Jump to content

Errata for 5.2?


Recommended Posts

Since the 6th Edition has been officially announced as forthcoming, I don't think we'll see any update to the 5.2 edition, nor any official 5.2 errata.

However, this is the right place to discuss and receive advice on any problems or errors within current rules. Can you describe the editorial error you wrote about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Page 61. Year 457, the opening sentence of the events description was dropped, creating a non sequitur.

As a noob walking through making a character for the first time, I was halted as I read it because it made no sense. I read forward and backward and there was no reference to these "rebels". Then I looked it up in 5.0 and found the missing sentence: "The eastern Britons rebel, protesting the policies of King Vortigern."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it came up in the Discord, I am just going to copy-paste my comment from here to this thread:

 

This really should be errata in KAP 5.2:

They tried updating the £6 manors to the £10 manors used in BotE and BotW... BUT they didn't take into account that £4 of that money is going to soldiers & courtiers (apart from £1), meaning that the knight & his family (including horses and a squire) only get £6 for their upkeep (£7, if they spend that extra £1 to upkeep, too).

The charitable reading of KAP 5.2 is that they tried to simplify it by referring to the whole £10 as the knight's upkeep, but then they screwed up the limits for the categories (p. 183-184). The limits should be £3 to qualify for poor, £6 to qualify for ordinary and £9 to qualify for rich, when using £6 upkeep for the ordinary knight. If using a 'total upkeep for the manor', then they should be more like £6, £9 and £12 (i.e. the old limits+£3 soldiers and courtiers, leaving £1 spending money for £10 manor - £9 ordinary).

 

Also, this bit (p. 183) applies ONLY to the household knights (word added by me):
"Thus, household knights do not get money every Christmas. Instead, the lord spends enough each year to keep each [household] knight up to accepted standards of maintenance. "
The accepted standards of maintenance is generally Ordinary, although hard times may require to temporarily tighten the belt down to Poor, as explained in the Book of the Estate. Vassal knights are responsible for their own upkeep, from the lands granted to them. Yes, if things go very wrong, they may beg the Lord for aid and likely get it (at least keeping them at Poor or perhaps even Ordinary if they are well-liked by the Lord), but it should not be a common thing to need help.

"Christmas" in the above quotation should be changed to "Winter", IMHO, to better draw the thoughts to the Winter Phase where these things are resolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
Posted (edited)

Some errata from Greg's page that did not make it into 5.2 printing are listed below (only "rules", none of the chrome has been reviewed.)

Quote

Page 89, Stewardship
Stewardship is listed as a non-knightly skill. This is incorrect. It is a knightly skill.

The reference to unknightly was removed, it was not changed to knightly. Was the errata in error or the correction in complete?

Quote

Page 108, Superlative childbirth
Under Effects of Maintenance, Superlative: strike “and a +3 modifier to on the Childbirth Table.”

This was left unchanged. It's just and editing error as the next sentence contradicts it and gives the intended value of +5

Quote

Page 117, Unburdened
I’ve been asked about this so many times, wherein players attempt to exploit it beyond its intention, that I suggest just eliminating the entire 2-paragraph section. There is no bonus for going without armor. If the GM must do something, then give a penalty to wear armor if not trained for it. 

Reference to the benefit remains on p119

Quote

Page 134, Care (my commoners)
If using the Complete Landholding Rules in the Pendragon Book of the Manor, all vassal knights get the Passion of Care (my commoners) at a starting value of 2d6. 

Page 134, Loyal to Vassals
If using the Complete Landholding Rules in the Pendragon Book of the Manor, Liege Lords with knight vassals of their own get the Passion of Loyal to Vassals at a starting value of 2d6+7. 

No mention of this in 5.2, perhaps because it only applies with Book of the Manor and is not core.

Every other rule change/edit/clarification appears to have been implemented

Edited by vegas
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I guess this is another "residual" error that was left in 5.2

Quote

Page 122, Lance Attack
Strike the phrase “wielding a great spear or another character…” That is, a Lance charge does get the bonus against a Greatspear. 

This change was implemented at p. 122 of 5.0 (p. 143 of 5.2) but was not implemented in the description of the Great Spear skill on p 110.

Edited by vegas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...