[projectaon] Re: Last of the 28thos errata
- From: John TFS <johntfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:06:01 +0000
No, no, no fight. I'm sorry Alan. I reacted to what I perceived to be your
post's impatient, entitled tone. Even if my perception was accurate, it's no
excuse to snap at you like I did, so I apologize.
That said, Project Aon is a labor of love. An unpaid, difficult, somewhat
expensive (server costs) labor of love. Simon and Jonathan do an amazing job
and their work, however long it might take, is always worth it. Plus, this is
the last of the original Lone Wolf books. I'm fine with taking extra care to
get it as right as possible.
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:27:04 +0100
Subject: [projectaon] Re: Last of the 28thos errata
From: feline1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT! :-D
Come on though, some of our readers may not have long to live
On 13 June 2014 15:54, John TFS <johntfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
How about you'll get the content when it's done and not before?
> From: alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 07:45:10 -0700
> Subject: [projectaon] Re: Last of the 28thos errata
>
> How about just publish the damn thing,
> and if some minor typo is found you just update
> the webpage. Simple.
>
> And for that matter, it appears that the FW books,
> are basically done as well and just need to be published.
> Can we please just get that out?
> The people don't want or need perfection, they want content.
>
> Thanks
>
> Alan Schlieper
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: projectaon-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:projectaon-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Simon Osborne
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 6:04 AM
> To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [projectaon] Re: Last of the 28thos errata
>
> We're so almost nearly there!! :-)
>
> On 13/06/2014 00:13, Jonathan Blake wrote:
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 189: vampire Lord Sejanoz -> vampire lord Sejanoz [or, Vampire
> > Lord Sejanoz] ~~~~~
> >
> > or "vampire, Lord Sejanoz"?
>
> Fixed.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 193: explodes the jagged branch -> the jagged branch explodes
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > Sounds a little weird, but it's OK as is. The verb "to explode" can
> > take an object.
>
> Rejected.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 200: [jc: If you possess the Kai Weapon 'Valiance', you will
> > benefit from its unique properties, as Brumalghasts are magical
> > creatures (as is stated in section 235).] ~~~~~
> >
> > Players must pass through 235 to get to 200, so is it necessary to
> > prompt them here, or should we require readers to realize when their
> > Kai Weapon gets the extra bonus? I'm thinking of the other cases in
> > the books where this would be applicable.
>
> I've added this to the text as "If you possess the Kai Weapon 'Valiance', you
> will benefit from its unique properties, as Brumalghasts are magical
> creatures." and added the justification in the errata entry. I think we've
> actually been pretty good at making these reminders consistent across the NO
> series, but if there are any we've missed, we can and should add the relevant
> reminder to the section.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 212: the force of your attack at such close quarters explodes the
> > Guard Captain's chest armour -> ...crushes the... [Or, ...shatters
> > the...] ~~~~~
> >
> > OK as is.
>
> Rejected.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 267: [jc: Should you also erase one Arrow in favour of the Arrow
> > of Atonement, if you have 6 Arrows in Quiver (like Zejar-dulaga)?]
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > If it's taking up a Special Item slot, it doesn't seem like it's being
> > carried in a Quiver, e.g. maybe strapped to the Backpack instead? In
> > the case of the Zejar-dulaga, the book tells players to carry it in
> > the Quiver and doesn't say it takes up a Special Item slot.
>
> Rejected.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 267: tyrant Lord of Bhanar -> tyrant lord of Bhanar [Sean Donald]
> > [SO: Or, Tyrant-Lord of Bhanar
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > The XML already has "tyrant lord" without an errata entry. Nowhere
> > else in the books do we find "tyrant of Bhanar" or "Lord of Bhanar",
> > so they don't seem like titles that need to be capitalized. I lean
> > toward "tyrant lord of Bhanar".
>
> Can't remember why that was changed. Added errata entry. Fixed.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 269: Kai Mastery -> mastery
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > This is pretty standard usage in the books. OK as is.
>
> Can't imagine why I missed this one; we've already rejected this change
> across the books. Rejected.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 275: Table and add 2 (0 = 10). If you possess Deliverance, you
> > may deduct 2 from your total. -> Table (0 = 10) and add 2 if you do
> > not possess Deliverance.
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > That is quite a bit less confusing. I'm OK making this change.
>
> Fixed.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (er) 286: after 3,000 years -> after three thousand years [jc: maybe
> > better] ~~~~~
> >
> > Is this an internationalization issue? The books use the comma as the
> > digit group delimiter fairly regularly, so this would require a few
> > changes across the books. I lean toward leaving this as is since this
> > is the conventional notation in English. Thoughts?
>
> Rejected.
>
> I did a quick 'n' dirty search for "000" across the xml files and aside from
> year-dates, the only non-comma-delimited instance was in Book 10 Section 65
> ("1000 miles"). I took the liberty of changing this in Book
> 10 to "1,000 miles".
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (ft) 172, 225: [lm: Ought there to be a footnote here clarifying that
> > you may not use your Kai Weapon in this combat. 'Dropping' the weapon
> > might be interpreted as dropping it by your side or within reaching
> > distance, or also to clarify whether or not you may draw another
> > Weapon in the seconds that it takes the robber to reach you.]
> > [Add: "You must fight this battle unarmed (i.e. with no CS bonuses
> > from your Kai Weapon)."]
> > [jc: You cannot use your Kai Weapon in this combat (see section 139).]
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > My suggestion: "You must fight this combat without your Kai Weapon.
> > (cf. Section 139)"
>
> Added this to the main section text as errata: "You must fight this combat
> without your Kai Weapon." and added the justification in the errata entry.
>
> > ~~~~~
> > (ft) 265: Does this affect the number of Arrow you can carry in your Quiver?
> > ~~~~~
> >
> > I think this was meant to be 267?
>
> Merged with the (er) issue in 267 above. Rejected.
>
> Committed changes to svn. Sorted! Also updated the test editions:
>
> Simple:
> <http://www.projectaon.org/test/en/xhtml-simple/lw/28thos.htm>
>
> Less Simple:
> <http://www.projectaon.org/test/en/xhtml-less-simple/lw/28thos/title.htm>
>
> Full:
> <http://www.projectaon.org/test/en/xhtml/lw/28thos/title.htm>
>
> --
> Simon Osborne
> Project Aon
>
> ~~~~~~
> Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
>
>
> jv�{*.�˛���ب��a�� � 0~���+-����X���k�7���'
Other related posts:
