Current Errata for True 20?

[Lord Lance]

Maybe just a maniac precisation...

Disguise, pag. 34 "Face in the crowd" and "Quick Change" (and other challenges). These challenges are written with the "a –5 penalty to your check", while many other challenges uses the "By accepting a +5 Difficulty modifier to your check" method. I think we need a steamlined description of the challenges (and i like the last one ).

[Arakor]

True20 Companion

Pg.27
Mentor Archetype lists "Desperation" as the 11th level ability in the table. However the text doesn't contain this but shows "Hidden Knowledge" instead.

Pg.28
Oracle Archetype lists "First", "Second", "Third" and "Fourth Revelation" in the table but the text only specifies "Revelation" and "Fourth Revelation".

Pg.48
Ability Decrease in the Racial Background section is listed as 2CP. If this is correct then the sample backgrounds are costing more than 3CP. The only way the sample backgrounds would fit is if the Ability Decrease is actually -2CP.

Pg.53
Is Autofire a Damage Type ?? Reverse-engineering the sample weapons seems to suggest that Auto-fire is a Trait to be added to Ranged Weapons for 1CP.

[True20Chick]

Maybe just a maniac precisation...

Disguise, pag. 34 "Face in the crowd" and "Quick Change" (and other challenges). These challenges are written with the "a –5 penalty to your check", while many other challenges uses the "By accepting a +5 Difficulty modifier to your check" method. I think we need a steamlined description of the challenges (and i like the last one ).

The difference is that Disguise is genrally an opposed roll rather than a check against a set Difficulty.

With opposed skill checks a Challenge reduces your total roll, thus making it potentially easier for your opponent to succeed over you.

With checks against a Difficulty a Challenge increases the total Difficulty, thus making it potentially more likely for you to fail.

The Challenge wording is consistent with other opposed rolls, such as Bluff, Intimidate, and Notice.

[Lord Lance]

Men, you are damn right. I wasn't thinking about that...

[Lord Lance]

I'm very lazy, so i'm asking to you if the new errata is online...

[True20Chick]

I haven't seen it posted yet. I can make PDF's and I have a version of the errata document with the OGL attached. I'll post it soon.

[Lord Lance]

Very cooool!

And, please, let me remind of these, if you can do da job :

Please, tell to the "formatting guys" to mark the new errata with a different color or some kind of symbol, so i can give a correction to my manuals without re-check all the old errata too!

[True20Chick]

I looked into doing that, and honestly there have been so many clarifications in the last few months that most of the text would be red.

I'll start doing that when new errata is added, but with the document as it now stands its just not practical. Sorry!

[True20Chick]

I've created a PDF that contains all up-to-date errata for True20, the True20 Bestiary, and the True20 Companion. It contains all of the errata and clarifications from the original PDF, as well as everything that has been added since then.

You can get it here:
http://members.aol.com/countrygrrlhere/True20Errata.pdf

Please note that this is not technically the "official" errata, as formatted and hosted by Green Ronin, although I have submitted to them the same document in MSWord format.

[Lord Lance]

In the Lantern descriptions under equipment, both have cone light. The second one should have the area illumination, not cone.

[True20Chick]

Where are you talking about? My core book has bullseye lanters giving a cone and hooded lanterns giving a radius

[Lord Lance]

In the rulebook:

Lantern, Hooded
A hooded lantern clearly illuminates a 30-foot radius and provides
shadowy illumination in a 60-foot radius. A cone emanates from a point
to the listed distance, where it is as wide as the cone is long. It burns for
6 hours on a pint of oil. You can carry a hooded lantern in one hand.

It's not a cone, it's a radius (you can see this difference in D&D 3.5).

Bye sweetie!

[True20Chick]

Sweetie?

That sentence is also in the description of the bullseye lantern, which does illuminate a cone. The description of the hooded lantern also clearly states that it illuminates a radius.

[cthughua]

He's Italian so it's okay right?

I think his point is that the bit about a cone appears in both the hooded and bullseye lantern descriptions when it should only appear in the bullseye entry, that qualifies it for errata.

[True20Chick]

Yes, as it's a repeated sentence in a description that doesn't require it.

I'll add it to my errata list, and update the PDF.

Edit: Done, including red text for newly added items.