I'm very aware there's some grammatical errors in the book. They're pretty few, and I'm not listing them.
There is, however, one major piece of errata. If you see the word "attribute" in the game, replace it with "pool." They used to be called "attribute pools," and I dropped the first part, but the change didn't make it everywhere.
Section-by-section errata, Revised Edition
Resolution / Types of ability checks and how they work
"The third and final step is actually rolling the dice. If the success level is equal or better than the difficulty, the character has succeeded." That's an artifact from an earlier version of the system. You only need to roll 1 or higher; ie, the difficulty target is always "Marginal(1)".
Resolution / Harm and defeat
"Whenever a successful ability check is made against a character while Bringing Down the Pain, that character takes harm. The base harm is equal to the success level of the acting player's roll, which can be modified by Secrets or weapons." The base harm depends on whether the actions were opposed or parallel. If opposed, base harm is the difference in success levels. If parallel, base harm equals the success level.
Resolution / An Example of Bringing Down the Pain and Harm
"I'm changing my intention. Gael's just going to high-tail it, trying to avoid danger. . . . They roll, his Dash now versus her Sneak." Using Dash is an error. In a round in which a character is changing intentions, he is only allowed to use a Defensive Action.
Section-by-section errata, First Edition
Damage and Defeat
In the fourth paragraph, the sentence "any successful action taken against the character succeeds when he is broken" has caused some confusion. I think what this means is that the broken character can still try to resist whatever gambit is being used against him or her (though this resistance will be penalized)--but if this tactic succeeds against him, the overall goal succeeds too: in other words, you've lost this battle of intentions. (Is this right?)
The Story Guide / Designing NP Cs / Punks and pogues:
"Likewise with Keys, which they shouldn't have points to spend on, anyway: none is fine." should be "Likewise with Secrets, which they shouldn't have points to spend on, anyway: none is fine."