Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In the Actual play example, pg. 352, right hand column in the middle:

DIANA - ..."I'm going to hurl flame at the wounded bandit and use a level of Effort to increase the damage to 5.."

From page 53 "Bears a Halo of Fire": "Hurl Flame (2 intellect points....short range that deals 4 points of damage"

And, with effort applied to damage being +3 points that would make 7 points of damage, minus 1 point for the armor of the bandits. So shouldn't it be 6 points of damage, not 5 as Diana mentions?

Also, the next action by BRUCE (same page as above) He rolls a 10 on his bow shot. Did he somehow lower the target number (12 for a lvl 4 bandit) to get a hit on that roll?

I'm sure this was well edited so I must be missing something!

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

Page 22 states

Instead of applying Effort to reduce the difficulty of your attack, you can apply Effort to increase the amount of damage you inflict with an attack. For each level of Effort you apply in this way, you inflict 3 additional points of damage. This works for any kind of attack that inflicts damage...

and page 53 states, for "Shroud of Flame"

At your command, your entire body becomes shrouded in flames that last up to ten minutes. The fire doesn’t burn you, but it automatically inflicts 2 points of damage to anyone who tries to touch you or strike you with a melee attack. Flames from another source can still hurt you. While the shroud is active, you gain +2 points of Armor that protect only against damage from fire from another source. Enabler.

Looks like you found an errata in the manual, with the example using the action "Hurl Flame" but with the damage of "Shroud of Flame".

As for your second question, it looks like either a mistake or a silent decision by the GM to make the roll succeed. I'd say a mistake.

share|improve this answer
    
That seems very possible, but it's a difficult answer to accept. Still, it's entirely possible as an explanation. –  Emrakul Nov 21 '13 at 4:35
    
I asked Monte and Shanna on g+. I'll post here if they clarify this. –  Adriano Varoli Piazza Nov 21 '13 at 10:55
    
@dijon I saw your question at ninthworldhub.com/forum/topics/… . I added these points to the errata thread. Sadly, even the best can go wrong. –  Adriano Varoli Piazza Nov 21 '13 at 16:41

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.