Enjoyed reading the new adventure compendium, but noted a few oddities in it that might be worth fixing before it goes to print.
There aren’t any stats for the people the players have to fight in the new adventures (pages 27 and 37). There also aren’t any archetypes in the core book that are easy picks for thugs/goons or survivors.
The description of doing extra damage in combat on p27 should be one extra point per two extra successes.
Pages 28, 43, 70 and 71 all have negative consequences for getting no successes. This is odd, since Dune has a mechanism for “critical failure” in the form of complications. Maybe replace references to no successes with a complication occurring?
Page 47 makes an odd reference to a third booklet in the first paragraph. I’d suggest deleting this bit.
I also noted a fair few typos and underlined them in my pdf. Happy to pass them on if it helps.
Thanks for those. Do send in other spots so we can take a look, although the file is long at the printers.
1 - Fair point, they just really need a Battle skill or just a target number as they drop if hit. They should have a Drive of 4 and a Battle of only 5 for a target number of 9.
2- Thats not the case, 1 Momentum should give you 1 point towards the requirement. Weirdly we failed to specify that in the corebook but it is in Wormsign.
3 - You still get negative effects for a failure depending on the test. Sometimes you just miss something, but other times failure can still cause you problems. Although complications can also come up as you say. It is essentially up to the GM to set out the consequences of failure.
4- Ah, ignore that, we thought we’d purged those from a previous incarnation of the work.
@Andy-Modiphius Thanks for weighing in on those. I’ll try submitting the marked up pdf to the new feedback page too (just got an email about that).
On point 2, page 167 of the core rulebook says
“Each successful attack scores points equal to 2 plus the Quality of the asset used; you may spend 2 points of Momentum to increase the Quality of the asset by +1 for that attack only.”
So I think it is 2 points of momentum for an extra point of damage (conflict differs from the general case).
It’s nice to see the “short form” for NPCs in action. That’s quick for defining someone without the burden of a full statblock.
Ah, I see where you are coming from.
You are correct in that you can increase the quality of the asset that way.
However, you can also spend 1 Momentum to add another point to the requirement after the test.
The asset increase should last for the scene, while the Momentum spend is only for that test, so while more expensive the asset bonus will do better in the long run.
"…you may spend 2 points of Momentum to increase the Quality of the asset by +1 for that attack only.”
(emphasis mine). I think the reason it costs 2 momentum per point is to limit the ability to one-shot powerful combatants. Even if you have 6 momentum horded up, the most you can do is buff your quality by 3. Further, since quality can’t exceed 4, the maximum damage in a conflict is 6, which is nasty, but not enough to take down a really skilled opponent in one go.
This latter point is particularly important for PCs, as the GM isn’t capped at 6 threat.
@Andy-Modiphius Just went to try to put in the typos. However the form doesn’t let me upload a file. I figure it’s quicker for me to send a marked up pdf then to type up all the page numbers and instances, and it’d be faster for someone correcting them to refer to the pdf (I’ve underlined them in red, so they’re easy to see, and they’re mostly pretty obvious what’s amiss). Is there anyone I could email the marked up pdf to? Shame they didn’t make it before printing.