Problems / Errata in Bestiary


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 739 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Universal Monster Rules

Curse (Su) ...
... Location: Special Attacks and individual attacks

Poison (Ex or Su) ...
... Location: Special Attacks and individual attacks

I would think it should be "Special _Abilities_ and individual attacks" in both cases?

Edit: the error is also found in the "Disease" entry.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Universal Monster Rule
Disease
"... can be removed through cure disease ..."

The spell name is "_remove_ disease. (The same minor error is found in the description of the Periapt of Foul Rotting in the rule book).

Liberty's Edge

Not so much an error, but some information is missing:

There is no costing guideline for Animated objects. It says that permanent ones can be created using Craft Construct, but there is no mention of cost.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Minor typoes:

"Concentration" should be "concentration" (used twice in the whirlwind universal monster rule).


The rules about swarms were copied more or less verbatim from the 3.5 SRD however the section entitled "Vulnerabilities of Swarms" was left out. Without this section, swarms are very very tough.

I have a thread (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinder RPG/rules/vulnerabilitiesOfSwarms) to discuss whether these rules were evicted deliberately or accidentally left out, but I've concluded the the latter so I'm making an errata request.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Re: Frightful presence (& dragons).

The description in the Universal Monster Rules (p300) says that "Opponents ... may become frightened or shaken."

I couldn't find any indication on when an opponent would be frightened and when he would be shaken. This used to be explained in the second paragraph of the "Frightful Presence" entry of the "Dragon" section in 3.5, but this second paragraph was cut off.

Unless I missed something?


Branding Opportunity wrote:
Racial skill modifiers missing for giant spiders. As they are mindless (and thus have no skill points), their skills must come from somewhere.

They're there--right under the skills.

Sovereign Court

mdt wrote:

Awesome Blow, page 314.

Maneuver is misspelled as manuever. What's funny is not only is this a spellcheck catch, but the word is spelled correctly in the same sentence. :)

Awesome Blow strikes me as useless now. Now it's just a CMB maneuver to propel someone 10 feet away for 1d6??? didn't it use to be the "batting cage" feat for giants? (i.e. damage PLUS homerun?)


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
mdt wrote:

Awesome Blow, page 314.

Maneuver is misspelled as manuever. What's funny is not only is this a spellcheck catch, but the word is spelled correctly in the same sentence. :)

Awesome Blow strikes me as useless now. Now it's just a CMB maneuver to propel someone 10 feet away for 1d6??? didn't it use to be the "batting cage" feat for giants? (i.e. damage PLUS homerun?)

Wow, that is pretty crappy. How is that any better than a bull rush?

Sovereign Court

hogarth wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
mdt wrote:

Awesome Blow, page 314.

Maneuver is misspelled as manuever. What's funny is not only is this a spellcheck catch, but the word is spelled correctly in the same sentence. :)

Awesome Blow strikes me as useless now. Now it's just a CMB maneuver to propel someone 10 feet away for 1d6??? didn't it use to be the "batting cage" feat for giants? (i.e. damage PLUS homerun?)
Wow, that is pretty crappy. How is that any better than a bull rush?

No it's a combined bullrush and trip, if the creature moved is knocked into something both things hit take 1d6 and the creature you hit is still prone, that's pretty cool.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Xuttah wrote:

Not so much an error, but some information is missing:

There is no costing guideline for Animated objects. It says that permanent ones can be created using Craft Construct, but there is no mention of cost.

Since you can create animated objects via a pairing of the spells animate object and permanency, the full details on crafting an animated object with Craft Construct are not AS necessary. But still... we should have included the crafting info. I'm not sure HOW we would have done so though since that page is about as packed solid as it can get...

Paizo Employee Creative Director

hogarth wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
mdt wrote:

Awesome Blow, page 314.

Maneuver is misspelled as manuever. What's funny is not only is this a spellcheck catch, but the word is spelled correctly in the same sentence. :)

Awesome Blow strikes me as useless now. Now it's just a CMB maneuver to propel someone 10 feet away for 1d6??? didn't it use to be the "batting cage" feat for giants? (i.e. damage PLUS homerun?)
Wow, that is pretty crappy. How is that any better than a bull rush?

It's also something you can do without moving yourself; you can stand still and deliver an Awesome Blow without moving. Although I kinda think the feat's missing some text that allows a particularly high CMB check to push a foe more than 10 feet... there might be some errata there.


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
mdt wrote:

Awesome Blow, page 314.

Maneuver is misspelled as manuever. What's funny is not only is this a spellcheck catch, but the word is spelled correctly in the same sentence. :)

Awesome Blow strikes me as useless now. Now it's just a CMB maneuver to propel someone 10 feet away for 1d6??? didn't it use to be the "batting cage" feat for giants? (i.e. damage PLUS homerun?)

Paizo's Awesome Blow is identical to the 3.5 Monster Manual 1's Awesome Blow, except that it's a CMB vs CMD check rather than a damage vs Reflex save check.

James Jacobs wrote:
Although I kinda think the feat's missing some text that allows a particularly high CMB check to push a foe more than 10 feet... there might be some errata there.

It's not "missing" in that it was never present in the source material. I don't think most people would object too strenuously if you added Bull Rush-like phrasing to allow for more distance, though.


Zurai wrote:


Paizo's Awesome Blow is identical to the 3.5 Monster Manual 1's Awesome Blow, except that it's a CMB vs CMD check rather than a damage vs Reflex save check.

The difference between doing normal attack damage and doing no damage seems pretty large to me.


hogarth wrote:
Zurai wrote:


Paizo's Awesome Blow is identical to the 3.5 Monster Manual 1's Awesome Blow, except that it's a CMB vs CMD check rather than a damage vs Reflex save check.
The difference between doing normal attack damage and doing no damage seems pretty large to me.

<Blinks, double-checks>

Now that needs errata. Just a note, the SRD version doesn't really say it does damage, either, except in the save DC. I'd say the intent was for Paizo's Awesome Blow to also deal damage as a melee attack, but it's (obviously) not clear. Like I said, the wording is identical save for the change to a combat maneuver from the kludgy wording WotC used; it's certainly feasible that the fact that it's supposed to do damage was overlooked since it wasn't really mentioned in the original source.

Sovereign Court

I think it's pretty clear from James' answer that it is no longer intended to cause damage... but I *do* fail to understand how you can take a giant baseball bat to someone's noggin, make them fly 10', and cause NO DAMAGE ON IMPACT, just a mere d6 on LANDING!??! O_O (NERF bats?)

James if it's not too late, perhaps the errata should have this feat read pretty much like Vital Strike but instead of doubling the damage die, just put it that 10' flight bit + "for every 5 pts. of exceedance over CMD, add 5' to the flight distance"

(here's hoping! :P)


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
I think it's pretty clear from James' answer that it is no longer intended to cause damage

I don't.


Posted this in another thread, but lion and dire lion have their stealth calculated incorrectly. They get +4 racial bonus to stealth (+8 in undergrowth), which means their stealth in undergrowth should be only 4 higher than their stealth outside of the undergrowth.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

I think it's pretty clear from James' answer that it is no longer intended to cause damage... but I *do* fail to understand how you can take a giant baseball bat to someone's noggin, make them fly 10', and cause NO DAMAGE ON IMPACT, just a mere d6 on LANDING!??! O_O (NERF bats?)

James if it's not too late, perhaps the errata should have this feat read pretty much like Vital Strike but instead of doubling the damage die, just put it that 10' flight bit + "for every 5 pts. of exceedance over CMD, add 5' to the flight distance"

(here's hoping! :P)

Personally, I think that allowing Awesome blow to do regular damage with the chosen attack AND knock foes back is best. I think this is the way the feat's intended to work, and that would certainly make it a worthwhile feat and justify the fact that it's a lot harder to do than bull rush (which doesn't require a feat to do). I'm not sure if removing the damage was an intent or an accident or what. This'll be something we'll look at for the errata, for sure.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Personally, I think that allowing Awesome blow to do regular damage with the chosen attack AND knock foes back is best. I think this is the way the feat's intended to work, and that would certainly make it a worthwhile feat and justify the fact that it's a lot harder to do than bull rush (which doesn't require a feat to do). I'm not sure if removing the damage was an intent or an accident or what. This'll be something we'll look at for the errata, for sure.

Could it be that it does regular damage and another 1d6 damage if they fail their save, similar damage for falling 10'?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

The Centaur is using a Breastplate (Medium Armour) but only has one speed listed as 50' speed.

Is it normally 60' and reduced to 50'? Or is it 50' and not reduced as it should be?


James Risner wrote:

The Centaur is using a Breastplate (Medium Armour) but only has one speed listed as 50' speed.

Is it normally 60' and reduced to 50'? Or is it 50' and not reduced as it should be?

I think it's a special situation because he's a centaur. I don't think he get's speed reductions as a quadruped, but I don't know that that wording got into the Bestiary, I haven't found it yet.

I do like the new way the Bestiary is laid out, but it does make finding all the rules difficult. Not because they are laid out in a way that isn't logical or especially convoluted, just because it's different than I'm used to.


Copied from a different thread. Totoro noticed something about the regeneration rules with Trolls...

totoro wrote:
mdt wrote:
totoro wrote:


Bestiary, pg. 303 wrote:

Creatures with regeneration heal damage

at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as
long as their regeneration is still functioning (although
creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when
their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms,
typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration
to stop functioning on the round following the attack.
The rules appear sound to me. Non-fire/acid damage is "lethal" in the sense that you can chop the troll into pieces. If you apply fire to the fleshy bits, then the lethal damage is not healed. Same for a human fighter that takes damage and sleeps in that lethal damage goes away when given the opportunity to recover from it. Lethal damage doesn't always kill you and you can recover from it. In the case of a troll, lethal damage never kills it unless its regeneration turns off while it is too far in the negative.

That's a bit of fuzzy text that is. If you read it the way it is written, it means that if a Troll is every attacked with fire or acid, it loses it's regeneration forever, since the regeneration stops. I am pretty sure what they meant was...

Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration to stop functioning for the round following the attack.

That would mean if they were negative, they die. But the current wording of ON doesn't specify a time limit. I know, being nitpicky...

I think you are right.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

The Behir's breath weapon doesn't indicate how often it can be used.

The Boggard had a +16 bonus to acrobatics when jumping, but it's skill is listed as acrobatics +2 (+14 jumping). I'm not sure if the bonus for jumping is supposed to be +12, or if the base skill should be a -2. For that matter, I can't see where any of it's skill points were put. As a monstrous humanoid, it should have 4+Int mod/HD, and with an Int of 8 and 3 HD, that should be 9 skill points. However, it's skills are: acrobatics +2, stealth -1, and swim +10. With a dex of 9, it's unmodified acro and stealth are +3 and +0, so I'm guessing 1 skill point went into acrobatics, which should therefore be one higher with class skill bonus factored in, and stealth has no skill points, since it's equal to the Dex penalty. Similarly, a Str of 15 adds 2 to swim, which also has a +8 for a swim speed. So, where are the other 8 skill points? (note, leather armor has no armor check penalty to these skills.)


JoelF847 wrote:

The Behir's breath weapon doesn't indicate how often it can be used.

The Boggard had a +16 bonus to acrobatics when jumping, but it's skill is listed as acrobatics +2 (+14 jumping). I'm not sure if the bonus for jumping is supposed to be +12, or if the base skill should be a -2. For that matter, I can't see where any of it's skill points were put. As a monstrous humanoid, it should have 4+Int mod/HD, and with an Int of 8 and 3 HD, that should be 9 skill points. However, it's skills are: acrobatics +2, stealth -1, and swim +10. With a dex of 9, it's unmodified acro and stealth are +3 and +0, so I'm guessing 1 skill point went into acrobatics, which should therefore be one higher with class skill bonus factored in, and stealth has no skill points, since it's equal to the Dex penalty. Similarly, a Str of 15 adds 2 to swim, which also has a +8 for a swim speed. So, where are the other 8 skill points? (note, leather armor has no armor check penalty to these skills.)

The Chimera seems to have the same issue with it's breath weapon.


Breath Weapons are a universal special ability defined in the back of the book. Recharge is 1d4 rounds for every breath weapon in the Bestiary unless otherwise specified.


Zurai wrote:
Breath Weapons are a universal special ability defined in the back of the book. Recharge is 1d4 rounds for every breath weapon in the Bestiary unless otherwise specified.

I'm afraid you are incorrect, It doesn't say that under breath weapons.

Bestiary, page 298 wrote:


Breath Weapon (Su) Some creatures can exhale a cone, line, or cloud of energy or other magical effects. A breath weapon attack usually deals damage and is often based on some type of energy. Breath weapons allow a Reflex save for half damage (DC 10 + 1/2 breathing creature’s racial HD + breathing creature’s Con modifier; the exact DC is given in the creature’s descriptive text). A creature is immune to its own breath weapon unless otherwise noted. Some breath weapons allow a Fortitude save or a Will save instead of a Reflex save. Each breath weapon also includes notes on how often it can be used, even if this number is limited in times per day.
Format: breath weapon (60-ft. cone, 8d6 fire damage, Reflex DC 20 for half, usable every 1d4 rounds); Location: Special Attacks; if the breath is more complicated than damage, it also appears under Special Abilities with its own entry.

Note that the Bestiary reference on Breath Weapons specifically states the breath weapon entry will hold the daily uses. It doesn't say 1d4 unless otherwise noted.

Liberty's Edge

I'm not completely thrilled that half-orcs are apparently light-sensitive now. (See the orc subtype description.)

The Exchange

Ghoul is listed as having 2d8+4 HP.

Ghoul Hit Dice are d12 and they don't have a con. It averages out the same but isn't correct.

Liberty's Edge

UndeadDan wrote:

Ghoul is listed as having 2d8+4 HP.

Ghoul Hit Dice are d12 and they don't have a con. It averages out the same but isn't correct.

You might want to reread your own creature type there, UndeadDan. Pathfinder's kind of a new ballgame where undead are concerned.


UndeadDan wrote:

Ghoul is listed as having 2d8+4 HP.

Ghoul Hit Dice are d12 and they don't have a con. It averages out the same but isn't correct.

The rules for Undead HD, BaB and hp have changed in Pathfinder.

PRD -> Monsters -> Creature Types:
"Undead are once-living creatures animated by spiritual or supernatural forces. An undead creature has the following features.

• d8 Hit Die.
• Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (medium progression).
• Good Will saves.
(...)
• No Constitution score. Undead use their Charisma score in place of their Constitution score when calculating hit points, Fortitude saves, and any special ability that relies on Constitution (such as when calculating a breath weapon's DC)."

Since Ghouls have 2HD and Cha 14 (+2), their hp are correct (2x4,5 + 4 =13 hp)

EDIT: D'oh, ninja'ed for 5 seconds !!!

The Exchange

Sorry 'bout that.

When I saw that they still didn't have CON scores I mis-assumed that they didn't change much.

Now I have to re-re- build all of my Dread <undead> creatures for RotRL 2.

Will read all creature types at earliest opportunity.


Couple problems with the Orc entry:

The orc's attack bonus doesn't factor in his weapon focus; he has a +4 (+1 BAB, +3 Str) on attacks with his falchion, and should have a +5.

He's not listed as having light sensitivity in his stat block; might not be an error per se, as light sensitivity *is* mentioned in the 'Orc Characters' section, but it seems like it'd be worth adding.

The Orc is listed as possessing both darkvision 60 ft. and low-light vision in his stat block, but only darkvision is mentioned in the 'Orc Characters' section. I think it'd be kinda cool for them to have both (being the nightmare berserkers stalking the night), but I'm pretty sure giving them low-light vision was an error and the issue could use some clarification.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:


Since you can create animated objects via a pairing of the spells animate object and permanency, the full details on crafting an animated object with Craft Construct are not AS necessary. But still... we should have included the crafting info. I'm not sure HOW we would have done so though since that page is about as packed solid as it can get...

It's really great to have this degree of access to the creators of a product. Thanks for your feedback!

I personally would base price on size since the HD and CP are based on that. Base 5000 for medium (they are pretty weak constructs so shouldn't be too expensive), and adjust the cost up and down by 50% per size category larger or smaller? A large animated object would be 7500 gp and a small would be 2500.

Next question: There's a price for a mithral cobra, what about cold iron? I'm playing a character in a Second Darkness campaign, and think a cold iron cobra with holy water in it's injectors would be +5 to cool.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Xuttah wrote:
Next question: There's a price for a mithral cobra, what about cold iron? I'm playing a character in a Second Darkness campaign, and think a cold iron cobra with holy water in it's injectors would be +5 to cool.

A cold iron cobra would have the same stats as a normal iron cobra, except that its natural attacks would penetrate cold iron. As for cost, a look on page 154 of the RPG indicates that a cold iron weapon costs twice as much as a normal iron one, so that'd probably just translate directly into the cobra's cost. A cold iron cobra would cost 8,000 gp.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:


A cold iron cobra would have the same stats as a normal iron cobra, except that its natural attacks would penetrate cold iron. As for cost, a look on page 154 of the RPG indicates that a cold iron weapon costs twice as much as a normal iron one, so that'd probably just translate directly into the cobra's cost. A cold iron cobra would cost 8,000 gp.

You am da bestest! Thanks!

Sovereign Court

So Xuttah, can I make one with Craft Weaponsmithing or Armorsmithing? (DHTBIFOM to check the craft entry for the mithral one...)

Sovereign Court

nevermind... PRD says:

Construction
An iron cobra's body is built from 100 pounds of magically treated materials (typically iron).

Iron Cobra

CL 7th; Price 4,000 gp (iron); 20,000 gp (adamantine), 5,000 (darkwood), or 10,000 gp (mithral)

Construction

Requirements Craft Construct, animate object, discern location, geas/quest; Skill Craft (armor), Craft (blacksmithing), Craft (carpentry [for darkwood cobras only]), or Craft (weapons) DC 15; Cost 2,000 gp (iron); 10,000 gp (adamantine); 2,500 gp (darkwood); 5,000 gp (mithral)

======================

So what's the "body cost" that I can work on as a nonspellcaster fighter type blacksmith??? as per the feat description, there is a body cost on top of the "magic item like enchantment cost"

Liberty's Edge

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
So Xuttah, can I make one with Craft Weaponsmithing or Armorsmithing? (DHTBIFOM to check the craft entry for the mithral one...)

Either will do. Our own little assassin bot, only, y'know for offing demons. Yeah, demons. That's right. :)

Sovereign Court

What's the body cost for a 4K iron cobra? is the 4K just the magical components? (cost 2K to make) or does the 4K includes body costs? (i.e. 1.5K for magical components and 0.5k for body cost?)

I ask because magical crafting uses a market price divided by two cost to make while nonmagical crafting uses a market price divided by three cost...

Liberty's Edge

Hound Archon greatsword damage should be 2d6 not 1d8.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Shisumo wrote:
I'm not completely thrilled that half-orcs are apparently light-sensitive now. (See the orc subtype description.)

Huh. Shame I don't have any of those in my group right now. I would totally spring it on them right after initiative. :D


The Eagle stats seems wrong to me.

It's listed and has the AC of a small creature but has the space/reach of a tiny creature.

It also has the size modifier on its attack bonus of a small creature - all of its attacks are primary as well is that right? It's CMB/CMD suggests it's small.

I'm also not sure what's going on with its skills as it doesn't appear to have spent its skill point - assuming the +8 fly is a racial bonus.


Another errata:

Skeleton, page 250:

“Melee: broken scimitar +0 (1d6), claw –3 (1d4+1) or 2 claws +2 (1d4+2)”

The Skeleton has +0 BaB and +2 Str, hence the ‘2 claws’ portion of the text is correct.
However, having a Broken Scimitar (-2 Hit, -2 damage) and fighting with both manufactured and Natural weapons, the entry should read:

“broken scimitar –2 (1d6), claw –3 (1d4+1)”

since, by rules, “When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only ½ of your Strength modifier on damage rolls. In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting. Your natural attacks are treated as light, off-hand weapons for determining the penalty to your other attacks.” (PRD -> Combat -> Actions in Combat -> Standard Actions -> Attack -> Natural Attacks)

So, basically, +0 BaB, +2 Str, -2 (broken scimitar), -2 (Two-weapon fighting) = -2


The Lizardfolk has the same problem; it's not suffering the penalties for two-weapon fighting with a melee weapon and its natural weapons.

Actually, after checking, neither are the tengu, the troglodyte, the skum, the salamander, the satyr, the sahuagin, and I'm guessing any other monster in the bestiary that uses both natural weapons and manufactured weapons.

Sovereign Court

the monster entries are correct... as per PRD, MONSTER UNIVERSAL RULES, NATURAL ATTACK:

"Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type."

The skeleton entry appears correct.


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

the monster entries are correct... as per PRD, MONSTER UNIVERSAL RULES, NATURAL ATTACK:

"Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type."

The skeleton entry appears correct.

The rules in the Bestiary conflict with the rules in the Core rulebook.

Sovereign Court

hogarth wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

the monster entries are correct... as per PRD, MONSTER UNIVERSAL RULES, NATURAL ATTACK:

"Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type."

The skeleton entry appears correct.

The rules in the Bestiary conflict with the rules in the Core rulebook.

Show us where.


For the reading impaired:

Bestiary = "Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type."

Core = "You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword. When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only 1/2 of your Strength modifier on damage rolls. In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting. Your natural attacks are treated as light, off-hand weapons for determining the penalty to your other attacks. Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack can reduce these penalties."

So Bestiary says "weapon attacks are made normally" and the Core book says "weapon attacks are made with two-weapon fighting penalties".

Paizo Employee Creative Director

I to would love to see how the Bestiary and the Patfhinder RPG contradict each other here. I'm not saying they DON'T. If they do we should fix it.

But the monsters in the bestiary do have the right stats in this case… a natural attack becomes a secondary attack (-5 to attack rolls) if a monster wields a manufactured weapon. Multiattack reduces the penalty to –2. Multiattack is a nice feat for monsters that fight with manufactured weapons and natural attacks as a result.

101 to 150 of 739 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Problems / Errata in Bestiary All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.