How about a scan?

Any chance it's a page cut out of a Dragon magazine?

Edit: Oops - you mean there's a product number for just the errata sheet?

Here's a scan:  (Notice also, copyright of 1985 - last copyright I see listed on the Expert Set is 1983).

Looking further, it could actually be something from the Master Set.  The Master Set came out in 1985 and it also had a product code of 1021. In which ccase it would not be the first time that there was a transposition of numbers on one of thier books, i.e the map from DL2-Dragons of Flame has a product code that matches up from DL3-Dragons of Hope, if you remember that.

bclarkie wrote:Looking further, it could actually be something from the Master Set.  The Master Set came out in 1985 and it also had a product code of 1021. In which ccase it would not be the first time that there was a transposition of numbers on one of thier books, i.e the map from DL2-Dragons of Flame has a product code that matches up from DL3-Dragons of Hope, if you remember that.

I see what you're saying . . . but I still think this is from an Expert Set.  The reason being, if you read the top paragraphs and the Errata, it definitely points to the Expert Set.  The errata is for two sections in the rulebook.

zhowar wrote:
So, it says "Character Information for High Level Games" and "above level 14", but the information in most of those tables only goes up to level 14. So, it's actually revised lower level information for use in conjunction with the Companion & Masters Set?

The "Rules for High Level Games" are contained within the first two paragraphs in the top section.  The rest is just reprinted Expert Charts.


Examing this sheet, I can tell it is not perforated, nor has it been torn from another book.  

Come on now . . . does no one else have an opinion?  Even verifying that your 5th print set doesn't have one is something.  

Beyondthebreach wrote: The "Rules for High Level Games" are contained within the first two paragraphs in the top section.  The rest is just reprinted Expert Charts.

But if you look at the first paragraph, you'll see it says "Magic-User and Thief Saving Throws are not revised". And if you look at the Saving Throw tables in the right column, M-U and T are missing. This implies that the other tables are revised tables. I don't have a Mentzer Expert set anymore so I can't do a detailed comparison. Anybody else?

I'm going to post a link to this thread over in the "Classic D&D" section on Dragonsfoot. Some folks there are experts on the differences between the Moldvay/Cook; Mentzer; and Rules Cyclopedia sets.

Here's the DF thread I just started:
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewt ... 422#348422

Here is some information from a Dragonsfoot thread that seems relevant:

Alex wrote:Expert - Very few errata.  There is a dwarven or halfling saving throw that differs from the class description and the reference table in the middle of the book.  There are 2 versions of Mentzer expert!  The differences are numerous, but confined to the spells-per-day, thief skills, and saving throw tables.

This information (spells, thief skills, saving throw tables) is strikingly similar to the information presented in the Errata sheet above.

The Acaeum Expert Set page lists two different printings of the Mentzer Expert Set (4th & 5th print), *but* indicates the rulebook is the same in each. So perhaps the Acaeum page does not include complete print info for this product.

Perhaps TSR first included the Errata Sheet with the rulebook, and then incorporated the Errata into the rulebook?

Netrodent, did you carefully check all of the numbers in each table for differences? If so, you could have a rulebook from after the Errata was incorporated.

http://i8.tinypic.com/25jfvop.jpg

Well most of the Errata is in my print, except for the Character HIt Rolls columns.

ShaneG.

Beyondthebreach wrote:I think some of the errata is fairly subtle - like on the Elf experience table.  It seems the level titles are now divided with a / (slash).  A 4th level Elf is not a Hero Magician, he is a Hero/Magician.


(Where's Frank M. when ya' need him.   )

My book doesn't have the / between the names on the elf table

ShaneG.

All I can suggest is that the sheet seems familiar to me.  I think I've seen it before, but I definitely don't have one on hand at the moment to verify.

It seems economically reasonable that they elected to create an errata sheet rather than a new printing, especially if they still had outstanding stock of the 5th printing.