AEC errata

For discussion of all things Labyrinth Lord.

Re: AEC errata

Postby Blood axe » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:48 am


This can't be right. Tell me its a typo. A d6 weapon, two handed, can not be thrown.

Old Rpgers know LL is from Basic. The warhammer was always: d6 damage, one handed, thrown

Why the big change to make it a useless weapon?
Tell me this was an error/typo.
To defend: This is the Pact.
But when life loses its value,
and is taken for naught -
then the Pact is to Avenge.
User avatar
Blood axe
Posts: 2243
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:19 am
Location: Famine in Far-go

Re: AEC errata

Postby artikid » Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:22 pm

Looking at wands, aren't Wand of Negation and Wand of Device Negation the same thing?

I think that there are more "doubles": like Amulet of Proof against Detection and Location and Amulet against ESP and Clairvoyance
Illustrator for hire, see my page on deviantart:
Find me on Patreon!
User avatar
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 11:56 am
Location: Concatenated cantons of Perrenland

Re: AEC errata

Postby bighara » Thu Dec 27, 2012 12:24 am

Did a quick search and didn't see this one on boards, so here goes:

Remorhaz (AEC 134): It lists the heat from its back spines as dealing 1d10 x 100 damage??

FWIW, 1e MM lists 10-100, so I'm assuming AEC should read 1d10 x 10

(Although, as is, it does allow for that dream-phrase of all DMs:

User avatar
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:06 pm

Re: AEC errata

Postby elf23 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:48 am

In both the AEC and LL, the magic-user version of remove curse specifies a range of 0. Range 0 typically means "caster only", which doesn't make any sense for the reversed bestow curse! The cleric version of the spell specifies range touch.
User avatar
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:37 am
Location: Berlin, DE

Re: AEC errata

Postby elf23 » Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:37 am

The description of spider climb states that no spells can be cast by the subject. I found this an unusual restriction, so did a bit of research on the topic recently. I found that this stems from AD&D, where the spell description says (paraphrasing) "The subject cannot manipulate small objects, thus is unable to cast most spells". "Most" spells, meaning (presumably) those with material spell components. As there is no concept of material spell components in LL, I wonder whether this restriction should be removed.
User avatar
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:37 am
Location: Berlin, DE

Re: AEC errata

Postby elf23 » Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:23 am

The magic-user spell hallucinatory terrain has a couple of oddities. Firstly, it states that a 1' square area per caster level can be affected. So, at the pinnacle of his mastery of the dark arts, a magic-user can hope to affect a 20' square area! :D This seems to be a mistranslation from AD&D, where the spell affects a 1" square area per caster level (= a 10' square area, so a 200' square at 20th level, which is more like it!). Secondly, the duration is stated as "see below", but then not clearly described in the spell's text (it is supposed to be permanent unless touched or dispelled).
User avatar
Posts: 316
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:37 am
Location: Berlin, DE

Re: AEC errata

Postby aspiringlich » Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:13 pm

The weight of an empty flask is given as 1.5 lbs, while a full flask of holy water or oil is only 1 lb. Somehow flasks get heavier when they're emptied ;)

I'm thinking an empty flask should be .5 lb.
User avatar
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:47 pm

Re: AEC errata

Postby Jay_NOLA » Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:18 pm

Monster (Good & Evil) Alignments of LL "basic" monsters in AEC

This isn't an error, but as AEC has an optional expanded alignment system and the new monsters in AEC indicate the additional information for the monster's alignment if you are using the expanded alignment rules.

A chart or quick listing of all the original "basic" LL monsters with the AEC alignment info to cover the optional expanded AEC alignment rules would be helpful since "basic" LL only uses 3 alignments and not the expand AEC alignment system.
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:40 pm

Re: AEC errata

Postby peacekeeper_b » Mon Aug 22, 2016 11:59 am

I know that assassins can only go to 15th level, druids to 14th and monks in AEC can go to 16th. However the assassin has a * that says "Hit point modifiers from constitution are ignored" when it should say "*Maximum level attainable for assassins."

The Human Classes Available Chart says unlimited to all (technically it seems 20 is the limit for all) but notes assassin is 15 level limit. Should it not also list druid as 14 level limit and monk as 16 level limit?

Fighters seemed nerfed. I saw no weapon proficiency rules (did I miss them?) and no exceptional strength or extra constitution bonus for high score for fighter's only that can be attained by most races (starting at con 17 in original AD&D), instead only a fighter with con 19 gets any extra benefit, which would be half orc and dwarf only. It also isn't clear if only fighter's get the bonus for 19 con or fighters and the two subclasses of ranger and paladin. However since dwarves and orcs cannot be rangers or paladins, the point may be moot as those who can be rangers and paladins cannot get a 19 con.

While I like AEC I am disappointed that it avoids some of the classic 1E troupes. Exceptional strength, fighter (ranger/paladin) con bonus to hit points, weapon proficiencies.

Also, is magic missile supposed to be 1d6+1 damage? You reduce starting hit points, reduce cure light wounds and increase magic missile? Wow.
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:53 pm


Return to Labyrinth Lord

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest