Leatherbound Core Rulebooks - Do They Have Errata?

[John Cooper]

Then again, perhaps not: http://www.enworld.org/reviews.php?do=review&reviewid=3256627

 

[Whimsical]

Of course you could simply treat your gaming books like a text book and mark it up with errata in the margins, then highlighted.

I hate to tell you this, but they are not mint condition anymore. Might as well do what you want with them.

 

[Aluvial]

Would you say there is enough errata to make the purchase worthwhile?

I don't think if you bought them just for the errata it would be worth it.

But if you bought them for the quality of the book, the feel of soft leather in your hands, nice gilded? pages, and a colored bookmark (red for PH, blue for DMG, green for the MM).

I just love running the game out of these books. Sure, the others have all of the rules and work just fine, bu these are great. And, page references are most often the same.

Very sweet books for the game. Quality made.

Oh yeah, errata is in, at least a bunch of it.

Aluvial

 

[Ranger REG]

Can anyone tell me which of the three special edition 3.5e core rulebooks (leather bound) have errata not found in the regular editions?

All of them contains the errata up until they were printed.

Errata that popped later (like the reversal decision of the polymorph rule) have not been incorporated.

 

[Deset Gled]

IIRC, the leatherbound books also contains stealth errata that was not officially released or changed in the SRD. The example that I distinctly remember is that the leatherbound books say that "most bard spells hava a verbal component" where the SRD says "every bard spell has a verbal component".

For the record, stealth errata (also rampant in the Spell Compendium) really pisses me off.