From 87e738d243dd3d02b95c3f70b38365d322fb134c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Wolmer Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 19:28:22 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Updated with implemented/commented/new issues in conjunction with new book upload. git-svn-id: https://projectaon.org/data/trunk@46 f6f3e2d7-ff33-0410-aaf5-b4bee2cdac11 --- changes/04wotw-changes.html | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-) diff --git a/changes/04wotw-changes.html b/changes/04wotw-changes.html index 2815919..e6789e2 100644 --- a/changes/04wotw-changes.html +++ b/changes/04wotw-changes.html @@ -1,3 +1,13 @@ + + War of the Wizards: Corrections @@ -63,7 +73,7 @@
toc
title
Title Page #1: THE WORLD OF LONE WOLF -> <cite>The World of Lone Wolf</cite>
Make that <cite>
ok!
-
Title Page #2: tumultuous climax to your epic struggle to overthrow -> tumultuous climax of your epic struggle to overthrow
+
Title Page #2: tumultuous climax to your epic struggle to overthrow -> tumultuous climax of your epic struggle to overthrow
approved
dedicate
acknwldg
Acknowledgements #1: frontmatter -> front matter
as in gs01, gs03, lw05, lw06, lw08-lw12
@@ -72,13 +82,13 @@
The Story So Far . . . #1: Kleasa -> Kleasá
7x
gamerulz
The Game Rules #1: Remove " at the front of this book"
-
The Game Rules #2: For WILLPOWER, add the standard footnote about going below 0 points.
This is the standard footnote: "It is possible for your WILLPOWER to fall below zero. For example, if you are the victim of an attack that drains your WILLPOWER, your score may be forced below zero. If your WILLPOWER falls to zero or below, you will not be able to cast spells or use your Wizard's Staff until your score is again above zero."
I was thinking, we may want to add some instructions about how to treat the Wizard's Staff in combat if your WP is at 0 or below, namely a normal non-magical weapon that has the normal penalty for not using the Wizard's Staff.
I am not sure of the Staff can be used as a normal weapon? But OK, it does say it looks like a normal quarterstaff and is stronger than all known metals, so I guess it should do. Change then "use your Wizard's Staff" -> "use the magical properties of your Wizard's Staff" and and add "You can still use your Wizard's Staff in combat as a normal weapon, but you must deduct 6 points from your COMBAT SKILL." either to this footnote or as a new footnote in Magical Powers, Wizard's Staff?
+
The Game Rules #2: For WILLPOWER, add the standard footnote about going below 0 points.
This is the standard footnote: "It is possible for your WILLPOWER to fall below zero. For example, if you are the victim of an attack that drains your WILLPOWER, your score may be forced below zero. If your WILLPOWER falls to zero or below, you will not be able to cast spells or use your Wizard's Staff until your score is again above zero."
I was thinking, we may want to add some instructions about how to treat the Wizard's Staff in combat if your WP is at 0 or below, namely a normal non-magical weapon that has the normal penalty for not using the Wizard's Staff.
I am not sure of the Staff can be used as a normal weapon? But OK, it does say it looks like a normal quarterstaff and is stronger than all known metals, so I guess it should do. Change then "use your Wizard's Staff" -> "use the magical properties of your Wizard's Staff" and and add "You can still use your Wizard's Staff in combat as a normal weapon, but you must deduct 6 points from your COMBAT SKILL." either to this footnote or as a new footnote in Magical Powers, Wizard's Staff?
I would add it to the same footnote, but link to the footnote in both places.
It's in two different sections, so it cannot be the same footnote... unless... no, won't work. So duplicated footnote then.
The Game Rules #3: Remove "If you run out of space, you can copy out the chart or have it photocopied."
The Game Rules #4: Remove " on the last page of this book"
-
The Game Rules #5: What happens to an existing CS score? Footnote similar to in 03btng (but note that WP and EP are covered already): "This section of the rules implies that you must re-pick your COMBAT SKILL even though you may have already completed a previous adventure. This is without precedent in other books and therefore appears to be a mistake. In order to preserve rule consistency among the books, you may choose to retain your COMBAT SKILL score."
-
The Game Rules #6: Endurance Points paragraph
Argh! Again, the sentance "Add *any* ENDURANCE points gained from playing previous Grey Star *adventures* {plural} to your initial score of 30..." is rather problematic. I can't possibly see how it would make sense to add EPs from all three of the previous Grey Star books! Surely it must mean the *last* successfully completed book? (So why use the phrasing as printed, then?). Also, it's standard practice in the Lone Wolf rules to restore your EPs to their original total when carrying them over (Dever explicitly endorses this in a Lone Wolf Club Newsletter) ... but I would hazard a guess that this isn't intended here. (Although the phrase "...points GAINED from playing previous...adventures" certainly doesn't clarify this - the phrase "left over from" would surely be the intended meaning?) ... Adding your restored EP total would just be too much of a bonus, I feel, and spoil gameplay. Hows about the following footnote: "The most likely interpretation of the rules here is that the player can take their final ENDURANCE points total from the end of their last successfully completed Grey Star adventure, and add 30 to this figure. Note that in the rules for the Lone Wolf books, it is standard practice to restore one's ENDURANCE points to their original total when carrying them across from one adventure to the next, but this does not appear to be appropriate here in this scenario with the Moonstone."
-
The Game Rules #7: Willpower paragraph
I find the sentence "If you possess unused WILLPOWER points from earlier Grey Star adventures, add them to the 50 WILLPOWER points which possession of the the Moonstone grants you" a bit problematic - it clearly says "adventures", plural - but surely it can only mean the *last* adventure you successfully completed? And of course, there's the whole "what WP score do I actually use - your initial total? the score you had at the end of the book?........... on balance, I'd suggest the following footnote: "The most likely interpretation of the rules here is that the player can take their final WILLPOWER total from the end of their last successfully completed Grey Star adventure, and add 50 to this figure."
-
The Game Rules #8: Combat Skill paragraph
Proposed footnote: "This implies that you must pick a new COMBAT SKILL from the Random Number Table even if have already completed previous Grey Star adventure(s). This conflicts with the rules for the Lone Wolf books, where you can carry over your score from a successfully completed previous adventure. For the sake of consistency, players may wish to carry over their existing CS score from the last Grey Star book they completed."
+
The Game Rules #5: What happens to an existing CS score? Footnote similar to in 03btng (but note that WP and EP are covered already): "This section of the rules implies that you must re-pick your COMBAT SKILL even though you may have already completed a previous adventure. This is without precedent in other books and therefore appears to be a mistake. In order to preserve rule consistency among the books, you may choose to retain your COMBAT SKILL score."
+
The Game Rules #6: Endurance Points paragraph
Argh! Again, the sentance "Add *any* ENDURANCE points gained from playing previous Grey Star *adventures* {plural} to your initial score of 30..." is rather problematic. I can't possibly see how it would make sense to add EPs from all three of the previous Grey Star books! Surely it must mean the *last* successfully completed book? (So why use the phrasing as printed, then?). Also, it's standard practice in the Lone Wolf rules to restore your EPs to their original total when carrying them over (Dever explicitly endorses this in a Lone Wolf Club Newsletter) ... but I would hazard a guess that this isn't intended here. (Although the phrase "...points GAINED from playing previous...adventures" certainly doesn't clarify this - the phrase "left over from" would surely be the intended meaning?) ... Adding your restored EP total would just be too much of a bonus, I feel, and spoil gameplay. Hows about the following footnote: "The most likely interpretation of the rules here is that the player can take their final ENDURANCE points total from the end of their last successfully completed Grey Star adventure, and add 30 to this figure. Note that in the rules for the Lone Wolf books, it is standard practice to restore one's ENDURANCE points to their original total when carrying them across from one adventure to the next, but this does not appear to be appropriate here in this scenario with the Moonstone."
The original intent of the author was most likely that the player should add 30 to their final ENDURANCE score from the end of their last successfully completed <cite>World of Lone Wolf</cite> adventure. In the <cite>Lone Wolf</cite> series, it is standard practice to restore one's ENDURANCE points to their original total when carrying them over from one adventure to the next, but the power of the Moonstone seems to change those rules in this case.
Using GS instead of WoLW in Jon's version.
+
The Game Rules #7: Willpower paragraph
I find the sentence "If you possess unused WILLPOWER points from earlier Grey Star adventures, add them to the 50 WILLPOWER points which possession of the the Moonstone grants you" a bit problematic - it clearly says "adventures", plural - but surely it can only mean the *last* adventure you successfully completed? And of course, there's the whole "what WP score do I actually use - your initial total? the score you had at the end of the book?........... on balance, I'd suggest the following footnote: "The most likely interpretation of the rules here is that the player can take their final WILLPOWER total from the end of their last successfully completed Grey Star adventure, and add 50 to this figure."
The original intent of the author was most likely that the player should add 50 to their final WILLPOWER score from the end of their last successfully completed <cite>World of Lone Wolf</cite> adventure.
Using GS instead of WoLW in Jon's version.
+
The Game Rules #8: Combat Skill paragraph
Proposed footnote: "This implies that you must pick a new COMBAT SKILL from the Random Number Table even if have already completed previous Grey Star adventure(s). This conflicts with the rules for the Lone Wolf books, where you can carry over your score from a successfully completed previous adventure. For the sake of consistency, players may wish to carry over their existing CS score from the last Grey Star book they completed."
It is implied that you must pick a new COMBAT SKILL from the Random Number Table even if have already completed previous one or more <cite>World of Lone Wolf</cite> adventures. This conflicts with the rules for the <cite>Lone Wolf</cite> books where you carry over your score from a previous successfully completed adventure. For the sake of consistency, players may wish to carry over their existing score from the last <cite>World of Lone Wolf</cite> book they completed.
Using GS instead of WoLW in Jon's version.
discplnz
powers
Magical Powers #1: physiurgy -> Physiurgy
@@ -98,6 +108,8 @@
Magical Powers #15: alchemy -> Alchemy
Errata
Magical Powers #16: divination -> Prophecy
Errata
Magical Powers #17: Add a footnote about choosing Powers similar to in 03btng: "The wording of this section of the rules seems to indicate--if read literally--that you may choose your set of Lesser Magicks again if you have completed a previous adventure. This is without precedent in other books. In order to preserve consistency with other books, you should not choose your Lesser Magicks again. If you have currently mastered five Lesser Magicks, you may choose one additional Lesser Magick from the list. If you have already mastered six Lesser Magicks, you keep these. If you choose Alchemy as a new Lesser Magick, or you have not mastered the Lesser Magick of Alchemy but you have selected the Higher Magick of Theurgy, you also receive a Herb Pouch with contents, as detailed in the Equipment section."
damn, this got a bit longwinded.
For the footnote, change "currently master" to "have currently mastered", "already master" to "have already mastered", and "do not master" to "have not mastered".
OK fixed above.
+
Magical Powers #18: COMBAT SKILL If -> COMBAT SKILL. If
+
Magical Powers #19: If your WILLPOWER falls to zero or below, you will not be able to use the magical properties of your Wizard's Staff until your score is again above zero. You can still use your Wizard's Staff in combat as a normal weapon, but you must deduct 6 points from your COMBAT SKILL.
A cut-down version of the footnote from Game Rules.
equipmnt
Equipment #1: Add "Mark these 4 items in your Action Chart." below the Alchemny equipment list.
add to Errata!
Done!
Equipment #2: Remove " at the beginning of this book".
@@ -151,8 +163,9 @@
sect12
12 #1: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
12 #2: Dimension door -> Dimension Door
-
12 #3: The wordings of the 1st and 3rd choices are confusing I think. The 1st sounds like you have to use Thaumaturgy if you can, but of course you'd rather use a Temeris potion and save some WP. Therefore I propose that we: 1) move the second choice to the first position, and 2) (see the next errata entry).
-
12 #4: If you are using -> Otherwise, you may use
This abuses the sentence structure a bit, but it works, or?
+
12 #3: The wordings of the 1st and 3rd choices are confusing I think. The 1st sounds like you have to use Thaumaturgy if you can, but of course you'd rather use a Temeris potion and save some WP. Therefore I propose that we: 1) move the second choice to the first position, and 2) (see the next errata entry).
Moonstone, deduct -> Moonstone, you may deduct
Thaumaturgy, deduct -> Thaumaturgy, you may deduct
Keep the same choice order or not?
+
12 #4: If you are using -> Otherwise, you may use
This abuses the sentence structure a bit, but it works, or?
I think the other proposed corrections would make this unnecessary.
OK, rejected.
+
12 #5:
Make the last paragraph a <choice/>.
Hm I have vague memories we have had this up before, long ago... should all "death sentences" be <choice> encoded?
sect13
sect14
sect15
@@ -161,7 +174,7 @@
15 #3: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
15 #4: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
15 #5:
Is there a missing link option that should go here? The final link lists 3 Magical Powers you can use, but you are only given the option of two of them. If not, 'Theurgy' should be removed from the final option.
To reach this section, you have to possess Theurgy, so the first choice implies that you use it. We could perhaps modify the choice text to make it explicit?
Ah, right. Would footnoting this would be best?
I vote for clarifying footnote.
OK, but... hm.
-
15 #6: Explain that the first choice means you use Theurgy.
I have no creative idea here. Anyone?
+
15 #6: Explain that the first choice means you use Theurgy.
I have no creative idea here. Anyone?
I would suggest that "wish to ask" should become "wish to use the Power of Theurgy and ask"
OK, this becomes an erratum.
sect16
sect17
sect18
@@ -181,12 +194,12 @@
24 #1: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
24 #2: this power -> this Power
Errata
24 #3: these powers -> these Powers
Errata
-
24 #4:
I don't think that's necessary.
+
24 #4:
I don't think that's necessary.
unnecessary
sect25
25 #1:
Remove all occurrences of '1' from the equipment list.
25 #2: (1) coil of Rope -> Coil of Rope
also
25 #3: Tinder box -> Tinderbox
As everywhere else.
This is Errata.
-
25 #4: What about those sheaths? In 02tfc we added this footnote: "If you wish to take the Sheath, record it as a Special Item on your Action Chart."
+
25 #4: What about those sheaths? In 02tfc we added this footnote: "If you wish to take the Sheath, record it as a Special Item on your Action Chart."
Sounds good to me.
25 #5: 1 Torch counts as 1 Backpack Item -> each Torch counts as one Backpack Item
sect26
sect27
@@ -218,7 +231,7 @@
34 #14: 1 Tinderbox -> Tinderbox
sect35
sect36
-
36 #1: Tanith have -> Tanith has
Wait here, neither ... nor can be followed by both singular and plural, right?
+
36 #1: Tanith have -> Tanith has
Wait here, neither ... nor can be followed by both singular and plural, right?
I recently found out that, formally, "neither" and "either" both take singular verbs. So, formally speaking, this correction should be made.
sect37
sect38
38 #1: persectuion -> persecution
@@ -245,7 +258,7 @@
sect47
47 #1: by the Agarash's inspired state -> by the Agarashi's inspired state
Agarash is a proper noun
Those with the "inspired state of crazed frenzy" are the (other) demons, not Agarash himself, right? I think this should say something else.
Dever later used the term Agarashi when referring to Agarash's minions; does this turn of phrase appear anywhere else in the book? If not, we could get away with inserting "Agarashi's".
I was also thinking about that too, but "Agarashi" is not used anywhere else in any of the GS books.
I vote for changing it to "Agarashi's" and adding an explanatory footnote. Are there any other occurences of this term where this tactic would be helpful?
OK changed above and new footnote issue added.
47 #2: half-way -> halfway
as in the PAMoS
-
47 #3: The term <cite>Agarashi</cite> is not used in any other place in the <cite>Worls of Lone Wolf</cite> books, but it is used elsewhere for the monstrous servants of Agarash the Damned.
That footnote really sucks. Better ideas anyone?
How about: "The term Agarashi is not found elsewhere in the World of Lone Wolf series. However, in the more recent Lone Wolf books, Dever has used the term to denote any monstrous servant of Agarash the Damned." Still not that great, though.
+
47 #3: The term <cite>Agarashi</cite> is not used in any other place in the <cite>Worls of Lone Wolf</cite> books, but it is used elsewhere for the monstrous servants of Agarash the Damned.
That footnote really sucks. Better ideas anyone?
How about: "The term Agarashi is not found elsewhere in the World of Lone Wolf series. However, in the more recent Lone Wolf books, Dever has used the term to denote any monstrous servant of Agarash the Damned." Still not that great, though.
Although the term <quote>Agarashi</quote> is not used in anywhere else in the <cite>Worlds of Lone Wolf</cite> books, it is used elsewhere as the collective name for the monstrous servants of Agarash the Damned.
I meant: Although the term <quote>Agarashi</quote> is not used anywhere else in the <cite>Worlds of Lone Wolf</cite> books, it is used in other books as the collective term for the monstrous servants of Agarash the Damned.
Using GS instead of WoLW in Jon's version.
sect48
sect49
sect50
@@ -264,7 +277,7 @@
58 #3: Move the 3rd choice up to the 1st position, according to the "qualified before non-qualified" rule.
sect59
sect60
-
60 #1: Tanith have -> Tanith has
See sect36 #1!
+
60 #1: Tanith have -> Tanith has
See sect36 #1!
sect61
sect62
sect63
@@ -301,7 +314,7 @@
sect86
86 #1: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
86 #2: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
-
86 #3: This section is missing a choice for what to do if you do not have any of the Magical Powers! However, 280 has one: "If you do not possess any of the above Powers, you must attack the bridge with your Staff; turn to 175."
+
86 #3: This section is missing a choice for what to do if you do not have any of the Magical Powers! However, 280 has one: "If you do not possess any of the above Powers, you must attack the bridge with your Staff; turn to 175."
I think it's OK to add that choice.
sect87
sect88
sect89
@@ -331,7 +344,7 @@
sect106
sect107
sect108
-
108 #1: enchantment -> Enchantment
Is it the Power of Enchantment or enchantment in general?
Errata
I'm not currently somewhere where I can view the graph to check, but I assume that there was no mention of which power was used when getting to this section. I vote for capitalization.
Section 170 has "If you have the Magical Power of Enchantment...". I don't quite see what you mean?
+
108 #1: enchantment -> Enchantment
Is it the Power of Enchantment or enchantment in general?
Errata
I'm not currently somewhere where I can view the graph to check, but I assume that there was no mention of which power was used when getting to this section. I vote for capitalization.
Section 170 has "If you have the Magical Power of Enchantment...". I don't quite see what you mean?
Enchantment
sect109
sect110
sect111
@@ -368,8 +381,11 @@
sect136
sect137
137 #1: group of demons are rushing -> group of demons is rushing
+
137 #2: Move the illustration to Section 139 where it actually fits the text of the section!
Blimey! After checking up you're absolutely right. I'd second this.
sect138
sect139
+
139 #1: Move illustration 8 here, and give it the new caption "Your heart misses a beat as a huge pair of monstrous eyes appears within the flames of the portal."
Blimey! After checking up you're absolutely right. I'd second this.
+
139 #2: The horde stop -> The horde stops
sect140
sect141
141 #1: large, reptilian -> large reptilian
@@ -410,13 +426,13 @@
sect165
165 #1: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
sect166
-
166 #1: clawed feet tells -> clawed feet tell
Wait - note that it says "The scratch and scuffle of clawed feet tells ...". I disagree, even though it's "scratch and scuffle".
+
166 #1: clawed feet tells -> clawed feet tell
Wait - note that it says "The scratch and scuffle of clawed feet tells ...". I disagree, even though it's "scratch and scuffle".
Agreed, er... vetoed - the change that is. "tells"
sect167
sect168
sect169
169 #1: WILLPDWER -> WILLPOWER
sect170
-
170 #1: growling and howling of the pack draws -> growling and howling of the pack draw
Disagree, see 166 #1.
+
170 #1: growling and howling of the pack draws -> growling and howling of the pack draw
Disagree, see 166 #1.
similarly vetoed. "draws"
170 #2: demon horde are -> demon horde is
170 #3: half-way -> halfway
Duplicate.
170 #4: out-rider -> outrider
as twice in lw15
@@ -430,7 +446,7 @@
sect173
sect174
sect175
-
175 #1:
This raises an interesting precedent. Could this be an alternative rule for negative WP scores?
I'd definately vote that we draw attention to it in the general Rules section where we discuss the possibility of "negative willpower". It still doesn't quite do away with the fact that the text in places has said "if your willpower has fallen to zero OR LESS" (am I remembering that correctly?) but it seems a good workable way to deal with the issue, and I think we'd do well to commend it to players as a rules suggestion.
I don't know if we should include it in the rules sections, but we could add footnotes in the places where you are told to use WP for a spell with no option to abstain. I don't think it's too many places actually; most are probably in the second half of 02tfc. Note that by only allowing it in these places, it is still possible to get negative WP when faced with Kleasas or Mother Magris.
+
175 #1:
This raises an interesting precedent. Could this be an alternative rule for negative WP scores?
I'd definately vote that we draw attention to it in the general Rules section where we discuss the possibility of "negative willpower". It still doesn't quite do away with the fact that the text in places has said "if your willpower has fallen to zero OR LESS" (am I remembering that correctly?) but it seems a good workable way to deal with the issue, and I think we'd do well to commend it to players as a rules suggestion.
I don't know if we should include it in the rules sections, but we could add footnotes in the places where you are told to use WP for a spell with no option to abstain. I don't think it's too many places actually; most are probably in the second half of 02tfc. Note that by only allowing it in these places, it is still possible to get negative WP when faced with Kleasas or Mother Magris.
I seem to remember that Grey Star the Wizard had many such situations also. I lean toward one footnote in the rules. It might be kind to the reader to add a reminder footnote for each situation that we recognize, but with one footnote in the rules section, they have no excuse to be confused when it happens even if we neglect to put it in the section. We can do both if that helps everyone sleep better at night. *smile*
175 #2: ie 2 -> i.e. 2
sect176
sect177
@@ -470,7 +486,7 @@
200 #1: shuffling column reach -> shuffling column reaches
200 #2: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
sect201
-
201 #1: shore', he says -> shore,' he says
This is already correct in the XML file?
+
201 #1: shore', he says -> shore,' he says
This is already correct in the XML file?
This is definitely Errata and still present. " 'I witnessed your struggle with the demons from the shore', he says."
Duh. Yes, sorry.
201 #2: great host of Masbaté warriors wait. -> great host of Masbaté warriors waits.
201 #3: wariors -> warriors
201 #4: you ashore. I am -> you ashore. 'I am
add to Errata!
Done!
@@ -499,7 +515,7 @@
sect214
sect215
sect216
-
216 #1: pupiless -> pupilless (or pupil-less)
I think this is strange enough that I vote for "pupil-less".
Yuk! two hyphenated letter l's, I think that looks very ugly - I much prefer Ian Page's "pupiless"
Urgh, the Shadakine have eyes like female pupils? Any of the others, but not "pupiless"!
I just found a comparable example (in the Oxford Dictionary no less): "tailless" as in "a tailless cat". So I still opt for "pupilless" even though the Internet seems to favour "pupiless" with about 6:5.
+
216 #1: pupiless -> pupilless (or pupil-less)
I think this is strange enough that I vote for "pupil-less".
Yuk! two hyphenated letter l's, I think that looks very ugly - I much prefer Ian Page's "pupiless"
Urgh, the Shadakine have eyes like female pupils? Any of the others, but not "pupiless"!
I just found a comparable example (in the Oxford Dictionary no less): "tailless" as in "a tailless cat". So I still opt for "pupilless" even though the Internet seems to favour "pupiless" with about 6:5.
OK, you've convinced me: "pupilless".
sect217
217 #1: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
217 #2: enchantment -> Enchantment
Is it the Power of Enchantment or enchantment in general?
I think this is being used generally and should be left uncapitalised.
Agreed, "enchantment".
Yeah it's a generic use of enchantment.
@@ -613,7 +629,7 @@
291 #1: shield of sorcery -> Shield of Sorcery
And mark it as a <spell>. We did similarly in 02TFC.
Errata. Note issue 2 refers to this issue.
OK, removing issue 2.
sect292
sect293
-
293 #1: horde begin -> horde begins
This is debatable, but I don't think a horde can gloat as a group, therefore "begin". I know this ignores other instances of the same rule, but this is a subjective rule.
I really think "begins" sounds better here, but some other cases in this book: sect139 "The horde stop", sect174 "The horde falters", sect221 "The horde comes". I'd change 139.
+
293 #1: horde begin -> horde begins
This is debatable, but I don't think a horde can gloat as a group, therefore "begin". I know this ignores other instances of the same rule, but this is a subjective rule.
I really think "begins" sounds better here, but some other cases in this book: sect139 "The horde stop", sect174 "The horde falters", sect221 "The horde comes". I'd change 139.
OK, "begins" for this section, and please change 139.
293 #2: battle cry -> battle-cry
as in the PAMoS
sect294
294 #1: backpack -> Backpack
Errata
@@ -622,7 +638,7 @@
sect296
sect297
sect298
-
298 #1: over Tanith imperils -> over Tanith imperil
Disagree. I read "Mother Magri and her power over Tanith" as a unity. Is there a clear rule for this?
Absolutely - the original text is fine & correct.
+
298 #1: over Tanith imperils -> over Tanith imperil
Disagree. I read "Mother Magri and her power over Tanith" as a unity. Is there a clear rule for this?
Absolutely - the original text is fine & correct.
I don't know that there's a clear rule for this one, but I would chalk it up to Mother Magri and her power acting as one.
298 #2: magical powers -> Magical Powers
Does GS refer to the "game term" or...?
I would leave this alone since it isn't referring to a specific Magical Power.
I vote to change it because it refers to Grey Star's powers which are the Magical Powers not generic magical powers.
yup
sect299
299 #1: lies -> lie
@@ -668,7 +684,7 @@
sect328
328 #1: Shadkine -> Shadakine
328 #2: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
-
328 #3: The first choice seems to allow you to teleport without cost! Proposed footnote: "If you possess a Temeris Potion you can teleport without using any WILLPOWER points. If you are versed in the Higher Magick of Thaumaturgy you can teleport by deducting 2 WILLPOWER points from your total. To use the Dimension Door of the Moonstone to teleport, deduct 4 WILLPOWER points. (Cf. Section 12.)
+
328 #3: The first choice seems to allow you to teleport without cost! Proposed footnote: "If you possess a Temeris Potion you can teleport without using any WILLPOWER points. If you are versed in the Higher Magick of Thaumaturgy you can teleport by deducting 2 WILLPOWER points from your total. To use the Dimension Door of the Moonstone to teleport, deduct 4 WILLPOWER points. (Cf. Section 12.)
approved
sect329
sect330
sect331
@@ -709,7 +725,7 @@
sect353
353 #1: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
353 #2: higher magick -> Higher Magick
as in the PAMoS
-
353 #3: This section is missing a choice for what to do if you do not have any of the Magical Powers! However, 280 has one: "If you do not possess any of the above Powers, you must attack the bridge with your Staff; turn to 175."
+
353 #3: This section is missing a choice for what to do if you do not have any of the Magical Powers! However, 280 has one: "If you do not possess any of the above Powers, you must attack the bridge with your Staff; turn to 175."
Again, I'm good with adding this.
sect354
sect355
sect356
@@ -717,6 +733,8 @@
sect358
sect359
sect360
+
360 #1: 'The demon lord, Agarash -> 'The demon lord Agarash
+
360 #2: Add a simple link to The Passing of the Shianti.
Shall the explanatory footnote be here or in 'Passing...'?
Link added, in the meantime.
sect361
sect362
sect363
@@ -757,28 +775,8 @@
sect398
sect399
sect400
-
ill1
-
ill2
-
ill3
-
ill4
-
ill5
-
ill6
-
ill7
-
ill8
-
ill9
-
ill10
-
ill11
-
ill12
-
ill13
-
ill14
-
ill15
-
ill16
-
ill17
-
ill18
-
ill19
-
ill20
passing
-
The Passing of the Shianti #1: Wytch-Queen -> Wytch-queen
just like Wytch-king
+
The Passing of the Shianti #1: Wytch-Queen -> Wytch-queen
just like Wytch-king
(Wytch-Queen -> Wytch-queen) This is Errata.
Approved. I think this can be considered "ne".
map
action
crsumary
@@ -797,3 +795,20 @@ + -- 2.34.1