in covenants under highly organized- there is an indication that Highly Organized can be added by a season of activity by making the same roll as is done for refinement even if further refinement is not possible, but this needs to be clarified as to whether this has all the secondary effects of refinement (potentially adding spotless and risking a hidden defect) or if this simply refers to highly organized. Additionally it indicates the virtue can be lost if someone with lower intelligence uses the lab, but it is unclear if this must be based on the maga's intelligence or if an an assistant with lower intelligence can install the virtue to enable those with a lower-than-maga's intelligence to assist.
2 Likes
MoH p.124: Image of the Lady should have a Individual Target just like Book of Images on the same page. This is the same issue as for Test of the Flames (HoH:S p.36), as noted above.
1 Like
HoH:TL p.141: A Window of Singular Direction was already included in the errata, but a big problem wasn't corrected. From the description of the spell (a circle of wall rather than all walls in the circle), this should really be Part rather than Individual.
I spotted another few I submitted a couple years ago and never got posted:
HoH:TL the box on pages 129-131 has several errors. It was published before RoP:M, so some rules probably weren't set yet. But half the errors have nothing to do with RoP:M.
All of the animals are magical animals, so they should all have the Free Virtue âMagical Animal."
None of the animals have essential traits listed among their Personality Traits. I would assume these would be âWolf* +3â or âOwl* +3â or âHawk/Kite* +3â (the hawk/kit bit is mentioned below).
Common white wolves on page 129:
- Their Size is 1, which matches the description below. However, their Wound levels donât match their Size and donât actually match any Size:
They are:
â1 (1-6), â3 (7-10), â5 (11-13), Incapacitated (15-18)
They should be:
â1 (1-6), â3 (7-12), â5 (13-18), Incapacitated (19-24)
- Shadow Owls and Fire Hawks on page 130:
- Their Size is -3. However, their Wound levels donât match their Size and donât actually match any Size:
They are:
â1 (1-2), â3 (3-6), â5 (7-9), Incapacitated (10-15)
They should be:
â1 (1-2), â3 (3-4), â5 (5-6), Incapacitated (7-8)
- Shadow Owls and Fire Hawks on page 130:
- They have Pre and Com listed as ân/aâ while none of the animals in RoP:M with cunning do. If no points were used, as presumably they were not, these should be changed to â0.â
- The title and first line say âfire hawk.â The powers and description say âfire kiteâ and âkite.â Hawks and kites are not the same, though they are both raptors. One of these should be changed for consistency.
This one surely wasnât caught because the guideline was only implicit until explicitly published later. The erratum for Disenchant says "Disenchant (core book p.160): Replace "exceeds" with "equals or exceedsâ." However, the guideline as published is "Dispel a Hermetic enchantment with a level less than the guideline level used + a stress die (no botch). Spell must be a ritualâ (HoH:TL p.75). Disenchant doesnât take the 1 magnitude for Range Touch into account. So it should only work on effects 5 levels lower than listed. The erratum could be changed to:
Disenchant (p. 160): Replace "the level of this spell + a stress die (no botch) exceedsâ with â(the level of this spell - 5 + a stress die (no botch)) equals or exceedsâ.
This one doesn't have a single page reference. I'd have to try to track it across a lot of books and will do so if desired. It's also debatable if it's really an error, but it should be an error.
The rules for language specialties give an enormous, nearly universal bonus for choosing a specialty other than a dialect. This is why I force players to choose dialects with languages. For example, if you specialize in reading, then not only are you better at reading but you're also noticeably better at speaking in general. Let's say you have a specialty in a dialect v. in reading: French 4 (reading) v. French 4 (Norman).
Reading:
Read: 5
Write: 4
Speak with someone speaking in any dialect: 4 & their score.
Norman:
Read: 4 (maybe 5 if there is Norman writing v. other writing, which may not apply)
Write: 4 (maybe 5 if there is Norman writing v. other writing, which may not apply)
Speak with someone speaking in French (Norman): 5 & their score +1.
Speak with someon speaking in French (any non-Norman dialect): 3 and their score -1.
Considering there are quite a few dialects, you're nearly always significantly better off speaking with anyone by not having chosen a dialect. As is, the person who has spent all their time reading and writing, barely speaking a language, can be better off in general speaking the language than a person who is better at the language but happens to have grown up speaking a dialect.
Consider now French 4 (reading) v. French 5 (Norman).
Reading:
Read: 5
Write: 4
Speak with someone speaking in any dialect: 4 & their score.
Norman:
Read: 5 (maybe 6 if there is Norman writing v. other writing, which may not apply)
Write: 5 (maybe 6 if there is Norman writing v. other writing, which may not apply)
Speak with someone speaking in French (Norman): 6 & their score +1.
Speak with someon speaking in French (any non-Norman dialect): 4 and their score -1.
The person with the lower score but a specialty in writing is no better at writing that the person with the higher score, but the person with the specialty in writing is actually better at speaking with nearly everyone in that language than is the person with the higher score. Isn't that twisted?
This would have been fixed if the hadn't included that 0 penalty if you haven't chosen a dialect, instead keeping it at -1 to match having the wrong dialect. So I would suggest altering that little statement to keep the non-matching dialect penalty, which would need to be adjusted across quite a few books that speak about languages, though the fix would be basically the same throughout.
3 Likes
RoP:D p.97, middle column, first paragraph under the "Finding a Text" header:
...a bastion of Christianity since the fifth century. no one knows how many total copies of the texts there are.
Capitalize "No".
Edit: Also, this, from page 100, left column:
This power works on beings or creatures that both belong to a realm or are aligned with a realm. To determine to which realm a creature is attached, you must exceed its Magic Resistance with a Perception + Ars Notoria + a stress die roll. You do not need to penetrate a targetâs Magic Resistance and only need to beat it by 1 point to successfully determine its nature.
SENSE REALM AFFILIATION:
Perception + Ars Notoria vs. 6 + Targetâs Magic Resistance/5If you roll is five or more above the targetâs Magic Resistance (not the Ease Factor calculated above), you may also glean insight about that creatureâs otherworldly powers. The storyguide will tell you the creatureâs weakest power. For each additional five points above the targetâs Magic Resistance, you may learn another of its powers.
is pretty confusingly written. (Also, the bolded/italicized "you" needs to be "your".)
First off, to determine the realm of a creature, the text "you must exceed its Magic Resistance with a Per + AN + stress" bit directly and explicitly contradicts the formula immediately following, where you instead have to exceed 6 + its MR/5.
Secondly, the ability to glean insight about a creature's otherwordly powers is entirely useless; nobody is going to be beating unmodified might scores of serious opposition by multiple magnitudes on a Characteristic+single Ability roll without some seriously excellent cheddar. Cheddar of Quality, even. (Edit: I suppose it could be handy for hedge mages and similar non-Magic-Resisting targets, theoretically?)
A quick search turned up this post, where Matt Ryan suggests
...which may or may not be of interest.
Edit the Third: Still more RoP:D stuff. Page 138, right column, under Holy Societates: Karaites:
A Karaite lineage can be found within House Ex Miscellanea where Holy Magic is the Major Non-Hermetic Virtue, Craft Amulets taken as the Minor Hermetic Virtue, and Karaite Magic as the Major Hermetic Flaw.
This is wrong twice over: Holy Magic is Hermetic, and Craft Amulets is not.
RoP:F p65, middle column:
This requires a roll with against an Ease Factor equal to (the Ease Factor of change the faerie has requested be made â 6).
A roll with what?
That's nearly the whole of the following column. It's not missing. It's just way too much to be put within the paragraph. They listed it once and stated that if the faerie requests the change it's 6 easier.
The particular Ability + Characteristic can vary, as explained in the prior column, since the type of artwork can vary significantly.
Ahhhhhhh. Okay. Well, in that case the particular sentence needs to be rewritten to be at least marginally grammatically acceptable, but I am no longer confused what it's trying to say, for which I thank you.
Edit: Wait, no.
The sentence is talking about sneaking an extra change past the faerie without them noticing, during the process of making the requested change. Being requested doesn't make it easier, it makes it possible, as far as I can tell. But the DC for slipping in an extra change without being noticed is 6 easier than the DC of the change being made.
As best I can tell, you need to create an object or performance, and whatever Craft or Profession or Enchanting Music or whatever other ability roll you're using for that is the roll being referred to. Which is still quite unclear in the quoted sentence, imo. Change it to, uh.
This requires an additional roll with [the same Ability | Guile] against an Ease Factor equal to (the Ease Factor of change the faerie has requested be made â 6).
maybe?
Edit the Second: More RoP:F, p47 left column, under "Time or Place of Power"
The time or place is known to any character who makes an Intelligence + Faerie Lore roll of against an Ease Factor of 9.
"of against an EF of 9" needs to be either "of 9" or "against an EF of 9".
Edit the Third: RoP:F p47, lower left, "Scale of Typical Might Scores" box.
11-20
Moderately powerful. Comparable, at least, to a starting magus. Mormo, Orm (Size â2)
This entry needs to be bolded, like the "ordinary creature of the realm"/"fairly powerful"/"very powerful"/"extremely powerful"/"earthshakingly important figures" entries- all the ones that list a range of Might scores instead of a single value are bolded, except this one.
You're right, sorry.
Yes, that would be good.
1 Like
Magi of Hermes, page 6 (Alexander of Jerbiton). The spells known include "Voice of the Bjornaer Magus (MuAn15/+11)", with a note that this includes the penalties for casting without speech (but nothing for gestures because he has Subtle Magic). A few problems here:
(1) Alexander does not have Quiet Magic, so the without speech penalty is -10. He's only been given a -5 penalty.
(2) The same reduction has not been done for Alexander +15 years and later ages, so that's inconsistent presentation.
(3) Reducing the listed casting total because of the circumstances it is cast in isn't a standard part of the presentation of spells. I've never seen it anywhere else.
My suggestion would be to list the spell as (MuAn15/+16), with a note that Alexander can expect to take a -10 penalty when casting it.
Broken Covenant of Calebais p.75: Tossing the Brawling Brute and Topple the Brutish Band both use base 4. However, Gift of the Frog's Legs (core p.134) uses base 10 for the same amount of sudden movement. Transforming Mythic Europe confirms Gift of the Frog's Legs uses the base-10 ReCo guideline for instant transportation. So these two BCoC effects should have their bases increased to 10 and their levels each raised by 10.
This one is just a typo, but in Magi of Hermes, Petalichus is described as being in "Verditus", not "Verditius" in his title. This is in the table of contents on page 4, and at the header to his entry on page 96. (But nowhere else that I've noticed.)
1 Like
Core p.121: I don't think most people are fans of the puddles, but I see how the idea is fitting. The first three look fine relative to each other, but someone botched their math on
Corrosive and otherwise dangerous liquids have a base Individual ten times smaller again, a puddle about a foot across and about six inches deep.
You can't divide by (3 x 3 x 3) and have it be very close to dividing by 10. The prior one it's working off of is
one pace across and half a pace deep
That's fine, matching the first one perfectly and being pretty close to the second. For corrosive/dangerous liquids you could use half a pace across and a fifth of a pace deep and be spot on. If you really want to switch from paces to feet, make it two feet across and half a foot deep (twice the diameter, same depth), and you're in the vicinity. Or make it less puddle-like as one foot across and half a pace deep to be a little closer. Regardless of the specific choice, something should be done to correct the math here.
.
Core p.181: While feet and inches have certainly been used in many places (such as noted above), for general rules ArM5 seems to stick with paces at least to begin with (including Aquam). The nice thing about using paces is that much of the world can choose to have them be meters while some use yards, and things come out pretty much the same. But falling damage has been written in terms of feet in its most basic form. +1.5 per pace puts it back in paces. This isn't an error, just something I'm pointing out to consider rewriting.
ArM5 124
The spell "Break the Oncoming Wave" states, "Breaks all waves and torrents of water (including magical ones)..." but the guideline it uses in ReAq is "Ward Against Mundane Water".
The addendum, "including magical ones" should likely be removed or the spell adjusted to account for increased capability above the guideline.
Mundane water includes mundane water that is magically created. It would not include a water elemental. Least thatâs my reading.
It could also be referring to the waves or torrents being magically created in completely mundane water but I still think the first part of my response should apply.
One more, one absolutely critically important question: does the lab text of a Longevity Ritual created by someone else on your behalf need to be translated, and if so, what is "the level of its effect" (ArM5 p102)? The Lab Total? Or is the Lab Text just "instructions for the ritual itself" and you can just read and do them?
Because damn, the idea of spending three or four years slaving away with Deficient Creo to slog through a translation of a 160-Lab-Total Longevity Ritual just so you can re-perform it if needed does not appeal.
(Note: I'm assuming that you don't need a Lab Total â„ the LR's Lab Total, because if you do there's very little point translating the text [if required] because you wouldn't be able to perform the ritual anyway [else why purchase a LR in the first place?]. Although the question should probably still be answered.)
Edit: Completely unrelated: nowhere that I can find is the blanket 15xp/year advancement (or 10 or 20/yr with Poor or Wealthy) explicitly permitted for advancement, only in character creation. And yet Grogs treats it as a default and proceeds to offer a set of advancement packages to do so more quickly and easily. (Which, by the way, are excellent.)
There probably needs to be a statement somewhere that grogs, rarely-played characters, and (at the SG's option) important NPCs are allowed to advance by blanket yearly XP instead of by seasonal activity, even after initial character creation.
1 Like
I have a list of errata for B&S here.
Edit: just realised that in the opening post, David asked for errata for ArM5 specifically. Oh well: Consider my post just a bit of random interest information. 
1 Like
Through the Aegis p.43: Lexora apparently knows Aegis of the Hearth (ReVi 15), but you cannot have a Ritual spell below level 20.
1 Like
Tentative errata from another thread per your request. These depend on the final decisions on General spells and Spell Mastery.
Through the Aegis has three books with Spell Mastery as a single Ability for a General spell rather than making them level-specific Abilities.
p.124
Calvacius of Tytalus, Destruet Extremum
Preiudicium, Demonâs Eternal Oblivion Spell Mastery, Quality 8. (8BP)
p.157
Helveticus of Flambeau, Scourge of the Infernal, Demonâs Eternal Oblivion Mastery Summa, Level 3, Quality 15 (24 Build Points)
Amadeus of Bonisagus, Fortress of the Home, Aegis of the Hearth Mastery Tractatus, Quality 14 (14 Build Points)
1 Like