regardless, it’s a fair point you’re making. My stance hasn’t changed, though.

[HPisBS]

This one has seriously bugged me ever since I first started D&D a few years ago.

Monks' "Martial Arts" should allow them to trade one attack to try a trip or disarm, as well as to counter-attack or deflect a blow with their reaction. These martial techniques' DC should use 8+Dex+Proficiency Bonus.

Add some actual martial arts to the game's "martial arts."


(Since it's a Dex-based DC, and costs your attack, there'd still be a place for Open Hand Technique, both mechanically and narratively... though Open Hand would still want a little something extra to make up for it.)

[MrCharlie]

This one has seriously bugged me ever since I first started D&D a few years ago.

Monks' "Martial Arts" should allow them to trade one attack to try a trip or disarm, as well as to counter-attack or deflect a blow with their reaction. These martial techniques' DC should use 8+Dex+Proficiency Bonus.

Add some actual martial arts to the game's "martial arts."


(Since it's a Dex-based DC, and costs your attack, there'd still be a place for Open Hand Technique, both mechanically and narratively... though Open Hand would still want a little something extra to make up for it.)

RAW you can absolutely trip (and maybe disarm, it's an optional rule in the DMG if I remember) using any attack from your action. You initiate a contest, athletics vs. athletics/acrobatics.

What it should do is let that be done with dexterity instead of strength-or make your wisdom/dexterity modifier act in place of your STR for athletics-and let your bonus action attack (but not flurry) be used for this as well.

I'd also like to see Monks get more stats/feats, and their AC needs a boost from somewhere or they need a more efficient disengage. Too much of what monks do conflicts with bonus actions, and it's almost always strictly better to simply attack until you've stunned something with your Ki than actually use any other feature. This isn't even getting into the sadness (not SADness, the actual sorrow) that is tier 3/4 monk.

[Amechra]

They could literally have been spears and no one would have noticed the difference. But I suppose there are like, 14 weapons that have basically no mechanical difference from each other on the weapon list, including two swords (scimitar, short-sword), three one-handed polearms (spear, javelin, trident), three two-handed polearms (glaive, halbred, pike), and six one-handed strength weapons (battleaxe, longsword, warhammer, morningstar, flail, war pick) so there are worse things to complain about. Even if you consider damage types a mechanical difference-which is almost laughable-the battleaxe/longsword, warpick/morningstar, flail/warhammer ('cept versatile), spear/trident, and glaive/halberd-are all identical. Heck, the glaive and halberd have identical costs and weights!

Hell, I'm changing my answer-my one errata is to make the weapons at least somwhat unique from each other!

Edit: hilariously, this makes the war-pick one of the best weapons in 5e, because it's got the same stats as a longsword except isn't versatile, and costs 1/3 as much. People are overpaying for a one-handed 1d8 STR weapon because of tradition.

Alternatively, go all the way and come up with a short list of distinct weapon categories, and have the stats of every weapon that falls under a category be identical.

Though that war-pick example is kinda hilarious.

---

If I can change my errata: Damage types are condensed. Bludgeoning, Force, Slashing, and Piercing are now just Impact damage. Deal with it, Warlocks.