Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="John Cooper" data-source="post: 1814428" data-attributes="member: 24255">Originally posted by MerricB:So, nitpicking the nitpicker, huh?  Fair enough.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />You're absolutely right, MerricB.  I added those to the errata list because I had recalled seeing two Powerful Charge entries in the same monster's stat block, and I had thought at the time that they had been in both the Attack and Full Attack lines.  Turns out (as I double-checked after you posted your comment), it was the Protean Scourge that had the double Powerful Charge, and they both show up in the Attack line.  I should have gone back and verified that, or at least looked up the rules for Powerful Charge to refresh my memory on how it worked.Entirely my fault, and an embarrassing mistake at that.  I deleted those entries in my review (and left incriminating notes as to my errors - I'm not trying to "sweep them under the carpet"), and posted a comment on the review explaining there what I'm explaining here.  Naturally, this brings the number of monsters in Monster Manual III with problems with their stats down to 59 out of 162, or 36%.  A little better, but still not great.Incidentally, my own error rate for my review of Monster Manual III is 2 out of 61, or 3%.  I'll have to do much better than that in future!As for the "smash the phoera eggs" trick - yeah, that would work, too.  Note, however, that I didn't list that as an "error," just as something that I personally found a bit weird.</blockquote>

Verification