Typo

72 posts / 0 new
Last post
Apep
Joined: 2012-11-08 11:16
Typo

I was trying to figure out how to calculate morale for a domain that I just took over and I noticed a typo. On page 39 of Campaigns v25. In the section describing how morale is handled during occupation, it reads:

"The dominion morale score for an occupier begins at (0 minus the dominion morale of the owner)."

The parentheses seem unnecessary.

Rodriguez
Rodriguez's picture
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2012-04-05 04:40

In the DaW - Campaigns Manuscript at the TROOP CHARACTERISTICS SUMMARY there is a typo at the "Light Infantry (spear, short sword, shield, leather)" entry. The HD says "1-14"

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Fixed!

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Thanks, guys! Every error we find now is an embarassing errata post I don't have to write next year. =)

Orangefruitbat
Joined: 2012-04-13 23:37

Another error - on p. 8 of the Kickstart Campaigns manuscript:

Qualifying Number (Per 100 Conscripts) should read
Qualifying Number (Per 120 Conscripts)

Nerdnumber1
Domains At War Backer
Joined: 2013-03-08 18:02

Can you please settle on sticking to groups of 50 or 60 as a standard? Manual of arms letting you train groups of 50 at a time is irritating when units are groups of 60 or 120. I'd lean toward 60, but consistency is the main focus.

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

I fail to see why those two should be consistent...what am I missing?

Nerdnumber1
Domains At War Backer
Joined: 2013-03-08 18:02

It isn't that they have to be consistent to have a complete rule-set, it is just irritating that for a unit of 120 you have to train 50 the first and second months and then take an extra month for the last 20 stragglers. I find it irritating that ACKs sticks to groups of 50 while D@W prefers groups of 60. Same problem with castle walls in mass combat.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

I agree with you. It's "legacy code". In the original drafts of Domains at War, units were 100 troops each, so units were trained in groups of 50. Historical research and the niceties of scaling suggested to me that units of 120 troops each were a superior choice, but I didn't update the training rules. 

Since we're doing a re-print of ACKS, I can fix this retroactively in the core rules, too.

 

Nerdnumber1
Domains At War Backer
Joined: 2013-03-08 18:02

That just made my day. I figured that was the issue. Are you considering any alterations of the stronghold building measurements? I distinctly recall an awkward passage in D@W about cutting standard 100ft*X lengths of wall into 60ft(?) hexes.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Fixed!

koewn
koewn's picture
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2012-07-17 20:11

Unless I'm missing some context, there's some disagreement between the BRs of troops on page 19/20 of D@W:C and page 49 - specifically the higher value units.

As a request, it'd be super handy if the tables on page 19/20 could have the same "A/B/C" type designations that their counterparts have in the Battles book for the various types of infantry/cavalry/bowmen/etc.

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

Campaigns, page 18: "when Darius raised his armies, each took three seasons (9 months) to arrive." -> shouldn't this be "whan Darius raised his armies, each took one season (3 months) to arrive", since the season is the unit here?

Campaigns, page 20: "This is a perfectly size army for war-mongering barons, earls, counts, and dukes"

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Campaigns, page 18: "when Darius raised his armies, each took three seasons (9 months) to arrive." -> shouldn't this be "whan Darius raised his armies, each took one season (3 months) to arrive", since the season is the unit here?

APM: Remember that it takes three time periods for the entire army to arrive. In one season, 1/2 the army would arrive.

Fixed the other typo.

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

Hmmm... re-reading it, I think what confused me about the example was the plurality, which referred back to to the previous example box. I took it to mean each portion of an army mustered at a single time, rather than the totals for two separate calls to arms. All clear now.

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

DaW Battles, page 16 - "If the army does not route, the commander with the next highest leadership..." should be rout, rather than route?

Also curious about the difference between being command-grade in Battles vs Campaigns (5th/7th vs 3rd/5th for lieutenant / commander).

One further question would be 'how useful were cavalry during historical siege assaults (both for offense and defense)?' I imagine they were quite useful for sallying (and countering sallies), but their use in offensive assaults sort of depends on what a breach means - one can run a horse through a hole in a wall, but not up a scaling ladder, and I'm not sure how well cavalry would do atop a wall on defense either. Is defensive cavalry assumed to be in courtyards and kill-zones, or what? The assault rules do not seem to consider this case.

It feels like there's room for a counter-intel hijink to help root out enemy perpetrators, or is the intent that this is done by infiltrating a spy into the enemy army and carousing for valuable information to learn of an enemy spy? (Love the use of 'perpetrator' here as the noun for someone performing hijinks, by the way)

Good and Ill Omen refer to a "Campaign Events" table; I presume this is the Vagaries of War table?

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

D@W Battles, page 16 - "If the army does not route, the commander with the next highest leadership..." should be rout, rather than route?

APM: Fixed!

Also curious about the difference between being command-grade in Battles vs Campaigns (5th/7th vs 3rd/5th for lieutenant / commander).

APM: Could you point out where you see this? In an earlier draft, lieutenants were 3rd level and commanders were 5th level, but after I carefully reviewed the demographic implications of ACKS, it was clear the requirements needed to be 5th and 7th level. Any mention of 3rd level lieutenants is therefore "legacy code".

One further question would be 'how useful were cavalry during historical siege assaults (both for offense and defense)?' I imagine they were quite useful for sallying (and countering sallies), but their use in offensive assaults sort of depends on what a breach means - one can run a horse through a hole in a wall, but not up a scaling ladder, and I'm not sure how well cavalry would do atop a wall on defense either. Is defensive cavalry assumed to be in courtyards and kill-zones, or what? The assault rules do not seem to consider this case.

APM: You are right, the rules do not address this. I hand-wave it on the assumption that cavalry are relatively elite troops and so even if dismounted they are still quite effective. I will think about whether I can offer an elegant way to handle this with more realism but not much complexity.

t feels like there's room for a counter-intel hijink to help root out enemy perpetrators, or is the intent that this is done by infiltrating a spy into the enemy army and carousing for valuable information to learn of an enemy spy?

APM: That would be one way to do it. You can also glean info about spies from interrogating captured prisoners, which comes about from successful Recon Rolls, and having infiltrated spies increases your Recon Rolls.

Good and Ill Omen refer to a "Campaign Events" table; I presume this is the Vagaries of War table?

APM: Yes. I'll fix. Thanks.

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

On page 13 (or 9 on gdocs):
"In campaign battle, the officers are usually PCs and/or major NPCs and monsters drawn from the campaign. However, not every character can serve as an officer:
A PC or NPC must be at least 5th level to serve as a general or commander in a campaign battle, while a monster must have at least four or more Hit Dice than is average for creatures of its race.
A PC or NPC must be of at least 3rd level to serve as a lieutenant in a campaign battle, while a monster must have at least two more Hit Dice than average for a creature of its race."
It's correct on page 84 of the manuscript, though, in the Epic rules section, which has company commanders at 7th and company lieutenants at 5th.

"Cavalry are elite" works for me; I could also see subtracting like .5 BR from cavalry during assaults, or something similar.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

OK, if that's the reference, I think I've fixed it in the latest draft. Thanks!

Rodriguez
Rodriguez's picture
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2012-04-05 04:40

Also on Page 10 of the Battles PDF under "Officers"

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

Battles page 18 - "but if destroyed our routed counts", our should be or.
Battles page 22 - "must not be adjacent to any of the enemy unit(s) which h had threatened it" should lose the ' h '
Battles page 23 - "Threatened units may not missile attacks." This sentence a verb.
Battles page 32 - "Routed will suffer casualties" should probably be 'Routed units will...'

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Fixed!

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

Battles page 39 - "A low wall stays broken ground, only now its rubble" should use "it's" instead of "its"
Battles page 54 - "A cloudkill, dispel magic fireball, wall of flame, or similar effect..." needs another comma between magic and fireball (although a fireball that also dispelled in the effected area would be pretty sweet...)
Battles page 55 - "Any units of less than 3HD that are contacted by the unit take 1 hit and..." One uhp?
Battles page 61 - "Creatures with this special ability deal one extra point of damage during charges if they hit with at least one attack with their attacks." seems to have two endings to the sentence.
also page 61 - "Units with more than 1 HD or less must make a successful saving throw versus spells or fall prey to dragon fear." More than 1HD or less?
Battles page 65 - Should the shp for the first two types of tower be per story?
page 66 - "The tyrannosaurs receive 2 attack per round against the structure"
Battles page 71 - "Units occupying any story of a fortified structure gain a +2 bonus to shock and morale rolls and a +4 bonus on saving throw versus Blast." should be saving throws
Battles page 74 - the Siege Tower table has movements listed as 1/-/-, while the text says it should be -/1/-

(Ah, the campaign leadership qualifications are at company scale. Sense is made)

Battles page 93 - Elven Light Infantry have a 2 in the Missile Attacks column without any further data; should this be "2 spear 9+" ?
Battles page 102 - "Likewise, units with mounts that are not trained for battle (such as riding houses) are always Irregular Mounted." Are riding houses related to the sheep on the housing table?
Page 108 - "Calculating a mixed unit’s number of attacks is a multi-step process." should probably be "Calculating a behemoth mounted unit's number of attacks is a multi-step process."
Page 112 - "topped on either end by vast 5,000 feet pillars" 5,000-foot?
Page 114 - The Division Commander entry for the 1st Division of the Aurans should be Palatine Komnarius, rather than Palatine Ulrand.

I really apologize if the manuscript was editable to readers in gdocs and these have been fixed already...

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

 


also page 61 - "Units with more than 1 HD or less must make a successful saving throw versus spells or fall prey to dragon fear." More than 1HD or less?

APM: More

Battles page 65 - Should the shp for the first two types of tower be per story?

APM: Looks like the tower shp are all messed up. I'll fix.

Battles page 102 - "Likewise, units with mounts that are not trained for battle (such as riding houses) are always Irregular Mounted." Are riding houses related to the sheep on the housing table?

APM: Yes. In the Auran Empire campaign setting, it's common for peasants to dwell on top of beasts of burden, in small saddle-mounted yurts. More affluent folk live on larger beasts of burden. The wealthiest and most powerful live in riding houses mounted on the backs of mastodons. Or, I made an egregious typo.

Thanks so much for fine eye for detail.

 

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Fixed!

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

The SHP and units per level of the towers are now fixed.

 

Round tower, stone, 30’ high, 20’ diameter

1/3 hex

1/3 stories

3

7

250/story

Round tower, stone, 40’ high, 20’ diameter

1/3 hex

1/3 stories

4

7

250/story

Round tower, stone, 40’ high, 30’ diameter

1/2 hex

1/2 stories

4

7

400/story

Round tower, stone, 60’ high, 30’ diameter

1/2 hex

5/6 stories

6

7

400/story

Square tower, stone, 40’ high, 30’ square

1/2 hex

1/2 stories

4

6

400/story

Square tower, stone, 60’ high, 30’ square

1/2 hex

5/6 stories

6

6

400/story

 

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

Hi Alex,

I have been writing comments in the Google doc for Battles; would you prefer that I use this thread instead, to have all the findings in the same place?

Thanks.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

I tend to check the forums daily and the google doc less frequently, so putting them here is easier; but if you've already put them in the Google doc, you don't need to replicate your work! Thanks for alerting me.

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

Good to know. I will use the forums moving forward.

One area which I didn't document when building a roster spreadsheet was the unit with small inconsistencies in the spelling of equipment. If I recall correctly, there were some "spear and shield" and "spear & shield", and also "pole arm" and "polearm". Sorry I didn't capture the exact locations.

koewn
koewn's picture
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2012-07-17 20:11

I'm running the ogre fight in Campaigns, just to provide a contrast when I get the battle report posted online.

Page 48, Resolving Battles, #5 - roll a number of die equal to your army's battle rating, modified by the Attack Throw Modifiers table.

D@W:C has an entry "unit is led by a lieutenant" (page 49), but the die rolls are by BR, not unit, so it's inapplicable?

The Free Starter doesn't have that entry in the corresponding table in the same section.

Both tables (D@W:C and D@W:FS) prefix the table with text stating "each unit's attack throws".

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

The intent is that you simply apply the +1 modifier to a number of d20 rolls equal to the BR of the unit.

For instance, I have a BR14 army: 4 Heavy Infantry Units (BR 2 each) and one Heavy Cavalry Unit (BR6). The Heavy Cavalry and one of the Heavy Infantry have a Lieutenant. Therefore I will hit on a 15+ with those 8 d20s, while the other 6 d20s will hit on 16+.

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

This is probably not a typo, but I cannot find an explanation for it. The elven light infantry and bowmen units have a morale of -1, while the other units have a 0. Am I missing anything?

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

Looking through the whole roster, it seems that all light infantry and any ranged units that aren't longbows or crossbows, are at -1 morale. So it's probably normal. Why do they have -1 morale? Well, they've got lighter armor and cheaper weapons, so they probably feel less protected and less valued.

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

This may be the reason, but I am looking to implement a formula to code it in the unit generator, and I need to make sure on what is behind those numbers to make the results consistent.
Thanks.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

See p.6 of D@W Campaigns: Mercenary Morale. The table shows how mercenary morale is calculated.

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

Thanks, I knew I had seen it somewhere! I was only looking at the battles manuscript.
This makes the morale formula a bit harder to implement for humans, but I will give it a try.

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

The entry for "Other melee weapons" on the table for "Mounted Formations by Weapon" on chapter 8 look a bit strange. The first 3 entries are 2/5/8; is it intended that a rider with a sword moves faster than a rider with a spear or a bow on the same mount? Every other entry for the same movement rate has the same unit movement.

zapicm
Patreon SupporterAdventurer Conqueror King BackerPlayer's Companion BackerDwimmermount BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu ContributorACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Contributor
Joined: 2011-07-28 03:22

This is more a question than a typo: do behemoth units have charge attacks? I could not find them on their section on conversion.

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

DaW Battles page 22, latest draft: "must not be adjacent to any of the enemy unit(s) which h had threatened it."

DaWB page 29: "Irregular units may not read to attack, as they lack the discipline to wait for enemy."

In the description of officer characteristics, "A general's morale modifier modifies the shock rolls of every unit in his army." Later under the rules for generals, "The general's morale modifier modifies the morale rolls of every unit in his army." The second version seems more likely.

jedavis.e504
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-06-17 19:29

Most recent pdf draft, page 23, Mercenary officers: "The base level, cost, and characteristics of mercenary *offers* are noted on the adjoining table."

Page 31: "Workers *are* cannot be formed into units on the battlefield except under exceptional circumstances or with magic."

Also page 31: "Most creatures can carry a maximum of twice their normal load at full movement. When carrying more than their normal load, their movement rate is reduced to half." Seems contradictory.

Mules are marked as Workers, but appear to also be usable as cavalry mounts, since the dwarven mounted crossbowmen ride them.

Do centaurs count as humanoid or non-humanoid for purposes of carrying capacity?

Earplugs equipment description, page 41 - "Commanders may issue these to troops *to* that will face harpies on the field of battle"

Line break issues between Prosthesis and Quintain

jedavis.e504
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-06-17 19:29

Page 55 - "The Exotic Creatures Roster (p. XX) has a list of weekly supply cost for other types of creatures." Cost should probably be costs?

Page 56 - "A supply line becomes blocked if the route through passes through any hexes occupied by enemy forces" seems to have one through too many.

Page 60, inconsistency between examples - "its second division has three battalion-sized units" with "its second division has four battalion-sized goblin light infantry units". Not critical, just momentarily jarring.

Page 62 - repeated use of "dominion morale" at top of second column. Probably meant domain morale.

Page 66 - The headings for the tables of engagement types by strategic stance combination all read Mutual Awareness.

Page 69 - "You can also check out D@W: Battles rulebook for the full details" should probably have a "the" between out and D@W

Page 70-71: Example inconsistency between "The Judge divides the wolf riders into three groups of 9 wolf riders each." and "Rolling for the first group of 4 wolf riders,..."

Are flyer units eligible to pursue a defeated army that retained its own flyers or cavalry?

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

Noticed some stuff in the D@W: Campaigns layout draft. Here's Chapter 1: Armies...

Pg. # Throughout the document, table titles are inconsistent in their capitalization. For example, some tables capitalize the prepositions, some do not.

Pg. 9 The text refers to the "Cost Per Week Per Mercenary Type" table as being below, but the formatting has pushed it above the note.

Pg. 11 The text refers to the "Mercenary GP Wage per Month" table as being below, but the formatting has pushed it to the page before the note (i.e. above).

Pg. 12 The text refers to the "Unit Loyalty" table, but doesn't point out where it is. Admittedly, it is right below the text reference.

Pg. 12 The text refers to the "Exotic Mercenary Cost Per Time Period Multiplier" table as being adjacent, but the formatting has pushed it above the note.

Pg. 13 The example at the top of the right-hand column uses the form "Marcus's" for the possessive; not sure if this or "Marcus'" is the currently accepted style.

Pg. 14 The text refers to the "Training and Equipment Time and Cost" table, but doesn't point out where it is (below).

Pg. 14 Not a typo, but the first time I've noticed this:
"If conscripts are released from service by their leader, trained conscripts will become mercenaries or brigands..." all of them? Every time? Why do none of them return home to a life less dangerous?

Pg. 14 "In addition to conscripting peasants, the leader of a domain can
also levy a peasant militia..." is it just me, or does the wording of this sentence seems to imply that one cannot levy a peasant militia with also implementing conscription? I presume that is not the case, but I'm unsure whether this is ambiguously written, or a case of poor reading comprehension on my part.

Pg. 15 The last paragraph on the right-hand column should be referring to militia who are released from service, but instead refers to conscripts.

Pg. 16 The text refers to the "Follower Type and Equipment by Class" table, but does not point out where it is (above and below). The second portion of the table also has (cont.) after the title; is this standard style? What about (cont. from previous page) for clarity?

Pg. 17 The text refers to the Upkeep costs for slave soldiers as 3gp per month, and 16gp per month for ogres. Why don't mounted slaves (e.g. cavalry, beast riders, etc.) cost more due to maintenance for their mounts? Slave goblin wolf riders suddenly seem very attractive...

Pg. 18 The last sentence of Example #1 is cumbersome, stating:
"...the slave soldiers can be trained as, e.g., light infantry or heavy cavalry, according to..."
How about:
"the slave soldiers can be trained (e.g. as light infantry or heavy cavalry) according to..."

Pg. 19 The text refers to the "Vassal Troops by Realm Size" table as being below, but the formatting has pushed it above the note.

Pg. 19 The text (last paragraph on the page) refers to the "Exotic Creatures Roster" as being on page "XX" instead of the actual page reference.

Pg. 20 The text uses no article for "Leadership proficiency," but this is inconsistent in the document; in some places the definite article "the" is used for proficiencies.

Pg. 20 The Example has inconsistencies in the number of units or divisions. 4 divisions are created from 10 units; 2 units (heavy cavalry) in the 1st division, and the other three divisions have 3 units each (heavy infantry, light infantry <strong>and</strong> bowmen), totalling 11 units.

Pg. 20 Under the explanation for Leadership Ability, "e.g." is used instead of i.e., when what is being presented ("4 plus Charisma bonus or penalty") is the sole (alternate) meaning, not one example among many

Pg. 23 Under Creature Handler, "Some creature handlers are animal trainers themselves, while otherwise rely on Beast Friendship..." should read, "Some creature handlers are animal trainers themselves, while others rely on Beast Friendship..." instead

Pg. 24 Under Quartermaster, "A quartermaster is an experienced soldier who manages distribution of supplies and provision to the troops..." should read, "A quartermaster is an experienced soldier who manages distribution of supplies and provisions to the troops..."

Pg. 24 Under Siege Engineer there is no mention of replacing Artillerists and at what ratio (1:1?), even though their abilities would seem to allow them to do so...

Pg. 27 The Beastman Troop table's line entry for "Goblin Troops" is improperly highlighted

Pg. 30 Under Size Category, "Gigantic creatures count as 24 men, s only 5 gigantic creatures..." should read, "Gigantic creatures count as 24 men, so only 5 gigantic creatures..."

Pg. 31 Under War Mounts the abbreviation "ML" is used for morale score, in spite of several previous uses of "morale score" and no prior explanation (e.g. "morale score (ML)")

Pg. 31 Under Workers, "Workers are cannot be formed into units..." should read, "Workers cannot be formed into units..."

Pg. 31 Under Normal Movement, "Most creatures can carry a maximum of twice their normal load at full movement..." and, "When carrying more than their normal load, their movement rate is reduced to half..." are incompatible.

Pg. 32 Under Monthly Wage, "Owned, or enslaved sentient, creatures can sometimes..." should read, "Owned, or enslaved, sentient creatures can sometimes..."

Pg. 32 Under Supply Cost, "p.XX" should list the page number.

Pg. 32 Under Handler Cost, "p.XX" should list the page number.

Pg. 32 Under Total Cost, "Note that the creature were owned or enslaved..." should read, "Note that if the creature were owned or enslaved..." and, "...feel free to round them to ease of play!" should read, "...feel free to round them off for ease of play!"

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

Actually, this:
Pg. 32 Under Monthly Wage, "Owned, or enslaved sentient, creatures can sometimes..." would probably be clearer than my suggestion if you simply drop the commas all together.

jedavis.e504
Patreon SupporterPlayer&#039;s Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-06-17 19:29

I assumed that the XX page numbers were the norm at this stage, since I don't recall seeing any page number references that weren't of that form. Ctrl-F XX finds a bunch.

Also if we're hitting inclarities rather than just clear errors, the reference to Legendary Leadership in the Morale section on officer abilities section kind of threw me; I assumed it was probably the 5th-level fighting-type +morale ability, but am pretty sure that it's not called that in the Fighter description. The example tacitly clarified it, but there were a good couple seconds of confusion.

jedavis.e504
Patreon SupporterPlayer&#039;s Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-06-17 19:29

Page 75, example: "Now Marcus can assault with (24 + 15) 49 units, while Moruvai can still only defend with 24 units." 24+15 = 39, not 49.

The circumvallation minimum in the Blockade Quick Reference on page 75 seems off; 20 units are worth 2500' of circumvallation, not 250'.

Sabotage description on page 77 includes the note "(as skilled commanders tend to be better at guarding their supply train)", despite being in the Blockade section where supply trains are not relevant.

Page 77, artillery ammunition - "For the defending army (which is usually out of supply), the daily cost represents consumption of artillery stored before the siege." Should by "comsumption of artillery ammunition".

Page 79 - How do reconnaissance rolls for detecting siege mines work? The set of relevant modifiers is likely very different from those for locating an army. Is it just unmodified?

Page 80 - "If a stronghold built on solid rock (such as a mountain-top fortress), its foundation is too hard to easily excavate, and is unlikely to readily collapse" should read "is built".

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Hugely helpful lists - thank you! Please keep posting any and everything you find.

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

I'll get to chapter two tomorrow, and I'll try and do one per day. I'll also point out that I am not exhaustively checking tables, as that requires far more back-and-forth than I have time for at the moment.

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

FRACK!!! Internet connection frigged off, eating my post. FRAAACKKK!!!

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

Well, at least it was faster the second time, as a lot of it was from memory. Also on the plus side, I caught a couple more things I missed on the first pass. Hopefully I didn't miss anything I originally caught...

Chapter 2: Equipment

Pg. 40 Under Craftsman’s Tools, "Craftsman’ tools are required..." should read, "Craftsman’s tools are required..."

Pg. 41 Under Crutch there's no mention of what a effect a crutch actually has...

Pg. 41 Under Howdah conversions are given for weights from Stone into Pounds (e.g. 6 stone (60lb)) when no prior conversions were given for anything other than capacity. Why?

Pg. 41 Under Pavilion, "...measuring 24’ diameter and 12’ in height..." should read, "measuring 24’ in diameter and 12’ in height."

Pg. 42 Under Prosthesis multipliers are given for different construction material (e.g. silver (x5)) with no explanation as to what is multiplied. Cost?

Pg. 42 The listing for Quintain has been pushed into the text for the previous entry (Prosthesis) by the formatting

Pg. 42 Under Shield, "...the shields’ interior can be used as a mirror..." should read, "...the shield's interior can be used as a mirror." (misplaced apostrophe)

Pg. 42 I'm a bad person because I lol'd at the example for Surgical Saw

Pg. 42 The "Artillery" table lists weight conversions from stone into pounds for all artillery. Why?

Pg. 43 Under Crew and Rate of fire it states the negative effects of not having an artillerist; can a siege engineer replace an artillerist?

Pg. 44 Under Battering Ram, "A battering ram weighs must be crewed with 5 man-sized creatures..." should read, "A battering ram must be crewed with 5 man-sized creatures..."

Also, the damage is listed in the description, giving both standard ("4d10 shp") and 1/10th ("1d4 shp") damage (for wood and stone, respectively). There is some inconsistency in that artillery doesn't do this, and these rates (x1 and x1/10th) are explained under structures, later, which could result in confusion (e.g. 1/10th of 1/10th for stone structures).

Pg. 45 Under Moveable Gallery and Moveable Mantlet it states that, "creatures gain a +4 bonus to saving throws versus Blast caused by artillery, burning oil, or similar effects." Does that exclude breath attacks, spells, etc.? The wording of, "...or similar effects..." seems to imply so.

Pg. 45 Under Screw it states that, "Each bore deals 3d10 shp of damage to wooden structures and 1d4+1 shp of damage to stone structures..." but this is at odds with the "SHP" entry on pg. 47, which would mean 3d10 shp to wood and 1d4-1 shp (or better, 1d3 shp) to stone.

Also, see the note for Battering Ram above.

Pg. 46 Under Siege Tower see the note for Moveable Gallery (pg 45) above.

Also, a huge siege tower lists its drawbridge as only 10', as well as being on the 5th floor, 75' up, all identical to a large siege tower. Is this correct?

Also, I know virtually nothing about classical siege warfare, but the siege tower entry states, "External crew generally stand outside the tower and pull it with ropes." How do these crew members avoid being slaughtered when so exposed? The wikipedia (I know, I know!) entry for Helepolis suggests the crew pushed the tower from behind (though it doesn't explain how). Please illuminate the darkness of my ignorance...

Pg. 46 Under EQUIPMENT AVAILABILITY ON CAMPAIGN the paragraph beginning, "An army of even modest size will be accompanied by a baggage train..." should be moved to before the "Army Size/Market Class" table for clarity. It's a personal, minor thing, but starting a sub-section with a table is cumbersome. The next sub-section on STRONGHOLDS AND STRUCTURES suffers from the same problem, but there is no introductory text to move.

Also, "...as shown on the adjacent table..." should then read, "as shown on the table above."

Pg. 48 Under Arrow Slit and Battlement: see Moveable Gallery (pg 45) above

Pg. 48 Under Wall it states, "Walls may be built up to 200’ high, but cost is doubled." Is the cost doubled for anything over 60' high?

Pg. 49 Under The Typical Labourer, "...every laborer has a construction rate of 1 2/3 sp..." should read, "...every laborer has a construction rate of 2/3rds sp per day..." for both correction and clarity.

Also, "...differentiate between unskilled laborers, skilled laborers craftsmen, and engineers..." should read, "...differentiate between unskilled laborers, skilled laborers, craftsmen, and engineers..." (missing comma)

Also, "Workers may be unskilled laborers, skilled laborers, craftsmen,
and/or engineers..." should probably be moved to directly after the sub-heading. I would also suggest the following for clarity (though it may be more trouble than it's worth):
"The Typical Worker: Workers may be unskilled laborers, skilled laborers, craftsmen, and/or engineers.

If you don’t want or need to differentiate between unskilled laborers, skilled laborers, craftsmen, and engineers, you can simply assume that every worker has a construction rate of 2/3rds sp per day. Every 3,000 workers will construct 500gp per day. This is a good option for large armies on long campaigns.

Unskilled laborers might be peasants, slaves, prisoners, conscripts, or even mercenaries on labor detail." This improves clarity, but introduces another term that would need to be updated in subsequent paragraphs (although some already use the term "workers" interchangeably with "labourers").

Also, undifferentiated labourers has a construction/wage rate lower than unskilled labour. Why? Balance? I seem to recall this being asked and answered before, but I can't find the reference...

Also, "Characters with just one rank of Siege Engineering proficiency count as skilled labor, not siege engineers..." should read, "Characters with just one rank of Siege Engineering proficiency count as skilled laborers, not siege engineers."

Pg. 50 Under CONSTRUCTION SITES it states, "Thus a project built with a work force of more than 3,000 workers will end up costing more (in gp of wages paid) than the labor cost of the project. However, the project will get built faster." After reading this several times, it's perfectly clear, but on initial reading it seemed counter-intuitive. The last sentence is the sticking point, as for workers beyond the first 3,000 the rate per labourer is SLOWER. Just wanted to mention my initial reaction.

Pg. 50 Under CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS the paragraph beginning, "Alternatively, raw materials may be bought with cash at a market..." should be moved to before the "Back to Basics" sub-heading for both clarity and continuity with costs and methods of obtaining construction materials.

Pg. 50 Under ASSISSTING CONSTRUCTION WITH MAGIC, "This construction rate only can be used on ditches, moats, and earthen ramparts!" should read, "This construction rate can only be used on ditches, moats, and earthen ramparts!"

Pg. 51 Under ASSISSTING CONSTRUCTION WITH MAGIC in the sentence that reads, "Apply 500gp towards the stronghold’s construction cost per wall of stone spell cast..." the word spell should not be highlighted in bold based on previous usage

Pg. 51 Under ARTILLERY AND SIEGE EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION, "The normal limits regarding construction sites not apply to artillery and siege equipment..." should read, "The normal limits regarding construction sites do not apply to artillery and siege equipment..."

Pg. 51 Under the "Spells Cast/Construction Effect" table spell-name highlighting in bold is applied inconsistently

bobloblah
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerDomains At War ContributorSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara ContributorLairs And Encounters BackerLairs And Encounters ContributorBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2013-03-22 16:16

Reading the Campaigns chapter, I see 1 2/3sp is being used consistently. Maybe "one 2/3sp" sould be better? I still find the original kludgy.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Reading over your comments, this really made your head hurt. You even ask at one point why a typical laborer makes less than an unskilled laborer.

The thing is, the value is: 1 2/3. As in 1 + 2/3. As in 5/3. As in 1.666. As in 1sp and 6.6cp.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Pages