Typos

Page 126:
Bladedancer Followers:
1d6 1st–3rd level bl. dancers
or is this just an abbreviation?

Having the pdf released before the print copy allows these types of issues (i.e., typos) to be resolved (many eyes helps greatly in identifying typos). Are you going to hold off on printing for a time, until the typos decrease and you can be more assured of a clean version for printing, or is it too late and it’s already being printed? I personally would be happy to run with just the pdf for a time (months) in order to ensure a clean print version.

Stainless, our backers and pre-orders were able to download the PDF prior to its wide release, and many did so and found typos just as you say. All of those were fixed; unfortunately the file that was sent to the printer is the same as the one that was commercially released, so the typos we’re finding now will appear in the hardback edition.
If our first printing sells out, of course, we will go back to press with these typos fixed. And while I hope these warts are minor enough that folks will go ahead and help us sell out of the first printing, another option would be to use one of our sales partners’ print on demand services (which will be enabled around the same time that the hardbacks are in store) to get a softcover copy of a later edition of the wart-fixed PDF.

@tavis: >>If our first printing sells out…<<
Speaking of selling out. Are you able to provide us with a print-run number or is this a secret? Just out of curiosity…Thanks

Not a secret, but also not 100% accurate as Greg Tito was the one dealing with the printer; that said I think it was 1,000 copies. That’s about three times as many as the previous publisher I was part of, Behemoth3, sold of each of its books; however Adventurer Conqueror King equalled those sales numbers through Kickstarter alone, so 1K seemed like a good estimate.

Top of page 14. “…riskiness and randomness of the situation character is facing.”
There is a missing “the”, should read;
“…riskiness and randomness of the situation THE character is facing.”

General:

  • all links to individual chapters from the text outside the Table of Contents are broken. (Well, maybe some work, but I don’t think I’ve run across any.) Page 10 HOW TO USE THIS BOOK is a good example.
  • similarly for Mortal Wounds and Tampering With Mortality tables. All – or at least most – inline links to those are broken.
    Individual pages:
    p. 7
    First paragraph refers to Treasure, which is not linkified.
    p. 94
  • Surprise table, first row should probably be: 1-2, not 2-.
    p. 102
  • Monster Attack Throw table, unclear. Should presumably have rows: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8-9, etc. instead. (Now it’s hard to tell if a 6 HD monster is supposed to be read from the row “5+ and 6” or “6+ and 7”…)
  • Character Attack Throw table, last row should be: 14, not 14-15. …unless you’re planning to add levels past 15. :slight_smile:
    p. 104
  • Not a typo as such, but…: “DOUBLE DAMAGE Whenever damage is doubled (from backstabbing or charging, for instance), multiply the standard damage roll by two. Bonuses to the damage roll, such as from magic or strength adjustments, are not doubled.” should probably be “DAMAGE MULTIPLIERS Whenever damage is multiplied (from backstabbing or charging, for instance), multiply the standard damage roll. Bonuses to the damage roll, such as from magic or strength adjustments, are not multiplied.” …since multipliers other than 2 get used as well.
  • EFFECTS OF DAMAGE says the d6 is modified, should probably say unmodified instead.

demoss: What version of the pdf are you using? I just tried a sampling of the links, and they’re working for me (v 431, in Preview on a Mac).

The one currently up on DrivethruRPG: ACKS_1E_20120131v431DTR.pdf. Just redownloaded to double-check.
Preview on Mac as well – ditto for Goodreader on iPad. Spell links, etc, are fine.
If I hover on top of the chapter links in the HOW TO USE THIS BOOK section on p. 10, they all display as “Go to page (null)”.
If I do the same on top of the “ability scores” link near the bottom of the same page, it displays as “Go to page 16”.

Page 16. Last sentence “Some class may have other minimum ability requirements which must be met in addition.”
I think it should be “classes”, not “class”.
While I’m here;
Page 8. Second column. Start of dialogue. “We rode out the gates and the massive wings…”
Personally I think it should read “We rode out of THE gates and…” but some may not find this an issue.
Lastly, all the hyperlinks I’ve clicked on so far are working. I’m viewing with Acrobat 9 Pro on a Windows 7 PC and obtained my pdf from the GameSalute site.

Page 114: ADJUSTMENTS TO XP section refers to both bonuses and penalties from prime requisites, but the prime requisite rules on p. 17 only provide bonuses.

re: PDF links: I think there’s something wrong with the version demoss is downloading from DTR. All of the links on page 10 are working for me, and the hovers are accurate.

P. 125, Divine Worship table: last row is -4, should either not be there at all, or be +5 or more.

This is probably picking at nits, but…
p. 19
“2 1st level spells”, should be “two 1st level spells”.
“1 2nd level spell”, should be “one 2nd level spell”.
“4 1st level spells”, should be “four 1st level spells”.
“3 2nd level spells”, should be “three 2nd level spells”.
p. 124
“2 1st level spells”, should be “two 1st level spells”.
“1 2nd level spell”, should be “one 2nd level spell”.

Page 17. “…and the number of languages the character is able to learn to read and
write, as described below.”
Can the character not speak the language?! Shouldn’t it be, “…learn to speak, read and write…”?
Page 17 - a nit-pick. “…dialects (e.g. Orc, Goblin).”
I was always taught that e.g., and i.e., have a comma after them.
Page 17 - a nit-pick. “2 ability points may be sacrificed…”
I was always taught that of you wanted to start a sentence with a number you spelt it out rather than write the numeral. Thus, “Two ability points…”
While I’m at it, I would habitually spell out all numbers from 0 to 9, inclusive, and use numerals only for 10 and greater. That may just be my idiosyncrasy.
Page 18 “…maximum result (e.g. an 8 for fighters or a 6 for clerics.)”
Apart from the e.g. not having a comma, the full-stop should be outside of the bracket. It only goes within the bracket if the text within the bracket is a complete sentence.

While I’m at it, I would habitually spell out all numbers from 0 to 9, inclusive, and use numerals only for 10 and greater. That may just be my idiosyncrasy.
APM: I always thought that was the rule, too, but when I actually looked it up, it’s not actually the rule. The actual rule is much more complex, with many exceptions. For instance, if you are listing several values from the same group, and at least one of them is larger than nine, you should use numerals for all of them.
Consider the sentence: “Characters can progress from levels [one/1] to [fourteen/14].” There are three ways you could write it:
a) Characters can progress from level one to 14.
b) Characters can progress from level one to fourteen.
c) Characters can progress from level 1 to 14.
Option “c” is the correct method, even though it involves using a numeral for 1, which is normally written out.
I tried my best to get all of this right in the document and I think in 95% of the cases I did, but I’m sure I slipped up here and there.

Hi! This is my first post, so I hope I am not making a fool of myself here. Maybe it’s something I’m confused about, but I think it’s a typo.
The Assassin’s progression table on p. 26 says “Assassin (Fighter)” at the top, and this agrees with the remark on the previous page to the effect that the assassin’s attack and saving throws advance as a fighter, at +2/3 levels. And the values for level 1 are the same as for the fighter. However, the values advance in increments of 2 levels, rather than in alternating 1-2 increments. So the advancement depicted on the table is +2/4 levels.
Hope this helps!

p 49-51 seem to use terms Loyalty and Morale somewhat interchangably for henchmen. It would be better to use just either one – or clarify the difference, if there is one.

APM: I always thought that was the rule, too, but when I actually looked it up, it’s not actually the rule. The actual rule is much more complex, with many exceptions.
Excellent. I’m a university lecturer and scientist, so I’m constantly marking student coursework and giving them feedback. Normally I’m a stickler for obeying conventions and being consistent as it’s a key skill in the sciences. Thus, I’d appreciate being directed to your source of this information (that’s not a way of saying I’m doubting you). I can then add that to my list of conventions such as table and figure headings, full-stops and paragraphs, et al.

Stainless, my source was the Grammar Book, “Rules for Writing Numbers”, hyperlinked below.
http://www.grammarbook.com/numbers/numbers.asp