Adventurer's Armory Unofficial Errata


Pathfinder Player Companion

Scarab Sages

I have spotted a couple things that I am sure are errors already, feel free to post other things that are obvious errors.

From the Alchemical Power Components section

ORIGINAL

Armory wrote:


Alchemist's Fire
Protection from Energy (M): If cast to ward against cold, increase the amount of fire damage absorbed by 5.
Resist Energy (M): If cast to ward against cold, increase the fire resistance to 12. At caster level 7th, you may use two flasks of alchemist’s fire as a power component to increase the fire resistance to 24. At caster level 11th, you may use three flasks as a power component to increase the fire resistance to 36.

Liquid Ice
Protection from Energy (M): If cast to ward against fire, increase the amount of cold damage absorbed by 5.
Resist Energy (M): If cast to ward against fire, increase the cold resistance to 12. At caster level 7th, you may use two jars of liquid ice as a power component to increase the cold resistance to 24. At caster level 11th, you may use three jars as a power component to increase the fire resistance to 36.

FIXED

Armory wrote:


Alchemist's Fire
Protection from Energy (M): If cast to ward against fire, increase the amount of fire damage absorbed by 5.
Resist Energy (M): If cast to ward against fire, increase the fire resistance to 12. At caster level 7th, you may use two flasks of alchemist’s fire as a power component to increase the fire resistance to 24. At caster level 11th, you may use three flasks as a power component to increase the fire resistance to 36.

Liquid Ice
Protection from Energy (M): If cast to ward against cold, increase the amount of cold damage absorbed by 5.
Resist Energy (M): If cast to ward against cold, increase the cold resistance to 12. At caster level 7th, you may use two jars of liquid ice as a power component to increase the cold resistance to 24. At caster level 11th, you may use three jars as a power component to increase the fire resistance to 36.

The fix seems necessary in these as the text is backwards otherwise. When you cast an energy resistance spell to ward against cold, you get cold resistance. Same with fire. As written, the text implies that if you ward against cold, you get fire resistance (which makey no sense).

Dark Archive

You caught the wrong mistake. Alchemists Fire protects you against cold, as it warms you. Liquid Ice protects you against fire, because it cools you down.

It should write:

Quote:

Alchemist's Fire

Protection from Energy (M): If cast to ward against cold, increase the amount of cold damage absorbed by 5.
Resist Energy (M): If cast to ward against cold, increase the cold resistance to 12. At caster level 7th, you may use two flasks of alchemist’s fire as a power component to increase the cold resistance to 24. At caster level 11th, you may use three flasks as a power component to increase the cold resistance to 36.

Scarab Sages

I thought about that as well, but wasn't sure since it seems to make a bit more sense to me that Alchemist's Fire should augment everything fire related, whether its extra damage or extra resistance. Same with the Cold bit.

I really don't know which way should be the 'correct' way, I can see it either way. All I know is the way it's written right now is wrong. :)

Grand Lodge

Inside the back cover, Exotic Weapons, I think the Critical notes for the Falcata and the Aldoran Duelling Sword are mixed up. Can anyone confirm? According to the PF Chronicles Campaign seting, it is anyway...

Liberty's Edge

While I understand that the Companion's line (or Pathfinder Player's Companion line, as the case is now) is the low-end (price-wise only!) of the Pathfinder RPG, is there any chance of seeing a pretty errata to this like the Core book has for those of us who do not have a PDF copy?

I will probably end up buying the second print anyway, but most of my fellow gamers will balk at the idea... especially since it is probably the most used Paizo product in PFS, behind the core assumptions.

Contributor

We've compiled a list of errata for the 2nd printing and will release it when the 2nd printing comes available.

Liberty's Edge

Thanks! I really didn't expect it for an item this small, but it is appreciated!

Scarab Sages

Just a quick question, given the description of the Khopesh and how its implemented within the Attack option: Bind from the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign suppliment.

Shouldnt the ability listed be Disarm and not Trip as detailed currently on the back cover?

Just a thought

Thanks

Contributor

Compared to the other weapons in the Core Rulebook that have the disarm ability, a khopesh isn't really shaped to be an ultra-effective disarm weapon (any more than an axe or longsword is).

Dark Archive

I'm actually curious as to why the garrote doesn't allow for sneak attack. As it is stated, it is a very weak weapon.

It would take a someone 23 rounds minimum to choke a character to death with a garrote with a Constitution score of 10! REALLY! In that time you would have dealt 23d6 damage (or 80.5 average damage)! That's ridiculous.

I thought the whole point of the weapon was to choke them to death before damage otherwise would. In real life, you have about 4 - 30 seconds before you black out depending on the hold. (If they cut off the blood supply, you've got 4 - 6 seconds tops).

My point is, the garrote needs either to be able to deal sneak attack damage, or be able choke them without having to wait the 2 rounds per Constitution score before they start making saves. It should just go strait to saves, or black-out. Otherwise its a worthless weapon. Not trying to be mean here or anything, just a little confused.

Contributor

As mentioned in the main thread about AA, the garrote can't be as lethal as it is in real life because we don't want bands of heroes running around garroting tough monsters to death, nor do we want entire groups of PCs killed by much weaker monsters using garrotes.

Dark Archive

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

As mentioned in the main thread about AA, the garrote can't be as lethal as it is in real life because we don't want bands of heroes running around garroting tough monsters to death, nor do we want entire groups of PCs killed by much weaker monsters using garrotes.

makes sense.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Given that it's vastly superior to every other one-handed melee weapon in the game, are you sure that the Falcata doesn't stand out too much? Last I heard, exotic weapons weren't supposed to be the always better option anymore.

Contributor

It's not vastly superior. When you factor in having to spend the feat on EWP rather than WF(longsword), they're still very close.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It's not vastly superior. When you factor in having to spend the feat on EWP rather than WF(longsword), they're still very close.

Well, in light of a long discussion about the Spiked Chain nerf, where Jason basically stated that exotic weapons are more fluff now than mechanically beneficial, it left me wondering. 1d8 19-20/x3 is just so much mechanically better, that it leaves every other comparable exotic weapon clearly in the dust.


I would like to note that the DC of the perception check to notice a hollowed pommel (page 7) is not listed. Unless I am missing something, I only see the following: "Detecting a hollow pommel is a DC Perception check."

Also, I like to voice disapointment in how weak the garrote is as well. Perhaps if it worked by sizing rule like the mancatcher does? At least that way you don't have to worry about them choking the huge sized dragon to death with it. Another alternative could be a special combat manuever with the garrote to reduce the amount of time it takes for them to go to suffocating by a number of rounds (perhaps representing getting the cord into position to cut of blood flow instead of just oxygen?)

I see the second option as fair because it gives the wielder a chance to have his weapon be effective while also giving the victim a fair chance to resist, so no anti-climactic quick strangling the BBEG (or PCs in the case of monsters using it). Combined with the fact that it wouldn't really be usable against something without a CON score or neck (try strangling a skeleton or gelatinous cube) and I wouldn't see it as an overpowered weapon.

My two-cents.

Contributor

magnuskn wrote:
Well, in light of a long discussion about the Spiked Chain nerf, where Jason basically stated that exotic weapons are more fluff now than mechanically beneficial, it left me wondering. 1d8 19-20/x3 is just so much mechanically better, that it leaves every other comparable exotic weapon clearly in the dust.

I don't recall Jason saying anything like that, but know that in general, our philosophy is not "exotic weapons are weapons that are uncommon," they're "weapons that take extra effort to learn how to use properly, and possibly have additional mechanical benefits compared to equivalent martial weapons."

The definition of what is an "exotic" weapon is going to vary from continent to continent, or even country to country. Many weapons currently on the exotic list may end up on the martial list if the core setting was set in Asia, simply because their "exoticness" stems from commonality, not difficulty; however, some of those currently-exotic weapons would still be exotic weapons in an Asian setting because they're mechanically better than standard weapons, and there should be a reason why Asian characters continue to use Asian-equivalent longswords instead of Asian-equivalent falcatas.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Well, in light of a long discussion about the Spiked Chain nerf, where Jason basically stated that exotic weapons are more fluff now than mechanically beneficial, it left me wondering. 1d8 19-20/x3 is just so much mechanically better, that it leaves every other comparable exotic weapon clearly in the dust.

I don't recall Jason saying anything like that, but know that in general, our philosophy is not "exotic weapons are weapons that are uncommon," they're "weapons that take extra effort to learn how to use properly, and possibly have additional mechanical benefits compared to equivalent martial weapons."

The definition of what is an "exotic" weapon is going to vary from continent to continent, or even country to country. Many weapons currently on the exotic list may end up on the martial list if the core setting was set in Asia, simply because their "exoticness" stems from commonality, not difficulty; however, some of those currently-exotic weapons would still be exotic weapons in an Asian setting because they're mechanically better than standard weapons, and there should be a reason why Asian characters continue to use Asian-equivalent longswords instead of Asian-equivalent falcatas.

Link

Second post by Jason in the thread. He didn't use the exact words I used, but the meaning is pretty clear. Hell, you yourself basically did say the same on page two.

The thing which bugs me is that, while every other exotic weapon at best gives players now only some slight mechanical advantage, like a +2 to trip attacks ( which non-exotic weapons also can give ), the Falcata breaks one of the basic concepts which seem to have guided weapon design since 3.0 . If you got a crit modifier of higher than x2, your threat range doesn't exceed a nat 20.

The Falcata is the only "official" ( i.e. WotC or Paizo ) weapon I know of to break that paradigm, besides the even worse Talenta scythe from the Eberron campaign setting.

Dark Archive

magnuskn wrote:
The Falcata is the only "official" ( i.e. WotC or Paizo ) weapon...

[nostalgia] Ah, those halcyon days of kaorti resin rapiers, scimitars and kukris. :) [/nostalgia]

I'm no DPR guru, but they do often seem to weight a point of increased threat range the same as a 1x increase in damage multiplier, so the a falcata at 19-20/x3 shouldn't be significantly more or less awesome than a 20/x4 scythe or 18-20/x2 scimitar, should it?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
The Falcata is the only "official" ( i.e. WotC or Paizo ) weapon...

[nostalgia] Ah, those halcyon days of kaorti resin rapiers, scimitars and kukris. :) [/nostalgia]

I'm no DPR guru, but they do often seem to weight a point of increased threat range the same as a 1x increase in damage multiplier, so the a falcata at 19-20/x3 shouldn't be significantly more or less awesome than a 20/x4 scythe or 18-20/x2 scimitar, should it?

Well...

Let's take a 12th level Fighter. Let's also say for sake of this comparison that he hits every attack from a rolled 5 on upwards and every crit is confirmed.

Let's put his stats at having started with 16 STR, meaning he probably has a 23 STR at this time. Let's give him a reasonable +3 weapon, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical and Weapon Training 2.

12th level Fighter with a Scythe: 2d4 + 18 = 23 damage per hit.

16 hits x 23 damage = 368 damage
Critical hit at 19-20 = 2x 69 damage extra.
Total: 506 Damage.

12th level Fighter with a Falcata ( used two-handed ): 1d8 + 18 = 22 damage per hit.

16 hits x 22 damage = 352 damage
Critical hit at 17-20 = 4x 44 damage extra.
Total: 528 Damage.

12th level Fighter with a Longsword ( used two-handed ): 1d8 + 18 = 22 damage per hit.

16 hits x 22 damage = 352 damage
Critical hit at 17-20 = 4x 22 damage extra.
Total: 440 Damage.

12th level Fighter with a Greatsword: 2d6 + 18 = 25 damage per hit.

16 hits x 25 damage = 400 damage
Critical hit at 17-20 = 4x 25 damage extra.
Total: 500 Damage.

Conclusion: One exotic feat makes your average damage way better than all normal martial weapons and better than the best martial weapon ( the Scythe ). At higher levels that disparity gets even wider.

Compared to every other exotic weapon from Pathfinder out there at the moment, the Falcata stands heads and shoulders above them.


magnuskn wrote:
Given that it's vastly superior to every other one-handed melee weapon in the game, are you sure that the Falcata doesn't stand out too much? Last I heard, exotic weapons weren't supposed to be the always better option anymore.
magnuskn wrote:
1d8 19-20/x3 is just so much mechanically better, that it leaves every other comparable exotic weapon clearly in the dust.

I'm sitting here looking at the Adventurer's Armory and wondering what the heck you are talking about. In my copy the falcata is listed at 18 gp, 1d8 slashing damage, 19-20/x2, 4 lbs. That means it's a bit more expensive than a longsword and requires an extra feat to use, so I can't for the life of me see what's so superior about it.

The aldori dueling sword and the temple sword is another matter, though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
evilash wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Given that it's vastly superior to every other one-handed melee weapon in the game, are you sure that the Falcata doesn't stand out too much? Last I heard, exotic weapons weren't supposed to be the always better option anymore.
magnuskn wrote:
1d8 19-20/x3 is just so much mechanically better, that it leaves every other comparable exotic weapon clearly in the dust.

I'm sitting here looking at the Adventurer's Armory and wondering what the heck you are talking about. In my copy the falcata is listed at 18 gp, 1d8 slashing damage, 19-20/x2, 4 lbs. That means it's a bit more expensive than a longsword and requires an extra feat to use, so I can't for the life of me see what's so superior about it.

The aldori dueling sword and the temple sword is another matter, though.

Oh, well... it seems the Pathfinder D20 SRD site is out of date, then. Since I only own the old Campaign Guide and not the updated Adventurers's Armory, I was referring to it to check if the Falcata is still using the old rules.

Disregard my whole rant. :D

Contributor

magnuskn wrote:
Let's take a 12th level Fighter. Let's also say for sake of this comparison that he hits every attack from a rolled 5 on upwards and every crit is confirmed.

It's nice to look at just one level's worth of data, but you're forgetting that for every fighter who spends a feat on EWP(falcata), there's a fighter who spends that feat on WF(longsword), which increases his attack bonus by +1, which increases his number of hits by 5%, which increases his damage by 5%. Yes, those two fighters both have an extra feat (or two, if human), but the point is that the longsword fighter basically has an extra feat available to optimize damage. That's going to account for something, especially at lower levels.

It's easy to look at a narrow slice of the data (like "if the wizard is flying, the wizard beats the fighter in 1-on-1 combat every time!") and come to a false conclusion ("the wizard is a more powerful class than fighter!"). You can't just compare two fighters at level 15 and decide whether or not a weapon is broken because of that comparison.

And when it comes down to it, I'm not really concerned if one weapon does a little more damage per round than other weapons, especially at high levels.

(BTW your assumption that "every hit is confirmed" also skews your damage data higher than normal, especially when you consider iterative attacks.)


magnuskn wrote:
evilash wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Given that it's vastly superior to every other one-handed melee weapon in the game, are you sure that the Falcata doesn't stand out too much? Last I heard, exotic weapons weren't supposed to be the always better option anymore.
magnuskn wrote:
1d8 19-20/x3 is just so much mechanically better, that it leaves every other comparable exotic weapon clearly in the dust.

I'm sitting here looking at the Adventurer's Armory and wondering what the heck you are talking about. In my copy the falcata is listed at 18 gp, 1d8 slashing damage, 19-20/x2, 4 lbs. That means it's a bit more expensive than a longsword and requires an extra feat to use, so I can't for the life of me see what's so superior about it.

The aldori dueling sword and the temple sword is another matter, though.

Oh, well... it seems the Pathfinder D20 SRD site is out of date, then. Since I only own the old Campaign Guide and not the updated Adventurers's Armory, I was referring to it to check if the Falcata is still using the old rules.

Disregard my whole rant. :D

No, the Adventurer's Armory is in error. The Falcata should be x3. Link to the correction. EDIT:: (Fixed the link to go to the proper post.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Let's take a 12th level Fighter. Let's also say for sake of this comparison that he hits every attack from a rolled 5 on upwards and every crit is confirmed.
It's nice to look at just one level's worth of data, but you're forgetting that for every fighter who spends a feat on EWP(falcata), there's a fighter who spends that feat on WF(longsword), which increases his attack bonus by +1, which increases his number of hits by 5%, which increases his damage by 5%. Yes, those two fighters both have an extra feat (or two, if human), but the point is that the longsword fighter basically has an extra feat available to optimize damage. That's going to account for something, especially at lower levels.

Actually, I left out to hit numbers completely, due to ( what I perceive as ) the fact at higher levels most fighter characters will very, very seldomly miss their first attack, unless they square off against other PC's.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It's easy to look at a narrow slice of the data (like "if the wizard is flying, the wizard beats the fighter in 1-on-1 combat every time!") and come to a false conclusion ("the wizard is a more powerful class than fighter!"). You can't just compare two fighters at level 15 and decide whether or not a weapon is broken because of that comparison.

And when it comes down to it, I'm not really concerned if one weapon does a little more damage per round than other weapons, especially at high levels.

(BTW your assumption that "every hit is confirmed" also skews your damage data higher than normal, especially when you consider iterative attacks.)

Well, I was hammering out that data in little time, so a more detailed analysis wasn't what I was shooting for. ;) But even if only half of the crits are confirmed, the Falcata still is superior to all other weapons in total damage output.

And that's fine... but in light of the other "too good" exotic weapons having been nerfed with Pathfinder, the Falcata stands out as an anomaly, which is what I was trying to point out in the first place.

And thanks to Disenchanter for clearing up if the Falcata has a x2 or x3 modifier. :)

Silver Crusade

12th level Fighter with Scimitar (Two Handed) 1D6 + 18 = 21

14 hits X 21 = 294
6 Critical hit at X2 = 252
Total damage = 546

12th level Fighter with Falchion 2D4 +18 = 22

14 hits X 22 = 308
6 Critical hits X2 = 264
Total Damage = 572

12th level Fighter with Falcata ( Two Handed ) 1D8 + 18 = 22

16 hits X 22 = 352
4 Critical hits X 3 = 264
Total Damage = 616

12th level Fighter With Dwarven Axe ( Two Handed ) 1D10 + 18 = 23

18 hits x 23 = 414
2 Critical hits x 3 = 138
Total Damage = 552

12th level Fighter With Bastard Sword ( Two Handed ) 1D10 + 18 = 23

16 hits x 23 = 368
4 Critical hits X 2 = 184
Total Damage = 552

now 60 points of damage over 20 swings? Most fights are over long befor that hapens.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Um just so you know... Don't discount the power of the spiked chain... just cause it has lost reach doesn't mean it isn't still a badass weapon...

"When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver,
make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your
normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have
on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These
bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to
perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your
target’s Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers
are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and
take any other penalties that would normally apply to an
attack roll." - Page 199 of Pathfinder Core Rulebook

Which sounds like to me it means a fighter's WF, GWF, Weapon Training, and the weapon's enhancement bonus applies to both Trip attempts and Disarm Attempts (in addition to improve and greater trip and disarm). You might even add in the benefits of Weapon Finesse without having to spend a feat on Agile Manuevers if your a finesse chain fighter. Falcata has what...? a higher critical damage? meh...? I'm going to stick to my trip monkey chain fighter thanks.

Now perhaps that particular bit wasn't part of the intention and with trip there is still the size limitation (which is easy to overcome with WoTC's goliath or just with Enlarge Person or both if you really need to trip a gargantuan creature (lol)). But I still think that perhaps you should try to rethink this entire argument.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Hollowed Pommel has no DC listed, it just says DC Perception with no number.
This has already been said in this thread, just making sure it isn't missed.

Combat Scabbard is two weapons? (sharpened light and heavy blade) or three? (sharpened, light, and heavy)
By my reading, there are only two Combat Scabbards. One for Light and one for Heavy Blades. They are both sharpened and use the same stats?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder LO Special Edition, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

As mentioned in the main thread about AA, the garrote can't be as lethal as it is in real life because we don't want bands of heroes running around garroting tough monsters to death, nor do we want entire groups of PCs killed by much weaker monsters using garrotes.

the main thread about AA


magnuskn wrote:
The Falcata is the only "official" ( i.e. WotC or Paizo ) weapon I know of to break that paradigm, besides the even worse Talenta scythe from the Eberron campaign setting.

Dwarven Dorn Dergar

Rhoka
Sawtooth saber
meteor hammer

Those are the easy ones.

Dark Archive

Thank dog kaorti resin stump knives no longer exist. :)

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

magnuskn wrote:
The Falcata is the only "official" ( i.e. WotC or Paizo ) weapon I know of to break that paradigm, besides the even worse Talenta scythe from the Eberron campaign setting.
Abraham spalding wrote:

Dwarven Dorn Dergar, Rhoka, Sawtooth saber, meteor hammer

Those are the easy ones.

Abraham, I'm not sure I understand you here.

The dorn-dergar does 1d10 and has a critical threat of (x2). That's neither an increaed range nor multiplier. Are you looking at a different source than I am?

The meteor hammer has some cool effects, but it is still 1d10 (19-20/x2), right?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Are the Stats for the Scizore accurate, d10 Damage and Piercing damage? Seems that the picture of the weapon and its description would lend itself to a slashing weapon and it seems that that d10 damage for a one handed martial weapon. I checked the reprint PDF version and found that it hadn't been changed. Would love a semi official ruling... or interesting opinions... specious conjecture...probably unavoidable...but hey I like the +1 Shield Bonus if you don't attack with it... I'm envisioning a magus in the Shackles with this as his primary early on...possibly as a prosthesis or a fake one... I love an ace in the hole like a hand no one knew I had!


Dusty rose Prism - Flawed, 2nd edition printing

Text (p 47):
This stone grants a +1 insight bonus to AC and a –2 penalty to Strength.

Table (p 48:)
+1 insight bonus to AC, –2 penalty to Constitution


Tangaroa wrote:

Dusty rose Prism - Flawed, 2nd edition printing

Text (p 47):
This stone grants a +1 insight bonus to AC and a –2 penalty to Strength.

Table (p 48:)
+1 insight bonus to AC, –2 penalty to Constitution

Is this for Seekers of Secrets?


Woops, brain fart. Yes, SoS. Let me track down the right forum...

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Pathfinder Player Companion / Adventurer's Armory Unofficial Errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Player Companion