Ok recently I had my players fighting the Orcs, Gretchins, and Squigs found in the "Creatures Anathema" book for Dark Heresy.

Myself and my players noticed that the Gretchins and Squigs movement ratings where odd.

The gretchins had an Agility Bonus of 3 and the Scrawny trait, meaning there movement should have been:

2/4/6/12

Instead it was:

4/8/12/24

Similarly Squigs had an Agility Bonus of 3 however there movement was:

3/6/9/24

When the full out run (the 24) should have been 18 if calcualted as normal movement.

After checking all there traits and talents we found nothing that supported this odd change in movement.

So the question is simple, is this an errata mistake? And if so do you think they are missing talents/traits to get said movement changes OR are the movement rates just wrong?

I couldn't find an errata for the book so hoping I can find some answers here.

Hi there,

never used any of this creatures till know but you are total valid that "something is a little weird there". Never the less, me thinks that they just missed to fill in a "bogus talent" to make the stats what they are.

@Gretchnis
I think this little fellas should be quick. After all, they live in an environment where those who aren´t quick enough are eaten by squigs, get smashed by an angry orc just for bein there or worst: getting tossed to work!

@Squigs
While 18 would be the RAW, I am personally finde with 24. At the moment I am working out a couple of stats for Dusk creatures an "cheat" on the movement quiet regulary to make the beast fit my needs and to work out certain strengthes like cumbersome beasts that a generally a little more sluggish but once set on full speed ahead tend to "get it on". An "attack squig fits this categorie, in my books.

Dark Bunny Lord said:

It's a problem with a few creatures in the book - the movement rates have been miscalculated in a number of cases. Unless there's a trait in there that explains why the movement rates are different (Quadruped, a Size trait, and Unnatural Speed are the only ones that do this currently), then they should be considered incorrect, as far as I'm aware.