Adventurer's Companion errata

[Dunkelbrink]

Okay, here's a breakdown of what happens:

The Champion elects to do Intimidate Foe and succeeds. This means that the enemy has lost 2/3/? Hate points.

The Champion then elects to use a Combat Advantage die. This result is added to the Hate point loss value. So we have a number now that is equal to 1d6+2/1d6+3/1d6+?. That number is a bonus damage value that will be used later.

The next round the Champion makes an attack. If they succeed, they add that bonus damage calculated above.

So the entire effect is an additional benefit from doing the Intimidate Foe action.

— • —

That still doesn't mean that there's not a better way to phrase it... perhaps the "additionally" needs to moved up to "If the Champion attempts the Intimidate Foe combat task and succeeds, additionally the player..."

Ok Zed, thanks. That's the way I thought it would work, but your description of the success die actually adding to Hate lost is missing in the pdf. If Cubicle meant this to be the effect they need to add it to the first sentence.

[Earendil]

Ok Zed, thanks. That's the way I thought it would work, but your description of the success die actually adding to Hate lost is missing in the pdf. If Cubicle meant this to be the effect they need to add it to the first sentence.

This still isn't clear to me. I see two possible effects of the success die:

1. Is it lost from the enemy's Hate points in addition to the normal loss?

2. Or is it, plus the Hate points lost, applied as additional Endurance damage if the champion successfully attacks that enemy next round?

I think zedturtle is saying only number 2 applies, but I'm not sure.

[Rich H]

1. Is it lost from the enemy's Hate points in addition to the normal loss?

No, the result on the success dice (and adding to that the hate point loss) just applies to the bonus to damage on a successful attack.

2. Or is it, plus the Hate points lost, applied as additional Endurance damage if the champion successfully attacks that enemy next round?

That's it. The success die spent has no effect on the Intimidate Foe result.

There really should be more examples of these kind of things to help players see how these work; you'd only need a couple of sentences for each and they'd help with clarity no end for those that find understanding the rules challenging.

[zedturtle]

Okay, here's a breakdown of what happens:

The Champion elects to do Intimidate Foe and succeeds. This means that the enemy has lost 2/3/? Hate points.

The Champion then elects to use a Combat Advantage die. This result is added to the Hate point loss value. So we have a number now that is equal to 1d6+2/1d6+3/1d6+?. That number is a bonus damage value that will be used later.

The next round the Champion makes an attack. If they succeed, they add that bonus damage calculated above.

So the entire effect is an additional benefit from doing the Intimidate Foe action.

— • —

That still doesn't mean that there's not a better way to phrase it... perhaps the "additionally" needs to moved up to "If the Champion attempts the Intimidate Foe combat task and succeeds, additionally the player..."

Ok Zed, thanks. That's the way I thought it would work, but your description of the success die actually adding to Hate lost is missing in the pdf. If Cubicle meant this to be the effect they need to add it to the first sentence.

If the Champion attempts the Intimidate Foe combat task and succeeds, the player may additionally spend and roll a Combat Advantage die; the Champion does bonus damage on any successful strike equal to the result plus the total Hate points his intimidation cost the enemy. The bonus lasts a number of rounds equal to the hero’s Valour rating.

Okay, here's the passage in question, with my recommendation for the corrected wording. The 'plus' I bolded is the result being added to the damage.

It is not added to the Hate loss.

EDIT: I see the confusion. The Hate loss in my second paragraph is just a number, it's not a loss of additional Hate. Sorry for the confusing wording.

[Earendil]

Thanks, Jacob (or zed if you prefer)! It's clear to me, at least, now.

[Borri]

The "Customizing Distinctive Features table" on page 141 misses the trait "wilful"