Tome of Horrors - Evil Nitpicker at work!

[Alzrius]

Re: Therianthropes

The Ability Score block for all therianthropes lists two separate sets of scores for animal/hybrid form and for humanoid form.

But the Alternate Form quality description reads "In humanoid form . . . [ the therianthrope] keeps its ability score."

Also, the introduction to the Therianthrope template states that "a slain therianthrope reverts to its animal form," but each example Therianthrope states that the creature does not revert to its natural form when killed.

As an extra note to that, "therianthrope" is the correct term for "werecreature". Werewolves, werebears, wererats, etc., are all therianthropes (its easy to determine this, since lycanthrope comes from the Greek lykos (wolf) and anthropinos (human), so you replace lykos with therio (beast) to get therianthrope which means people who can become beasts).

Since that section of the ToH was full of "creatureweres" (the opposite of werecreatures), they should instead have been listed as "antherions" (anthropinos followed by therio, meaning beasts who can become people).

 

[Gez]

Thanks for all your interest and input. And make sure to visit the official errate link that "Chick" posted above. Of course, if you find new stuff, come to our boards and post new findings.

Of course, when I found something that seems not right, I check the errata threads and PDF before posting it. But I have some problems with loging on EZboards.

By the way, I found another possible mistake, in the Fen Witch (who rocks, by the way -- between them and the hags in the MM and CC, my players are going to suffer when they'll find some covey):

Page 135, Fen Witch: The mind probe ability don't works on creatures without Int score, or with Int score of 1 or less. Which is not possible, since creatures can't have Int 0 (outside of draining effects that makes them comatose and helpless anyway).
I think this should read "Creatures with an Intelligence score of 2 or less and creatures with no Intelligence score" rather. In other words, creature with animal- or vermin-level Intelligence are unaffected.

 

[Knight Otu]

I think I noticed something else...

The lesser shadow has 1d12 HD, but 11 hp. It should only have 6.

 

[Gez]

Page 117, Draug. It has 6 HD and a listed advancement range of 6--15 HD. I guess it was initially meant to be a 5 HD creature, and then tweaked to 6 HD. It's advancement should be changed to 7--18 HD (or, at the very least, 7--15, but tripling is more standard).

 

[Gez]

I just wanted to thank everyone here for your continued input. While we try to do our best in making our products, we dont have the staff of WotC. And ToH is a monstrous book (in many ways, but I mean size and scope). So your comments and errata are amazingly helpful--besides just being fun discussions about monster design.

When will there be an update of the errata ?

Thanks for all your interest and input. And make sure to visit the official errata link that "Chick" posted above. Of course, if you find new stuff, come to our boards and post new findings.

EZboards don't like me... I prefer to post there. If that thread isn't valid, maybe someone who may successfully log in on EZB may repost errata suggestions there ?

My list:

66: Shaggy demodands are the greater relative of slime demodands.
117: Draug advancement is 7--18.
135: Fen Witch's mind probe ability affects only creature with Int score of 3 or more.
231: Skulk should get darkvision.

 

[BOZ]

i'm thinking that when the official set of rules for 3.5e comes out (and not just the tidbits we've seen sneaking in here and there in various books and magazines), we're going to need to put out a little PDF for the tome of horrors, as well as giving the CC a complete overhaul. since the three of us tend to be pretty busy, we'll probably have to put out a call for help (HELP!) to whoever wants to give some input on getting that done. it's a BIG project to go through all of that.

i forget who it was, but i remember reading an article by one of the 3.5e designers who warned that you should really wait to see the whole product before you start monkeying with things, and that's good enough for me. no sense in jumping the gun!

 

[Knight Otu]

we'll probably have to put out a call for help (HELP!) to whoever wants to give some input on getting that done. it's a BIG project to go through all of that.

s you know, I already (sort of) volunteered.

i forget who it was, but i remember reading an article by one of the 3.5e designers who warned that you should really wait to see the whole product before you start monkeying with things, and that's good enough for me.

Certainly good advice. I still stat out monsters according to the 3E rules, but I must admit that I add lines that use the rules that we more or less know from R3E (for example, 1 line for Skills according to 3E, and one according to R3E). Guess I'm a bit fast.

 

[BOZ]

oh, i know what you mean, it's not a bad thing. scott and i (dunno bout erica) are in that sort of "transitional phase" as well. just look at some of my recent conversions, or the vuore, there are some things in there that are not standard 3E... but like i said in the above post, it will all need a serious overhaul later... some of it won't need much, but some (like shapechangers and beasts) will need a lot of work. all my pleistocene animals will become exactly that, animals, for example.