Note: Sub rules are a different thing than the numbered list used in attacking and attacking doesn’t have any sub rules so I don’t think this will do anything. Sub rules would be what the creatures and items are in their respective rules. The easiest way to tell the difference in the ruleset would be that the title of each subrule is in a larger font size and bold. You can edit this to say something like “Amend the third step in the numbered list in Attacking to read:” and it should work. Also, if you don’t know this already, you can edit a proposal as long as all the comments begin with ‘Note:’ and don’t contain a voting icon.

Fixed. On that that, does that make requests to examine the dead slightly non-functional?

The part of the rule I refer to is “the last Orc that caused that creature’s health to decrease is allowed to distribute the loot of that creature as if they were the attacker in Attacking sub rule 4.”

Attacking has no sub rules as you say, so I might not have actually been able to legally distribute those potions. That thirsty skeleton would still be removed though.

You know I think I might have posted that comment before the edit went through. Ah well. I’ll just do this over later.

I would say that yes, that will need to be fixed. The dispersing of those potions should be undone. I would say that since the skeleton is going to be gone anyway, in the proposal to fix examining include a part to give the potions out as they should have been distributed.

Right, I’ll undo the potions for now.

The revision history doesn’t list the second at which it was modified and the minute is the same as your comment so it would have been impossible to tell. I doubt any one would have brought it up since it was a harmless fix anyway but good for posterity I guess.