ajwsavage wrote:It's funny - there is much much less errata than I was led to believe on these forums...
For the most part, that's because people were seeing that a lot of the Benefits had "reverted" back to previous versions. The thing is, the mechanics in most of those Benefits hadn't changed - they'd simply been reworded for a little extra clarity, though were perfectly usable as-is. They were seeing those and just sort of figuring that everything had reverted and was screwed, and reacting accordingly, when the actual mechanical issues had been covered and addressed on the forum threads and whatnot, and so were among the materials that I had available when doing the revision of the manuscript.
