WOIN New WOIN errata?

I'm a bit surprised to see it, but the main WOIN errata page seems to have been updated with no announcement here in the forums. Rather than the older (perhaps partly out of date?) PDF errata documents, there's now just a few text rule updates. But those updates are not ones I've seen anywhere before:


  • Damage. When exchanging attack dice for damage, you may do so at a 1:1 exchange rate.
  • CHARGE! Usually a basic “charge” is a move and then an attack. However, any character may pay 2d6 once per round to move and attack in one action. The Charge! universal exploit allows you to move and attack with one action, once per round, without paying 2d6. In both cases the character rmust move at least 10’ in a straight line and every square they enter must be closer to the target than the previous square.
  • Assisting. Anybody can use an action to assist another and add 1d6 (cumulative with multiple assistants) to another’s roll. The GM will decide who can assist and how many people can assist. Usually breaking down a door is a max of two people.
  • REPUTATION. REP starts at 3, not 0.
  • Critical Hits. Three 6s is an automatic hit. Three 6s which would also have normally hit is a critical hit.
  • Armour. The following SOAKs apply:
    • Natural SOAK protects against falling, acid, and liquid-based damage.
    • Armour SOAK does not protect against falling or acid damage, or against gas or liquid-based damage.
    • Psychic damage is only SOAKed where specified.

I really like all of these changes! The 1:1 exchange rate for attack to damage dice is going to be a very big deal, and making three sixes always a hit, even if the roll does beat the target's defense is a good way to give at least a slim hope of hitting even very high defense targets. I suspect the new Charge rule will make my melee character very happy, as his action economy is otherwise very bad (and taking an exploit to make it suck less has always seemed like a lousy option).

I'd also be curious to know if the changes to some of the core races that are also in the the Galactic Sentients Catalog should be considered errata. The ones I noticed were that humans get an extra exploit (instead of the often-changed explorers exploit), and Androids get an extra upgrade (from an expanded list, and without seeming to lose anything).
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
The old errata is all in v1.2 of the books, so it’s redundant now.

The GSG is the latest version of those races, so they take precedence.
 

Len

Prodigal Member
To be clear, these errata apply to O.L.D. 1.2, right?

We're due to start our O.L.D. campaign tomorrow, based on the 1.2 draft rules - this is timely!

( [MENTION=36055]Woundweaver[/MENTION] take a look )
 
Last edited:

Flips

Explorer
I am still concerned that just needing 3 sixes for a guaranteed hit trivializes high defenses at higher levels. Once you have a dice pool of 12 (through skills/attributes/equipment/bonuses) the target's defense is irrelevant 1/3 of the time. For a party of 6 that is 2 guaranteed hits, on average, every round, where they also deal a critical effect.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I am still concerned that just needing 3 sixes for a guaranteed hit trivializes high defenses at higher levels. Once you have a dice pool of 12 (through skills/attributes/equipment/bonuses) the target's defense is irrelevant 1/3 of the time. For a party of 6 that is 2 guaranteed hits, on average, every round, where they also deal a critical effect.
Dang, that’s a grade 78 character minimum!
 

Len

Prodigal Member
Oh hey, my character now has a bigger reputation than his animal companion! :)
 

Taralan

Villager
The 1:1 dice exchange errata seems like the more fundamental change. I am curious to see what warranted this change now ? Combat took too long maybe and this is a good way for higher grade character to deal quickly with lower level threats ?
 

Flips

Explorer
Dang, that’s a grade 78 character minimum!
Or Grade 11 (8d6) with some strategic bonuses and exploits (high ground, aim, flank/xfire, point blank shot, jouster, luck) gets you to 11d6 or 12d6 pretty easily. I am not saying it is guaranteed to get you there all the time, but it not unlikely to come up. Maybe this is exactly as intended, but if a party of 11th grade characters can generally ignore the fact that their enemy has 100+ DEF, it worries me.

Other than scaling up the number of 6s required (like half your pool, min 3) I am not sure that there is a solution. I think an early draft was like this.
 

easl

Explorer
Other than scaling up the number of 6s required (like half your pool, min 3) I am not sure that there is a solution. I think an early draft was like this.
You could simply add an exploit. E.g.:
Hard to Kill (requires Agi or Str 15): opponents now need four 6's on a roll to gain a critical on you.
 

Flips

Explorer
You could simply add an exploit. E.g.:
Hard to Kill (requires Agi or Str 15): opponents now need four 6's on a roll to gain a critical on you.
yes, if all high level enemies have that, it will help. having all of your players need to get it is harder, but having the monsters stack up the bonuses on players is less likely.
 

Len

Prodigal Member
Knee-jerk reaction: I like beginning characters having Reputation 0, conceptually. With this change, Rep 0-2 must represent only the peasant farmer who never comes into town.
I think it works OK for most character backgrounds, if you rationalize the REP as being spread out over the 5 starting careers and not something they were born with.

I do like that you won't have most characters getting "Nondescript" as their low-attribute trait choice. The other low-attribute traits will show up now.

We did have to house-rule that one PC in our group can have the Nondescript trait because Morrus changed the rule and invalidated his character concept, the day before we started the campaign. :D

But anyway if you look too closely at things like this you can come up with all sorts of nagging questions, like why does it take elves 4-5 times as long as humans to learn 2 skills & an exploit. :) You just have to shrug and chalk it up to "game reasons".
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
But anyway if you look too closely at things like this you can come up with all sorts of nagging questions, like why does it take elves 4-5 times as long as humans to learn 2 skills & an exploit. :) You just have to shrug and chalk it up to "game reasons".
Simple. They aren't in any rush!
 

Advertisement

Top