Official Errata for HQG?

[jholen]

I just wanted to check-in and see if the errata thread, that was started back over @ Glorantha.com, was ever compiled into an official errata. If not, no worries -- just checking in due to the forum switch over.

I'm really starting to dig into HQ:G and am watching Yohann Delalande's awesome HQG game on YouTube and wanted to nail down the rules as I read through them for a second time.

 

Thanks,

Jonathan

[Eric Christian Berg]

I'll second this. The main thing I'm interested in is the discrepancy between the rules and the example for extended contests (PC RP totals tracked per contest or summed). The consensus seems to be that the example is incorrect, but I'd like the official ruling.

[jholen]

7 hours ago, Eric Christian Berg said:

I'll second this. The main thing I'm interested in is the discrepancy between the rules and the example for extended contests (PC RP totals tracked per contest or summed). The consensus seems to be that the example is incorrect, but I'd like the official ruling.

Since posting this thread, I splurged on getting the HQ Core Rules to supplement HQG as many mention that the rules examples and charts are a bit easier to understand. Haven't dug into it yet, but it was a no brainer considering I was getting some other materials and was only $19.95. Would still be nice... but then again, I'd probably prefer new books as hopefully the HQ Core clears anything ambiguities up.

[Steve]

Yes, we still need an official errata. If you're referring to the Battle of Auroch Hills example, then that seems to have been played wrong since the resolution points received for each hero facing multiple opponents should be kept in separate tracks for each opponent, not lumped together. e.g. on p92 where Herrox is supposedly nearly out of the contest, this is wrong, he's got one point from Guard 8 and three from Guard 9 (not four points in total).

 

[jholen]

28 minutes ago, Steve said:

Yes, we still need an official errata. If you're referring to the Battle of Auroch Hills example, then that seems to have been played wrong since the resolution points received for each hero facing multiple opponents should be kept in separate tracks for each opponent, not lumped together. e.g. on p92 where Herrox is supposedly nearly out of the contest, this is wrong, he's got one point from Guard 8 and three from Guard 9 (not four points in total).

 

Gotcha! Hence the portion of the rules which speaks about the fact that you can have the possibility of having more than five points against you, spread over multiple opponents. Thanks! 

[David Scott]

As the writer of the HeroQuest Glorantha examples, it's my plan to revisit the Auroch Hills example and adjust it accordingly. As noted, the multiple opponents track was merged in the excitement of the moment. Sadly this wasn't pickup in the editing phase. All the examples were the result of real rolls and playing. When I run games, I often lump the resolution points together as it's quicker and shortens combat. This is a house rule of mine and clearly doesn't help the example.

[jholen]

8 hours ago, David Scott said:

As the writer of the HeroQuest Glorantha examples, it's my plan to revisit the Auroch Hills example and adjust it accordingly. As noted, the multiple opponents track was merged in the excitement of the moment. Sadly this wasn't pickup in the editing phase. All the examples were the result of real rolls and playing. When I run games, I often lump the resolution points together as it's quicker and shortens combat. This is a house rule of mine and clearly doesn't help the example.

No worries! They're great examples and I'm slowly picking it up. Thanks for the wonderful book!