On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 8:06 AM, James Durrant <james.durrant@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
described
To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [projectaon] 24rw Errata
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2016 17:14:12 +0100
Rune War Section 63 says that your boat has provisions amounting to a
feast. Yet, in section 88, you are instructed to eat a backpack meal,
though the boat has not been looted. Section 138 confirms that you use
your provisions to make breakfast the next morning.
(See <https://www.projectaon.org/en/svg/lw/24rw.svgz> )
(88 --> 138)
so: We could either footnote this discrepancy, or change the wording:
(er) 8: Before you go to sleep, unless you possess the Discipline of
Grand Huntmastery, you must eat a Meal or lose 3 ENDURANCE points. ->
Before you go to sleep, you sate your hunger from the provisions
provided for your voyage. [so: or similar.]
I'll start by saying I'm somewhat neutral - but I would like to defend the
original.
"Unexpected feast" is clearly flavour text. If these are clawing, feral
creatures, then any untainted food - even a small amount - can be
as a feast.basis
Presumably, the remains content of the boat would eventually form the
for provisions.food,
Also backed up by "arrived too late..." - if there were an abundance of
it would not disappear entirely so quickly.
I will caveat that I only skimmed the sections - maybe surrounding content
sheds more light?
-----
Rune War Section 214: This isn't a language error, but the player should
have been given the opportunity to use the Eye of Lhaz (found in a
previous book) here.
so: Hmm. We have made a change in 27v Section 70 to add "or an Eye of
Lhaz" to an option regarding Animal Mastery, which necessitated a change
to the text of the subsequent section too. Since we've done this in Book
27, I think we should do this in Book 24 also. So I propose:
(er) 214: If you possess Animal Mastery and wish to use it -> If you
possess Animal Mastery or an Eye of Lhaz and wish to use it
(er) 96: Drawing upon your Grand Master skill, you command -> You
command [so: and explain why this change was made in the Errata entry.]
Makes sense to me.