Black Company Errata

This forum is for the discussion of Green Ronin's various campaign settings, such as Freeport, Thieves' World, Black Company, and the Mythic Vistas titles.

Black Company Errata

Postby RJS » Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:33 am

Ranger (p. 71)- Under Combat Style Mastery, replace Improved Grapple with Stunning Fist.

Originally, we had planned to have the Heal skill do what the Physician feat now does (described on page 99), however that changed. Where "see the Heal skill in Chapter Five: Skills" is mentioned, replace it with "see Heal in Chapter Four: Skills of the PHB"

Where the book mentions Healing Magic feat on page 128, replace with the Healing Talent Spell.

Under the Heal Skill and Healing Talent header (on page 129), replace with the following text...

Characters recover hit points lost to lethal damage through natural healing (possibly augmented through the Heal skill), special uses of the Heal skill (Physician background or Physician feat), or use of the Healing Talent spell. All of these methods convert lethal damage to nonlethal damage.
Robert J. Schwalb
Game Designer/Developer
User avatar
RJS
Ronin Evil
Ronin Evil
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: M'boro, TN

Postby Soulmage » Mon Dec 27, 2004 8:51 am

Dabblers cannont expend spell energy despite text under Magnitude on pg 151. See this thread.

http://www.greenronin.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5920
User avatar
Soulmage
Cohort
Cohort
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:54 am

Postby Doug_J » Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:47 pm

Under the Ranger's Combat Mastery for Unarmed, Improved Grapple appears twice.
Doug_J
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Tennessee

Postby RJS » Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:42 pm

Gotcha covered. First line of the errata post.
Robert J. Schwalb
Game Designer/Developer
User avatar
RJS
Ronin Evil
Ronin Evil
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: M'boro, TN

Postby Doug_J » Thu Dec 30, 2004 10:54 pm

:oops: How did I miss that?

Thanks, the book is fantastic! It's the best RPG book I've purchased in a looong time.

Doug
Doug_J
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Tennessee

Postby McBard » Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:36 am

I agree with Doug_J: BC is fantastic! Anyway, here's a bit of errata:

A couple of number spreads in Table 9-2 ("Grievous Injuries", p. 130) seem to have been leftovers from previous versions of the table. For example, in the second column of the 66-76 d% row the text ends by saying:
If shield, treat as 26-30

However, there is no "26-30" row; rather, there is a 01-25 row and a 26-32 row.

There seem to be two other instances of this sort of mistake:
    --the 84-88 row, second column, refers to a "36-45 result."
    --the text at the bottom of the page (outside of the table) refers to a "46-50" result.

What are the correct d% spreads?
McBard
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:18 am

Postby waiwode » Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:24 pm

Hmmm. Skills.

Under Craft it mentions a labourer gets paid 2 copper pieces a day. Under Profession it mentions that a labourer gets 1 copper piece a day.

I don't think I'm going to be needing to know this for my game (unless the guys decide to re-build Juniper) but how much does a labourer make?

Doug.
waiwode
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 5:39 am
Location: St Catharines, ON

Postby RJS » Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:30 pm

McBard wrote:I
A couple of number spreads in Table 9-2 ("Grievous Injuries", p. 130) seem to have been leftovers from previous versions of the table. For example, in the second column of the 66-76 d% row the text ends by saying:
If shield, treat as 26-30

However, there is no "26-30" row; rather, there is a 01-25 row and a 26-32 row.

There seem to be two other instances of this sort of mistake:
    --the 84-88 row, second column, refers to a "36-45 result."
    --the text at the bottom of the page (outside of the table) refers to a "46-50" result.
What are the correct d% spreads?

For 66-76 Replace 26-30 with 26-32
For 84-88 Replace 36-45 with 44-54

Under Repairing Grievous Injuries
Replace 46-50 to 84-88
Robert J. Schwalb
Game Designer/Developer
User avatar
RJS
Ronin Evil
Ronin Evil
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: M'boro, TN

Postby RJS » Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:32 pm

waiwode wrote:Hmmm. Skills.

Under Craft it mentions a labourer gets paid 2 copper pieces a day. Under Profession it mentions that a labourer gets 1 copper piece a day.



Labourers earn an average of 2 cp per week.
Robert J. Schwalb
Game Designer/Developer
User avatar
RJS
Ronin Evil
Ronin Evil
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: M'boro, TN

Postby Toric » Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:23 pm

I noticed what appears to be a contradiction in the Speak Language skill description on page 87. It says that a character cannot spend more than one language point per level. Later in the text it says that each time a character buys one rank of Speak Language skill, they get a number of language points equal to 1 + Int bonus which must be spent immediately unless the PC is an Academician. These two statements seem to contradict. If you can only spend one language point per level and you get say three language points when you buy one rank of Speak Language and have to spend them immediately, that wouldn't seem to make sense. Am I reading this wrong and could someone clarify this?

Toric
Toric
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:03 pm

Postby McBard » Sat Jan 01, 2005 12:25 am

To address Toric's Speak Language question: I believe the one lp per level restriction is per language. Therefore, excess lps gained from an Int bonus would have to be spent on other languages (or learning to read/write in the same or other language).

That is, one's level of mastery in a given language can only improve one level per character level.

That's my take on it; perhaps RTS has an official response.
McBard
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:18 am

Postby Soulmage » Sat Jan 01, 2005 8:21 am

Under the armor talent there is a residual reference to armor bonus. This should be deleted. (It provides an insight bonus as stated twice in the talent description.)
User avatar
Soulmage
Cohort
Cohort
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:54 am

Question(s)

Postby Narsham » Mon Jan 03, 2005 3:09 pm

Great game system! Now let's make it perfect... :D

I saw a range of minor typos, and many of the figures in the examples don't add up (I'm guessing modifiers changed close to press time), but few of these interfere with using the rules. Here's a few questions and requests for clarification... I'll probably post more later.

1. For using APs. Suppose I expend an AP to improve a d20 roll which is subject to automatic failure (a save or a to-hit, for example). If I roll a natural "1" do I still automatically fail despite spending the AP?

2. For clarification--when expending Spell Energy to cast a spell, I subtract any Energy spent before Step 6 where I suffer the spell's drain, correct?

3. If I use Preparation to ready a spell and I plan to use Spell Energy to boost my magic use, do I expend the spell energy upon finishing the spell, or when preparing it?

4. Limper serves as an example for the Armor spell, but he lacks the Talent to cast such a spell.

David
Narsham
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 4:31 pm

Postby RJS » Mon Jan 03, 2005 3:24 pm

1. For using APs. Suppose I expend an AP to improve a d20 roll which is subject to automatic failure (a save or a to-hit, for example). If I roll a natural "1" do I still automatically fail despite spending the AP?

Yep. Note, you can declare the use of an Action Point until after the roll but before the GM tells you the result. So, if you throw 1d20 on an attack and get a 1, don't spend the AP.

2. For clarification--when expending Spell Energy to cast a spell, I subtract any Energy spent before Step 6 where I suffer the spell's drain, correct?

Correct.

3. If I use Preparation to ready a spell and I plan to use Spell Energy to boost my magic use, do I expend the spell energy upon finishing the spell, or when preparing it?

You don't make the Magic Use check until you "speak" the initiator (or the last action of the spell's casting time). Consequently, you wouldn't use any spell energy until you decide to cast the effect.

For example, Junior the wizard casts a Create Fire effect modifiying the DC to 35. After checking his Aptitude (Table 10-4), he sees it will take 4 actions to cast. He casts the spell for 3 actions, not making a roll and stores the effect in his brain, assuming he has an Intelligence modifier of +1 or higher (p.149). In the thick of combat, he decides to fire off the effect. He has one action left on this effect, so he makes his Magic Use check. Seeing how hard it will be, he then decides to spend spell energy for the bonus to the check (bound by the limits of spell energy expenditures described on Table 10-1).

4. Limper serves as an example for the Armor spell, but he lacks the Talent to cast such a spell.

Naturally. :oops: I'd dump Improved Unarmed Strike and take Talent in its place to gain Armor.
Robert J. Schwalb
Game Designer/Developer
User avatar
RJS
Ronin Evil
Ronin Evil
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: M'boro, TN

Thanks

Postby Narsham » Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:21 am

Thanks for the quick response. Limper must have been particularly nasty to design (appropriately enough), particularly since he seems to do most of the spellcasting in the early books.

Looking him over again, I think he also needs the Alter Talent since he magicks up his sword during the Black Castle fight.

:wink:

David
Narsham
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 4:31 pm

Re: Thanks

Postby Eric Anondson » Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 pm

Narsham wrote:Limper must have been particularly nasty to design (appropriately enough), particularly since he seems to do most of the spellcasting in the early books.


Maybe the best solution would be to just give Limper enough levels in something to just get the feats.

I mean... it's The Limper! ;)


Regards,
Eric Anondson
Eric Anondson
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 4:23 pm

Question

Postby Tarc70 » Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:00 am

I assume at some point there will be an errata gathered and posted somewhere on the GR site so we don't have to search through various posts to find some of the answers to some errors that were made.

I sure hope so. :)
Tarc70
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 12:27 pm

Postby RJS » Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:22 am

Yeah. I'll be pulling an errata list together soon.
Robert J. Schwalb
Game Designer/Developer
User avatar
RJS
Ronin Evil
Ronin Evil
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 4:01 am
Location: M'boro, TN

Postby Soulmage » Wed Jan 05, 2005 12:00 pm

Spell Energy for most of the NPC stats looks a little suspect. I haven't had time to do a thorough review on each, but a quick mental calculation showed that most of them were off by a few points. Might be worth looking at in detail and recalculating to make sure the latest spell energy acquisition rules were used.
User avatar
Soulmage
Cohort
Cohort
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:54 am

Postby Valkrist » Thu Jan 06, 2005 12:33 am

A question on the Rite of Taking.

On page 184, second colum, paragraph 5, the BCCS book says "The Rite of Taking requires at a minimum of eight hours of uninterupted spellcasting. During this time, the spellcaster targets the subject with one spell effect of every spell she knows, of which the subject may not resist, voluntarily failing all saving throws."

Does this mean that the target automatically fails all saves during the Rite, or that the subject must VOLUNTARILY fail all saves?

I ask because I suspect that none of the Circle (Whisper, Journey, Feather) were volunteering for this, but the text sort of seems to imply it will only work on willing targets.
Valkrist
Dabbler
Dabbler
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:12 pm

Postby Yuan-Ti » Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:46 am

Plus, the Dominator, I was under the impression, "took" the Taken. They didn't willing go along with it.
Yuan-Ti
Supporting Cast
Supporting Cast
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:55 am
Location: Forbidden City, Massachusetts

Postby Soulmage » Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:03 am

Well, perhaps it was a situation of, "You can be taken, or you can be destroyed. Choose now."
User avatar
Soulmage
Cohort
Cohort
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:54 am

Taken

Postby Tarc70 » Thu Jan 06, 2005 7:08 am

Yeah I am guessing it was, you can resist, but you will die a most hanious and painful death in the process, or you can become a 'Taken' and become an even more powerful wizard than you are now.

:)
Tarc70
Bystander
Bystander
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 12:27 pm

Postby Valkrist » Thu Jan 06, 2005 7:40 am

Yuan-Ti: I agree, it's very likely that the Dominator just forced them against their will, but we have no proof of that. We SEE Whisper Taken, and she's pretty clearly not willing.

Soulmage and Tarc70: See, I would have guessed that Whisper would rather die...

That passage, in the Black Company novel, also contradicts the Campaign Setting on the subject of ressurection, although it can be argued that Cook was just being poetic when he says Whisper was slain and ressurected dozens of times.

Anyways. Just wanted to know if the rule was SUPPOSED to be "willing targets only," or if it was some sort of "Rite so powerful, you CANNOT resist it" type of thing.
Valkrist
Dabbler
Dabbler
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:12 pm

Postby Yuan-Ti » Sat Jan 08, 2005 10:39 am

Answered my own question... :roll:
Yuan-Ti
Supporting Cast
Supporting Cast
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:55 am
Location: Forbidden City, Massachusetts

Next

Return to Campaign Settings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TurnitinBot [Bot] and 1 guest