Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (
-   The Fantasy Trip (
-   -   TFT Errata for Hexagram #3 (

Steve Jackson 09-09-2019 04:02 PM

TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
See the listing of known errata on the news page. Mark these in your book, if you are so inclined.

Am I missing anything significant?

hcobb 09-09-2019 04:33 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
The life or death question for TFT is the cleanup of "Dying" vs "Dead".

This is my stab at the issue:

ULFGARD 09-10-2019 01:44 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
Wait - is Hexagram #3 in development now? Coming soon? Kickstarter?

TippetsTX 09-10-2019 01:52 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
Clarify that IQ increases from XP is not intended to provide points for the acquisition of talents or spells (i.e. is XP now the only way to gain talents/spells post character creation?).

Skarg 09-10-2019 03:27 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
* Typo to the errata: Can't find "the second sentence under Ingredients" on page 152.

* The "army/police auxiliary" job shows a $250 salary. Seems clearly a typo that should be $50 as in original ITL.

* The new 2-handed damage of 2d+2 for ST 13 bastard swords is an exception to the usual damage curve, and embarrasses ST 14 great hammer users who only do 2d+2. Original 3d-2 worked better because average and min damage are lower than 2d+2. An alternative fix could be to make great hammers do 3d-1.

* No explanation what it means that PC gargoyles are 32-points, but summoned gargoyles are 39 points, as far as what NPC gargoyles in the population might be like. Or why encumbrance rules show very heavy/large gargoyles and reptile men when the PC versions have been nerfed to human ST. Reptile Man fans also wanting mention of higher-ST reptile men.

* New XP table very 32-point oriented. Doesn't work well for races that don't start at 32 points. No direction on how to handle that.

* Some people read the new options list as a change meaning Dodge is an option that can't be changed to after Movement.

* Some people read the new options list as a change meaning Defend requires a figure to be engaged, or even engaged at the start of their movement phase because of the wording "The options available to a figure depend on whether it is engaged, disengaged, or in HTH combat at the moment its turn to move comes."

* Some people read the new options list as a change meaning Defend requires only having moved one hex (rather than 1/2 MA as listed in original rules) because it is in the engaged options section so mentions shifiting one hex.

* Some people read the pole weapons charge rules as meaning a defender can only get pole weapon bonuses if a figure moving up to them from a non-adjacent hex literally takes the Charge Attack option, meaning they think they can deny the pole weapon bonuses if they take any other option (Defend, Disbelieve, whatever), or if they only moved one hex.

* Some people (well, Henry) think that a Brand can be cast on an arrow, crossbow bolt, or wooden weapon as a cheesy cheap way to get a Flaming Weapon effect and think it would do as much damage as that $10,000 enchantment.

* People wonder if in Legacy you can no longer attack with a Spike Shield as a second attack like a main gauche.

* People wonder if Unarmed Combat kick bonus damage stacks on top of Unarmed Combat punch bonus damage (hopefully not, as that gets really high).

* People wonder if you can really get +2 damage in all unarmed combat from the new IQ 7 1-point Brawling talent for "dirty brawling", or if it's only for surprising people when escalating a brawl. Since actual daggers only do +3 damage in HTH, this seems excessive to some and not well balanced with the harder Unarmed Combat talents.

* People wonder if Brawling and Unarmed Combat damage bonuses apply to gargoyles, cestus, and reptile men.

* People wonder if/why ST 13 PC gargoyles seem to do the same claw damage as ST 20 summoned/NPC gargoyles.

larsdangly 09-10-2019 04:01 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
I think it would be extremely helpful to have an errata that stated clearly and directly how all the various two-weapon and off-handed-weapon modes of fighting work. The rule book presents these ideas in several different contexts (net and trident, two nunchucks, two cesti, weapon and main gauche, normal melee weapon in each hand, shield rushes, spike shield punches, and, of course, two weapon talent). Some of these seem inconsistent with each other; others imply something that sounds like it should apply more broadly but isn't found in the other places, others are probably intentionally unique, others are just never stated one way or the other (like, do you get your shield bonus to armor protection on the same turn you punch with a spiked shield?). We've had a lot of threads that circle around to this problem, and it could all be cleared up in a Hexogram page worth of rules.

hcobb 09-10-2019 08:08 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
My fix for forcing retreat is to make it a one turn avert.

And the term for "flintlock arquebus" is "musket". This means that they do have flash powder and any chemist should be able to devise ninja style flash/smoke bombs.

This moves the gun timeline from 1400 to 1630, so expect to encounter a rifle eventually. (Accurate shot at 600 hexes.)

Skarg 09-11-2019 12:31 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
The more I think about removing the chance of falling into pits on a retreat, the more I can't resist ranting against it. Please read.

larsdangly 09-11-2019 02:35 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
I don't have an elaborate set of house rules for push backs and forced retreats, but I effectively enforce a version that is very good for the pusher and very bad for the pushed because I love what these options do to the tactics of the game and the interaction of combatants with terrain. The simple version is that I let the aggressor choose the direction of movement, and the victim gets a 3d save vs. DX only to do something like grab the edge of a pit - not to negate the move or pick a different hex.

Theohippip 09-11-2019 08:21 PM

Re: TFT Errata for Hexagram #3
ITL p.153 "Notes to Greater Magic Item Creation Table" Note B. In a thread, several people tried to figure out how "5 wizards, 3 apprentices, and 12 doses of potion to make a ST17 powerstone" was arrived at. The conclusion was that it doesn't work. Please work through this problem.

ITL p.45 Under "Learning New Spells and Talents," it states that "Each new spell or talent learned costs 500XP - or 1,000 for talents marked (2) in the listing, and so on." Is the sequence 500/1,000/1,500/2,000 XP or is it 500/1,000/2,000/4,000 XP for those marked (1), (2), (3), and (4) respectively?

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.