Cambion: Worst writeup ever?

[der_kluge]

If we want to talk about glaring errors, the Balor has 0 ranks in Sense Motive. ZERO.

Paladin: "Hey, your shoe is untied!"
Balor: *looks down*
Paladin: *attacks flat-footed Balor*
Balor: "D'oh! I fall for that every freaking time!"

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

If we want to talk about glaring errors, the Balor has 0 ranks in Sense Motive. ZERO.

Paladin: "Hey, your shoe is untied!"
Balor: *looks down*
Paladin: *attacks flat-footed Balor*
Balor: "D'oh! I fall for that every freaking time!"

Glaring error? I can see that being an omission or oversight, but error...nah. No rules were broken. Sorry dk, the Cambion had actual errors in it.

 

[Nikosandros]

Boy, do I respect honesty -- and I can certainly deal a lot better with an honest error. Thanks!

Well said, I really appreciate this kind of honesty. I must also say that I'm quite disappointed with WotC for this one... rushing the manuscript and failing to properly develop edit is a fault on their end...

 

[edbonny]

So is someone going to step up to the plate and write up the Cambion as it should have been?

How about a Wizards "Rewrite the Cambion" Contest? The winner's write-up replaces the current one on the website.

 

[rom90125]

that is a great idea. I will sit back and judge...

 

[Razz]

If we want to talk about glaring errors, the Balor has 0 ranks in Sense Motive. ZERO.

Paladin: "Hey, your shoe is untied!"
Balor: *looks down*
Paladin: *attacks flat-footed Balor*
Balor: "D'oh! I fall for that every freaking time!"

Did you forget that you add your base attack bonus to a Sense Motive roll to oppose Bluff checks made to feint in combat?

 

[Delta]

The truth is, I screwed this up due to haste, and I had a misguided desire to fit in the cambion as a nod to Planescape. As best I can tell , it was a quick rip from 2e that I meant to develop and lost track of.

I salute your honesty and taking responsibility for this! Truly a breath of fresh air, and it's so much better knowing the simple backstory than being left with a mystery. Thank you!

 

[delericho]

The truth is, I screwed this up due to haste,

As others have said, I applaud your honesty. Incidentally, you might consider mooting a "Design & Development" "Monster Makeover" column for this monster, thus fixing the problem?

I wrote Expedition to the Demonweb Pits under a very, very tight deadline, and worked very hard to deliver the best manuscript possible in the timeframe.

I haven't yet read the whole, but the chapters I have read are very good indeed. And, given the choice, I absolutely would prefer the effort be applied to the adventure part rather than the 'extras', so good call there.

There is, however, one oddity in the structure that bothers me (spoilers ahead): Much of the adventure relies on the party

Spoiler

working for Rule-of-Three,

and yet the first encounter in the Sigil section

Spoiler

has the PCs strongly warned against trusting him

. Surely that runs a huge risk of derailing the adventure right there? Would you care to shed some light on that decision?