Possible Mythic Adventures errata


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 256 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Perhaps this is not the place for this but here it go. For this analysis tier and ranks are equivalent because I'm under the assumption that APL = CR, if am I wrong in this assumption please let me know.

2 Mythic ranks/tiers = +1 CR/APL (First rank/tier are an exception to this)
If you broken apart each rank/tier you have 3 Mythic abilities per rank/tier, these Mythic abilities can be a +2 to one score, one mythic feat, or a monster mythic ability/path ability. So you can say that in order to give a +1 to CR/APL you have six Mythic abilities and lets say you chose only bonus to scores, lets say +2 to each ability score. But here is the problem, the Advanced template gives +1 to CR but increase each score by 4, that is the double.

This was intended or is some kind of inner inconsistency with the system?

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
aceDiamond wrote:

Something I noticed earlier today was this little accident.

Mythic Spells, pg. 103 wrote:

POWER WORD KILL

Treat the target’s current hit point total as though it were lowered by 5 times your tier. For example, a 3rd-tier archmage casting mythic power word kill would instantly kill a creature with 85 hit points or fewer.
Emphasis mine. Seems like there was just an issue with addition/subtraction and that example should read "115 hit points or fewer". Though it would be odd that one would go through all the trouble of gaining Mythic ranks, learning the Mythic version of the spell, pour mythic power into it, and wind up with a less powerful version of the original spell.

That's definitely weird. I'll have to check on the draft text when I'm back at the office. The example (85 hp) is wrong.

Silver Crusade

I have a question/observation on the Champion Path Power Armor Master.
The way the path power is written is fine until you get to the Prereq's.

Why would someone who specializes in Heavy Armor need to Master Light or medium armor first. It makes no sense to me and seems like a path tax to me for no good reason.

If you already have Proficiency with the type of armor that you want to Master in and if you are a fighter have armor training as well it sees redundant to me to make a Champion spend to path powers to take heavy armor mastery which is the weakest path power of the champion path powers IMO.

To fix this IMO Just remove move the the Prereqs and let the Champion master which ever type of armor that he is Proficient in.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Force of Will is listed at tier 6 on the table, but tier 7 in its description. Which is it?

I'm guessing you get it at 6, because your surge bonus also increases at 7 (this way you get something every tier and have no "dead" tiers).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another issue: Mythic Augment summoning feat says:

Quote:
Additionally, if the creature summoned has damage reduction, its damage reduction becomes DR/epic.

This could actually be a nerf to your summoned creatures, though, since DR/epic is easier for monsters to overcome than other forms of DR (their natural weapons will do it). Heck, if the summoned creature has DR/-, then there is no conceivable way this could be a benefit. It should probably say something along the lines of

"Additionally, if the creature summoned has damage reduction, then Epic is added to the list of qualities needed to overcome its damage reduction."


Ravingdork wrote:

Force of Will is listed at tier 6 on the table, but tier 7 in its description. Which is it?

I'm guessing you get it at 6, because your surge bonus also increases at 7 (this way you get something every tier and have no "dead" tiers).

I noticed this too, personally came to same conclusion, but every time I see it in my pdf, It makes me wonder.


Immolation Cloak's last ability that allows the wearer to explode does not seem to have any action cost.

Can one really perform Standard,Move,Swift, Explosion in one round?

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
137ben wrote:

Another issue: Mythic Augment summoning feat says:

Quote:
Additionally, if the creature summoned has damage reduction, its damage reduction becomes DR/epic.

This could actually be a nerf to your summoned creatures, though, since DR/epic is easier for monsters to overcome than other forms of DR (their natural weapons will do it). Heck, if the summoned creature has DR/-, then there is no conceivable way this could be a benefit. It should probably say something along the lines of

"Additionally, if the creature summoned has damage reduction, then Epic is added to the list of qualities needed to overcome its damage reduction."

Actually DR/Epic can only be bypassed by creatures with DR/Epic themselves. You might be thinking to yourself "Hey now, nearly every Mythic creature will have DR/Epic". Well yea you are correct, but you have to realize that even Mythic PCs aren't supposed to be fighting a bunch of Mythic enemies, mostly just enemies with higher CR. Even WotR isn't going to have many Mythic enemies at all. DR/Evil (the dr celestial creatures will have) is going to be bypassed a lot more easily in WotR then DR/Epic is (All attacks from Evil Subtype Alignment Outsiders count as Evil for DR purposes).


xevious573 wrote:
137ben wrote:

Another issue: Mythic Augment summoning feat says:

Quote:
Additionally, if the creature summoned has damage reduction, its damage reduction becomes DR/epic.

This could actually be a nerf to your summoned creatures, though, since DR/epic is easier for monsters to overcome than other forms of DR (their natural weapons will do it). Heck, if the summoned creature has DR/-, then there is no conceivable way this could be a benefit. It should probably say something along the lines of

"Additionally, if the creature summoned has damage reduction, then Epic is added to the list of qualities needed to overcome its damage reduction."
Actually DR/Epic can only be bypassed by creatures with DR/Epic themselves. You might be thinking to yourself "Hey now, nearly every Mythic creature will have DR/Epic". Well yea you are correct, but you have to realize that even Mythic PCs aren't supposed to be fighting a bunch of Mythic enemies, mostly just enemies with higher CR. Even WotR isn't going to have many Mythic enemies at all. DR/Evil (the dr celestial creatures will have) is going to be bypassed a lot more easily in WotR then DR/Epic is (All attacks from Evil Subtype Alignment Outsiders count as Evil for DR purposes).

But there are still scenarios where you would be better off not having the feat than having it--seriously, if you are summoning something with DR/- or DR/(something other than epic or magic), there are cases where you'd actually be better off having an unspent feat slot than mythic augment summoning. That's the only time I can think of where a feat actually has the potential to hurt you part of the time.

And DR/Epic is still much, much easier to overcome than DR/-


The mythic improved critical feat talks about increasing multipliers but the monsters with the feat have increased threat range's instead?

Treant, nessian warhound, dragon bite attacks... what's going on there?

Silver Crusade

stuart haffenden wrote:

The mythic improved critical feat talks about increasing multipliers but the monsters with the feat have increased threat range's instead?

Treant, nessian warhound, dragon bite attacks... what's going on there?

If a mythic creature has the mythic version of a feat, the non-mythic version is not listed in the stat block. So the increased threat range seems to be correct, they only seem to be missing the effect of the mythic feat. (cant access my book right now)


Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
stuart haffenden wrote:

The mythic improved critical feat talks about increasing multipliers but the monsters with the feat have increased threat range's instead?

Treant, nessian warhound, dragon bite attacks... what's going on there?

If a mythic creature has the mythic version of a feat, the non-mythic version is not listed in the stat block. So the increased threat range seems to be correct, they only seem to be missing the effect of the mythic feat. (cant access my book right now)

You're missing the point, the range has been increased to 18+ for slams which should be 19+ with the normal feat. I know the regular versions aren't listed. It appears that during development the feat was changed from increasing the threat range a further +1 to increasing the multiplier by +1 .

The monsters I listed all have 18+ threat range's for attacks that should only be 19+.

However the monsters started out in the mini adventure at the end of the book have the correct listing for the feat and also include the increased multiplier.

Grand Lodge

Ataraxias wrote:

Immolation Cloak's last ability that allows the wearer to explode does not seem to have any action cost.

Can one really perform Standard,Move,Swift, Explosion in one round?

PRD wrote:

Wondrous items are usually use-activated or activated by a command word, but details vary from item to item.

Command Word: If the activation is on command or if no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.

A command word can be a real word, but when this is the case, the holder of the item runs the risk of activating the item accidentally by speaking the word in normal conversation. More often, the command word is some nonsensical word, or a word or phrase from an ancient language. Activating a command word magic item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Bold is mine.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
stuart haffenden wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
stuart haffenden wrote:

The mythic improved critical feat talks about increasing multipliers but the monsters with the feat have increased threat range's instead?

Treant, nessian warhound, dragon bite attacks... what's going on there?

If a mythic creature has the mythic version of a feat, the non-mythic version is not listed in the stat block. So the increased threat range seems to be correct, they only seem to be missing the effect of the mythic feat. (cant access my book right now)

You're missing the point, the range has been increased to 18+ for slams which should be 19+ with the normal feat. I know the regular versions aren't listed. It appears that during development the feat was changed from increasing the threat range a further +1 to increasing the multiplier by +1 .

The monsters I listed all have 18+ threat range's for attacks that should only be 19+.

However the monsters started out in the mini adventure at the end of the book have the correct listing for the feat and also include the increased multiplier.

I'm with Stuart on this question: for a particularly egregious example, look at the wyrm red dragon, which has mythic IC (bite) and normal IC for its claws.

Silver Crusade

stuart haffenden wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
stuart haffenden wrote:

The mythic improved critical feat talks about increasing multipliers but the monsters with the feat have increased threat range's instead?

Treant, nessian warhound, dragon bite attacks... what's going on there?

If a mythic creature has the mythic version of a feat, the non-mythic version is not listed in the stat block. So the increased threat range seems to be correct, they only seem to be missing the effect of the mythic feat. (cant access my book right now)

You're missing the point, the range has been increased to 18+ for slams which should be 19+ with the normal feat. I know the regular versions aren't listed. It appears that during development the feat was changed from increasing the threat range a further +1 to increasing the multiplier by +1 .

The monsters I listed all have 18+ threat range's for attacks that should only be 19+.

However the monsters started out in the mini adventure at the end of the book have the correct listing for the feat and also include the increased multiplier.

My bad, you are correct, I could not acces my books at that time.


Hmmm, there is a FAQ page for the mythic rules up now. Not all the questions have been answered yet, but the devs are probably still talking some of them over. I'll resist the urge to bump the Archmage/Heirophant abilities thread I had going just yet ;)


We Can Haz Chee-- er, URL, Pleez?

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

Click the Help/FAQ link in the upper right corner of the page, then click the Pathfinder RPG Mythic Adventures link under that.


linky

So far the main thing that was answered is how the DR/Epic works vs magic weapons. There are also some entries explaining the basic purpose and reasoning behind the mythic rules, but I'm going to assume that everyone who has been posting here is familiar with that stuff :)

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only thing in the Mythic Adventures book that has me scratching my head thus far is the Spellcasting sub-ability within the Intelligent legendary ability you can apply to legendary weapons (Page 172).

-It's unclear whether you can "save" unspent points to use for a level 6-9 spell, or if the intent is to cap them at level 5.

-It's unclear if spells with expensive components are permissible; even capped at 5th level, you could put raise dead on it, then be ahead 5k gold each use... Or permanency, for arcane casters. (OR, if players CAN 'roll-over' the points to get 9th level spells, Wish and Miracle...)

Those are both things that I can easily houserule... I'm just curious what the design intent is. All in all I have to say it's definitely worth the money, though, my players are loving it so far.

If anyone has any light to shed on that, it'd be appreciated.

Silver Crusade

pg. 19
6th-Tier Archmage Path Abilities

Channel Power (Su)

You gain the ability to channel raw arcane power into a spell. You can also expend one use of mythic power when casting an arcane spell to increase its damage by 50%. If the spell has a duration greater than 1 round, the duration doubles. Any saves required by the spell take a –4 penalty, although for mythic creatures, this penalty is reduced to –2. This spell ignores any spell resistance the targets have, although targets immune to the spell or to magic still retain that protection.

The bold portion says what it does without defining how, as though there is text missing between it and the second sentence, which contains an also, as though there were more that can be done. Or is the expenditure of mythic power what is meant?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Greetings, fellow travellers.

I've got a question concerning Mythic Bond (3rd tier Marshal, p.42):

The text says my AC gains half my favored enemy bonus, but the text from CRB says:

CRB wrote:
A ranger's animal companion shares his favored enemy and favored terrain bonuses.

So, does my AC gain half my bonus on top of what it has already gained through the normal bond feature (i. e. if I have fav enemy [aberration] +4 my AC would have a bonus of +6 against aberrations)?

Thanks in advance!

Ruyan.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kain Darkwind wrote:
It means that a +5 flaming sword penetrates ALL damage reduction in Pathfinder.

Me thinks you forgot about DR X/- as well as those that require a specific damage type (such as bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing).

Silver Crusade

The FAQ about DR/Epic says that, "Currently the Pathfinder RPG has no weapons with a permanent +6 or higher enhancement bonus" and this simply is not true (The Axe of the Dwarvish Lords comes to mind). Granted the examples are artifacts... but shouldn't it take an artifact to breach the defenses of Mythic or "Epic" DR?

I don't know, I just do not get the reasoning for making it easier to bypass. Not to mention that it still allows a weapon to bypass the DR/Epic of an Adamantine Golem but not any other Golem... So I can have a steel sword enchanted with +1, keen, and dancing and it can cut through said Adamantine Golem like butter but will bounce off of a Wood Golem failing to do full damage... I simply do not get it.

Am I missing something here?

As I had mentioned before, my intention is to simply ignore this change. But, I am still curious about it.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or, is the intention now that this is the standard for breaching DR across the board? So, per Mythic Adventures, does a +2 flaming weapon now bypass cold iron/silver (+3 weapon) or a +2 flaming keen weaon bypass adamantine (+4 weapon)?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Can you use your surge ability when flat-footed (to save, for example, when a dragon turtle rises up under your ship and potentially knocks you over)?

Surge says it's an immediate action, which can't be used while flat-footed, but that seems like it'd be a key use for a surge.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The mythic red wyrm's SOOTY FLAME ability doesn't seem to exist as anything but a name.

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

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

p. 93 Faerie Fire outlines figments with caster levels equal to or less than your tier. Should this be spell level instead? Caster levels equal to or less than your tier would almost never come up, and most other similar effects in mythic spells use spell level.

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

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

p. 102 Named Bullet - while not technically errata, it's very odd that a spell primary designed to affect bullets (it's even in the spell name) doesn't actually do anything for bullets, since most firearms already have a crit multiplier of x4, capping the crit multiplier for the mythic version of the spell at x4 means it won't affect bullets from the most common firearms.

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

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

p. 93 Enlarge Person - why does the mythic version increase the target's weight by 25, when the mythic reduce person reduces it by a factor of 16? They both change 2 size categories, and the non mythic versions both adjust by a factor of 8.

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

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

p. 161 Screaming Spear of the Sun - what effect does having this spear lodged in a target have? The rules explain how to remove it, but there doesn't seem to be any penalty to having it stuck in you. As written, if my character had this stuck in them, they'd just leave it there until after combat.

I'd suggest at a minimum it giving the entangled condition.

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

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

p. 209 Medusa - why does the mythic medusa use a bastard sword, when they have the weapon finesse feat and mythic weapon finesse feat? As a non-finessible weapon, neither feat works with it, which is pretty odd for a mythic foe to not use a cool ability. A simple dagger or short sword would be easy to pick up instead, and grant a +3 to attack and damage.

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
JoelF847 wrote:
p. 209 Medusa - why does the mythic medusa use a bastard sword, when they have the weapon finesse feat and mythic weapon finesse feat? As a non-finessible weapon, neither feat works with it, which is pretty odd for a mythic foe to not use a cool ability. A simple dagger or short sword would be easy to pick up instead, and grant a +3 to attack and damage.

Because sometimes you want to hit things with a bastard sword instead of a dagger or short sword.

Because sometimes the artist paints the monster with a bastard sword.

Because a medusa with a bastard sword looks ten times cooler than one with a short sword.

Because when your PCs spend a round wondering, "what's up with the bastard sword?," that's one more round she has to use her gaze attack on them. :)

Also, "I don't think this monster is using an optimal weapon" isn't really potential errata.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

My google-fu brought me no relevant results, so I'm assuming this hasn't been brought up.

D20PFSRD wrote:
Divine Source (Su) - You can grant divine spells to those who follow your cause, allowing them to select you as their deity for the purposes of determining their spells and domains. Select two domains upon taking this ability. These domains must be alignment domains matching your alignment if possible, unless your alignment is neutral. You grant access to these domains as if you were a deity. Creatures that gain spells from you don't receive any spells per day of levels higher than your tier; they lose those spell slots. In addition, you can cast spells from domains you grant as long as their level is equal to or less than your tier. Each day as a spell-like ability, you can cast one spell of each level equal to or less than your tier (selecting from those available to you from your divine source domains). If you're a cleric or you venerate a deity, you may change your spell domains to those you grant others. At 6th tier and 9th tier, you can select this ability again, adding one domain and two subdomains to your list each time and adding their spells to the list of those that you can cast.

So

1. Divine Source allows you to cast spells from domains you have access to as spell-like abilities, of spell levels up to your tier.
2. Some domains have Miracle as their 9th level spell.
3. Spell-like abilities do not have material components.

The 25,000gp cost for powerful miracles is (as I understand it) a material component.

Also, I'm assuming the first bolded paragraph is meant as a qualifier (or whatever you call it) for the second, and all it does is allow you to cast your granted domain spells as spell-like abilities. However, the way it is worded, it seems possible to interpret it as adding those spells to your list of spells known ("you can cast spells from those domains").

Shadow Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

First time you take this it needs to be an alignment domain , neutrals have a way out given the lack of a neutral domain. It also implies no subdomains until you choose again. All of these domains seem rather similar. To get miracle you need to either be a cleric with the domain spell or select again at 6th tier.

Given you need to be a tier 9 or 10 mythic to then use miracle the power curve is already way off by this stage (assuming 17-18th level characters with 9 tiers, that CR21-22 for an average encounter).
And really its only community, divine (subdomain) and luck that possess miracle.

So far prob not an errata issue so much as a concern over balance.

Now as an aside is there a way to get mythic spell like abilities so you can upgrade the miracle to miracle (mythic)?

Clarification may be needed in the area you bolded:

I interpreted the ability as; you can cast any of the 9 domain spells as a spell like ability, each once per day.

I also read that no matter how many domains and subdomains you have you still only get to cast ONE spell of each level per day. Choosing the ability more often simple lets you have a greater variety to choose from.


Cronatos wrote:

My google-fu brought me no relevant results, so I'm assuming this hasn't been brought up.

D20PFSRD wrote:
Divine Source (Su) - You can grant divine spells to those who follow your cause, allowing them to select you as their deity for the purposes of determining their spells and domains. Select two domains upon taking this ability. These domains must be alignment domains matching your alignment if possible, unless your alignment is neutral. You grant access to these domains as if you were a deity. Creatures that gain spells from you don't receive any spells per day of levels higher than your tier; they lose those spell slots. In addition, you can cast spells from domains you grant as long as their level is equal to or less than your tier. Each day as a spell-like ability, you can cast one spell of each level equal to or less than your tier (selecting from those available to you from your divine source domains). If you're a cleric or you venerate a deity, you may change your spell domains to those you grant others. At 6th tier and 9th tier, you can select this ability again, adding one domain and two subdomains to your list each time and adding their spells to the list of those that you can cast.

So

1. Divine Source allows you to cast spells from domains you have access to as spell-like abilities, of spell levels up to your tier.
2. Some domains have Miracle as their 9th level spell.
3. Spell-like abilities do not have material components.

The 25,000gp cost for powerful miracles is (as I understand it) a material component.

Fluff-wise, this makes perfect sense. A cleric casting Miracle is making sacrifice unto his god as part of a petition for the miracle. A character with Divine Focus is the god and has no need to sacrifice unto himself.

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

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
p. 209 Medusa - why does the mythic medusa use a bastard sword, when they have the weapon finesse feat and mythic weapon finesse feat? As a non-finessible weapon, neither feat works with it, which is pretty odd for a mythic foe to not use a cool ability. A simple dagger or short sword would be easy to pick up instead, and grant a +3 to attack and damage.

Because sometimes you want to hit things with a bastard sword instead of a dagger or short sword.

Because sometimes the artist paints the monster with a bastard sword.

Because a medusa with a bastard sword looks ten times cooler than one with a short sword.

Because when your PCs spend a round wondering, "what's up with the bastard sword?," that's one more round she has to use her gaze attack on them. :)

Also, "I don't think this monster is using an optimal weapon" isn't really potential errata.

Sean, while I respectfully disagree that the standard bestiary (or in this case Mythic Adventures) stat block should have a combination that ignore the abilities of the monster granted, that's a matter of opinion. However, saying that it's not really potential errata isn't really fair. No one but the designer and developer of the mythic medusa knows what was intended, but it certainly looks to a reader like it could be an error, and therefore is worthy of bringing up in an errata thread.

Your reasons are quite valid for a specific NPC medusa, but having the standard one minimize the affect of its mythic abilities in a book that's supposed to present sample mythic monsters seems counterproductive. I don't think that every choice for a monster or NPC should be optimized, in this particular product, I think it's far more useful of a tool to provide a baseline that's using the mythic rules chosen for the creature more effectively.

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

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

p. 215 Rakshasa - the telepathic dodge ability doesn't indicate how much of an insight bonus it grants. Also, the AC listing in the stat block includes a +5 insight bonus (which suggests that the bonus is equal to the Charisma bonus), but since that bonus doesn't apply to all opponents, wouldn't it be standard not to include in the baseline AC listed?


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
p. 209 Medusa - why does the mythic medusa use a bastard sword, when they have the weapon finesse feat and mythic weapon finesse feat? As a non-finessible weapon, neither feat works with it, which is pretty odd for a mythic foe to not use a cool ability. A simple dagger or short sword would be easy to pick up instead, and grant a +3 to attack and damage.

Because sometimes you want to hit things with a bastard sword instead of a dagger or short sword.

Because sometimes the artist paints the monster with a bastard sword.

Because a medusa with a bastard sword looks ten times cooler than one with a short sword.

Because when your PCs spend a round wondering, "what's up with the bastard sword?," that's one more round she has to use her gaze attack on them. :)

Also, "I don't think this monster is using an optimal weapon" isn't really potential errata.

I don't care if it has an optimal weapon.

I don't care if it has optimal feats. I mean, lots of monsters have the suboptimal toughness or weapon focus, but that isn't an issue.
What is weird would be a monster with weapon focus (greatsword) who didn't have a greatsword. That would have the exact same effect as just giving the monster one fewer feat than normal.

Now, I will admit that when I first looked at the mythic medusa statblock, that's what I saw. I thought "what? No light weapons? Why does it have a feat which it has no possible way to use?"

And then I remembered that its bite attack counts as "light" for purposes of WF, so it actually can use it. So in this case, I don't think there is an issue. But if a hypothetical monster stat block showed up with a feat or ability that it couldn't possibly use in any way, I would consider it a problem. Not because of optimization, but because giving a monster a feat it can't use both makes it more confusing and uses up ink, with nothing gained in the quality of the product.

Shadow Lodge

137ben wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
p. 209 Medusa - why does the mythic medusa use a bastard sword, when they have the weapon finesse feat and mythic weapon finesse feat? As a non-finessible weapon, neither feat works with it, which is pretty odd for a mythic foe to not use a cool ability. A simple dagger or short sword would be easy to pick up instead, and grant a +3 to attack and damage.

Because sometimes you want to hit things with a bastard sword instead of a dagger or short sword.

Because sometimes the artist paints the monster with a bastard sword.

Because a medusa with a bastard sword looks ten times cooler than one with a short sword.

Because when your PCs spend a round wondering, "what's up with the bastard sword?," that's one more round she has to use her gaze attack on them. :)

Also, "I don't think this monster is using an optimal weapon" isn't really potential errata.

I don't care if it has an optimal weapon.

I don't care if it has optimal feats. I mean, lots of monsters have the suboptimal toughness or weapon focus, but that isn't an issue.
What is weird would be a monster with weapon focus (greatsword) who didn't have a greatsword. That would have the exact same effect as just giving the monster one fewer feat than normal.

Now, I will admit that when I first looked at the mythic medusa statblock, that's what I saw. I thought "what? No light weapons? Why does it have a feat which it has no possible way to use?"

And then I remembered that its bite attack counts as "light" for purposes of WF, so it actually can use it. So in this case, I don't think there is an issue. But if a hypothetical monster stat block showed up with a feat or ability that it couldn't possibly use in any way, I would consider it a problem. Not because of optimization, but because giving a monster a feat it can't use both makes it more confusing and uses up ink, with nothing gained in the quality of the product.

I rarely agree with SKR, but really dude? If it bothers you so much just give any medusas that you use a dagger. Weapons in stat blocks are not carved in stone. I guarantee that SKR won't show up at your house to tell you that you are having BADWRONGFUN.


Kthulhu wrote:
I guarantee that SKR won't show up at your house to tell you that you are having BADWRONGFUN.

Isn't that what those men in black suits, ties and dark sunglasses are employed for?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
Weapons in stat blocks are not carved in stone.

They weren't, but then they looked into the eyes of a mythic medusa...

Also, "but you can houserule it!" isn't a defense of bad design.

Shadow Lodge

Substituting one weapon for another doesn't count as a houserule.


"You can change it!" isn't a defense of bad design.

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

"This monster (whose primary attack is the ability to turn enemies to stone with a look) doesn't have the optimal weapon (even though it's almost never going to hit things with weapons)" isn't bad design.

Liberty's Edge

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
"This monster (whose primary attack is the ability to turn enemies to stone with a look) doesn't have the optimal weapon (even though it's almost never going to hit things with weapons)" isn't bad design.

So you believe that giving a creature a feat and a mythic feat that it cannot use, is good design?

That aside, I don't believe that bad design is enough of an excuse to warrant errata, but it certainly seems that the stat block could have been looked at a bit closer and been modified for better playability.

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

8 people marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:

So you believe that giving a creature a feat and a mythic feat that it cannot use, is good design?

That aside, I don't believe that bad design is enough of an excuse to warrant errata, but it certainly seems that the stat block could have been looked at a bit closer and been modified for better playability.

It is using that feat: it has two natural attacks (snakes), which are light weapons, and therefore WF and MWF applies.

But feel free to keep suggesting that I didn't spend enough time developing the monsters chapter. It's great when someone who doesn't understand my job tells me how to do my job. :)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:

So you believe that giving a creature a feat and a mythic feat that it cannot use, is good design?

That aside, I don't believe that bad design is enough of an excuse to warrant errata, but it certainly seems that the stat block could have been looked at a bit closer and been modified for better playability.

It is using that feat: it has two natural attacks (snakes), which are light weapons, and therefore WF and MWF applies.

But feel free to keep suggesting that I didn't spend enough time developing the monsters chapter. It's great when someone who doesn't understand my job tells me how to do my job. :)

Then that is my bad for not looking at the monster myself, my apologies.


Kthulhu wrote:
137ben wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
p. 209 Medusa - why does the mythic medusa use a bastard sword, when they have the weapon finesse feat and mythic weapon finesse feat? As a non-finessible weapon, neither feat works with it, which is pretty odd for a mythic foe to not use a cool ability. A simple dagger or short sword would be easy to pick up instead, and grant a +3 to attack and damage.

Because sometimes you want to hit things with a bastard sword instead of a dagger or short sword.

Because sometimes the artist paints the monster with a bastard sword.

Because a medusa with a bastard sword looks ten times cooler than one with a bastard sword.

Because when your PCs spend a round wondering, "what's up with the bastard sword?," that's one more round she has to use her gaze attack on them. :)

Also, "I don't think this monster is using an optimal weapon" isn't really potential errata.

I don't care if it has an optimal weapon.

I don't care if it has optimal feats. I mean, lots of monsters have the suboptimal toughness or weapon focus, but that isn't an issue.
What is weird would be a monster with weapon focus (greatsword) who didn't have a greatsword. That would have the exact same effect as just giving the monster one fewer feat than normal.

Now, I will admit that when I first looked at the mythic medusa statblock, that's what I saw. I thought "what? No light weapons? Why does it have a feat which it has no possible way to use?"

And then I remembered that its bite attack counts as "light" for purposes of WF, so it actually can use it. So in this case, I don't think there is an issue. But if a hypothetical monster stat block showed up with a feat or ability that it couldn't possibly use in any way, I would consider it a problem. Not because of optimization, but because giving a monster a feat it can't use both makes it more confusing and uses up ink, with nothing gained in the quality of the product.

I rarely agree with SKR,...

If you read my post carefully before responding, you'd notice that I said that my hypothetical "complaint" doesn't apply to the Medusa, because it has natural attacks and can therefore use its weapon finesse. I was agreeing with SKR.

101 to 150 of 256 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Possible Mythic Adventures errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.