8
\$\begingroup\$

I signed up specifically to ask this question, because this website is one of the only places I have found this extra line of text in the warlock's "Eyes of the Rune Keeper" eldritch invocation from D&D 5e.

On a few posts here, I have seen Eyes of the Rune Keeper quoted as:

You can read all writing. You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning

Specifically here: Can Warlock's Eyes of the Rune Keeper decipher written code?
and here: What would a Warlock understand from written spells outside of their class, via Eyes of the Rune Keeper?

I haven't been able to find this specific description for the invocation in any official documentation; I've looked through the PHB, both versions of the released errata for the PHB, XGE (most of the official reference books), scoured through Sage Advice, and I can only find one other non-official reference to the extra line of text over at the DND5E Fandom wiki.

Is there any official reference document that contains the second sentence in the above quote? Or is the following sentence the only official description of the ability?

You can read all writing.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Apr 28 at 3:00
12
\$\begingroup\$

In the Sage Advice Compendium pdf I found:

Does the Eyes of the Rune Keeper invocation work on magical runes? Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any.

So I believe that fandom.com (not really known for their validity) took it upon themselves to update the description with some Sage Advice text.

Then people starting using fandom.com as a "source of truth". It's becoming more common for posters here to directly link to DnD Beyond which keeps their info up to date and correct.

So you are correct, the only legit description is:

You can read all writing.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ This is what I thought might be the case since I found that on Sage Advice, but wasn't sure if there was something official that I had missed that included the extra line. Thank you so much for your time. \$\endgroup\$ – Seidr Apr 28 at 2:01
6
\$\begingroup\$

That's not the official text.

As you've pointed out, that extra line is not in the PHB, or licensed published material. It's also not in the D&DBeyond page for the Warlock class, which is up to date with errata, and that site is considered a more reliable source than the unofficial D&D wikias.

The unofficial wikia seems to have adapted the text from the 2019 Sage Advice Compendium (publicly available on WOTC's website), or possibly from the original tweet from game designer Jeremy Crawford, and added that text into their entry for Eyes of the Rune Keeper.

Apparently some users on this site have copypasted the combined text from the unofficial wikia, or perhaps they copied each other.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Part of the reason people are so quick to cite third party sources is much of dndbeyond content is beyond a singnupwall. Throughout SE it's considered bad form to link to private content, especially when a public source is available. \$\endgroup\$ – Harper Apr 28 at 13:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.