Topic: Differences between 1999 and 2003 Arms Law ?

[runequester]

The title says it all. I have a copy of the old one, what sort of updates does the new one bring ?

[dutch206]

Whoever answers the question this time, can we please sticky the response?  This is a FAQ.

[ob1knorrb]

I've got some information on it in an article on my website:
http://www.icewebring.com/docs/Arms_Law.pdf

[munchy]

Then maybe not make it sticky but add it to the FAQ of the forums.

[Marc R]

If you sit down with one of each copy of AL (AFAIK any 2 copies), you will find minor tweaks and changes to the attack tables in every one. I recall discussing this about a year ago, and we found that between 3 editions ('89, '99 and '03) and 2 printings (A UK printing, and a 2nd US printing) we found at least one attack table had been fiddled with each time the books went to press. So you could have 3 Arms laws with exactly the same cover art and text content, a US 1st edition, a US 2nd printing, and a UK printing and each one will have some slight variations in the attack tables somewhere. . .I can't recall any of them being major, more akin to "Qarterstaff does hits 5 points sooner on the table" or the like.

I'm not aware of anyone making a study of what all the little changes are.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

There are several big differences between the 1999 and the 2003 versions of Arms Law. They are mostly all detailed on page 12 of the PDF that Brent gives a link to. Two of the most major changes were the change from 1 number per row to 3 numbers per row (i.e. 148-150, 145-147, etc..) and the change to the primary crit with selectable alternative criticals.

The comparison that Lordmiller is referring to  was done in preparation for doing the RMC Arms Law, and while it possibly included the pre-2000 RMSS/FRP Arms Laws, I am doubtful that it included the 2003 because of the big changes that were made between the 1999 and 2003 versions meant that the 2003 version had few rows on the attack tables (and thus the numbers would not have matched up).

Most of the compared versions were different versions of the RM1/RM2  Arms Law, and it drove us bonkers until we realized that the old ICE would change/tweak a few attack tables every time that they sent them to the printer. And it was never the same tables....

[Marc R]

Heheh. . .we were literally on the verge of a dispute over "Can you read, row 130-135 is clearly 15BK!?!?" when we finaly realised that despite the fact we were all using the same book, that each one had tiny modifications here and there. The three ALs were all the red cover RM2 book, all slight tweaks. . .and all slightly different from any other ALs we had handy to cross reference the same table on.

I think we did look at the Q-staff table in every book we had bettween us and found no two that exactly matched. or was it the club? It's been a while I don't exactly remember.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

It was the Club

[Marc R]

I hope we haven't sent Brent off on a mission to find all the variations.

[ob1knorrb]

Nope, I'm not that crazy 

[markc]

Nope, I'm not that crazy 

 Or have that much time?
MDC

[ob1knorrb]

I think even trying to figure out how many different printings there actual were of those books would be difficult, much less trying to find all the differences in the actual tables between them.  That could definitely be a time and money consuming venture.

[Marc R]

I can see players out there, scurrying to check, and photocopying the best table version for their personal weapon. heheh. So I get a hit 5 points sooner on the table muahahaha!

[Balhirath]

I really dont care about the differences I just use what-ever weapon table I find that fits the weapon. A few hit-points difference doesn't matter