|
Post by Zipp on May 3, 2010 2:22:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Zipp on May 3, 2010 2:37:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Zipp on May 3, 2010 2:40:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pi4t on May 3, 2010 12:39:27 GMT
To purify it?
|
|
|
Post by Zipp on May 3, 2010 15:42:41 GMT
With what? Rubbing alchohol?
|
|
|
Post by pi4t on May 3, 2010 16:40:45 GMT
HH equipment section:
|
|
|
Post by Zipp on May 3, 2010 17:29:42 GMT
Ah. That makes sense then.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on May 4, 2010 10:24:41 GMT
Seems unnecessary; it should be self-evident that a second item is also destroyed here. Added a footnote: "It is possible that you may not be carrying a missile weapon at this point. This is a game-design issue that cannot be easily rectified." Added a footnote to the preceding Section 97: "If you are not carrying at least one Medi-kit unit, turn directly to Section 283 without picking a number." pi4t covered this before I got here! Right now, energy and focus is on the Spanish Lobo Solitario section of the site, updating books and getting others ready for release, so not much is happening for English-speakers (like me!). I would imagine most fans would prefer us to work on the remaining New Order books when we start work on the English-language books, with the Freeway Warrior books being the last books released. Personally, I'd rather have a look at the FW books first, because I think they require less editing work than the NO books, but I'm almost certainly in a minority, I'm afraid. :-\
|
|
|
Post by Zipp on May 4, 2010 16:59:22 GMT
Oh, I see! They meant the second item LISTED on your backpack, not the item in SLOT number 2!
|
|
|
Post by Zipp on May 8, 2010 21:35:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on May 9, 2010 9:39:21 GMT
Thanks for the tip! Actually, it seems we fixed this sometime recently, because it's not present in the xml, though I don't recall when this might have happened. But I can definitely verify that the fix will be in the next edition. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by zut on May 9, 2010 14:38:37 GMT
Some minor errors: Book #1, Equipment section: Healing potion...when swallowed after combat You only... -> ...combat . You... (missing fullstop) #4/40, #5/239, #8/284: ...reached Kai rank of [rank]... -> ...reached Kai rank of [rank] or higher... #5/118: To guard raises... -> The guard raises... #6/300: It is the Tower of the King and marks... -> It is the Tower of the King and it marks... (or maybe and -> that/which) #6/350: ...skin ripples as if a wave were washing... -> ...skin ripples as if a wave was washing...(?) #7/The Story So Far: By doing so successfully, you too, will... -> By doing so successfully, you , too, will...(missing comma) #8/13: There's one great footnote there but maybe there could be also stated that in revised versions (Mongoose ed.) you are given 6 rounds to defeat Vordaks? (as with Zakhan Kimah and Chaos Master)
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on May 10, 2010 15:55:59 GMT
Hey, thanks for posting these! I'll comment on each in turn: Damn! I wish we'd seen that sooner! This will be fixed in the next release of the book. These seem fair enough. Fixed in the source files. This is one we introduced ourselves. D'oh! Fixed in source. Yes, I see what you mean. English syntax can be strange because the subject can be implied across clauses, but this sounds and reads better if fixed by adding that extra "it" in there. Fixed in source. Gah! Subjunctive use of was/were. I haven't fixed this because I'm not 100% sure about whether the original is correct, but I have "escalated" it to be reviewed the next time we revise Book 6. I considered dropping both commas, because having three commas following three successive words looks very fussy; but the way the sentence is written, it seems all three commas are needed here. Fixed in source. Although we have kept the original stats in the main body of the text, we have already footnoted this in the source file: All of the above issues (save for the 8:13 footnote) have been added to the relevant Errata page as well. This was a very helpful list of issues, zut, and the Aon editions will be much better for it. So you know what to do if you come across any other problems in the books...
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on May 11, 2010 17:52:19 GMT
Gah! Subjunctive use of was/were. I haven't fixed this because I'm not 100% sure about whether the original is correct, but I have "escalated" it to be reviewed the next time we revise Book 6. "Were" is indeed the subjunctive, correctly used here. "Was" is right only in that the subjunctive is uncommon in modern English and is usually replaced by the indicative past tense. Or without the grammar babble: The original is fine. Just to throw in my two cents while I'm here, I personally think it were best to omit the two commas.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on May 11, 2010 19:51:06 GMT
OK, thanks! Marked the "subjunctive were" issue in Book 6 as Rejected.
As for the second issue, I have to confess, I was that close to removing the commas altogether; but before committing the change, I read the sentence back to myself, and it really looks/reads very oddly without any punctuation. Without rewording the sentence, which we've tried to avoid doing as much as possible, I think the better compromise is the overly-fussy (but accurate) comma use, unfortunately. :-\
|
|