Matt, most of these are cosmetic, picky corrections. In no way am I criticising you, so don’t be offended
Also, these were looked at
before the
'Another day, another update' version (so the page numbers could be different from the version that is now posted), and if you've caught any of these already, my apologies... and my apologies if these have already been mentioned by others
(I've printed at 600dpi on a HP LaserJet 1320 in black and white)
Document printed at A5 with no text clarity issues.
Document printed at A4 with no text clarity issues.
Although some illustrations in the main body of text are difficult (blockier at A4, obviously) on the whole they are ok. However, the footnote examples are quite difficult to see.
The header and footer needs to be positioned further away from the main text.
Justified text looks nice.
TOC – Credits are unnecessary here, they are better at the top of each ‘chapter’.
Occasionally, the text flows onto the following page in an ‘unusual’ manner. For example, page 11 the last part of the sentence reads, “…the followers involved are”, it then page breaks and continues on page 12 with, “removed.” There appears to be plenty of room on page 11 for the last word. Another one is on page 54 where a page break would be better before the heading ‘2. Deploy a follower’.
Is the new expansion name King, Count and
Consort or King, Count and
Consorts? I only ask as it is repeated throughout the footnotes as the latter, and I thought it was the former. Like I said, i'm only nit-picking
Page 3 – ‘Where does this document stand?’, 2nd line, “-there are currently 11-“ should read “-there are currently 12-“.
Page 17 – Inns and Cathedrals. The text under the cloister and crossing tiles is overlapped by the inn and farm tiles underneath (it's the word 'segments'
).
Page 18 – Footnote 40, ‘excludes’ should be ‘exclude’.
- Footnote 41, the apostrophe after ‘players’ is not required… (I think).
Page 20 – Cosmetic correction for consistency. Footnote 44, “The RGG edition of the Big Box…”, 'Big Box' should be in bold and italics.
Page 43 – Footnote 136, lose the space before the close bracket [it eats them ]… it’s annoying me (having said that, this is probably the very reason to leave it in
)
Page 49 – Footnote 160, the word extended should be enclosed with the same inverted comma/s.
- Footnote 166, there’s a different font used on the inverted commas. I know… slightly fussy!
Page 54 – Footnote 187, “…cloister neighbour”, should read “…cloister to neighbour”
- I am not sure as to what exactly your comment in brackets means ([No-Matt]). Can you expound on this? …After looking at it, I understand (I think). You are answering the question posed in a straightforward way, yes?
