D&D (2024) Monster Change: Force Damage vs. Magic Weapons

[HammerMan]

It's still a very overall inconsistency thing that 5E has.

not just 5e... D&D in general

 

[Charlaquin]

It's still a very overall inconsistency thing that 5E has.

not just 5e... D&D in general

It’s not inconsistent at all, just, again, poorly worded. The books are entirely consistent in how they use the term melee weapon attack. It’s a misleading term to use for the purpose they consistently use it for, but they are consistent about it.

 

[the Jester]

Well Orcus is immune and the nightwalker is resistant, which is fine. The inconsistency I’m complaining about is “non-magical BPS weapons” vs. “non-magical BPS attacks.” Unless the intent is for non-magical BPS attacks that aren’t weapons to be able to hurt Orcus, which seems weird.

In my campaign, I long ago switched the wording on that one to "nonmagical BPS damage".

 

[Charlaquin]

In my campaign, I long ago switched the wording on that one to "nonmagical BPS damage".

As did I. I’m just surprised WotC apparently isn’t using the revision as an opportunity to fix the inconsistent wording. Even if they keep it as “nonmagical BPS weapons” or “nonmagical BPS attacks,” just pick one or the other and use it consistently instead of some monsters using one phrasing and some monsters using the other. Unless they really are intended to function differently, which I doubt.