evl wrote:Checked my copy of B10 - the table of contents lists the pull-out sheets as being between pages 12-13 as well. But my pull-out sheets are actually between pages 28 and 29.

Mine were between 28-29 too, but I pulled them out to use them (though my counters are unpunched)

johnhuck wrote:

deimos3428 wrote:Wow, they really messed that up (Magic Resistance too!).  I'm just surprised I didn't notice for the last 20 years.

Wasn't there an errata for the MM?  I've got a vague recollection of seeing one.

The Acaeum has an errata, Http://www.acaeum.com/Library/ErrataMM.html, but it doesn't contain the word quasit (I didn't read the whole thing).  This site states that Dragon 25 had an errata article, and earlier printings apparently came with an errata sheet.  All is claimed to be fixed by the 4th edition.

deimos3428 wrote:

johnhuck wrote:
Wasn't there an errata for the MM?  I've got a vague recollection of seeing one.

The Acaeum has an errata, Http://www.acaeum.com/Library/ErrataMM.html, but it doesn't contain the word quasit (I didn't read the whole thing).  This site states that Dragon 25 had an errata article, and earlier printings apparently came with an errata sheet.  All is claimed to be fixed by the 4th edition.

A picture of the errata sheet is here: Page Not Found

An expanded version of this sheet was released as an article in Dragon #35.  While the majority of the corrections had been implemented by the Fourth print, a few never were.

You folks are the first to spot the Quasit discrepancy -- I've added it to the MM errata article on the site.

I have this (extremely) vague memory of this coming up and them verifying that the entry in the book was correct and the cover was incorrect (as you would expect).  

Carl

OD&D - Fourth Minus: more "fun and games"

Recent 4th- (Nov 1975) purchase
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 5925011042
(books EX-NM, did more damage opening to scan... hrrr...)
did have the TSR Hobbies Inc. sticker at the back of volume 1:


However, at least one of my other 4th-s doesn't:


=

The mention of errata sheets in The Acaeum printing history is also a bit confusing...

e.g. 2nd print has a separate "errata sheet"

whilst one of the other four page folded sheets (weapons/potions/etc., tables) has a blank front cover:


The 4th- (per above eBay auction) still has the errata, but this has been printed into that blank space on the front of the weapons/potions/etc. folded sheet, rather than being separate:
(front; folded, with Lizardman logo)

(back; folded)

(this sheet is folded separately from the other folded reference sheets)

Whilst by the 5th print this particular weapons/potions/etc. sheet is now entitled "Reference Sheets" on the front page (confusingly with a GK logo!) and forms the "cover" to the reference sheets.
There is no errata in any form for this printing.


Does this tally with other copies around?

=

Also, it appears as though (most?) earlier white box printings have a lighter red and crisp "Dungeons & Dragons" text header on the front, which is a duller blurred red on later non-OCE boxes.
How consistent this is, I'm not too sure...
(The darkness of the central wizard scene on later non-OCEs is also variable).

Anyone have other observations on these boxes, too?

Regards,
David.

harami2000 wrote:OD&D - Fourth Minus: more "fun and games"

The mention of errata sheets in The Acaeum printing history is also a bit confusing...

Also, it appears as though (most?) earlier white box printings have a lighter red and crisp "Dungeons & Dragons" text header on the front, which is a duller blurred red on later non-OCE boxes.
How consistent this is, I'm not too sure...
(The darkness of the central wizard scene on later non-OCEs is also variable).

Anyone have other observations on these boxes, too?

Regards,
David.

Good work.

I've also noted the different versions of reference sheets and the variable quality of the wizard.  But isn't the boxed set complicated enough?  

I'd be interested in any other observations and theories though.

Regarding the "Quasit" question from some previous posts:

I remember this difference from way back. . . I noticed it shortly after buying my first Monster Manual.  As I think about it now, I get the feeling that the Quasit was probably changed at the last minute to bring it in line with the Imp (and to some degree the pseudo-dragon & Brownie).  This makes the "special" alignment familiars more similar in power level and magic resistance "transferance".  In fact, maybe it was decided that a Chaotic Evil familiar choice was needed and the Quasit was determined to be the most suitable candidate.

As a side note, I do find it odd that the Quasit was selected to be put on the back cover of the Monster Manual to begin with. . . what were they thinking?  A Quasit?  How about an Ogre?  or Storm Giant? or Manticore?  or anything else that someone new to the game might relate to or think was cool. . . but a Quasit?  What the hell is that anyway?  I know that Gygax & Co. dug up a lot of monsters from history and folklore, but I have yet to encounter the word "Quasit" anywhere else.

Maybe they were trying to demonstrate that not all the monsters were ones you had heard of?  Even so. . . .

Now that I actually have a Monster Manual in front of me I am going to put one little addition to my comment on the quasit.  The short excerpt from the back cover reads:

"The Quasit is the unchanged form of the familiar of a chaotic evil magic-user or cleric, just as the imp is the unchanged form of the familiar of the lawful evil magic-user or cleric.  As such it is very rarely encountered except in the planes of the abyss or upon the death of its master or. . . "

Despite the poorly written description (they used "of" four times in the first sentence and twice more in the second) what this implies is that all familiars of CE evil magic-users are, in fact, quasits.  They would be changed in appearance so that they resembled a rat or cat or whatever, but their true form is a quasit (an imp would be the same to a LE magic-user).  Also, it indicates that clerics can have familiars as well.  I guess then, it is not surprising that in the final edit, the quasit was changed as the above description is very limiting (in that absolutely every CE magic-user with a familiar has a quasit) and probably not a very good idea for game balance.

Quick question for anyone who knows:  Are the booklets of some B2's 3-hold punched by TSR?  Not the cover (which I have never seen) but the booklet itself.