Typos, Errata , Corrections, and Clarifications

[Atgxtg]

I would figure most things would benefit from another set of hands. Even if it is just "Hold theses screws; don't loose them", or "put pressure here."

BTW, Is there a penalty if the assistant fumbles? I could see that too.



"I thought I told you not to loose the screws"

[Jack Tar]

Thanks for the clarification Jason. That makes sense now. Elegant as ever.

[Jack Tar]

Sorry, I've spotted another thing I feel is a bit odd. I've spotted it becaue sailing ships will feature in my next campaign, and I regularly do wargaming with Napoleonic ships.

On page 179 the average movement rate for "Ship, vintage sailing" is given as 6 km/hr. That translates into about 3 knots.

"According to Admiral Beaufort, a man-of-war in this [Napoleonic] period...with all sial set...when the wind reached 4 knots...would go in smooth water 1 or 2 knots. A gentle breeze of 7 to 10 knots would give the ship 3 or 4 knots of speed, while a moderate breeze of up to 16 knots would give the ship 5 to 6 knots." Lavery, B. (1989) Nelson's Navy. Conway Maritime Press, London.

Granted this is in the period when sailing vessels arguably obtained their pinnacle, but a man-of-war is a huge, heavy ship. Although the sail set gets smaller with smaller vessels, so does the hull cross section and weight. Frigates were known to sail significantly faster. Also granted, the BRP category covers everything from cogs, through figates, through men of war, through to tea klippers. In addition, winds range from still to hurricane.

But I still can't help feeling, almost instinctively, that the speed given on page 179 is too slow. I would suggest doubling it.


Hmmm, me thinks a BRP supplement dealing with the age of sail might be worth while

[drohem]

Quote:
Originally Posted by drohem
what is the relationship between Maneuver and Handling?

So with the chariot example: would the net bonus/penalty to the Drive skill check be +10% (Maneuver = -5% and Handling = 15)?

On p.216 it says to add/subtract the Handling modifer for the vehicle from the character's appropriate skill.

On p. 265, it says that this modifier is applied to your character's skill.

Why is Maneuver expressed as a percentage and Handling just a number?

Why have two vehicle attributes that serve the same function?

I am confuzzled

I would surely appreciate some incite into these vehicle attributes and there applications.

[MattyHelms]

This may be just a "See Page XX" error, but I wanted to make sure the reference gets fixed in the final layout:

On page 183 under "Exceeding 100% in a Skill," the text refers to the optional rules for "Skills Over 100%" as being on page 183. The option box is actually on page 175.

Thanks!
Matt

[MattyHelms]

In the "Common Powers" section for the High Fantasy setting on page 297, the last sentence putters out into "<<>>"

Thanks,
Matt

[Jason Durall]

Originally Posted by MattyHelms

This may be just a "See Page XX" error, but I wanted to make sure the reference gets fixed in the final layout:

On page 183 under "Exceeding 100% in a Skill," the text refers to the optional rules for "Skills Over 100%" as being on page 183. The option box is actually on page 175.

Thanks!
Matt

Edits may cause page #s to shift somewhat, so I'm letting Chaosium handle those issues.

Originally Posted by MattyHelms

In the "Common Powers" section for the High Fantasy setting on page 297, the last sentence putters out into "<<>>"

Thanks,
Matt

Got it!

Thanks!

[Jason Durall]

Originally Posted by drohem

Why is Maneuver expressed as a percentage and Handling just a number?

Why have two vehicle attributes that serve the same function?

It's a holdover from the Call of Cthulhu vehicular system, and one I'm streamlining (into one attribute instead of two).

I'll be posting some form of errata after every last scrap of edits are submitted and integrated into the manuscript.

[drohem]

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

It's a holdover from the Call of Cthulhu vehicular system, and one I'm streamlining (into one attribute instead of two).

I'll be posting some form of errata after every last scrap of edits are submitted and integrated into the manuscript.

Thanks, Jason.

[frogspawner]

Sorry if I'm giving "onlie the liveliest awfullness" to this long-dead thread, but I think it's worth it. After all...

Originally Posted by Shaira

At the risk of muddying the waters still further, I do think the entire Attack / Parry / Dodge system does need to be laid out, explicitly, in one place at some point.

Here is what I have pieced together so far - <snip>

One thing I will say: having seen the farce which was MRQ's muddy and confusing portrayal of combat 18 months ago when the rules first came out - and the fact that people on the MRQ forums are *STILL* asking today how combat works, I think it's worth making sure this is CRYSTAL clear in the BRP rules! I know the BRP *rules* work fine in this respect - we just need to make sure the *wording* of those rules is completely and unambiguously clear, even at the risk of repeating things.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

So right now I'm going through the whole combat chapter to ensure that it's as clearly worded as possible.

Hurrah!

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

I'll be posting some form of errata after every last scrap of edits are submitted and integrated into the manuscript.

Presumably that's finished now. Any chance your posting could be soon, please, Mr D?