Trying to make a list of changes (arent we all) to play correctly any thoughts on the following card?

Raise the Dead - card reads

* Place your reanimate familiar token in a space adjacent to you.

You may only control 1 reanimate at a time. You may discard your Reanimate token at any time during your turn.

FAQ Errata 1.6 reads.

Necromancer, “Raise Dead”: The card should read, “Place your Reanimate familiar token in an empty space adjacent to you.”

Based on the following confirmations others have received from FFG i take that the second paragrah now no longer exists, therefore allowing multiple reanimates and no discarding of them?

Any thoughts??

Break the Rune Card (post)

Got confirmation from FFG- the entire text of "Break the Rune" is in the errata (they did not just post the changed section). This would mean it now can in fact be affected by blast.

Hmm. Multiple reanimates? But there is only one token. Isn't that the limit?

I think there is only one thing we have confirmation of and that is that the (current) Errata document is terrible..

That said: nice try, but I'm pretty sure the other 2 sentences still apply.

I know right - i totally agree but based on their comment "The entirety of the card should read as stated in the FAQ, so it should not contain the last sentence." makes me wonder if they have changed it as they did on the break the rune card (or made a mistake) i personally would have expected only the first paragraph of the card to change keeping the bottom paragraph intact (but above confirmation statement seems to reflect thats not correct). On the same token using the above confirmation statement the errata says Monster Cards Elemental, Act I and II: The Air ability should read, “Until the start of your next turn, this monster can only be affected by attacks from adjacent figures.” No indication of the other elements listed - again one would assume that they still remain in place but then then thats says the above statement is incorrect. I would have also assumed that the blast statement in the break the rune card would have remained until the above confirmation statement where they confirmed no longer exists... Soo confused as to what stays and what goes.. why couldnt the whole card just have been listed for each change....

The card should be there in its entirety. This is a legitimate mistake. The change to the card in the errata was only supposed to be the additon of "empty", which is an incredibly important word when stuck before "space". Yes, it contradicts what was said about the errata (hence the mistake) but I'd be willing to bet the rest of the card still holds. 1 reanimate, discard as normal.

"But Zaltyre, how can you be so sure?" I have the updated card.

I know right - i totally agree but based on their comment "The entirety of the card should read as stated in the FAQ, so it should not contain the last sentence."

Technically, they are talking about the card , not all cards . They didn't literally say this was the case for all cards in the errata, just the one the question was asked about.

I know right - i totally agree but based on their comment "The entirety of the card should read as stated in the FAQ, so it should not contain the last sentence."

Technically, they are talking about the card , not all cards . They didn't literally say this was the case for all cards in the errata, just the one the question was asked about.

...the best kind of correct.

But really, I'm more comfortable with "it's a mistake" than "each card may or may not be listed entirely in the errata." Option 1 is forgivable. Option 2 is just silly bad.

Hence my initial comment (and as you know one made by many people before me) about the state of the errata. It's supposed to correct/explain things, but its either incorrect or bad at explaining things.

Pdf pages aren't made of trees. So no real reason to use them sparingly and not write the whole card. And why it, to begin with, doesn't just say at the top "The corrections above are intended as being the whole card" I don't understand. Because I, before the answer in post #1, thought it only replaced incorrect sentences, and didn't affect the rest of the card. But if some seem to affect the whole card and others don't,.. how are we in the end supposed to know.

We can only hope that mentioning it yet again might bring some change, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Thank you so much guys for your responses at least i know im not alone in being confused and/or frustrated lol..

Kinda glad its a mistake actually cause i didnt like it with out it that second paragraph.

In my search to try to find an answer i did find a post where someone (cant remember who) had contact FFG and they advised that they were discussing what was happening next for the errata I think it was in Jan 16 with little done since then i guess im also not holding my breath.

Atom4geVampire - yes we (hubby and I) did have a dicussion about whether it was it was only that one card or in general and kinda figured that whilst they were talking about a card, surely they didnt keep changing the format OK concede now that they do keep changing,

Guess will just take each card as it comes and hope my crystal ball is working trying to read their mind.. lol...

Would just love amended cards but lets not start that debate again lol..

Zaltyre thank you for sharing the card - great to know an official response.

Just another example I just noticed, and why the "The entirety of the card should read as stated in the FAQ" thing is totally stupid.

The errata for the conjurer's Mirror Image reads: "This card should read, 'Use this card during your turn and suffer fatigue equal to the number of image tokens on the map.'"

So, if that was all the card should read, the conjurer wouldn't even be able to summon tokens, lol (because that is the rest of the card)