Topic: Arms Law 2003, printing error in criticals

[Doridian]

Hi all. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that Arms Law 2003 suffered from a systematic printing error in the critical tables. Apart from a few notable exceptions, every persistent penalty for a bad injury has been coded as 1(-x), instead of simply (-x). There's also just one case where a 1(-20) in the previous edition (I do possess both) has been replaced by (-20). I've not got the rules at hand, but if needed I can provide details.

[Doridian]

In effects I didn't explain very well. It was more a question than an affirmation. The point is that I've got the RMSS version of AL and more recently I've grabbed a copy of the 2003 version. What I do not know is whether the 2003 version criticals are consistent with the RMFRP version of the same book or not. For sure they differ from the RMSS version of AL. I find strange not seeing any errata regarding this issue. Maybe I've missed it?

[ob1knorrb]

From this Article: http://www.icewebring.com/articles-and-indexes/the-evolution-of-arms-law/

There is an unfortunate error that has made it’s way into the Critical Tables in the first printing of this version of Arms Law. A “1” accidentally got inserted before critical results that indicate a negative modifier. This implies that the penalty would only last for one round, which is not correct.
So when it says “1” preceded by a negative modifier ignore the “1”, the penalty lasts until the wound is healed. For example, the last line for a 66 result in the “A” column on the Brawling Critical Strike Table says “+8H-6*-1(-15)”. This would be read as “8 additional hits, 6 rounds of Stun, -15 penalty for 1 round. It really should be a permanent -15 penalty until healed.

[Doridian]

Ah, I see. Thank you Brent. Actually there are a few 1(-x) in the original AL, so the whole matter could be easily amended. But I think that I'll stick to the original critical tables.
Thank you again.