Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Staver 02-16-04, 12:47 PM	Hi, I didn't see a 3.5 Monster Manual errata thread, so I thought I would post this: Trolls p.247 and 248, table on 247 has Darkvision 90 ft. and Trolls as Characters has 60 ft. -Staver :D edit: removed other "errata" because I was wrong and book is right.
Ogre4Hire 02-17-04, 11:43 AM	I'd say DV 60 feet, since that's the default range of the ability.
Staver 02-17-04, 12:21 PM	I agree. Is there an "official" errata thread being compiled some place I missed? -Staver
olshanski_home 02-17-04, 12:30 PM	Here is another possible errata: Animals (non-combatant herbivores) are supposed to get no primary attack, all attacks they make are considered "secondary" suffering -5 to hit and using only half strength for the attack they make. (from the MM). Lets compare 2 CR2 animals, both summonable with Monster Summonging 3: Black Bear: (Omnivore) AC 13 Move 40 HD 3d8+6 (19 hp) Atk +6 (1d4+4 claws x2) Bison: (Herbivore) AC 13 Move 40 HD 5d8+15 (37 hp) Atk +8 (1d8+9) The bison has 1 fewer attack, but its one attack hits more often, does more damage, and twice the HP of the bear. I think the bison should suffer the herbivore penalty, thus it still has twice the HP of the bear, but its attack is only +3 and does 1d8+3 damage. This would make them equivalent creatures, in my opinion.
Zherog 02-17-04, 12:32 PM	Originally posted by Staver I agree. Is there an "official" errata thread being compiled some place I missed? -Staver The general rule of thumb is that text supercedes table entries when the two conflict. While I want to say this statement was made in the FAQ, I'm not 100% sure.
Shadowfax7 02-17-04, 12:53 PM	Text superceding tables is official errata in the 3.5 PHB errata document except where specifically noted. Thus I would say it would apply to any future errata documents of the 3.5 DMG or MM1 (unless an exception is made). I agree with the above posters that a Troll character would have darkvision out to 60'.
Zendu 02-17-04, 01:39 PM	hmmm if hes suffeing -5 for attack for offhand weapons, why whould that apply to his damage also? shouldnt it still be 1d8+9?
olshanski_home 02-17-04, 03:12 PM	The rules state for herbivore animals that thier attack is secondary (-5 to ATK) AND they may use only 1/2 the strength modifier for damage. The bison strength is 22. As written in MM, damage is 1d8+9 (strength * 150%) According to the definition of animal type, it should only be 1d8+3 (Strength * 50%).
quaiven 02-17-04, 05:26 PM	Isn't the bison's attack a gore? While generally most herbivores should suffer the -5 penalty for not have a natural attack, some herbivores (bulls, bisons, hippopotomus, rhinos, elephants, among others) do have natural attacks which they use often, both in defense and in mating, so I don't believe they should suffer the -5 penalty or the str penalty (don't believe me? go cow tipping and upset the bull). Now other herbivores however (like sheep for example) don't have natural attacks and the penalties should be applied. More importantly, is that most animals (even carnivores) will not fight at all (summoned animals excepted of course), they will flee at the first oppurtunity.
Glak 02-17-04, 09:42 PM	Yeah, a bison is not a noncombat animal. They are tough.
Walter Russ 02-18-04, 01:50 AM	I saw one spit a watermelon some ninety feet. Must have been over forty degrees out.