White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

A forum for discussion of The Wanderer's White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game

Moderator: The Wanderer

Post Reply
User avatar
The Wanderer
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: North of the Emerald City
Contact:

White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by The Wanderer »

Hi Folks,
I would like to update the rules to fix any known errors. If you got ‘em, post them here.

There is a free 7 day trial for Indesign that I will take advantage of so I can update the rules. So I I’ll wait awhile to collect as many issues as possible and then update it. Thanks!
White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game
http://whiteboxgame.blogspot.com/

User avatar
merias
Site Admin
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:37 am
Location: Eastern Townships, Québec
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by merias »

Putting my other post here, to keep them in one place:
merias wrote:Charlie here are a few errata from the April 2017 second printing, for if you plan on publishing a new edition. I think the only real one is the treasure table, the others could be seen as just a re-interpretation of the rules for legal reasons. But they make sense as compared to the original rules.

p. 62: Sleep spell - the text says that the spell affects from 1-6 creatures of 3 to 4+1 HD, but the table is missing a row - it should affect 1-6 creatures of 3 HD and 1 creature of 4 or 4+1 HD. At least that more closely matches the description from OD&D.
p. 97: Iron golem - Should do more damage than the stone golem, maybe 3d6 is good? These are from the Greyhawk supplement, so the damage used there doesn't translate well (stone golems do 3d8 and iron golems 4d10 damage in that supplement).
p. 105: Ogre/Ogre mage - Ogres do 1d6+2 damage in OD&D (instead of the 1d6+1 listed).
pp. 116-117: Treasure tables - Anywhere it says 'roll 1d6 on the X table' or 'roll 1d6+something on the X table' the die used should be 1d8 instead, since the roll is to a d20 table and the max roll of 1d6+12 only goes up to 18. But even at 1d6+0, a 1d8+0 makes more sense on those tables (kenmeister first noticed this in the WB 3rd printing here: http://odd74.proboards.com/thread/9699/whitebox-errata).

User avatar
The Wanderer
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: North of the Emerald City
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by The Wanderer »

The updates and fixes will be happening very soon so if you folks happen to know of any other issues get them in soon!

One of the fixes I’ll be making is in the ability generation section. It currently has a point swap in 1 for 1 basis. That was a typo and should be 2 for 1 basis.
White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game
http://whiteboxgame.blogspot.com/

xanstin
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:34 pm

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by xanstin »

For wandering monsters was the intent 1 per hour? (Original was once per turn - 10min)

User avatar
The Wanderer
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: North of the Emerald City
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by The Wanderer »

The wandering monster checks are indeed different. There are a lot of rules that are slightly different throughout the game. I have thought about doing a bigger update to make it closer to OD&D in a lot of respects but at that point it would be getting Away from the being a clone of S&W WB. It was originally intended to be a replacement for that book if folks wanted a nicer layout with the game.
White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game
http://whiteboxgame.blogspot.com/

User avatar
The Wanderer
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: North of the Emerald City
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by The Wanderer »

When I had the 2nd printing layout done by a professional, I thought The partnership would last a long time to cover all future updates. That did not turn out to be the case. So very small changes should work by just updating the PDF. But any big changes like adding sections or removing sections, could be a problem.

So what I may end up doing is using Affinity Publisher myself and redo the layout. That way I have full control over putting out the updates/fixes.
White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game
http://whiteboxgame.blogspot.com/

User avatar
merias
Site Admin
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:37 am
Location: Eastern Townships, Québec
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by merias »

merias wrote: p. 62: Sleep spell - the text says that the spell affects from 1-6 creatures of 3 to 4+1 HD, but the table is missing a row - it should affect 1-6 creatures of 3 HD and 1 creature of 4 or 4+1 HD. At least that more closely matches the description from OD&D.
I was reading this thread on the sleep spell history:

http://odd74.proboards.com/thread/8809/story-sleep

and I noticed this:
Original D&D (Gygax & Arneson) 1st-4th prints, Jan 1974-Nov 1975.
2-16 up to 1+1HD, 2-12 up to 2+1HD, 1-6 up to 4+1HD, 240ft.
So it seems I was mistaken, and White Box actually did take it's sleep spell from OD&D - just an early printing I had never read!

User avatar
merias
Site Admin
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:37 am
Location: Eastern Townships, Québec
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by merias »

Not sure if you are still planning an update Charlie, but I noticed the Fighter's combat fury ability does not specify melee vs. missile attacks. I think it should specify melee, since this was the original intent, and I can see missile attacks getting out of hand with bows getting 2 shots per round already.

cbarchuk
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2020 4:41 pm

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by cbarchuk »

I would like to add that I think updating the Thief's backstab to a +4 to hit along with backstab progression would be appropriate.

From the Greyhawk supplement:

By striking silently from behind the thief gains two advantages: First, he increases
the chance to hit by 20% (+4 on his die). Secondly, he does double damage when he so
attacks, with like additional damage for every four levels he has attained. Thus, if a thief
of the 4th level attacked from behind he would do twice the damage indicated by the die,
4 at 5th through 8th levels he would do thrice the damage, at 9th through 12th levels he
would do four times the damage and so on.

User avatar
merias
Site Admin
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:37 am
Location: Eastern Townships, Québec
Contact:

Re: White Box:FMAG, looking for errors

Post by merias »

Agreed. I have always used the +4 to-hit for thieves' backstab in my games. I add the +2 they get in the rules to the normal +2 to-hit I give for anyone who attacks from the rear, so I guess in my case I am adding a separate house rule rather than changing this one. I've never had a player in my games with a thief of 5th level or higher, but I agree on importing the higher damage multiplier (and actually FMAG has a subtle difference here - the rules say to roll weapon damage twice instead of one roll doubled. That skews the probabilities to make it much harder to get max damage).

[Also, welcome!]

Post Reply