Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

List of Errata in Pathfinder Core Rulebook


Paizo Products

1 to 50 of 805 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

I decided to start this thread in order to post the errata which have not been corrected in the Manual (and in the PDF, either).

I started noticing this:

page 23:
"Defensive Training: Gnomes get a +4 dodge bonus to AC against monsters of the giant type."

It should read 'giant subtype', like in the Dwarf entry.


4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.

These are some others typos I noticed searching throughout the PDF:

page 63:

"Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side (...)"

There is no mention on how much time the Mount remains with the Paladin (rounds? hours?) and which kind of action is required to dismiss it before time (if possible).

Skills, page 87-108 (PDF only):

the hyperlink underscore for Ability names (Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha) is placed in the middle of the name instead that on the bottom - it seems that the word has been canceled instead that underscored (Adobe Reader 8.1.6)

page 136:

"Weapon Finesse: With a light weapon, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category (...)"

Add Elven Curve Blade to the list.

page 144:

"A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way"

There is a contraddiction with the rules on page 141:

"The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon — only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round"

The reference to 'creatures wielding a double weapon in one hand' is obviously for larger creatures who can wield (albeit with a -2 penalty) a smaller Double weapon as a One-handed weapon - and in this case, since they are not using the second head of the weapon, they cannot benefit from wielding it for Two-Weapon fighting. However, the first part ('a character can choose to wield it two-handed') falls in contraddiction with the rule on page 144 - unless that rule has a typo and should read 'A double weapon can be wielded as a two-handed weapon' (etc.)

Page 155:

"Type of Alchemical Silver item"

The spacing between the definition of the last entry and the price modifier is a little messy - it reads 'Two-handed weapon, or both heads of a +180 gp double weapon' (the item cost modifier is not in line with those above)

page 183-184 (cross-reference with Bestiary Preview, page 22):

"In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes (...). Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack (see the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary) can reduce these penalties."

However, the sample Human Skeleton from the Bestiary Preview shows this Melee Attack pattern:

"Broken Scimitar +0 (1d6), claw -3 (1d4+1)"

The primary attack has been calculated as if the Skeleton had Two-Weapon Fighting (+0 BaB, +2 Str, -2 TWF with One-handed and Light Weapon), the secondary attack has only the -5 penalty for attacking with a Secondary Natural Weapon and no TWF penalties at all (+0 BaB, Str +2, -5 Secondary Weapon)

So, either the Bestiary Preview or the Core Rulebook have a typo.

page 548 (PDF only):

It is erroneously placed after page 552 (originally noticed by Ploppy here)

EDIT: deleted a reference, since I noticed the table was right.


Page 30
Table 3-1
In the table it refers to the ability score increase in the singular.

Advancing Your Character
In second paragraph of this section, it refers to the ability score increase in the singular. In the third paragraph, it refers to "..any ability score increases due to gaining a level."

I assumed that both ability increase refer to a single +1 every 4 levels. This is how 3.5 worked. After searching every related topic to character advancement, I was able to confirm this by referencing page 454-455, where a sample NPC is created. Not any easy find for the inexperienced.

This is probably not a huge issue for 3.5 players. It could be a huge issue for brand new players that have never played 3.5 or any game based on the d20 system.

I would suggest that the table be edited as follows, under the table add the line: Ability Score: +1 to any ability score.

Thanks for all the hard work.

Star Voter 2013

Wow, I just got mine today (and thank you to Paizo for packing it with styrofoam corners! That was a very nice touch - no more worries about crumpled corners from me).

All I have to say is that if these are the only issues, the staff who worked on this need a big round of applause! Virtually all of these are such minor nitpicks (that could just as easily be the result of editorial choice as oversight in some cases) that this sounds like it's a very well put together product!


I've finished reading the manual on PDF (my physical copy is currently being carried back and forth by the courier - he doesn't find me at home when he brings the book, and when I go to their warehouse, the courier is out with my manual !!!...), and these are the last typos I found out:

page 12:

"Exceptional abilities (Ex): Exceptional abilities are unusual abilities that do not rely on magic to function."

For the rest of the manual, (Ex) abilities are called Extraordinary abilities (as per 3.x).

page 289:

"Giant Form II: This spell functions as Giant Form I except that it also allows you to assume the form of any Huge creature of the giant type."

It should read 'giant subtype'.

page 382:

"Dragon Form (Sp): (...) This ability works like Form of the Dragon I. At 10th level, this ability functions as __ and the dragon disciple can use this ability twice per day."

In the PDF, there is only a hint of a hypertext link (non-functioning) in the blank space. It should read 'At 10th level, this ability functions as Form of the Dragon II'

page 458 - 578 (PDF only):

Hypertext links (except for customer e-mail links on top and bottom page) do not work on these pages.

Overall, I have to say, for such a huge book, these are really minor issues.

As a side note, I also noticed an errata looking through the Bestiary Preview:

page 18:

"Melee short sword +1 (1d4/19–20)
Ranged short bow +3 (1d4/×3)"

Since the Goblin Warrior has BaB +1, Str 11, Dex 15 and has a +1 to hit due to his Small size, it should read:

Melee short sword +2 (1d4/19–20)
Ranged short bow +4 (1d4/×3)

Liberty's Edge Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The Wraith wrote:

"Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side (...)"

There is no mention on how much time the Mount remains with the Paladin (rounds? hours?) and which kind of action is required to dismiss it before time (if possible).

This isn't a mistake. The paladin's mount isn't "from the celestial realms" anymore; it's a real, physical mount. The paladin's special ability is to call it to his side--once it's there, it stays. This might need a clarification, but not an errata.

Jeremy Puckett


The spell "Mount" refers to a "light horse", but the Bestiary has changed the animal's name to "horse".

Marathon Voter 2013

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Under the spell "Detect Evil", the table listing aura power for various creature types and levels gives these numbers:

Aligned creature (HD) = NONE 5 or lower; FAINT 5-10

So does a 5 HD creature have no aura or a faint one?

Sovereign Court

In Feats list Combat Casting still says +4 to Spellcraft, despite the fact that concentration is not part of Spellcraft anymore


kitenerd wrote:
In Feats list Combat Casting still says +4 to Spellcraft, despite the fact that concentration is not part of Spellcraft anymore

I believe that's already listed in the Errata sheet.


Ok, this is not so much an errata item as it is an omission, or awkward editorial choice:

Chapter 1 has a section called something like "Common Terms" (sorry, I don't have the book in front of me), which seems to be just a glossary. At first, I only briefly skimmed this section, since I'm already familiar with most of the terms as a long time D&D player. It didn't occur to me that this section would have crucial game rules, just brief overviews of terms that would be defined/described more thoroughly eslewhere.

However, unless I'm missing something, this is the only place in the entire book where it tells you how many hit points your character gets. And even then, it's not explained as well as it could be for newbies.

So, I think there needs to be a more thorough explanation of how many hit points a character gets, and it needs to be somewhere other than the glossary, such as the Classes chapter.

Sovereign Court

on page 342
Shield of Faith says
... with an additional +1 to the bonus for every six levels you have(maximum +5 deflection bonus at 18th level)

the math doesn't make sense

a + 1 for every six levels should be a +3 at 18th level
or
is it a typo
that should read
for every three levels

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Modules Subscriber
Eltanin24 wrote:

on page 342

Shield of Faith says
... with an additional +1 to the bonus for every six levels you have(maximum +5 deflection bonus at 18th level)

the math doesn't make sense

a + 1 for every six levels should be a +3 at 18th level
or
is it a typo
that should read
for every three levels

It provides an already flat +2 bonus.

The increase of +1 per 6 levels will make the overall bonus +5 at 18th

(+3 at 6th, +4 at 12th, +5 at 18th).

Robert

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Modules Subscriber

Wraith, thanks for starting this thread.

Good info - your attention to detail is scary good. This was a helpful thread.

Robert


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am updating the srd with the changes i am able to verify as they are posted here. Keep 'em coming folks :)


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.

The spell "Shapechange" references "beast form IV" instead of "beast shape IV".

Also, the spell "Baleful Polymorph" says:
"the new form would prove fatal to the creature, such as an aquatic creature not in water, the subject gets a +4 bonus on the save."

But in Pathfinder, polymorphing into an aquatic creature does not remove your ability to breathe air.

Sovereign Court Star Voter 2014

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There is a contradiction in the rules for making magic items. Under the section on Item Creation Feats, it says the DC of the skill/spellcraft check is 10+CL of the item, but in the back of the book in the Item Creation Rules, it says 5+CL. I might be reading something wrong there, but it looks like a mistake (I don't have my book with me right now, however).


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I fixed the shapechange one hogarth, the other one needs clarification from Paizo methinks.

Star Voter 2013

Minor nitpick:

page 74 Ascension (su) description. The last two sentences of the paragraph both start with "Finally, ..."


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Walenski wrote:

Minor nitpick:

page 74 Ascension (su) description. The last two sentences of the paragraph both start with "Finally, ..."

This is fixed in the SRD now.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Pg102: Perception Table.

The examples under footnote 1 speak of bonusses and penalties to DC's rather than checks, if you follow the examples it's easier to see in torchlight than sunlight.


There is a similar thread to this right here, so it would be extremely good if its contents could be merged here (or the contents in this thread could be merged there), in order to focus our feedbacks.

I am sorry because it seems (looking at the date of creation) that this thread started by me is the redundant one (it has been created later), so I apologize for the slight mess.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
The Wraith wrote:

page 144:

"A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way"

There is a contradiction with the rules on page 141:

"The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon — only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round"

The reference to 'creatures wielding a double weapon in one hand' is obviously for larger creatures who can wield (albeit with a -2 penalty) a smaller Double weapon as a One-handed weapon - and in this case, since they are not using the second head of the weapon, they cannot benefit from wielding it for Two-Weapon fighting. However, the first part ('a character can choose to wield it two-handed') falls in contradiction with the rule on page 144 - unless that rule has a typo and should read 'A double weapon can be wielded as a two-handed weapon' (etc.)

Actually, there isn't anything wrong with the way that is worded (on page 144). It agrees with the second sentence of the example you gave from page 141 (A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon — only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round).


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I posted these on another errata thread, but here they are:

Page 23
Illusion Resistance
"... saving throw bonus against illusion spells or effects."
Minor error: I believe, to be consistent with the wording change they made for "Elven Immunities", this sentence should end with "... and effects."

Page 33
Increased Damage Reduction
Minor technical error: It is out of alphabetical sequence.

Page 33
Moment of Clarity
Moderate error: no mention of the action it takes to activate it.

Page 37
Suggestion
Major error: "Making a suggestion does not count against a bard's daily use of bardic performance".
Daily uses were scrapped in the final release -- this appears to be some left over Beta babble.

Shadow Lodge

The Wraith wrote:


page 144:

"A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way"

There is a contraddiction with the rules on page 141:

"The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon — only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round"

The reference to 'creatures wielding a double weapon in one hand' is obviously for larger creatures who can wield (albeit with a -2 penalty) a smaller Double weapon as a One-handed weapon - and in this case, since they are not using the second head of the weapon, they cannot benefit from wielding it for Two-Weapon fighting. However, the first part ('a character can choose to wield it two-handed') falls in contraddiction with the rule on page 144 - unless that rule has a typo and should read 'A double weapon can be wielded as a two-handed weapon' (etc.)

I don't see the contradiction and I didn't get the same meaning you did.

The reference to 'creatures wielding a double weapon in one hand,' I thought, referred to somebody wielding a quarter staff with one hand and using the other for something else (say a shield). That person could use it one handed but not as a two handed weapon.

The second quote refers to using the quaterstaff as a baseball bat.

Just my 2 coppers.

edit: Oops... missed post above saying something similar.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 45
Knowledge Domain - Remote Viewing:
"... can use clairvoyance/clairaudience at will as a spell-like ability..."
"... can use this ability for a number of rounds equal to ..."

If it is round-based, it's not "at will". (Also, on the nit-picking side, since the ability name is followed by (Sp), I'm not sure you really need to refer to it as a "spell-like ability".


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:

I posted these on another errata thread, but here they are:

Page 23
Illusion Resistance

Page 33
Increased Damage Reduction

Page 33
Moment of Clarity

Page 37
Suggestion

I fixed the 4th one in d20pfsrd.com but the other ones need input from Paizo before I can update them.

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

hida_jiremi wrote:
The Wraith wrote:

"Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side (...)"

There is no mention on how much time the Mount remains with the Paladin (rounds? hours?) and which kind of action is required to dismiss it before time (if possible).

This isn't a mistake. The paladin's mount isn't "from the celestial realms" anymore; it's a real, physical mount. The paladin's special ability is to call it to his side--once it's there, it stays. This might need a clarification, but not an errata.

Jeremy Puckett

Actually, the entry says: " This ability is the equivalent of a spell of a level equal to one-third the paladin's level." So if you look at the Mount spell, the mount stays for 2 hours/level.

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

Page 135

Stunning fist says "A Monk may select Stunning fist as a bonus feat...", While monk's get the feat automatically now.

Liberty's Edge Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Salama wrote:
hida_jiremi wrote:
The Wraith wrote:

"Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side (...)"

There is no mention on how much time the Mount remains with the Paladin (rounds? hours?) and which kind of action is required to dismiss it before time (if possible).

This isn't a mistake. The paladin's mount isn't "from the celestial realms" anymore; it's a real, physical mount. The paladin's special ability is to call it to his side--once it's there, it stays. This might need a clarification, but not an errata.

Jeremy Puckett

Actually, the entry says: " This ability is the equivalent of a spell of a level equal to one-third the paladin's level." So if you look at the Mount spell, the mount stays for 2 hours/level.

The mount spell is never mentioned anywhere in the paladin description. That sentence is there only to determine the concentration DC if the paladin has to use his spell-like ability defensively or if there is a local effect preventing the use of spells of a certain level or lower (like minor globe of invulnerability). The mount can be summoned; but once it's there, it stays.

Jeremy Puckett

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

hida_jiremi wrote:


Actually, the entry says: " This ability is the equivalent of a spell of a level equal to one-third the paladin's level." So if you look at the Mount spell, the mount stays for 2 hours/level.

The mount spell is never mentioned anywhere in the paladin description. That sentence is there only to determine the concentration DC if the paladin has to use his spell-like ability defensively or if there is a local effect preventing the use of spells of a certain level or lower (like minor globe of invulnerability). The mount can be summoned; but once it's there, it stays.

Jeremy Puckett

Hm, you're right, I didn't read it carefully enough. Anyway, the text can't be there because of concentration check, because spell level has nothing to do with the check, only caster level and ability bonus. And now I don't really see why Paladin has the ability to summon it four times per day at 17th level, if it's not going anywhere. Or is it just that you can keep it from dying?

Liberty's Edge Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Salama wrote:
Hm, you're right, I didn't read it carefully enough. Anyway, the text can't be there because of concentration check, because spell level has nothing to do with the check, only caster level and ability bonus. And now I don't really see why Paladin has the ability to summon it four times per day at 17th level, if it's not going anywhere. Or is it just that you can keep it from dying?

Actually, it does, since the DC for a concentration check to cast defensively is 10 + twice the spell's level.

And you never know when you're going to go through an area too narrow for your mount to get through. This way, you can get through the needle's eye (or climb a cliff, or whatever), summon your mount, use it in the open area, then leave and summon it back out.

Jeremy Puckett

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

hida_jiremi wrote:
Salama wrote:
Hm, you're right, I didn't read it carefully enough. Anyway, the text can't be there because of concentration check, because spell level has nothing to do with the check, only caster level and ability bonus. And now I don't really see why Paladin has the ability to summon it four times per day at 17th level, if it's not going anywhere. Or is it just that you can keep it from dying?

Actually, it does, since the DC for a concentration check to cast defensively is 10 + twice the spell's level.

And you never know when you're going to go through an area too narrow for your mount to get through. This way, you can get through the needle's eye (or climb a cliff, or whatever), summon your mount, use it in the open area, then leave and summon it back out.

Jeremy Puckett

Wow, seems that I shouldn't do any reading today =). I just read the concentration part and assumed that it was about casting defensively. Well, assumption is the mother of all screwups.

There seems to be a LOT of different DC's for concentration. Fortunately there is a good table for those.

Hm. Dismissing the mount was free action in 3.5, but since there is nothing about it in these rules, it must be standard action like with spells?


hida_jiremi wrote:
Actually, it does, since the DC for a concentration check to cast defensively is 10 + twice the spell's level.

I believe it's actually 15 + twice the spell's level.

Dark Archive

[derail]

(Just popped in to say you guys are doing a very good job here! :))

[/derail]

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16 , Star Voter 2013

I see mentioned as a errata giant type to giant subtype a few times. But giant has never been a subtype.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 45
Luck Domain - Good Fortune
There is no action indicated for this ability, which would then default it to a Standard action, however I believe its design was based on an Immediate action.

Note: "Any one roll" is not well defined. Since it doesn't refer to just re-rolling 1 die, I then take it any roll (even those that involve multiple dice such as a fireball damage roll) can be rerolled. Perhaps some clarification would be in order though?

EDIT:
After re-reading the ability, I really think it meant to refer to a d20 roll. I definitely now think this needs to be clarified.

For their 6th level ability this really doesn't seem comparable to the benefits enjoyed by the other domains (unless you do actually affect the outcome of multiple dice rolls, such as fire ball damage rolls -- then this is fine). Perhaps a 1 round, 30' aura that granted the Bit of Luck ability to all allies would have been better? (Still at the progression of once at 6th level, and additional at every 6th level)


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anry wrote:
I see mentioned as a errata giant type to giant subtype a few times. But giant has never been a subtype.

That's a good catch! I do think I remember reading somewhere though, that Pathfinder was making giants a subtype now. Under the Ranger Favored Enemies, it is listed as: Humanoid (giant). So I suspect Paizo has indeed made this change.

Dark Archive

Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:
Anry wrote:
I see mentioned as a errata giant type to giant subtype a few times. But giant has never been a subtype.

That's a good catch! I do think I remember reading somewhere though, that Pathfinder was making giants a subtype now. Under the Ranger Favored Enemies, it is listed as: Humanoid (giant). So I suspect Paizo has indeed made this change.

Indeed; it's confirmed in the Bestiary Preview that giants are a subtype now.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 46
Plant Domain - Wooden Fist

I believe the final paragraph of this ability is missing a sentence: "These rounds do not need to be consecutive."

Liberty's Edge Star Voter 2013

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Doodpants wrote:
hida_jiremi wrote:
Actually, it does, since the DC for a concentration check to cast defensively is 10 + twice the spell's level.
I believe it's actually 15 + twice the spell's level.

D'OH! You're absolutely right. That'll teach me. ^_^

Jeremy Puckett


Doodpants wrote:


I believe that's already listed in the Errata sheet.

Where can I find this offical list of errata ? Thanks !!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 326

The Prying Eyes and Prying Eyes, Greater spells are out of alphabetical order with surrounding spells.


Environment Chapter - Dungeon Terrain - Ledge (in rulebook and PRD):

"A character who is next to a railing gains a +2 circumstance bonus on his opposed Strength check to avoid being bull rushed off the edge."

There is no opposed STR check when bullrushing. Should read: "+2 circumstance bonus to his CMD..."

----------------------------

Equipment Chapter - Weapons - Intro (in rulebook and PRD):

"If this second attack roll exceeds the target's AC, the hit becomes a critical hit, dealing additional damage."

Shouldn't it be "If this second roll is also a hit - meaning meeting or exceeding the target's AC..."?

-----------------------------

Skills chapter - Skill checks - Opposed checks (in rulebook and PRD):

"When making an opposed skill check, the attempt is successful if your check result exceeds the result of the target."

Should't it read "...if your check result meets or beats the result of the target." ?


Greater Penetrating Strike (rulebook p. 125):

Is there missing the "Special" entry telling you something like this:

"You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take this feat it applies to a new weapon with which you have already taken the Penetrating Strike feat" ?


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 47
Rune Domain - Spell Rune

There is no action indicated for this ability, which would then default it to a Standard action, however I believe its design was based on an Immediate or Swift action.

Page 47
Strength Domain - Might of the Gods

There is no action indicated for this ability, which would then default it to a Standard action, however I suspect (but not 100% sure) it was intended to be an Immediate or Swift action.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 47
Travel Domain - Agile Feet

This ability states: "As a free action, you can gain increased mobility for 1 round. For the next round, you ignore all difficult terrain..."

Okay, so on the 2nd round I ignore all penalties for difficult terrain. What do I gain on the 1st round? I'm not sure what the benefit of "increased mobility" is supposed to provide on the 1st round?

Perhaps this should just indicate: "As a free action, for 1 round, you can ignore all penalties when moving through difficult terrain."

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Not sure if this was covered or perhaps I'm missing something (which has been known to happen).

On page 112 it says:

"Successfully creating a magic item requires a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to 10 + the item’s caster level."

And on page 548 it says:

"The DC to create a magic item is 5 + the caster level for the item."


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 48
Trickey Domain - Master's Illusion

There should be a save DC calculation given for those allies that wish to be unaffected by the effect as per the Veil spell. Or perhaps, this ability should only affect "willing allies" -- which I suspect was the intent, and accordingly should be clarified?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Page 48
War Domain - Battle Rage

"... bonus on melee damage rolls equal to 1/2 your cleric level for 1 round (minimum +1)"

I'm probably just be picky now, but I think the minimum reference should be before the round reference like it is throughout the other domain powers:

"... bonus on melee damage rolls equal to 1/2 your cleric level (minimum +1) for 1 round"

1 to 50 of 805 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Paizo Products / List of Errata in Pathfinder Core Rulebook All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.