Why? What will it achieve? Prove that the game was playtested with two attack rolls? Prove that they used the top line of the combat chart? And what then? So Mongoose decide to reduce the number of rolls to attack, in order to simplify combat (one of their stated goals), and then someone forgot to alter the combat charts in the core book. Embarrassing. So maybe they'd rather try to save face by issuing the pdf guide than admit to a rather basic blunder. Ultimately so what?
No. You're misundarstanding my intentions.
Mainly because I was interested in using a two-roll system myself except for the problem I realized I would have with criticals (see my post above). I'd like to know how the playtesters played and tested the system to try and figure out exactly how it worked as presented in the rulebook because that's how I see the game working as I would like it to work.
I would hope that the months of playtest and feedback that contributed to the final version of the game were what showed up in the rulebook.
The Player's Guide PDF seems to be a stopgap to fix some of the rules in the rulebook - and possibly done at the behest of feedback that was critical to the two-roll system rather than because the book was in error in several places.
Mongoose releasing a 'stop gap' fix document doesn't have to be considered a bad thing - though I would have hoped that months of playtesting contributed to the final version of the combat system. If not, why have playtesters ?
I have no vested interest in seeing Mongoose embarassed if the Player's guide PDF was just an attempt to 'save face' instead of fess up to the errors in the main book. In fact, I hope that's not the case because I think MRQ has great potential, and I would hate to see that kind of attitude from the company that produced it.
Seriously, I don't see how that could be the case...I think it might be more of an instance of not thinking things through before releasing the Player's Guide rather than trying to save face...I mean, why admit in the Player's Guide PDF that the examples in the book are in error, but then try to save face regarding other errors or rules that were left out ?
That doesn't make sense unless the sheer number of errors would make the 'Runequest: Atlantean Edition' a necessity, and Mongoose customers slap their foreheads and say "Oh no, not again!".
The problem I have now is the lack of response from the Mongoose folks since the Player's Guide PDF was released. Like I have said elsewhere, I'm glad to see Matt's response on the Errata thread that says they are working on it, and I am hoping that the Errata document clears up several of these issues.
Unfortunately, It looks like (from the now missing in action "MRQ Companion - No Thanks" thread), that a whole new set of questions are waiting to be answered.
Don't get me wrong Gevrin - don't think I am anti-MRQ. I really want to use it for a Glorantha campaign, for Middle Earth, and for a Classic History game. I'm just waiting for some issues to be cleared up because I just can't (personally) use it in it's current state.