KotS FAQ up at WotC

[Chowder]

I salute WotC for aggressively providing errata for KotS. I'm still disappointed in the editing (and agree with prior comments that leaving out the half-elf ability to save space is insane), but very pleased that the company has quickly responded to customer questions and issues.

Hoping that not much errata is required for the core rulebooks,
-Chowder

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Heh. The FAQ has an error:

It says that the rules for Bullrush are not in the module.

They are not on Page 38, where it firsts mentions the act in the Tactics section,

but the ARE on Page 65 in the Features of the Area section.

The rules are:

[sblock]Bull Rush: To attempt a bullrush, make a Strength vs Fortitude attack. If the Attack succeeds, push the target 1 square and move into the vacated square.

No mention of the action type, which is obviously Standard, and none of provoking Opportunity Attacks, so I would assume it doesn't.
[/sblock]

Fitz

 

[Family]

Kudos guys. I now owe you a solid. feal free to call in that chit anytime.

 

[djdaidouji]

Hoping that not much errata is required for the core rulebooks,
-Chowder

PG 1: In the second paragraph, replace "Pole Raying game" with "Role Playing game."
PG 29: Replace the Fighter power "Magic Missile" with the power below. Fighters do not actually have Magic Missile.

 

[Family]

Whoa... I think it's awesome that you can call a customer service line for D&D questions... For once I think this would be a CS job that wouldn't totally suck...

If I ever get to pitch a sitcom to a major studio this is it...

 

[ForbidenMaster]

I can understand errors, considering they were either working on the rules and the module at the same time or rushing to get the module together immediately after the rules were finalized. But leaving out the half-elf's best racial ability on purpose to save space is kind of a WTFer.

So you think they should have listed every single class's at will power? Why not just throwing the rest of the PHB as well? They were trying to go for a pick up and play, no modifying what so ever, sort of experience. Including a power that says "choose" and then not being able to choose IMO is worse then just not having the power listed.

 

[Bishmon]

So you think they should have listed every single class's at will power? Why not just throwing the rest of the PHB as well? They were trying to go for a pick up and play, no modifying what so ever, sort of experience. Including a power that says "choose" and then not being able to choose IMO is worse then just not having the power listed.

So I'm assuming you think they should have left out everyone's ability scores, powers, equipment, trained skills, and feats, right?

I mean, come on, they're pre-gens. 'Not choosing' comes with the territory. Up until this point, 'not getting all your abilities' wasn't part of the territory.

 

[pweent]

So you think they should have listed every single class's at will power?

YES.

Or at least not included all of every character's powers with the exception of the half-elf.

They were trying to go for a pick up and play, no modifying what so ever, sort of experience. Including a power that says "choose" and then not being able to choose IMO is worse then just not having the power listed.

The character sheet should not have said, "Choose a power" any more than the character sheet should have said "Pick a bonus feat" for the human. The should have simply picked a power and put it on.

Simplification is all well and good, but as has been pointed out above, dropping a complete power for space reasons is not an adequate solution, compared to designing the character differently if necessary so that the complete character could fit. That said, I do greatly appreciate the corrections made in the FAQ.

 

[pawsplay]

I can't help it... every time I hear the title, I think, "Sheep on the Meadowlands."

 

[pukunui]

Where is this FAQ? The OP's link does not work for me and I don't see it on the WotC website anywhere ...