My First Errata (Paladins and Dragons Errata and Clarifications)

So I caught my first errata the other day. That is, I found the first error in a published item which is my fault.

From Paladins and Dragons, published by Asmodee Editions.
Game written and designed by Christophe Boelinger

As it appears:

Pentacle Room
The Pentacle Room is a goal. The Pentacle is made of 4 squares. A player earns 1 VP as long as he is the only one with at least any character (not wounded) standing on each of the 4 squares of the Pentacle. If characters from two or more different colors (wounded or alive) are standing on these pentacle squares, nobody gets the additional Victory Point. The 4 squares of the Pentacle are not considered regular floor squares.

As it should be:

Pentacle Room
The Pentacle Room is a goal. The Pentacle is made of 4 squares. A player earns 1 VP as long as he is the only one with at least one character (not wounded) standing on any of the 4 squares of the Pentacle. If characters from two or more different colors (wounded or alive) are standing on these pentacle squares, nobody gets the additional Victory Point. The 4 squares of the Pentacle are not considered regular floor squares.

That's right. I changed two words, one of which almost completely changes the meaning of the paragraph.

The Dragonslayer from Paladins and Dragons (which also appears later in Mercenaries) is only usable in combat when attacking dragons, and does not work on the defensive. This applies both to its +4 and to its instant kill ability.

This one was pointed out for me via GeekMail, and doesn't apply to all versions of the rules - The rules you can download from Asmodee are different from the published rules - the difference is in Figure 1. In the downloadable version, the Golem is yellow. In the published version I have, the Golem is blue. Blue is the correct color for the Golem in this example. I don't know if this is different in any other printings of this expansion.

A few clarifications on the Charm Scroll:
1) Christophe very specifically worded worded the Charm Scroll. There are a number of ways to attack characters, but the Charm Scroll only prevents Combat. So, if you charm my Red Dragon, you can fireball my characters with it (provided they are in line of sight, of course).
2) This exact wording was suggested to me by Donald Walsh on BoardGameGeek. Change the phrase

If the charmed character kills another character, the VP goes to the player who normally controls this character.

to

If the charmed character kills another character, the VP goes to the player who would normally receive for that character's death.

A good rule of thumb to follow is this: Whenever a character is killed, the Victory Point for that death goes to the opponent of the player who normally controls that character - in a 2-player game, a Blue character's death will always give points to the Yellow player and vice versa.

I didn't write the English rules - I just edited, but it gives me a whole lot more respect for the people who write game rules. And a whole lot more understanding for games with errata - especially errata which significantly alter how a game works.

Reviews

I apologize for the delay in posting - I have three or four half-written posts that I'm still polishing. One of them is a review, so I thought I'd better make a couple of things clear when it comes to reviews that I write and/or post:

1) These are my opinions. They may coincide with that of others, it's true, but when I say, "This is a good game," it means, "I believe that this is a good game." There is no objective standard that can be used for rating games. You can measure component quality, but even games with really cheap components can be a lot of fun.

2) I will compare games to other games. If it's not a common game that nearly everyone knows, I'll try to detail why these two things are similar or different. It's not enough to say, "It has a character-based card mechanic similar to Citadels" - in reality, not all of you have played Citadels, so this would be unfair.

3) I will tend to only review games that I liked. There may be exceptions here and there, but, for the most part, I want to talk about games that excite me. So I may eventually review Nautilus, but for now look for reviews of Mission: Red Planet and Bloode Island XPG.

4) I may talk about games I'm involved with in some way. I'll make sure to make that clear from the outset on that review, however. It's no fair for me to point at a game and encourage you to buy it simply because my name is somewhere in it.

5) Please comment, especially if you disagree. Disagreements are part of what sparks discussion, and I love discussion.

6) I will try to credit game designers for their games. I'll also try to link to the manufacturer and/or the BoardGameGeek page for a given game.

7) I'll not direct you to specific retailers. I would prefer that, if at all possible, you support your Friendly Local Game Store. The FLGS is the best place to discover new games and new gamers. If you don't shop there, it'll die. It's that simple.

Any questions?