Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pugmire backer PDF errata

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pugmire backer PDF errata

    The Pugmire backer PDF is almost here! Use this thread to report typos or visual glitches. Please take discussion of content to other threads.


    Rose Bailey
    Onyx Path Development Producer
    Cavaliers of Mars Creator | Chronicles of Darkness Lead Developer

    Retired as forum administrator. Please direct inquiries to the Contact Us link.

  • #2
    On page 177, under the Ticking Rose Wonder, the second sentence says "Even if there are visible indications of time moving on..." I think, from the context, it is supposed to say "Even if there no visible indications of time moving on..."

    Comment


    • #3
      On page 169, in Yosha's sidebar about adding new spells, the second paragraph begins with "Cat magic isn't something I'm familiar with, so that will be covered in the book." I'm assuming from context that it's probably supposed to say something like "that will be covered in the Monarchies of Mau book."

      Comment


      • #4
        Don't know if double posting is still frowned upon in a a topic like this, but on page 191, in the description of the Mementomorian, it says "The Mementomorian claims the memory of dead dogs at its own" when it should say "as its own"

        Comment


        • #5
          (Some of these may not be applicable to post within this thread. I'll add them to a more appropriate thread once I finish my first check through the book. I just figured its best to put these concerns in a official thread rather than one that may not be monitored.)

          On Page 74, The 1st refinement for Trap Sense states that "She must make another attempt to bypass it if she doesn't have a legitimate means to deactivating it". Does this only apply if the ratter would come across this trap again after re-activating it or does this mean that to re-activate it you need to succeed a skill check?

          It's likely the first option but I think it could possibly be clarified a bit. Maybe something along the lines of "If the trap is encountered again after she re-activated it she must make another attempt to bypass..."

          The 2nd refinement also seems very vague. Can a ratter allow a ally to reroll ANY failed wisdom check that was rolled while in proximity of a trap or only failed wisdom checks to notice said trap. It should really only be the second example.

          For the 3rd refinement, if the user has both the 2nd and 3rd refinement does the target/s have to be the same or can a ratter target two different targets?

          (May not be relevant once I finish reading further.) On Page 75, the last improvement for Indomitable Will states that the Stray can use a stamina die to regain stamina points or spell slots, if she chooses. Strays cannot use spells, correct? So listing that may confuse people... UNLESS... And this excites me... Eddy took my advice to include a optional rule for cross learning tricks between callings later on in the book. That could certainly be awesome.

          On page 81, More of a suggestion in all honesty. I think unarmed attacks such as bites, punches and kicks should have the finesse property. At the moment making a monk like character is pretty difficult in terms of making them effective due to unarmed not scaling off dex and unarmored defense being changed to dex and con from str and con. I think we all can agree its more a flavor thing than a effective thing here. We have all seen martial artists who use their body in a very finesseful sort of way.

          On Page 95, The wording for Triumph is somewhat confusing. Does a triumph automatically do two times the maximum damage a character can deal or do you simply roll damage, double it, and then add any additional modifiers. It's likely the 2nd example but its a little inconsistent with how other similar effects word it. For example the Enlarge spell that directly states it doubles your dmg as well as when someone is weak to a damage type.

          On Page 101, It states that spellcasters must have an aptitude trick for whatever armor they are wearing or else they cannot cast spells at all. However, I can't find any section of the book that implies that characters can even wear armor they do not have an aptitude for. All of the defense calculations are listed within their respective aptitude tricks rather than in a general section. If dogs are intended to be able to wear armor they do not have the aptitude for with a negative this should be detailed somewhere. What are the benefits and negatives of doing so?

          On Page 103, Its states Bears Endurance gives the target temporary stamina points which are lost when the spell ends. Is this amount taken away at the end of the duration even if they took damage? Such as someone at 5 hp gaining 10 temporary and then losing 6 health. When the effect ends do they drop back to 5 hp or do they drop to 0?

          On Page 117, Magic Missile states that the missiles strike unerringly, even if the target is in melee combat. Is this a leftover from the 5th edition rules used in Pugmire? I do no see any rules regarding shooting into melee with ranged attacks within the rules. Perhaps shooting into melee rules are missing and were intended to be included.
          Last edited by Yig1015w; 02-10-2017, 05:39 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            p218, Yosha block references Seneschal Murra as her father, when every other mention of Murra remarks that he's her uncle.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Yig1015w View Post
              On page 81, More of a suggestion in all honesty. I think unarmed attacks such as bites, punches and kicks should have the finesse property. At the moment making a monk like character is pretty difficult in terms of making them effective due to unarmed not scaling off dex and unarmored defense being changed to dex and con from str and con. I think we all can agree its more a flavor thing than a effective thing here. We have all seen martial artists who use their body in a very finesseful sort of way.
              If they were, then DEX would be added to unarmed damage, effectively making everyone a "half martial artist" (save for the idea that monks in 5E do get a die - initially d4 but increases with level - of damage as a basis rather than 1 bludgeoning). The Unarmored Defense trick in Pugmire mirrors the same effect that 5E Barbarians get - monks get it as well but they sum DEX and WIS instead, which is more their idiom.

              Perhaps it could end up OK because the Ratters' Precise Attack trick no longer entails a finesse attack (the ranged option is pushed off into a Refinement), so that horse is out of the barn.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bigheadzach View Post

                If they were, then DEX would be added to unarmed damage, effectively making everyone a "half martial artist" (save for the idea that monks in 5E do get a die - initially d4 but increases with level - of damage as a basis rather than 1 bludgeoning). The Unarmored Defense trick in Pugmire mirrors the same effect that 5E Barbarians get - monks get it as well but they sum DEX and WIS instead, which is more their idiom.

                Perhaps it could end up OK because the Ratters' Precise Attack trick no longer entails a finesse attack (the ranged option is pushed off into a Refinement), so that horse is out of the barn.
                I think it simply comes down to the fact that currently unarmed attacks always do a single point of damage. Regardless if they get str or dex added to that dmg it is still weaker than simply having a weapon. The only two exceptions to this is the alter self spell and the oversized paws trick. Paws makes it the equivalent of a dagger and alter self is a spell so it makes sense its a bit stronger. I do agree it feels a little odd in concept that anyone is capable of using their unarmed strikes in a finessful way but at the same time it does make sense that anyone even wanting to make an unarmed attack is likely going to do with whatever is most natural to them, str or dex.

                However, if a monk class is intended to be added in a future supplement then I can understand not making this an official change. It would reduce the options they could give to monks in the future to make it a broad change now. I think I'll simply houserule it as such until a more fitting class comes along to emulate those types of characters and then convert any characters who wanted that monk archetype to the more fitting class.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Page 202 - Rondo Border-Collie is called Ronda in the very first sentence of the paragraph about him.

                  I just got my PDF printed and in its new 3-ringed binder, so i'll start giving it a read through and let you know if I find anything else. Also, do you want individual posts for each thing we find, or should we just edit our own post and keep adding to it?
                  Last edited by Harp0; 02-10-2017, 07:11 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Pg. 40: Add "two-pawed" to the small crossbow's list of qualities in the rucksack section.

                    Pg. 60: In the last sentence of the descriptive text, the word "are" is missing between "outside of it" and "willing".

                    Pg. 61: The last sentence in the 2nd descriptive paragraph noting the adoption of "Mutt" as a family name is redundant. The "Example family names" section just below it explains exactly the same thing.

                    Pg. 64: Delete the extra full stop at the end of the first main paragraph mentioning the ability score numbers.

                    Pg. 68: In the first sentence of "Martial Weapon Aptitude", "attack" should be "attacks".

                    Pg. 81: Small crossbow. Needs the "two-pawed" quality added.
                    Pg. 81: It's cool that you adopted nearly all the suggested tweaks and changes I put forward for weapons during the playtesting, but a couple others need addressing:
                    * The Dart has the same stats as the dagger, but cannot be used in melee and doesn't count as light making it woefully inferior. As darts were rarely ever used as weapons beyond the Roman plumbata and Greek kestros (which was thrown with a sling anyway), you're better off just ditching it. Potentially replace it with:
                    One-Paw Crossbow (ammunition, ranged 20/60, light, loading) 1d6 piercing damage

                    If you go this route, you need to replace the "dart" on pg. 68 under "Simple Weapon Aptitude" with "one-paw crossbow".

                    * The Trident is *exactly* the same as the common spear as presented, but is also a Martial Weapon, so essentially it's another inferior choice. Again, never really used outside of the Retiarius gladiator in Rome, so probably worth removing. Replace it with the much more likely Longspear (aka a Pike or Doru) as very long spear-like weapons were used throughout history in phalanx and pike formations, as well as to hunt more dangerous prey in some nations. It makes makes a nice counterpart to the glaive and halberd and step-up from the simple spear. Use these stats:
                    Longspear (reach, two-pawed) 1d10 piercing damage

                    If you go this route, you need to replace the "tridents" on pg. 68 under "Martial Weapon Aptitude" with "longspears".

                    Pg. 83: Yosha's example says that Alistair is not a fast dog and that he only has Speed of 30/40. That's incorrect: he's a Runner with the Speedy Runner trick so he is a fast dog and his Speed is actually 35/50.

                    Pg. 108: Elemental Wall, 2nd main para, 2nd sentence, delete the comma after "stone" before "or force".

                    Pg. 168: Cross-Calling Tricks. Delete "to" between "might" and "try" in the first sentence.

                    Pg. 181: Stray Vagabond: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 183: Blind Dire Rodent: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 184: Nefarious Necromancer: "Spot" should be "Notice".
                    Pg. 184: Assistant of Labo Tor: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 185: Smoldering Chemist: "Spot" should be "Notice".
                    Pg. 185: Illuminated of Re-Ser-Char: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 186: Demon Hound: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 187: Major Demon: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 188: Tenacious Zealot: "Spot" should be "Notice".
                    Pg. 188: Powerful Warrior: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 190: Careful Warrior: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 193: Shadow Feline: "Spot" should be "Notice".
                    Pg. 193: Tormented Spirit: "Spot" should be "Notice".

                    Pg. 194: Two-Headed Giant. Stamina Points should be 128 as it’s a Huge, Con +4, CR8 opponent.

                    Pg. 195: Whisperwood Ancient: "Spot" should be "Notice".
                    Last edited by Jargogle Bamboozle; 02-20-2017, 06:20 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Yig1015w View Post
                      On Page 117, Magic Missile states that the missiles strike unerringly, even if the target is in melee combat. Is this a leftover from the 5th edition rules used in Pugmire? I do no see any rules regarding shooting into melee with ranged attacks within the rules. Perhaps shooting into melee rules are missing and were intended to be included.
                      I'd be in favour of ditching the reference to striking "even if the target is in melee combat". It keeps things more streamlined and simple and as this is about "heroic dogs", let's let them be heroic and shoot, etc. into melee without being penalised. It gives the archers a chance to shine as much as melee masters and the fewer special cases anyone needs to consider, the better.
                      Last edited by Jargogle Bamboozle; 02-15-2017, 02:28 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Yig1015w View Post
                        On Page 103, Its states Bears Endurance gives the target temporary stamina points which are lost when the spell ends. Is this amount taken away at the end of the duration even if they took damage? Such as someone at 5 hp gaining 10 temporary and then losing 6 health. When the effect ends do they drop back to 5 hp or do they drop to 0?
                        If we assume any powers/rules not explicitly granted by the book to Pugmire are by default presumed to be 5E compliant, then taking 6 damage would reduce the temp HP to 4. When the effect ends, all temp HP are lost, and the character is still at 5 HP.

                        Temporary HP can be thought of like an ablative shield (like in the game Halo) that damage is applied to first. When given temp HP, you either have that amount in total or keep whatever temp HP you had (they do not stack and can't be recharged, just set to a new value). They don't affect your actual health condition in any way, except in the case of being already unconscious and dying, they could protect you from having your death saves auto-failed, and from receiving enough damage beyond 0 that you die instantly. If you were unconscious and stable, if the damage you took didn't exceed your temp HP, you would remain stable.

                        Actual healing effects do not affect temporary HP in any way - the only thing the two numbers have in common is they absorb damage you receive.
                        Last edited by bigheadzach; 02-13-2017, 12:10 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Jargogle Bamboozle View Post
                          Pg. 81: Small crossbow. Needs the "two-pawed" quality added.
                          It seems to me that the small crossbow is intended to be a hand held crossbow. It's listed in the premade ratter's backpack without the two-pawed tag as well.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Personally deleted to reduce clutter.
                            Last edited by Jargogle Bamboozle; 02-16-2017, 03:22 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Jargogle Bamboozle View Post

                              I think it's a "light crossbow" in D&D parlance; it does a lot more damage than a pistol crossbow would (only one step below a standard heavy military crossbow, and more than a shortbow) and has a range much longer too (equal to a shortbow). A pistol crossbow wouldn't do more than 1d4 damage, would have mediocre range, and would likely have the light quality (as it could be fired easily from an off-paw). Finally, it has the "loading" quality, which the weaker, quicker-to-use pistol crossbow wouldn't. So, a One-Paw Crossbow might look like this:

                              One-Paw Crossbow (ammunition, ranged 20/60, light) 1d4 piercing damage
                              Seems reasonable, although your proposed stats for the One-Paw Crossbow looks an awful lot like just a normal dagger. Id suspect atleast 30 or 40 for the base range, 1d6, loading, and probably would make it exclusive to martial. I think keeping the loading even when its a 1h gives it that unique niche that a side arm single shot pistol would provide.Giving it light would certainly be interesting in the hands of a Guardian though with their two weapon fighting trick. Still odd to me that Ratter's seem counterproductive to dual wielding though.

                              (Martial) One-Paw Crossbow (ammunition, ranged, 40/160, light, loading) 1d6 piercing damage.
                              Last edited by Yig1015w; 02-14-2017, 11:59 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X