Errata for King Arthur Pendragon, 5th edition, the Great Pendragon Campaign, the Book of the Manor and the Book of Knights and Ladies van be found on Greg's Pendragon website on this page:

http://www.weareallus.com/pendragon/totalerrata.html

Further notes and game aides are linked to from the main page:

http://www.weareallus.com/pendragon

It is a totaly cool page.

Hello to everyone,

I have seen the errata page on the Greg's Pendragon Site, but I wuold appreciate if there was a PDF version of the errata to download and easily print.

May you help me?

Yes, pdf would be quite handy!

Also, the adress has changed: http://www.gspendragon.com/totalerrata.html

At the moment I solved printing the web page through softwares like PDF Creator... which makes the page a PDF document, but the graphic and the structure of the page is not so well tranlated into PDF... it is readable though!

Yes please dear Greg (or someone willing). A PDF to print and just slide into the back would be great. Even better, ready replacement pages for the PDF version...

The problem with a pdf is that it needs to be updated whenever the errata is updated.

I expect Greg would be willing to host it, if a fan wanted to make such a pdf each time the errata was updated :)

The problem with a pdf is that it needs to be updated whenever the errata is updated.

I expect Greg would be willing to host it, if a fan wanted to make such a pdf each time the errata was updated :)


That is a solution I can live with.

That is a solution I can live with.



Well dear Greg, than I am able to send you the pdf-made pages... via mail is ok?

:-[ I feel like an absolute heel being picky in my first post, especially as it comes in response to a very gracious unprompted author authored set of errata and especially following a very civilised plan for making it easier to use but here we go regardless.

The errata page contains an error I believe
Addition unhelmeted claims that Partial Plate has 12 AP 'for Partial Plate, 12 x 75%= 8,' isn't it reinforced chain 12AP, Partial Plate 14AP?



Al the churlish

well spotted.
Also 12 x 75% would be 9.

Ok, while we are at it:

KAP5 errata:

Page 47, Year 454
The Battle of Chalons took place in 451, not 454.
Change this to be 451.

Page 47, Years 451-453
Change this to be Years 452-454

Sure, I'll buy that the battle took place in 451.. but this errata completely screws up the logic of the entries (and it "works" before).

Hello everyone!

I noticed this morning that on the Book of Knights & Ladies, on page 47, there is no hint of what the religious bonus for an Irish Pagan should be.

All the others are written down there or in other pages of the book, but not that.

Byez

Not sure if this has been discussed before. My apologies if it has.

GPC page 38 refers to the adventure "Riding Patrol". However, I couldn't find this anywhere in the book or KAP5. It's not mention in the GPC errata either. Can anyone help me find it. If not, is there an outline to help flesh this out, with perhaps random encounters?

Thanks.

Not sure if this has been discussed before. My apologies if it has.

GPC page 38 refers to the adventure "Riding Patrol". However, I couldn't find this anywhere in the book or KAP5. It's not mention in the GPC errata either. Can anyone help me find it. If not, is there an outline to help flesh this out, with perhaps random encounters?

Thanks.


I belief it refers to the adventure RIDING THE ROUNDS on page 67 GPC.

Thanks. I'd completly missed that.

In BoKL, knights whose fathers are men-at-arms are listed as having -5 to Horsemanship; should this perhaps be +5?

In BoKL, knights whose fathers are men-at-arms are listed as having -5 to Horsemanship; should this perhaps be +5?


Probably not. Men @ Arms are footmen, so they probably wouldn't be skilled horsemen.

Yeah, Men-at-arms are not necessarily even knights.

Yeah, Men-at-arms are not necessarily even knights.


I am trying to remove this particular terminology from BoA right now

-g

Mentioned in another thread but I thought I would put it in here.

In the 5.1 rulebook there is no dowry listed for Lady Jenna where one exists in the 5th edition book.

Also, and this has been bothering me for a while, if you go through the Salisbury history tables and you are born in 465 and the GPC starts you off in 485 you would be 20. Not 21 which is the assumed age. Hence I started off the GPC with 20 year old knights. Not an issue in itself but it seems to make nonsense of some of the other bits in the rulebook that talk about 21.

Lusus and all,

Unfortunately I believe you are correct. The age of being born under 5.0 is 465. Since the changes in those tables were mine in 5.1, I must take the credit for not correcting it as I was not checking to see if those dates were correct.

However, the simplest fix is to take note that after the battle of Mt. Damien, Uther and the Britons are extremely short-handed and so suitable candidates of whatever age are being knighted. One year, I don't believe will make the system fall apart.

We might want to change this going forward - I'll leave that in Greg's hands.

Robert Schroeder

Is there any errata that's specific to the 5.1 rulebook? There's errata on the website for the 5.0 book, but not the new one...

Please put this int he Errata section of this forum.



I recall where I got confused in this.

http://www.gspendragon.com/missingglory.html

in the Sample Glory Table,
under, Holding Land
it states, "This Glory is received annually by the knight enfeoffed." ie only by the knight who Holds the fief. no mention made of his lord.

perhaps it ought to read,

"This Glory is received annually both by the knight enfeoffed, and by the Lord (or Knight) from whom that fief is held."

I noticed a mistake in the Book of Knights&Ladies, old version...
The Pict ladies seems to have, in the first period of time, a Tourney skill of 1, while their male counterparts have it at 0.

I suppose it may be a mistake.

I noticed a mistake in the Book of Knights&Ladies, old version...
The Pict ladies seems to have, in the first period of time, a Tourney skill of 1, while their male counterparts have it at 0.

I suppose it may be a mistake.


Note it in the Errata section below, please

Hope this is the right place to post this...

Error (Omission):

Book of Knights & Ladies, (5th Edition, (c) 2007
p. 92
Section 2: Traits & Passions
The "German (Arian Christian)" subsection is MISSING the starting values for "Valorous" and "Cowardly" (assumed to be 15/5.

Interesting read. Thanks guys! Really enjoyed it.