HappyDaze,

Maybe that's why your various questions to FFG have gone unanswered. If you're requesting/demanding justifications for things instead of asking actual rules questions, then those messages are probably just getting deleted from the system, possibly before they even show up on Sam's inbox.

After all, they're the ones with the license and the material's been approved by LucasFilm, so they really don't have to justify anything to you, me, or anyone else on these forums really. They can simply say "this is how we wrote the stats, and we're sticking to it" and call it day. If that's something that really upsets you, then you can easily vote with your wallet and not purchase any more of their products.

I've already decided that I'm likely to stick to the PDFs when available. When FFG loses the license, I won't shed a tear.

This isn't so much errata, but a formatting error:

The green used on the Move Force Power tree pg. 284 is slightly lighter than the green on the previous two trees.

(It's not a printing error, since the other colors are the same.)

Here's a small one...

On page 252 it says that "walkers ignore penalties... from difficult terrain composed of any hazard lower than half the vehicle's height."

And then neither of the listed walkers (AT-PT or AT-EST) have a height listed.

Easy enough to hand-wave, but still.

Here's a small one...

On page 252 it says that "walkers ignore penalties... from difficult terrain composed of any hazard lower than half the vehicle's height."

And then neither of the listed walkers (AT-PT or AT-EST) have a height listed.

Easy enough to hand-wave, but still.

This reminds me the silencer weapon attachment in Dark Heresy. It reduces the range a gunshot can be heard be 50% (and has no other mechanical benefit), but nowhere in the rules or errata does it specify how far away a gunshot can be heard. It took all the way from Dark Heresy (2008) until Only War (2012) for FFG to add a table specifying range figures. Before then I guess we were just supposed to guess?

On page 252 it says that "walkers ignore penalties... from difficult terrain composed of any hazard lower than half the vehicle's height."

And then neither of the listed walkers (AT-PT or AT-EST) have a height listed.

As anyone who has ever tried to walk into a very messy room can tell you, just because stuff isn't piled up to your waist doesn't mean it's just as easy to walk around as in an empty room. If things are even piled as high as your shins it starts to get difficult to walk around. I'd suggest that walkers are subject to at least some of the same penalties as anything else. True, they can step over things, but they can't "walk akimbo" or take wider steps than normal for any reason -- there are very specific ranges/patterns that the feet must step in. Basically, I'd ignore that statement in the book and just have walkers subject to the same penalties as anything else.

Page 34, second sentence misspelling:

"Does he want to play a roguish pilot, quick to wdraw..."

Sould be "quick to draw"

Should be "Should be" rather than "Sould be".

I'll see if I can get that fixed in the second printing

Hutt Crime Lord....Resilience 8....what's up with it?

Hutt Crime Lord....Resilience 8....what's up with it?

And I think that appeared in, at least, two references (on other books).

pg 228

Critical hit rating at the top of the page should probably have threat symbols. Instead they are ≤.

p.60 & p.79

Point blank under both the Gadgeteer and the Mercenary Soldier says"

"attacks made while at close range or engaged"

And should say:

"attacks made while at short range or engaged".

The latter is what it says on page 141, and only makes sense. Close range seems to be the starship version of engaged.

I've noticed some places where the context suggests a die symbol should appear, but instead there's a greater-than-or-equal symbol (example: pg. 228, under Critical Hit Rating). I gathered from context that the greater-than-or-equal symbol is a placeholder that should've been replaced by an Advantage symbol. Is that correct?

so it has almost been a full year since v1.0 of the faq/errata came out...are they planning on updating that soon or what?

I'm not aware of any such plans, but feel free to use the forum tool for asking questions of the developers to find that out for yourself.

Close range seems to be the starship version of engaged.

Almost. Engaged is a subset of the Short Range band. Close Range is a range band all to itself.

Hi

I'm new here so please forgive if I ask a question already considered.

In my personal copy of the Core Rulebook, page 105 has what looks like a printing smudge, making some of the text unreadable.

Is there anyway I could get a copy of page 105?

Help in this would be much appreciated.

Willh.

Hi

I'm new here so please forgive if I ask a question already considered.

In my personal copy of the Core Rulebook, page 105 has what looks like a printing smudge, making some of the text unreadable.

Is there anyway I could get a copy of page 105?

Help in this would be much appreciated.

Willh.

Submit a request here . FFG is usually very helpful.

kaosoe

Thanks for the prompt reply ... will follow this up.

Willh.

The question was:

Does the stat chart show the price of a single dueling pistol or a pair. The description states almost invariably comes in pairs.

Sam's answer:

I noticed a typo that only applies to second printing (19NOV) core rulebooks. On page 415, in the the "Captive Rancor" entry, under "Abilities," the text says that the Rancor can spend "+" to activate its sweep attack. In first printings of the book, the character is accurately displayed as a Triumph.

Hopefully this will be corrected in the upcoming third printing.

Has there been errata on any of the supplement books? If so, where could that be found?

I think that not, sorry mate.

Has there been errata on any of the supplement books? If so, where could that be found?

Yes, FFG does publish errata for the books. It is included as part of the FAQ, and for the EotE CRB, you want to see the page at http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite_sec.asp?eidm=232&esem=4 .

EotE page 255 - The Syliure-25 hyperdrive sled "Designed to add hyperspace capabilities to smaller ships without hyperdrives." It gives a class 2 hyperdrive to a sil 3 ship, good for five jumps.

hyperspace rings could use better definition. saying that they have 5 uses seems a bit odd. i mean, having only 5 pre-programmed jumps makes a bit more sense, especially it the ship doesn't have an astromech to program them. but 5 jumps before non-use at a cost of 10,000 credits does not seem very cost effective for any consumer. i mean, for the supplier it makes sense, as it causes the consumer to buy more... but who would buy such a costly hyperdrive for so few uses?

"we could almost buy our own ship for that much. we don't have to sit here and take this"~ luke skywalker

EotE page 255 - The Syliure-25 hyperdrive sled "Designed to add hyperspace capabilities to smaller ships without hyperdrives." It gives a class 2 hyperdrive to a sil 3 ship, good for five jumps.

hyperspace rings could use better definition. saying that they have 5 uses seems a bit odd. i mean, having only 5 pre-programmed jumps makes a bit more sense, especially it the ship doesn't have an astromech to program them. but 5 jumps before non-use at a cost of 10,000 credits does not seem very cost effective for any consumer. i mean, for the supplier it makes sense, as it causes the consumer to buy more... but who would buy such a costly hyperdrive for so few uses?

"we could almost buy our own ship for that much. we don't have to sit here and take this"~ luke skywalker

Im sorry, does the draconian imperial/corporate commerce is not worth while?

"...Hot dogs come in packages of ten and hot dog buns come in packages of eight..."