7
\$\begingroup\$

The Tomb of Annihilation module has a section on Dungrunglung, where the grung King is trying to conduct a great ritual. The sidebar "The Great Ritual", on page 51, reveals to the DM the plan of one of the King's priests to fool him. I've reproduced a specific paragraph (emphasis mine):

Krr’ook’s Plan. A while ago, Krr’ook found a box of Nolzur’s marvelous pigments, which she hid from the king. She plans to paint an image of Nangnang of such quality that Groak will be fooled into thinking it’s the real goddess. Krr’ook hopes that one of the adventurers will have the skill to illustrate Nangnang convincingly. She’s willing to give the magical pigments as a reward to the adventurers if all goes well. As a further reward, Krr’ook offers a ring of jumping. Anyone touched by a dose of poison must succeed on a DC 12 Constitution saving throw or take 5 (2d4) poison damage. A dose of poison is used up once it deals damage to a creature.

What is the last part of the text talking about? What poison doses are players touching? Was this some formatting-gone-wrong issue?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The 2020 ToA errata posted on D&D Beyond addresses this issue. You may want to reconsider the accepted answer accordingly. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jun 20 at 9:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast Thanks for the update. There is another typo I can suggest to the WotC team to fix, do you know the most efficient way of contacting them? \$\endgroup\$ – BlueMoon93 Jun 20 at 14:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ Jeremy Crawford has tweeted in the past that such potential rules errors can be pointed out by emailing sageadvice@wizards.com. (I started compiling a massive email listing all the errors I'd spotted at one point but got distracted so it's still sitting in my drafts. Some of those errors may or may not have been fixed in the meantime since I drafted that email :P) \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jun 20 at 21:49
3
\$\begingroup\$

Those sentences were removed in the 2020 errata as "junk text".

On June 19th, 2020, D&D Beyond published a list of changes in the 6th printing of Tomb of Annihilation published starting June 17, 2020. (Wizards of the Coast has not yet released their own errata PDF, though I'm sure they will release one soon.)

Among those changes is the following entry:

Chapter 2

The Great Ritual (sidebar) (p. 51). In the "Krr'ook's Plans" subsection of the sidebar, delete the last two sentences: "Anyone touched by a dose of poison . . . To a creature." (This is junk text.) Deleting this text will shorten the sidebar.

The previous text of that paragraph is quoted in the question. Now that paragraph simply ends with the following sentence:

As a further reward, Krr’ook offers a ring of jumping.

As you guessed in the question, it was indeed some formatting-gone-wrong issue or editing error; the quoted lines have nothing to do with the context they appear in, and have been removed.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
5
\$\begingroup\$

It appears to be an editing error, and originally most likely related to the party being offered or asking for doses of grung poison as a reward

The highlighted text has been removed in the 6th printing of the Tomb of Annihilation module. Wizards of the Coast hasn't published an official errata document for it yet, but it has been updated on D&D Beyond and mentioned in their official errata thread:

  • The Great Ritual (sidebar) (p. 51). In the "Krr'ook's Plans" subsection of the sidebar, delete the last two sentences: "Anyone touched by a dose of poison . . . To a creature." (This is junk text.) Deleting this text will shorten the sidebar.

Speculating on why it was there in the first place, all Grung (as described in Appendix D) use poisoned weapons, and the DC and damage described in this paragraph matches the DC and damage of the grungs' poisoned weapon - so, the poison being mentioned in this paragraph is almost certainly just normal grung poison. In the context in which it's placed, immediately following on from the mention of the rewards that Krr'ook is willing to offer the characters for helping execute her plan, the most likely explanation is that it was originally intended that the party might also be offered, or ask for, doses of grung poison in exchange for their assistance. Presumably that option didn't survive editing, but the description of the poison did.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It was indeed an editing error; the latest errata on D&D Beyond removes those 2 sentences, and describes them as "junk text". You may want to update your answer accordingly. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jun 20 at 9:54

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.