Jump to content



Photo

EotE Core Rulebook Errata


  • Please log in to reply
269 replies to this topic

#241 ianinak

ianinak

    Member

  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 13 February 2014 - 12:55 AM

Oops, sorry I missed that this was Core Rule Book ONLY,  Deleting my post.


Edited by ianinak, 13 February 2014 - 01:01 AM.


#242 Raistlinrox

Raistlinrox

    Member

  • Members
  • 178 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 06:34 AM

Was the 8 Resilience for Hutts ever answered?  Need that info for tonight's game.  Thanks guys!


  • Josep Maria likes this

#243 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,444 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 05:25 AM

The description for the YT-1300 indicates that it only comes standard with a dorsal turret-mounted medium laser but the stats indicate that it has one dorsal turret-mounted medium laser and one ventral turret-mounted medium laser. Which is correct for the basic version of the ship that PCs can start with?

I finally got an answer back regarding this simple issue, here it goes

 

My Question:

On page 264 of the EotE core rule book, under the description of the YT-1300 light freighter it is stated
"In their factory configuration, a rarity among such
versatile and easily modifiable ships, the YT-1 300 is
relatively well armored and is equipped with a small
but powerful shield generator. It mounts only one
weapon, a medium laser cannon on the dorsal gun
mount, (...)"

So only one weapon, but then on the ship's profile
"Weapons: One Dorsal and One Ventral Turret Mounted Medium Laser Cannon (Fire Arc All; Damage 6; Critical 3; Range [Close])."

There are two.

Which is correct? the description or the stats block?

Kind regards,
Yepes

 The answer:

Hello sir,

 
The stats block is correct.
 
Hope this helps!
 
Sam Stewart
Senior RPG Producer
Fantasy Flight Games

The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#244 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,073 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 05:29 AM

In almost every case where stat block conflicts with fluff text, FFG seems to favor the stat block.


Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#245 DVeight

DVeight

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 05:14 AM

For logical reason. The YT-1300 is meant for a larger group of players and makes sense to have dorsal and ventral mounted on the ship. This brings in two players that can mount the weapons and shoot. Up to two could pilot and two could assist with emergency repairs.

 

Makes perfect sense. Keeps the narrative going and the players active.


  • Tear44 likes this

#246 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,073 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:10 AM

For logical reason. The YT-1300 is meant for a larger group of players and makes sense to have dorsal and ventral mounted on the ship. This brings in two players that can mount the weapons and shoot. Up to two could pilot and two could assist with emergency repairs.

 

Makes perfect sense. Keeps the narrative going and the players active.

That's not consistent with the Wayfarer which is made for even bigger groups and yet only has one weapon. Making up things to try to justify why they took one approach over another is still just making stuff up.


Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#247 Donovan Morningfire

Donovan Morningfire

    Looking for a saint? Look elsewhere.

  • Members
  • 4,421 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 04:13 PM

The Wayfayer's more of a dedicated cargo vessel, probably meant not so much for larger groups, but for groups that actually intend to haul lots of cargo as part of the campaign... that or are looking for a "mobile command ship" that they plan to add hanger space to in order to have a few starfighters on board.

 

The YT-1300 is more of an "adventurer's ship" that can give a decent size party (5 PCs) enough stuff for everyone to do (one pilot, one engineer, two gunners, and a fifth person to act as commander) while still being effective in combat and able to be modified as the party feels is necessary.  While prior RPGs had the YT-1300 listed with only a single laser cannon, to most folks, the most iconic example of a YT-1300 (the Falcon) had two laser cannons.  Could also be that the YT-1300 listed in the corebook isn't a "stock" model but one that's been tweaked a bit to pack a bit more firepower and a bit more speed, as would be suitable for a bunch of spacers trying to make a living the rough fringes of the galaxy.

 

I've mentioned this to you before, but FFG doesn't seem to feel beholden to what prior RPGs, be it d20 or d6, have done in regards to anything, be it starships or species (Wookiees not having claws for one, which if you think about it never showed up anywhere by the EU, as the film Wookiees were never seen or suggested to have claws).  If the folks at LucasFilm say "well, our archives actually say this" and it contradicts a stat block that was published years ago, odds are that FFG's going to go by what the LucasFilm folks say (case in point, the size of the HWK-290 in the X-Wing game).  They're going to do their own thing, and prior RPG versions be damned.


  • Icosiel likes this

Dono's Gaming & Etc Blog - http://jedimorningfire.blogspot.com/

"You worry about those drink vouchers, I'll worry about that bar tab!"


#248 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,073 posts

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:04 PM

The Wayfayer's more of a dedicated cargo vessel, probably meant not so much for larger groups, but for groups that actually intend to haul lots of cargo as part of the campaign... that or are looking for a "mobile command ship" that they plan to add hanger space to in order to have a few starfighters on board.

 

The YT-1300 is more of an "adventurer's ship" that can give a decent size party (5 PCs) enough stuff for everyone to do (one pilot, one engineer, two gunners, and a fifth person to act as commander) while still being effective in combat and able to be modified as the party feels is necessary.  While prior RPGs had the YT-1300 listed with only a single laser cannon, to most folks, the most iconic example of a YT-1300 (the Falcon) had two laser cannons.  Could also be that the YT-1300 listed in the corebook isn't a "stock" model but one that's been tweaked a bit to pack a bit more firepower and a bit more speed, as would be suitable for a bunch of spacers trying to make a living the rough fringes of the galaxy.

 

I've mentioned this to you before, but FFG doesn't seem to feel beholden to what prior RPGs, be it d20 or d6, have done in regards to anything, be it starships or species (Wookiees not having claws for one, which if you think about it never showed up anywhere by the EU, as the film Wookiees were never seen or suggested to have claws).  If the folks at LucasFilm say "well, our archives actually say this" and it contradicts a stat block that was published years ago, odds are that FFG's going to go by what the LucasFilm folks say (case in point, the size of the HWK-290 in the X-Wing game).  They're going to do their own thing, and prior RPG versions be damned.

It's never hard to come up with reasons to justify a decision, whether the reasons (or the decision) are good or bad.


Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#249 Donovan Morningfire

Donovan Morningfire

    Looking for a saint? Look elsewhere.

  • Members
  • 4,421 posts

Posted 20 February 2014 - 04:31 PM

HappyDaze,

Maybe that's why your various questions to FFG have gone unanswered.  If you're requesting/demanding justifications for things instead of asking actual rules questions, then those messages are probably just getting deleted from the system, possibly before they even show up on Sam's inbox.

 

After all, they're the ones with the license and the material's been approved by LucasFilm, so they really don't have to justify anything to you, me, or anyone else on these forums really.  They can simply say "this is how we wrote the stats, and we're sticking to it" and call it day.  If that's something that really upsets you, then you can easily vote with your wallet and not purchase any more of their products.


Edited by Donovan Morningfire, 20 February 2014 - 04:32 PM.

  • ScooterinAB, progressions, Rikoshi and 3 others like this

Dono's Gaming & Etc Blog - http://jedimorningfire.blogspot.com/

"You worry about those drink vouchers, I'll worry about that bar tab!"


#250 Venthrac

Venthrac

    Member

  • Members
  • 907 posts

Posted 20 February 2014 - 04:50 PM

May I recommend a separate thread to discuss starship design issues? I have this thread set for email alerts so I can update it with errata-related stuff as needed,

 

Thanks guys!



#251 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,073 posts

Posted 20 February 2014 - 08:10 PM

HappyDaze,

Maybe that's why your various questions to FFG have gone unanswered.  If you're requesting/demanding justifications for things instead of asking actual rules questions, then those messages are probably just getting deleted from the system, possibly before they even show up on Sam's inbox.

 

After all, they're the ones with the license and the material's been approved by LucasFilm, so they really don't have to justify anything to you, me, or anyone else on these forums really.  They can simply say "this is how we wrote the stats, and we're sticking to it" and call it day.  If that's something that really upsets you, then you can easily vote with your wallet and not purchase any more of their products.

I've already decided that I'm likely to stick to the PDFs when available. When FFG loses the license, I won't shed a tear.


Edited by HappyDaze, 20 February 2014 - 08:25 PM.

Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#252 Doc, the Weasel

Doc, the Weasel

    Pretending to be many, many things.

  • Members
  • 1,650 posts

Posted 21 February 2014 - 11:52 PM

This isn't so much errata, but a formatting error:

 

The green used on the Move Force Power tree pg. 284 is slightly lighter than the green on the previous two trees. 

 

(It's not a printing error, since the other colors are the same.)


Listen to my actual play podcasts at BeggingForXP.com.

 

Take a look at my Talent Trees (Edge of the Empire and Age of Rebellion), YT-2400 deck plans for the Lazy Bantha, as well as my other handouts.


#253 CorPse

CorPse

    Member

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 08 March 2014 - 02:51 PM

Here's a small one... 

 

On page 252 it says that "walkers ignore penalties... from difficult terrain composed of any hazard lower than half the vehicle's height."
 

And then neither of the listed walkers (AT-PT or AT-EST) have a height listed.

 

Easy enough to hand-wave, but still.



#254 cps

cps

    Member

  • Members
  • 987 posts

Posted 07 April 2014 - 10:04 AM

Here's a small one... 

 

On page 252 it says that "walkers ignore penalties... from difficult terrain composed of any hazard lower than half the vehicle's height."
 

And then neither of the listed walkers (AT-PT or AT-EST) have a height listed.

 

Easy enough to hand-wave, but still.

This reminds me the silencer weapon attachment in Dark Heresy. It reduces the range a gunshot can be heard be 50% (and has no other mechanical benefit), but nowhere in the rules or errata does it specify how far away a gunshot can be heard. It took all the way from Dark Heresy (2008) until Only War (2012) for FFG to add a table specifying range figures. Before then I guess we were just supposed to guess?



#255 CharismaticMechanic

CharismaticMechanic

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 16 April 2014 - 01:17 PM

On page 252 it says that "walkers ignore penalties... from difficult terrain composed of any hazard lower than half the vehicle's height."

And then neither of the listed walkers (AT-PT or AT-EST) have a height listed.

As anyone who has ever tried to walk into a very messy room can tell you, just because stuff isn't piled up to your waist doesn't mean it's just as easy to walk around as in an empty room.  If things are even piled as high as your shins it starts to get difficult to walk around.  I'd suggest that walkers are subject to at least some of the same penalties as anything else.  True, they can step over things, but they can't "walk akimbo" or take wider steps than normal for any reason -- there are very specific ranges/patterns that the feet must step in.  Basically, I'd ignore that statement in the book and just have walkers subject to the same penalties as anything else.



#256 CharismaticMechanic

CharismaticMechanic

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 16 April 2014 - 01:22 PM

Page 34, second sentence misspelling:

"Does he want to play a roguish pilot, quick to wdraw..."
Sould be "quick to draw"

Should be "Should be" rather than "Sould be".



#257 Venthrac

Venthrac

    Member

  • Members
  • 907 posts

Posted 16 April 2014 - 01:30 PM

I'll see if I can get that fixed in the second printing ;)



#258 Raistlinrox

Raistlinrox

    Member

  • Members
  • 178 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 01:26 AM

Hutt Crime Lord....Resilience 8....what's up with it?


  • Josep Maria likes this

#259 Josep Maria

Josep Maria

    Member

  • Members
  • 622 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 07:27 AM

Hutt Crime Lord....Resilience 8....what's up with it?

 

And I think that appeared in, at least, two references (on other books).


Be brave and listen to your heart.

5,981 Profile Views.


#260 yoink101

yoink101

    Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 08:14 AM

pg 228

 

Critical hit rating at the top of the page should probably have threat symbols. Instead they are ≤.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS