Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rogueattorney" data-source="post: 8434118" data-attributes="member: 17551">The more time you spend with the RC, the more you’ll find subtle changes and omissions from the BECM. Several of these I think were unintentional.&nbsp; Some of the class progression charts reflect an earlier printing of the Companion rules.&nbsp; The m-u version of the Wish spell seems to have been copied over from the cleric version - intentional to make cleric and m-u versions the same, or done without realizing there was a difference?&nbsp; And so onYou’ll also find that several sections were taken from the “Black Box” Basic set that came out the year previous that often had significantly different wordings in rules. That’s the source of - for example - the inconsistency in the movement in combat rules.There are also several portions that came from the GAZ series of supplements. The non-weapon skills are a partial compilation of those found in the GAZs. The spell research rules are from the GAZs and are different from those found in BECM.And then there’s some completely new sections. The Mystic pc class is an adaptation of the Mystic npc “monster” from the Master box.So “errata” becomes a little bit of a loaded question, because there’s really no way of knowing which changes were intentional versus careless and also depends on the reader’s desire for fidelity with the BECM rules versus allowing the RC to be its own thing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rogueattorney, post: 8434118, member: 17551"] The more time you spend with the RC, the more you’ll find subtle changes and omissions from the BECM. Several of these I think were unintentional. Some of the class progression charts reflect an earlier printing of the Companion rules. The m-u version of the Wish spell seems to have been copied over from the cleric version - intentional to make cleric and m-u versions the same, or done without realizing there was a difference? And so on You’ll also find that several sections were taken from the “Black Box” Basic set that came out the year previous that often had significantly different wordings in rules. That’s the source of - for example - the inconsistency in the movement in combat rules. There are also several portions that came from the GAZ series of supplements. The non-weapon skills are a partial compilation of those found in the GAZs. The spell research rules are from the GAZs and are different from those found in BECM. And then there’s some completely new sections. The Mystic pc class is an adaptation of the Mystic npc “monster” from the Master box. So “errata” becomes a little bit of a loaded question, because there’s really no way of knowing which changes were intentional versus careless and also depends on the reader’s desire for fidelity with the BECM rules versus allowing the RC to be its own thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification