Stomp the typo / Errata & FAQ

[Pesky]

I think I found a misprint in the MM effects table. Result 00 says to roll 4d20 twice. I'm pretty sure this is supposed to be 5d20.

I think that "Roll again twice, but instead of rolling d%, roll 4d20 modified by the wizard’s Luck adjustment (in increments of 10%)" is intended; however, I'll check with Joseph to be sure. There are places in the book where patterns are intentionally broken, and ambiguities are maintained. This may be one of them. Of course, you are free to adjust as you see fit. If you feel that 00 should be better than 99, then perhaps change it to 4d20 + 20; this way you shift the mean out of the "No Effect" zone. I'll respond back here once I get an answer.

[Pesky]

@jon_lollard, here is Joseph's response regarding 4d20, "It’s deliberate. It’s just a weird result…after all, it’s on a table about weird magic." With that being said, don't forget the rulebook's first admonition, "The judge is always right. Let the rules bend to you, not the other way around."

[Pesky]

For those of us still finding typos, note that the Goodman Games website now has this official Stomp the Typo submission form (note the preceding text is a hyperlink). Posting here is still appreciated so that we can all be notified of the errors, but the website form is probably more efficient for notifying Goodman Games directly.

[seanskispeth]

Re: the 7th printing. Is there anywhere that lists the changes from the 4th printing. I noticed the addition to pg. 106 which is pretty major:

"When your character casts a spell, you roll 1d20 and add your caster level, and apply your luck modifier. This is called a spell check. You also add your Personality modifier if you are a cleric or your Intelligence modifier if you are a wizard. Wizards also apply modifiers for wearing bulky armor [...], and there may be other modifiers specific to certain situations."

Has anyone noticed any other big changes with this printing? Also, does anyone play this way with adding the Luck mod for spell checks? Has this been added because of the Fleeting Luck rule from Lankhmar?

[Pesky]

Re: the 7th printing. Is there anywhere that lists the changes from the 4th printing. I noticed the addition to pg. 106 which is pretty major:

"When your character casts a spell, you roll 1d20 and add your caster level, and apply your luck modifier. This is called a spell check. You also add your Personality modifier if you are a cleric or your Intelligence modifier if you are a wizard. Wizards also apply modifiers for wearing bulky armor [...], and there may be other modifiers specific to certain situations."

Has anyone noticed any other big changes with this printing? Also, does anyone play this way with adding the Luck mod for spell checks? Has this been added because of the Fleeting Luck rule from Lankhmar?

There is not a published change log printing by printing. Regarding your citation, you'll find that it is contradicted (in that Luck is not part of the spell check) elsewhere in the rules. For example, on p. 28 of the 7th printing, "The spell check is made like any other check: roll1d20 + Personality modifier + caster level." Luck is not included. Sometimes there are contradictions that encourage the reader to "fear no rule" (see Admonitions on p. 314). I've found that most people do not include Luck with the spell check, unless a cleric is turning unholy. Regardless, play it how you like, but be careful in assuming it is "RAW." Hope that helps!

[seanskispeth]

There is not a published change log printing by printing. Regarding your citation, you'll find that it is contradicted (in that Luck is not part of the spell check) elsewhere in the rules. For example, on p. 28 of the 7th printing, "The spell check is made like any other check: roll1d20 + Personality modifier + caster level." Luck is not included. Sometimes there are contradictions that encourage the reader to "fear no rule" (see Admonitions on p. 314). I've found that most people do not include Luck with the spell check, unless a cleric is turning unholy. Regardless, play it how you like, but be careful in assuming it is "RAW." Hope that helps!

Totally agree 100% about not being chained to RAW. I was more just curious about why it was added at all. I guess I'd like to understand the rationale before I decide it's not right for my table.

[Vort]

Not sure if this is a typo, but it seems odd or I'm misinterpreting something. In DCC Lankhmar's "Compendium of Secret Knowledge", page 30, under "Black and White Magic" is the following:

Black magicians are more prone to horrible corruption and roll on the next higher corruption table when struck by casting misfortune. If the Greater Corruption Table is already being rolled on, the caster applies a -2 modifier to his die roll.

If the magicians are "MORE prone to horrible corruption", shouldn't the caster apply a +2 modifier (not minus) to the roll, as higher rolls are worse?

[Pesky]

I'm not certain of the original intent, but for the Nehwonian Greater Corruption (p. 28 of Compendium) there are still some vicious results for low rolls (results 1 and 5, for example). So, a -2 isn't necessarily welcome.

[Vort]

I'm not certain of the original intent, but for the Nehwonian Greater Corruption (p. 28 of Compendium) there are still some vicious results for low rolls (results 1 and 5, for example). So, a -2 isn't necessarily welcome.

Haha! You're right, most of the results aren't that welcoming! In the spirit of the corruption tables, higher usually seems worse, so that's why it seemed odd to me. But, maybe it's just my perception of the tables.