SRD Removal Tracker

[Solomoriah]

Many of the names you call out are probably not problems. Pretty much any "[item] of [effect]" where [item] and [effect] are common words are not a problem; neither are spells that consist of one or two common words. We could probably have stuck with "magic missile" but I chose to change it; "cloudkill" worried me more mainly because it's not the most obvious thing to call the spell. "Knock" is staying, for example.

"Ring of X-Ray Vision" offends me for its use of what can only be called scientific terminology, and if I can think of a better name I'll use it. Same goes for "ESP" and there I already have a better name, "mind reading."

[Dimirag]

"Ring of X-Ray Vision" offends me for its use of what can only be called scientific terminology, and if I can think of a better name I'll use it.

Ring of Piercing Sight?

[SmootRK]

Nice. Ring of Transparency would work well too.

[coureur_d_bois]

Many of the names you call out are probably not problems.

This is why I kind of would like to wait for 4e to be published. I'll then be able to identify the problematic content more accurately. I'd get started with the FG2 for the time being if that's OK with you.

[Boggo]

Ring of Penetrating Sight maybe?

[AlMan]

Would it be OK to add a line to each book for Chi, TPFox and I to put a 'Proofed' line so we don't step on each others toes. It could include any other proofreaders you want to include.

Kinda like this:
The Basic Fantasy Equipment Emporium r25 - DONE

Priority: Medium
Status: Reviewed
Tracker: Link to master post
Proofreaders: TPFox, Chiisu81, Leon, AlMan (just add the next proofers name at the end of this list.)

[Solomoriah]

TO the actual document? Yeah, as long as I can find it to remove it for the release.

[Solomoriah]

Also, check the Core Rules thread for my first cut at the new magic item distribution.

[AlMan]

TO the actual document? Yeah, as long as I can find it to remove it for the release.

Actually the list on the first post of this thread is what I was thinking of.

[Jim1804]

I know we were asked to prioritize what was already in print but my recommendation would be to tackle the Filed Guide 2 before any other module and to wait to have the new rule set so we can rely on it to identify problematic terminology as we proof read.

Any thoughts?

Makes sense to me - that way we're not guessing or trying to remember what has been changed.