Tuala Morn Errata?

[name_tamer]

Is there an official compendium of acknowledged errata?

If I find one, to whom should I submit it?

[gojira]

I think Steve prefers a PM for errata. It's more certain he won't miss it that way.

If you have something of general interest (i.e., you spot a mistake and think you know the correction too) I'm sure posting it here also for folks to peruse would be fine.

[name_tamer]

Thanks, but I'm not sure I want to interrupt the writing of 6E for this - it's more like a little strange thing that would best be addressed in a broader list of errors. And frankly, I'm not even sure that I've got it right. Maybe the boards could check my reasoning?

Basically, I think the limitation values for beneficial geasa on page 136 are backwards - a greater limitation value is given for a restriction that is actually less restrictive to the character. The beneficial geasa ("can only be killed by X") are written up as damage reduction, only versus deathblows, only against limited type of attack, with "limited type of attack" being "everything except X."

So "can only be killed by spears" is DR, only versus deathblows, ineffective against spears (-1/2). And "can only be killed as the result of some incredible combination of factors" is DR, only versus deathblows ineffective almost never (-2). The first writeup is therefore cheaper than the second, whereas the second is a more powerful, less limited power.

Sanity check?

[gojira]

I think you're right. I think that "can only die as the result of some incredible combination of events" should get no limitation, because basically it's not limited at all, it works against durn near everything. So basically just the -4 for death blows. 39 points for the whole ability.

Also, as written, that last geasa is stated out wrong. Should be 11 points for the Armor component, not 14.

[name_tamer]

Thanks for the reply.

[ghost-angel]

Ummm... no you have it backwards.

Only Vs Spears is less Limited than Only Vs A Red Haired Man On Sunday

Remember, these only work against a blow that would kill you. Not any other form of injury.

If you're character has a Detrimental Geasa that says a man will kill you with a spear, the beneficial Geasa "only vs spears" will protect you from that, only that and specifically that final blow - not any spear attack.

It's priced correctly.

Getting killed by a Spear is a lot more common that getting killed by "a man riding a red boar on a full moon on the third day of battle".

In other words it's going to come into play a lot more often if it's Spears, as an example, and is worth only -1/2 than an extremely rare attack.

[gojira]

Ummm... no you have it backwards.

Only Vs Spears is less Limited than Only Vs A Red Haired Man On Sunday

Remember, these only work against a blow that would kill you. Not any other form of injury.

If you're character has a Detrimental Geasa

Just to make sure, we're talking Beneficial Gaesa, not detrimental ones, I think. Page 136, bottom left corner.

So if you can only be killed by a Spear, then you're protected from a lot of types of damage (giants wielding clubs, arrows, deliberate poisoning, etc) but what can affect you really could happen without too much effort. So you end up with damage reduction/armor that works most of the time. -1/2 seems about right here.

If you can only be killed by a red haired man wielding a Logrem axe, that's way less common, and therefore the Damage Reduction/Armor comes into play much more often. I'd call that a -1/4 limitation, tops.

And if you can only be killed by a chariot riding barbarian in the town of Carmarthen on Samhain day, then your basically protected all the time. I call that no limitation at all, other than the standard one for Death Blows.

[bigbywolfe]

I don't even have the book, but you just referred to the "limitation" value of a "Beneficial Geasa"...:confused: I'm pretty sure you have something mixed up. Maybe I'm way off base here, but I think you may be deriving a benefit from something that is supposed to be negative, or perhaps just mixing the two up in general. Maybe, maybe not?...

[ghost-angel]

Lemme try this angle:

The Limitation on the Beneficial Geasa PROTECTS FROM THAT ATTACK.

If the Attack is Super Rare it's not going to PROTECT you that often, that means it comes into play RARELY. That's a hefty Limitation. The less often it works the more Limited it is.

Spears are common in Tuala Morn. If you are protected from the Death Blow of a Spear it's going to come into play Often (or potentially so) and thus it's not very Limiting since you get to Use It A Lot.

If you only get to use it when a "Wild Eyed Druid Smacks You With A Cudgel On The Third Half Moon" that's really really really rare and is really really really Limited.

Again, this Geasa only protects you from the Death Blow of a Specific Attack. The More Rare The Attack the more Limited the Geasa.

[bigbywolfe]

But they are saying that it protects against everything but X. I don’t have the book, so I don’t know what the wording is, but they are stating “can only be killed by a spear” as an example and inferring that that then protects them from everything but spears. Are they mis-paraphrasing? Because I think you’re kind of talking past each other…

[ghost-angel]

They are reading it wrong. It protects Only Against X.

[bigbywolfe]

Gotchya, thanks.

P.S. That response was ridiculously fast!

[ghost-angel]

Just to make sure, we're talking Beneficial Gaesa, not detrimental ones, I think. Page 136, bottom left corner.

So if you can only be killed by a Spear, then your protected from a lot of types of damage (giants wielding clubs, arrows, deliberate poisoning, etc) but what can affect you really could happen without too much effort. So you end up with damage reduction/armor that works most of the time. -1/2 seems about right here.

If you can only be killed by a red haired man wielding a Logrem axe, that's way less common, and therefore the Damage Reduction/Armor comes into play much more often. I'd call that a -1/4 limitation, tops.

And if you can only be killed by a chariot riding barbarian in the town of Carmarthen on Samhain day, then your basically protected all the time. I call that no limitation at all, other than the standard one for Death Blows.

You've also misread me. Try the whole sentence.

The Beneficial Geasa protects you against a very specific kind of attack.

A witch comes along and says "you will be killed by a spear"

You find a Druid, whom you perform a deed for, and he grants you a Beneficial Geasa that "Protects you from the death blow of a spear"

That's what p136 is saying.

[ghost-angel]

Gotchya, thanks.

P.S. That response was ridiculously fast!

I could claim some kind of clairsentience ... but really, I clicked reload at exactly the right moment :)

[ghost-angel]

never Browse Before Coffee.

I think I may have come off a bit gruff, if I did apologies.

I've always interpreted the Beneficial Geasa as protecting you from the death blow of your end... rereading it enough times and I can see it being interpreted the opposite. rereading it even more to straighten my brain out just caused it to go sideways. . . I'm pretty sure Steve got it right though.

[gojira]

I've always interpreted the Beneficial Geasa as protecting you from the death blow of your end

Nope it doesn't. :) It protects you from everything BUT your end. Clearly, because if you end that way, well that's how you end. It's your fate, your geasa.

A beneficial geasa only allows you to be killed certain way. That's why it's beneficial. An attack that's somewhat common (let's say spears in TM) means the geasa protects you less often than an attack that occurs very rarely (that dude on a red pig wielding a blue sword during Dovarr). Clearly the latter means you are very hard to kill, and therefore protected all the time. "Spears" means you aren't protected quite so much.

I'd go into a big long example, but you seemed to have figured it out on your own. Get some more coffee, read it again on Sunday, see if it starts to come into focus. I was pretty confused too until Name Tamer pointed out the error, then it's obvious.

Also there are some obvious math errors on that page. All of the Armor components of the example geasa are have a real cost of 14 points, which is clearly incorrect, because all of the geasa have different limitation values. That's the first clue that something bad happened with that section.

Oh well, the good thing about a completely transparent game system is we don't have to wonder and guess, we can just fix it ourselves.

[ghost-angel]

The problem is.. I'm reading it both ways now. At once.

After the coffee.

ARGH! STEVE!!!

[gojira]

The limitation values are written as you suggest. However, the rest of the text reads the opposite way. That's why Name Tamer says the limitation values are reversed.

Here's a quote for everyone to peruse, straight from the book. Middle of the second paragraph on p. 136.

"For example, if a character has a beneficial geas that he can only be killed with a spear, other forms of attack -- axes, fists, fire, spells, being trampled by horses -- cannot kill him (in other words, they can't deliver the "death-blow" that finally slays him or puts him in a position where he'll bleed to death). But any of those things can injure him, right up to the very point of death."

So it's pretty clear to me what "can only be killed with a spear" means and does. The only thing now is to make the limitations match the desired outcome.

[ghost-angel]

I know what it says. . . . I keep reading the top half and the bottom half of the descritpion and coming to different conclusions, and that's before I get to the write-ups. :p