|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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. :)
Probably not how you intended but this comes across a little petulant. Are you perhaps taking this a little too personally? Or is the medium of internet forum allowing for some miscommunication here?
|
|
Oh and I agree with you 100%. Makes sense that a medusa should have feats that are focused on her natural attacks, the ones she will be using all the time. The manufactured weapon is irrelevant - I'm sure they even use bows on some occasions, even without all the bow feats!
I think the mythic creatures presented are well done, and serve to highlight the differences between mythic and non-mythic creatures. I've quite enjoyed comparing the mythic to their base forms.
Besides we have bestiary 4 just around the corner and that should, hopefully, contain a whole raft of new mythic creatures and monster abilities.
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.
If you do this it is too easy for arcane casters to get the ability to cast arcane spells wearing fullplate.
Now they would need a mythic feat and three mythic powers (the feat being the one giving you access to a second path) which is a rather big investment.With your change this would be reduced to 1 mythic feat and one power. A much cheaper way. Especially considering how mythic arcane armor training works.
|
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.
If you do this it is too easy for arcane casters to get the ability to cast arcane spells wearing fullplate.
Now they would need a mythic feat and three mythic powers (the feat being the one giving you access to a second path) which is a rather big investment.
With your change this would be reduced to 1 mythic feat and one power. A much cheaper way. Especially considering how mythic arcane armor training works.
Well they can already do so... Take Component Freedom(Somatic). Then all they will suffer is armor check penalties to attack rolls (meh) and and skill checks for movement abilities (double meh).
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Probably not how you intended but this comes across a little petulant. Are you perhaps taking this a little too personally? Or is the medium of internet forum allowing for some miscommunication here?
No offense, dude, but let's create a message board where people can pick apart everything you do in your day job, without ever having done your day job, and without actually reading the project you're working on. And have them publicly question whether you're doing a good job. And then you can tell me if you're taking that criticism personally or not. Just sayin'. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Probably not how you intended but this comes across a little petulant. Are you perhaps taking this a little too personally? Or is the medium of internet forum allowing for some miscommunication here?No offense, dude, but let's create a message board where people can pick apart everything you do in your day job, without ever having done your day job, and without actually reading the project you're working on. And have them publicly question whether you're doing a good job. And then you can tell me if you're taking that criticism personally or not. Just sayin'. :)
I was going to make this exact point (can't remember whether it was in this thread or another one, now) - I know that when someone (a customer, for example) tells me that I'm doing a "bad job", without knowing anything at all about how hard I've worked to achieve what they wanted, it makes me want to scream. No matter how much they say "I'm not taking this out on you, personally", if they then proceed to (effectively) tell me that I wasn't paying attention, I'm going to take it personally. My boss knows me well enough to give me 5 minutes to rant, and then life goes on. But I sure as heck stop caring about that customer's needs. I expect most people feel the same way when someone who doesn't actually know the ins and outs of a particular task criticises it on the basis of false assumptions. And until or unless Sean's boss pulls him up for defending his work, I'm not going to slate him for doing so. In fact I'm going to stand right beside him and agree wholeheartedly with his position, and make public my firm opinion on his right to do so.
TL;DR: Ninja'd by Sean K Reynolds. How cool is that?
|
|
Probably not how you intended but this comes across a little petulant. Are you perhaps taking this a little too personally? Or is the medium of internet forum allowing for some miscommunication here?No offense, dude, but let's create a message board where people can pick apart everything you do in your day job, without ever having done your day job, and without actually reading the project you're working on. And have them publicly question whether you're doing a good job. And then you can tell me if you're taking that criticism personally or not. Just sayin'. :)
That's the internet, social media makes it really easy to do just that. Criticism with anonymity, founded or not, tends to bring out the worst in people. Add to that the ease of miscommunication and you tend to end up in situations where people come across badly. I'm not questioning you design skills - I'm a big fan of paizo and the work it's people do. In fact I agree with you 100% on the issue and think the comments aimed at you crossed a line (remember the number one rule on the messageboards), especially since you already adequately explained the choice.
I'm a high school teacher so the idea of people criticizing and questioning my job and the quality of my work is a constant, and almost expected event. In fact most people support it. Every person with a child in a school often feels they can do a better job, knows how to do my job, or can pick perceived flaws in what I do or how I do it and all without ANY real understanding of what the job entails. I'm not new to the idea.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a former teacher, I say:
*teacher fistbump*
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No offense, dude, but let's create a message board where people can pick apart everything you do in your day job, without ever having done your day job, and without actually reading the project you're working on. And have them publicly question whether you're doing a good job. And then you can tell me if you're taking that criticism personally or not. Just sayin'. :)
With all due respect, if constant criticism on Paizo's forums vexes you, then it might be a good idea to spend less time here. Wrong or right, people are going to be harsher and more forthcoming with their criticisms on a quasi-anonymous internet forum than they would be elsewhere.
A few points:
1. For people who are just fans of Pathfinder and don't work at Paizo, it's not very transparent who came up with specific ideas. For example, looking at my copy of the Bestiary 3, on the credits page, credited are 1 lead designer, 10 designers, 1 creative director, 1 managing editor, 5 people for development, and 8 people for editing. However, the book doesn't state, for example, that this specific Paizo employee is responsible for this specific cool idea for the Graveknight, etc. I think this makes it easier for people to mention criticism, because to them, they are criticizing the combined work of 20 or more people, not criticizing any individual person.
2. Most criticisms on these forums are only concerned with details involved in running/playing in a Pathfinder campaign. They are only tangentially related to the rest of the work of being a game designer. This is an area where a lot of people, who have spent years playing in games, DMing games, homebrewing content, publishing 3rd party content, etc. do have experience. Obviously, there are things that go into publishing content besides just making the best product (Paizo does have to remain viable as a company to continue publishing anything). I guess I don't know whether one can just admit, for example, that part of the reason Bestiary 4 is using mythic tiers is to sell more copies of Mythic Adventures. To me, this seems like such a benign fact that it should be possible to mention it to help explain design decisions. I could easily be missing something, however.
3. Not everyone mentioning criticisms is doing so hostilely. The person who started the thread the other day criticizing Paizo's entire business plan for Pathfinder as being too much like D&D3.5 probably was. But most criticism seems to come from a position of caring about the quality of the game. For example, in the thread about Grendel, the person who expressed concerns about mythic tiers in Bestiary 4 did so politely and reasonably. Your response to them came off as dismissive and just rude. It's unreasonable to hold everyone who expresses criticism responsible for the actions of the most argumentative.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The mythic medusa's bastard sword is now a Sunblade, optimizing the uses of her Feats for her manufactured weapon and natural attacks, there!
Mythic Rules are in the PRD? because I can't find it, or it have some type of regional lock?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
With all due respect, if constant criticism on Paizo's forums vexes you, then it might be a good idea to spend less time here.
So you're suggesting the staff either (1) deal with it, or (2) stay away. Gotcha.
If someone suggests that a non-errata design decision is "bad design", I'll call them out on it. Not only because they're wrong, but because they're going out of their way to be a jerk. Remember the most important rule of the Paizo.com message boards.
Feel free to criticize what I do. Just be informed about the topic (i.e., don't argue from a position of ignorance), and don't be a jerk with your criticisms. For this particular discussion (the mythic medusa), I have no idea if you're informed or not (there's no indication whether or not you actually read the monster, you just jumped in with some one-liners), and your first two posts in the thread were to call it "bad design," without any explanation or justification for the comment (that's being a jerk).
Mythic Rules are in the PRD? because I can't find it, or it have some type of regional lock?
It's the next book scheduled to appear on the PRD. All of the books in our core rulebook line end up on the PRD. The tech team is working on it, it just takes a little while.
First off, thank you for your response. It does bring to light some questions though.
All flagged threads are being looked at. No threads need to be bumped. Once they have clicks, they stay in the queue until they are answered or cleared.Them staying in the que doesn't help anyone. And really, there's more threads getting FAQs every week then there are FAQs getting answered every week. (Maybe not large numbers of FAQ clicks, but 1 - 2? Certainly. I've certainly hit FAQ rather than reply a time or 2.) Perhaps there should be some junk sweeper or even some method for posters to remove their posts from the que (like if the FAQ their own post (or if we misclick) and later down the thread someone answers their question for them).
Secondly, do you look at flagged threads or posts? If someone asks a question that isn't well worded in the first post, but asks a clearer version of it later on, should we only hit the FAQ on the first post or on the clearer post, or both?
Do short threads help more with the process or is the length of a thread and the amount of debate within it irrelevant? What about bolding the relevant question with the background information or what have you not bolded?
The more we know about the FAQ process and the selection process the more we as forum posters can do to try and help you have less to wade through.
Except obviously the devs have noticed than some threads with a lot of FAQ clicks are not really QUESTIONS people want answered. Sometimes it’s just someone wants a rule CHANGED, sometimes it just someone who wants to rattle the devs cages. Look at the thread where it is complained there are ‘so many” FAQ clicks. But really what the Op is asking for is a rules CHANGE, or someone to say “Yep, that’s really what the rules say”. Now, there was a FAQ clarification which was generated from that thread (so it's Good), but it wasn’t really the “Q” that the OP wanted answered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Probably not how you intended but this comes across a little petulant. Are you perhaps taking this a little too personally? Or is the medium of internet forum allowing for some miscommunication here?No offense, dude, but let's create a message board where people can pick apart everything you do in your day job, without ever having done your day job, and without actually reading the project you're working on. And have them publicly question whether you're doing a good job. And then you can tell me if you're taking that criticism personally or not. Just sayin'. :)
Sean, as you know, at one time I was a “Dev” (of sorts, anyway). It was *MUCH* harder work than any others who have not walked a mile in your moccasins can possibly image. Mind you, it is a very fun job, one of the best for that too, but it’s by no means easy- it’s hard and doesn’t pay all that well.
So, even tho we don’t always agree (the ‘corner” exception for reach weapons being a case in point!) those of us who have worn those moccasins, even for a short time, have to give you all props for doing this.
Folks have to learn that it is possible to disagree but still remain polite and respectful. So even tho you were completely wrong about characters in adventuring garb being caught on fire <g> that is such a tiny portion of your overall output that your batting average is still phenomenal.
Guys, you may think Sean’s job is easy, but just go ahead and try it. See if you can even get a magic item or something published in the next contest.
Or if you really want your ego pulverized and trampled into the mud, try writing something and submitting it for publication with a 3PP. Heck, just get it ready for submission and you have my respect. It’s so much harder than you think.
|
Hi Sean, I have an Idea I would like to shot by you,[this is strictly not the right thread but your here and I don't know if I can find the right thread.] This has to do with the Magus Hasted Assault in light of the rulings on haste and the Magus, would you talk to to magus designer and possibly suggest replacing Hasted assault with Fleet Warrior from the Mythic Adventures book.
I see this as solving the Haste issue with the Magus. The Magus would be able to move and spell combat or spell strike with Irriative attacks but not get an extra attack or cast another spell unless he had Quickened Meta-magic.
Sometimes when a newer power is created it can correct a problem in a prior power/ability w/o causing the Devs any grief from your often time grumpy fan base.
Sean do you know if Pazio has any plans on using your divine ranking system. I see some players on the boards thinking that Mythic powers have a chance vs. Divine powers could you set them stright.
Lou,
1) We're not going to replace an Ultimate Magic magus arcana (or its effect) with a path ability from Ultimate Magic. They do two different things and they're okay that way. :) Also, changing that arcana to work like fleet warrior devalues fleet warrior (as in "there's much less reason to take this as a path ability when I can get it as a non-mythic arcana").
2) I don't understand what you mean by divine ranks vs. mythic ranks. The Pathfinder RPG (and the Golarion setting) doesn't have any formal, number-based ranking system for categorizing the deities. And mythic ranks don't have anything to do with divine ranks (in that you can have a level 1, tier 1 mythic character, or a level 19, tier 9 mythic character, and neither of them is a deity).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't leave us, SKR! I love your responses; they are a speck of hope in an otherwise Lovecraftian existence!
|
|
I think he may a slightly thicker hide than that.
Should the wild arcana ability be a swift action, while the heirophant inspired spell appears to be a standard? Both appear to do almost the same thing. Not sure if this was intended as a difference, or an oversight/error in the write up.
Clarification on mythic casting and metamagic feats (if possible). When I cast a mythic spell do I expend MP to upscale it to mythic as I cast or before starting? Seems like a small issue but it alters how metamagic feats work. Essentially do I apply metamagic feats before hand to the basic spell and cast the mythic version with those enhancements OR do I get to upgrade the base spell to the mythic version then apply any metamagic feats?
is there any way of casting a spell-like ability as the Mythic version of that spell ?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
is there any way of casting a spell-like ability as the Mythic version of that spell ?
I want to say I submitted a Mythic SLA feat as part of my turnover for MA, but if so it was cut (possibly for space, possibly because it had other issues, who knows).
I may be misremembering as well.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Regarding the mythic medusa,
shouldn't she have a -5 penalty on her snake attack while she is wielding the bastard sword?
Therefore, making it a +7 attack with the secondary snake bite, instead of +12 which seems to indicate that it is her sole attack.
I thought that was how using a weapon together with natural attacks worked.
Have I been misinformed?
So, an errata for Inspired Spell and Wild Arcana has been posted. Both take Standard Actions to activate now, and only work on spells that take a standard action or faster to cast. So yea, they've been nerfed into the ground ;)
I don't know why they didn't post one for Arcane Surge and Recalled Blessing as well, but I think it is safe to assume that the developer's intent is that both of those should be nerfed to Standard Action as well.
Yeah, so nerfed both of our arcane casters took it anyway. Even tho our DM nerfed it a little more. It's that good.
Regarding the mythic medusa,
shouldn't she have a -5 penalty on her snake attack while she is wielding the bastard sword?
Therefore, making it a +7 attack with the secondary snake bite, instead of +12 which seems to indicate that it is her sole attack.
I thought that was how using a weapon together with natural attacks worked.
Have I been misinformed?
I noticed a similar issue with the Mythic Minotaur. I don't have it infront of me, but I remember the bonus for the gore attack didn't have the normal -5 penalty.
|
|
So, an errata for Inspired Spell and Wild Arcana has been posted. Both take Standard Actions to activate now, and only work on spells that take a standard action or faster to cast. So yea, they've been nerfed into the ground ;)
I don't know why they didn't post one for Arcane Surge and Recalled Blessing as well, but I think it is safe to assume that the developer's intent is that both of those should be nerfed to Standard Action as well.
Good to see. Those two powers, mainly wild arcana, were far too good. Glad they "nerfed" it back to a balanced and far more reasonable ability.
In "Fire Over Blackcrag," the sacred guardians (mythic gargoyle barbarians) have a cone of acid as a breath weapon. The base mythic gargoyle as a line of acid as a breath weapon. I'm not seeing anything in the sacred guardians' stat block that would change it, but I'm not sure which one is in error.
Just errata Mythic Vital Strike to not be the most broken thing ever. I have no idea what it's original intended purpose was, but as it stands now it just adds a ton of free damage for nothing.Vital Strike is worthless without the mythic version.
While an incredibly huge boost on its own, far more than the feat has any right to be, this is entirely a "tax" issue - It incorporates several aspects that should have been in Vital Strike and its upgrades to begin with, but were not.
It's fine to Errata mVS, but if this is done it cannot, must not be done without transfering portions of the bonuses removed across the vital strike line as well with it.
Yeah, I mean once you realize exactly when you can use Vital strike, the feat becomes not anywhere near as good as it seems. In fact one thing I suggested is that Fighters get it for FREE, one each at 5, 10, 15, 20 levels.
Mythic Vital strike is powerful, sure, but you still can't use it on a FAO or a charge or on most special manueverers such as Spring attack.
I agree with Jamie- MVS is then just barely worth it, due to the high "tax" of low powered feats going into it. And still, only useable with normal move & attack, which is not optimal.
So, let us assume you go for MVS- compare that to a Full Attack with two other feats like Wpn Spec and Mythic Wpn Focus. I guess if you're facing DR you can get thru or looking for a insta-kill by massive damage, the MVS is better, but it's a trade off.
Now, the synery with Mythic Haste......
|
Not sure if this was an oversight or intentional:
On page 223, the mythic wyvern entry has a blurb at the end for variant mythic wyverns that are more closely related to one of the chromatic dragon types. It mentions they lose their energy resistance and power lift abilities but gain appropriate energy immunity and breath weapon abilities in their place. Should they also gain the subtype of the dragon in question? For example, should a mythic white wyvern also have the cold subtype?
Also, and I'm really more curious than anything, was there a reason the variant wyverns were restricted to chromatic breeds? Is there a reason we might not see silver wyverns or brine wyverns?
Page 198, the Mythic Gargoyle is said to have Dr/10 Epic and Magic. With only 5 Hd shouldn't it only have Dr/5 Epic and magic as per the mythic subtype rules, or is this an intentional boost to the monster?
Thanks,
Illius
Question regarding the Guardian Call 'Absorb Blow'.
Absorb Blow (Su): As an immediate action, whenever you take hit point damage from a single source (such as a dragon’s breath, a spell, or a weapon), you can expend one use of mythic power to reduce the damage you take from that source by 5 per tier (to a minimum of 0 points of damage taken). If you have another ability or effect that reduces damage (such as protection from energy), reduce the damage with the absorb blow ability before applying any other damage-reducing effects. For every 10 points of damage that this ability prevents, for 1 minute you gain DR 1/epic and 5 points of resistance against acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic damage. The DR and resistances stack with any other DR and resistances that you have.The damage reduction was change from 10 per tier (playtest) to 5 per tier (go live). Due to this fact the bold marked part of the ability is only active with tier2 and higher. Is this RAI or some kind of typo?
This is a question that came up tonight. Do you need to absorb 10 points of damage in a single attack (so this DR and resistance only kicks in at Tier 2) or can you absorb 5 points one round and then 5 points the next round to reach the 10 for the DR and Resistances to kick in?
Page 198, the Mythic Gargoyle is said to have Dr/10 Epic and Magic. With only 5 Hd shouldn't it only have Dr/5 Epic and magic as per the mythic subtype rules, or is this an intentional boost to the monster?
Thanks,
Illius
Gargoyles have DR 10/Magic.
If the creature already has damage reduction, it adds epic to the qualities needed to bypass that reduction. If the damage reduction granted from this subtype has a larger numerical value than the creature's original damage reduction, increase the creature's original damage reduction to the amount of the epic DR. For example, a monster with DR 5/bludgeoning that gains DR 10/epic from the mythic subtype gains DR 10/bludgeoning and epic.
|
So I don't know where to post this so I decided to just post it here. After playing with mythic character's for a few month's and watching the general power level of champion archmage trickster etc. I have found that they are all severely potent at what they do. In previous posts, people have been fear mongering regarding the abilities of the archmage and hirophant and while they are amazing... those surge abilities are the ONLY thing that create a better action economy for a caster. Several other abilities allow fighters and the like to Mythic Vital Strike twice in a round doing high hundreds of points of damage with a foe murdering legendary weapon.
And this is not counting the action economy of monsters with agile templates (I've seen 12 goblins with that template...*shivvers*)
I know that magic is scary for a lot of people, but the swift action economy was allowing combinations that simply hadn't existed before as now casters had the chance to experiment with being awesome.
I therefore humbly request to the developers that your reverse your faq ruling and allow Arcane and Inspired surge to cast a spell as a swift action. It is awesome and legitimately the kind of awesome we need from mythic spell casters in a world all too often overcome by DPS olympics.
Thank you.
Did we ever figure out what a mythic red dragons SOOTY FLAME ability does?
Nope. In the meantime, though, I think I'm going to assume that it creates an effect equivalent to the smoke cloud use of pyrotechnics in the area of the dragon's breath weapon.
I have to say, I find it very odd that Inspired Spell and Wild Arcana have gotten an errata, but Arcane Surge and Recalled Blessing have not. These two powers suffer from the exact same issues that Inspired Spell and Wild Arcana did before their errata.
Should we expect these to get an official errata at some point?
Intimidating Prowess (mythic) claims to provide an ability if you also have Persuasive (mythic); however, Persuasive (mythic) already provides that ability by itself.
If you also have the Persuasive (mythic) feat, you can expend one use of mythic power to treat the Intimidate check as if you had rolled a natural 20. You must decide to use this ability before the roll is made.
In addition, you can expend one use of mythic power to treat a Diplomacy or Intimidate check as if you had rolled a natural 20. You must decide to use this ability before making the roll.
Not sure if someone else already called this out but...
Mythic lunge says that while lunge is active you get a +2 bonus on attacks of opportunity. This bonus is unlikely to ever apply to anything since lunge's effects only increase your reach until the end of your turn, not until your next turn.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So, due to some wierdness in wording I'm confused.
Mainly about counterspelling and mythicness.
Flexible Counterspell (Su): Your mythic power enhances your ability to counter others' spells. As an immediate action, you can expend one use of mythic power to attempt to counter a spell. This ability otherwise works like readying an action to counter a spell, except instead of using the exact spell or dispel magic, you can instead expend a spell or spell slot of a level equal to or higher than the target spell.
Resilient Arcana (Su): Your spells and effects become more difficult to identify and dispel. Add your tier to the DC of any checks to identify your spells, recognize them as they are being cast, or dispel them using dispel magic or similar effects.
So here's a couple of sample scenarios.
1)Mage A and B are fighting. Mage B after a few well quipped insults throws a fireball at mage a. Mage A using a readied action and dispel magic, makes a caster level check and attemtps to dispel the fireball. Success, he's not nuked. This would not work if he didn't ready an action though correct?
Scenario 2) Same as above, but Mage A has Flexible counterspell. Mage B throws a fireball, and mage a attempts to counter it using Dispel magic and his readied action. Oh no, he fails! But fear not, he has flexible counterspell. my question is can he use it, already having attempted to cast a dispel magic?
Scenario 3) Same as 1, however deciding that he might fail to counter the dastardly b's spell, he spends the mythic point, and uses a 3rd level spell, but this time didn't ready an action to dispel the spell. Does it work?
Scenario 4) Both A and B are mythic. A has flexible counterspell, but B has Resilient Arcana. Mage B casts his spell, but A fails to identify it. Oh no! but fear not, he can still use dispel magic or Flexible counterspell, because neither rely on knowing the spell! He might survive! My question, if he wants to use Flexible Counterspell, can he do so by spending his mythic point, and use a 4th lvl spell and hope that it is high enough to dispel the oncoming spell?
Also, does the spell that he uses with flexible counterspell automatically match the spell that getting used against him?
And finally, what if Mage B stills and silents the spell that he's casting? Does the other mage get a chance to use flexible counterspell to get rid of it? Technically since dispel magic doesn't let you counter spells that have durations of instantaneous, and the fireball is now incoming, I don't assume that he can use it to get rid of the fireball mid flight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*pokes thread*
Hmmm, I think it has been more than half a year since the Mythic Adventures book came out, and there still has not been much in the way of erratas. I guess Paizo is busy :(
I have to say that I am looking forward to seeing what fixes Paizo implements to this book. As much as I love the Mythic rules I think this book is going to need even more faqs and erratas than any other book Paizo has put out.
I know this thread is ages old, but now is when I got my hands on the book, so I'm going to report the errors I find as I did for the first three Bestiaries.
Aboleth, page 178
1) The Mythic subtype says it should receive 1+MR mythic abilities, so 4 in total, but it only got 2: Mucus Mist and Slime Armor, neither of which seem so strong as to take up two mythic abilities slot.
2) This is, I suppose, a mere design choice to fit in the new CR, but I'll point it out anyway: tentacle damage was increased from 1d6 to 1d8 with no reason (except, as said, design choice).
Greater Barghest, page 179
1) Opposite to the Aboleth, this one seem to have way more mythic abilities than it should. It should have a total of 3 mythic abilities, and it instead gains:
- Goblin King;
- Improved Bite (which is quite powerful and maybe it should even take 2 mythic ability slots; and what's more, in the stat block but not in the ability description, the bite also has the Ghost Touch property);
- Burn
- Vorpal Bite (another very strong ability, especially when combined with Improved Bite).
2) Initiative bonus is listed as +8, but should be +6; it doesn't have Mythic Improved Initiative.
Cockatrice, page 180
1) CMD is listed as 17, but should be 18 (due to the improved bonus from the Mythic Dodge feat).
2) In the Petrification special ability, the DC is listed correctly the first time it is mentioned, but not the second time (12 instead of 13).
Great Cyclops, page 181
1) In the Melee entry, the gore attack is listed as "Gore +24 (1d8+14)", but since it is made together with the greatclub attacks, it should be treated as secondary and thus read "Gore +19 (1d8+7)".
2) The damage for Powerful Charge lists a +21 (as per Str x1.5), but should be +28 (Str x2, as per Powerful Charge rules). Also, the dice damage has been decreased from 4d8 to 4d6, but this brings another issue as the original Great Cyclops should have had 2d8 in the first place, instead of 4d8.
3) Spell-like abilities lists Chain Lightning, which is a 6th level spell and thus requires Charisma 16, whereas the Great Cyclops only has 12. (Maybe change it with a 3/day Scorching Ray?)
4) MR 6, so it should have 7 mythic abilities; it has only 5 additions, instead: immunity to electricity, immunity to fire, Contemptuous Toss, Earthquake (are these last two considered strong enough to take up two slots?) and that odd Chain Lightning I already mentioned.
Demon, Marilith, page 182
1) SR is listed as 32, but should be 36 (28 base, +8 from Mythic Rank).
2) All the longsword attacks are listed as having a critical of 16-20 (with no multiplier, thus implying it is x2); they should be 17-20/x3 instead, as Mythic Improved Critical doesn't lower critical range by 1, but rather raises the multiplier by 1.
3) Again on the swords. They are listed as dealing their normal damage "plus poison". Not entirely incorrect, but 90% misguiding. The Marilith can only apply poison to one weapon once per round as a swift action (or three, if it uses the whole round using swift actions to do just that), so, assuming it applied poison to all its weapons before fighting, when it had all the time to do that, after any of those weapons hit, the poison is gone, and the Marilith will be able to re-poison only one per round. Writing "plus poison" like that makes it look like the poison is always there.
4) One more time on the number of mythic abilities; at MR 8, it should have 9 abilities, but it has:
- Immunity to cold;
- Immunity to fire;
- Poisoned Weapons (does it count as two abilities, with its DC 20 for a CR 21 creature?);
- Greater Infuse Weapons (this may count as two abilities, though not too sure);
- Heal (self only) 1/day;
- Change Shape.
Demon, Nalfeshnee, page 183
1) SR is listed as 28, but should be 32 (rules say the whole MR should be added, not just half).
2) Bite attack: same issue as #2 in the Marilith list in my previous post.
3) Again not sure about the mythic abilities number (it should have 8). The Nalfeshnee gets:
- Fire immunity;
- Demonic Knowledge;
- Touch of Chaos;
- Steal (with claws);
- Constant Detect Thoughts; at will Move Earth, Slow, Stone Shape, Stone Tell; 3/day Scrying; 1/day Contact Other Plane (not sure how many ability slots all of these should fill).
4) Unclear text about Touch of Chaos: does it imply that the Nalfeshnee gets the equivalent of such power usable 3+Wis times per day AND it can use it with natural attacks if it uses mythic power, or does it mean that the Nalfeshnee can ONLY use it when expending mythic power that way?
Demon, Vrock, page 184
1) SR listed as 22, should be 24.
2) Entrapping Vines is an upgrade of Spores, as Manic Dance of Ruin is for Dance of Ruin. Both of them, though, are written as if the basic ability disappeared and just the mythic version is now usable (only by expending mythic power).
Oh, About the Nalfeshnee I forgot to mention that it also has 6 ability points more than it should (dunno if they're considered mythic ability-equivalents).
The normal Nalfeshnee has Str 32 and Cha 20, whereas the mythic one has 40 and 24 respectively. 6 of those 12 points of difference are from normal MR bonuses, so there's the question for the other 6.
Devil, Bone, page 185
1) SR listed as 22, should be 24.
2) Bleed effect isn't listed for the bite. Dunno if design choice or error, since the Vrock has it for all its attack.
3) Number of mythic abilities by rules: 5; things the Osyluth gets:
- Bleed;
- Pounce;
- Rend;
- Bone Eruption;
- Pain Blast.
Which makes 5, but Pain Blast is quite powerful, with no save or any other way of avoiding it; does it count as 2 mythic abilities?