Advanced Class Guide errata is up!


Pathfinder Society

101 to 150 of 254 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 5/5

Nefreet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
So...is it me or should we be seeing all of the swashbucklers at service at the temple of saranrae this weekend?
Problem is that you can't use a Buckler with Dervish Dance, either.

Why not? It specifies "carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand" Bucklers are not in a hand they are strapped to a forearm, else you could not wield a bow (at no penalty) or a second weapon (at -1) while using one.

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Tamec wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

So...is it me or should we be seeing all of the swashbucklers at service at the temple of saranrae this weekend? Are we back to the rapier not being a viable swashbuckler weapon?

Rapier still works - Fencing Grace isn't affected by the change.
Fencing Grace was the clue that slashing grace was going to be changed since fencing grace's wording matches the errata to slashing grace and they both match dervish dance now. I always assumed it was going to be changed.

Just rechecked the wording of Fencing Grace. I don't see anything in there that would suggest this. Could you be more specific, please?

Liberty's Edge

Protoman wrote:

Yea I know no one was commenting about the action economy. I'm just grumpy that they only fixed the most easy-to-fix issue about the archetype.

Movie and comic Cap mostly uses unarmed (in "Captain Andoran: The Winter Rider" anyways) which I appreciate. Only shield bashing occasionally as it seems slower than his fists or kicks. Him releasing to throw shield or catching and restrapping it was way faster than 6 seconds though.

I'll grant you that but it wasn't less then a second (swift/free action) it was at least a move action (1-3 seconds). It's not a waste of an archetype though, as melkiador said, because this is not a ranged focus class. Sure I'm going to be throwing my shield until I get within punching distance but when I'm within punching distance I'm punching.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Kalindlara wrote:
Just rechecked the wording of Fencing Grace. I don't see anything in there that would suggest this. Could you be more specific, please?

I agree, Fencing Grace is still working as originally intended. So it continues to work as expected unless more back-pedaling is done.

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Joe Ducey wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
So...is it me or should we be seeing all of the swashbucklers at service at the temple of saranrae this weekend?
Problem is that you can't use a Buckler with Dervish Dance, either.
Why not? It specifies "carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand" Bucklers are not in a hand they are strapped to a forearm, else you could not wield a bow (at no penalty) or a second weapon (at -1) while using one.

Thats way more loopholey than you want to try to build a PFS character around.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Enough for some ppl to spend Prestige on, even.

I'm glad I'm not playing my Swashbuckler at GenCon. I have a feeling these questions won't be answered by then.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Crap! I just realized my whip using Slashing Grace Warpriest is going to have to get rid of her shield.

Silver Crusade 1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pack Flanking still not a combat feat :-/

2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Joe Ducey wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
So...is it me or should we be seeing all of the swashbucklers at service at the temple of saranrae this weekend?
Problem is that you can't use a Buckler with Dervish Dance, either.
Why not? It specifies "carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand" Bucklers are not in a hand they are strapped to a forearm, else you could not wield a bow (at no penalty) or a second weapon (at -1) while using one.
Thats way more loopholey than you want to try to build a PFS character around.

*tongue-in-cheek*

Cut the hand off and strap the buckler to your forearm. No GM can say you are wielding anything in your offhand that way. In case they ask, carry the off hand around in a glass box and show them that it is empty and not doing anything. Your worst enemy then will be a necromancer that animates your off hand.

Hello Thing!

***************

Okay, being serious now, the worst case that a GM can do is to take away the shield bonus when you attack. The best case is that a GM realizes that you could two hand a weapon when using a buckler, so your hand is still free... to hold a torch, a flag, a bottle of ale, etc.

That still leaves lots of viability at every table: having the buckler on the hand to increase flat-foot AC, build up a raw defensive AC mode, having bonus AC when you are moving into attack position and provoke an AOO, and readily boosting AC any time you can't get in an attack.

Silver Crusade Venture-Agent, Florida–Altamonte Springs

Rory wrote:

Okay, being serious now, the worst case that a GM can do is to take away the shield bonus when you attack. The best case is that a GM realizes that you could two hand a weapon when using a buckler, so your hand is still free... to hold a torch, a flag, a bottle of ale, etc.

That still leaves lots of viability at every table: having the buckler on the hand to increase flat-foot AC, build up a raw defensive AC mode, having bonus AC when you are moving into attack position and provoke an AOO, and readily boosting AC any time you can't get in an attack.

Actually a GM can say you don't meet the requirements for the feat so that is invalid if he wants to be a stickler. I've seen it happen, one player who barely met the dodge prereq (dex 13) got enlarge person cast (-2 dex) and lost access to Dodge because his dex dropped to 11. If people want to play a concept that relies on table variation they might have the 1 ac but not their dex damage.

Grand Lodge 2/5

supervillan wrote:
Pack Flanking still not a combat feat :-/

I know!

p.s. that's a link, please click it

Tamec wrote:
Rory wrote:

Okay, being serious now, the worst case that a GM can do is to take away the shield bonus when you attack. The best case is that a GM realizes that you could two hand a weapon when using a buckler, so your hand is still free... to hold a torch, a flag, a bottle of ale, etc.

That still leaves lots of viability at every table: having the buckler on the hand to increase flat-foot AC, build up a raw defensive AC mode, having bonus AC when you are moving into attack position and provoke an AOO, and readily boosting AC any time you can't get in an attack.

Actually a GM can say you don't meet the requirements for the feat so that is invalid if he wants to be a stickler. I've seen it happen, one player who barely met the dodge prereq (dex 13) got enlarge person cast (-2 dex) and lost access to Dodge because his dex dropped to 11. If people want to play a concept that relies on table variation they might have the 1 ac but not their dex damage.

But that's an actual case for the PC not having the feat... I fail to see how that applies to the conversation you're responding to.

1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Joe Ducey wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
So...is it me or should we be seeing all of the swashbucklers at service at the temple of saranrae this weekend?
Problem is that you can't use a Buckler with Dervish Dance, either.
Why not? It specifies "carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand" Bucklers are not in a hand they are strapped to a forearm, else you could not wield a bow (at no penalty) or a second weapon (at -1) while using one.
Thats way more loopholey than you want to try to build a PFS character around.

With a small adjustment, it might work.

I used to play an archer bard who used a buckler with a bow. The way I played it (and I believe this is correct), is that she only received the ac bonus from the shield if she had not used her bow yet during that round. Once she uses her bow, the offhand is 'occupied', and therefore the shield bonus is removed.

Perhaps Slashing Grace and a buckler could be the same. You can use Slashing Grace - but you no longer receive an ac bonus from the buckler for the remainder of the round.

Edit: Er - or maybe you all are talking about a different ability. This thread has multiple topics and I may be boggled.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

14 people marked this as a favorite.

As a heads-up, Monday's blog is going to release the updated Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, which contains expanded ways to retrain your character following a playtest or errata. It doesn't fix every concern, but it does address numerous concerns.

These include more generous reselling of obsolete equipment, broader retraining of feat prerequisites, and clearer instructions for how to handle an item whose price has changed.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

John Compton wrote:

As a heads-up, Monday's blog is going to release the updated Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, which contains expanded ways to retrain your character following a playtest or errata. It doesn't fix every concern, but it does address numerous concerns.

These include more generous reselling of obsolete equipment, broader retraining of feat prerequisites, and clearer instructions for how to handle an item whose price has changed.

I'll be studying it to see if I can rebuild my occultist arcanist. Suddenly I need charisma.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

John Compton wrote:

As a heads-up, Monday's blog is going to release the updated Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, which contains expanded ways to retrain your character following a playtest or errata. It doesn't fix every concern, but it does address numerous concerns.

These include more generous reselling of obsolete equipment, broader retraining of feat prerequisites, and clearer instructions for how to handle an item whose price has changed.

Thank you John, it is very much appreciated.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

The Fourth Horseman wrote:


I'm also disappointed about the limitation on Rogue Talents that Slayers can take.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? I don't see any restriction.

Dark Archive 4/5

Tamec wrote:


Actually a GM can say you don't meet the requirements for the feat so that is invalid if he wants to be a stickler. I've seen it happen, one player who barely met the dodge prereq (dex 13) got enlarge person cast (-2 dex) and lost access to Dodge because his dex dropped to 11. If people want to play a concept that relies on table variation they might have the 1 ac but not their dex damage.

Then that GM was wrong, the rules relating to this are pretty clear.

PRD wrote:
This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.

You can lose AC due to a reduced Dex Bonus from Enlarge, you can lose AoO due to it, you cannot lose access to feats.

3/5

Andrew Christian wrote:
The Fourth Horseman wrote:


I'm also disappointed about the limitation on Rogue Talents that Slayers can take.
Can you clarify what you mean by this? I don't see any restriction.

From the errata, Slayers can now only take one of the available Rogue talents from the list given to Slayers.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

The Fourth Horseman wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
The Fourth Horseman wrote:


I'm also disappointed about the limitation on Rogue Talents that Slayers can take.
Can you clarify what you mean by this? I don't see any restriction.
From the errata, Slayers can now only take one of the available Rogue talents from the list given to Slayers.

Check again. The original entry has two lines in it saying you can take Rogue Talent more than once. The errata only removes the redundant line.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Ascalaphus wrote:
The Fourth Horseman wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
The Fourth Horseman wrote:


I'm also disappointed about the limitation on Rogue Talents that Slayers can take.
Can you clarify what you mean by this? I don't see any restriction.
From the errata, Slayers can now only take one of the available Rogue talents from the list given to Slayers.
Check again. The original entry has two lines in it saying you can take Rogue Talent more than once. The errata only removes the redundant line.

Hmmm, I absolutely missed that before, and on the read through the errata. Good to know that even though they're trying to make other classes less swashbucklery, they're not trying to make the slayer less roguish.

5/5 *****

Ascalaphus wrote:
John Compton wrote:

As a heads-up, Monday's blog is going to release the updated Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, which contains expanded ways to retrain your character following a playtest or errata. It doesn't fix every concern, but it does address numerous concerns.

These include more generous reselling of obsolete equipment, broader retraining of feat prerequisites, and clearer instructions for how to handle an item whose price has changed.

I'll be studying it to see if I can rebuild my occultist arcanist. Suddenly I need charisma.

It takes 2 points of charisma and a spell slot of your highest level to get a single extra use of the highest level standard action summon. It becomes prohibitively expensive very quickly. At this point I am looking at just retraining out of the archetype.

3/5

It is theoretically feasible to continue to play a Cha dumped Occultist Arcanist, if you're okay spending two feats in order to use your SLA three times a day. Here's the breakdown:

SLA costs 1 point - 3 uses before Consume Spells.
SLA costs 2 points - 2 uses before Consume Spells. @ lv 4, you can consume one level 2 cast for an extra use.
SLA costs 3 points - 2 uses before Consume Spells. Take Extra Reservoir (Level 5 Feat). Consume 1 level 1 spell for 3 uses.
SLA costs 4 points - 2 uses before Consume Spells. Consume one 2nd level spell for 3 uses.
SLA costs 5 points - 2 uses before Consume Spells. Take Extra Reservoir (Level 9 Feat). Consume one 2nd level spell for 3 uses.
SLA costs 6 points - 2 uses before Consume Spells. Consume one 4th level spell for 3 uses.

That covers your regular PFS career up to level 11.

1/5

Extra reservoir doesn't say you get +3 to your daily recharge, just to the max you're able to have at one time.

Grand Lodge

Chess Pwn wrote:
Extra reservoir doesn't say you get +3 to your daily recharge, just to the max you're able to have at one time.

It increases the amount you start with and your max.

Arcane Resevoir:
You gain three more points in your arcane reservoir, and the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount.

If it was only max it would just say.
Increases the maximum number of points in your arcane resevoir by 3.

There would be no reason to add the extra if it was only max and the idea that you get 3 when you take the feat and it just disappears after the first day is also absurd. I've read way too much on arcanist. I feel disappointed that they only seemed to mention consume magic items and consume spells, which is meh.
Was really hoping the'd errata the elf fcb as that can be interpreted differently, even if it seems to mean it only increases your max amount.

My 2 cents on the errata is done.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Fourth Horseman wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
The Fourth Horseman wrote:


I'm also disappointed about the limitation on Rogue Talents that Slayers can take.
Can you clarify what you mean by this? I don't see any restriction.
From the errata, Slayers can now only take one of the available Rogue talents from the list given to Slayers.

Not so. The errata erased the third sentence. But not the second to last, which essentially says the same thing. They omitted sentence three because it was redundant. But the second to last still allows you to take multiple.

EDIT: Ninja'd

1/5

it may be absurd but that's what it says it does. It doesn't say that you start the day with any more points

Silver Crusade Venture-Agent, Florida–Altamonte Springs

Kevin Willis wrote:
Cao Phen wrote:
Dhenn wrote:
I did have one of the rods that got a price hike, though. Any advice on how to handle that? The character's already level 12, and I usually forget I have it, so it's not a huge deal either way.
Usually it would be a simple refund and then you can choose to do whatever afterwards.

Based on what happened with the APG staffs; you can keep the rod but as of today all purchases must use the new price.

In the APG case the math was straightforward and the staffs were clearly half-priced in the first printing. If people were allowed to keep those it's reasonable to let people who bought the ACG rods (without knowing the designers considered them mispriced) keep them.

John said something different about price changes, in the other thread.

Silver Crusade 3/5

Chess Pwn wrote:
it may be absurd but that's what it says it does. It doesn't say that you start the day with any more points

I'm interested in hearing what you think Toughness does.

Extra Reservoir wrote:

Prerequisites Arcane reservoir class feature.

Benefit You gain three more points in your arcane reservoir, and the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount.

Special You can take this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.

4/5 5/55/55/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis

Chess Pwn wrote:
it may be absurd but that's what it says it does. It doesn't say that you start the day with any more points
ACG, pg. 147, Extra Reservoir: wrote:

Your reservoir of arcane energy is greater than others’.

Prerequisite: Arcane reservoir† class feature.
Benefit: You gain three more points in your arcane reservoir, and the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount.
Special: You can take this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.
ACG, pg. 9, Arcane Reservoir wrote:
An arcanist has an innate pool of magical energy that she can draw upon to fuel her arcanist exploits and enhance her spells. The arcanist’s arcane reservoir can hold a maximum amount of magical energy equal to 3 + the arcanist’s level. Each day, when preparing spells, the arcanist’s arcane reservoir fills with raw magical energy, gaining a number of points equal to 3 + 1/2 her arcanist level. Any points she had from the previous day are lost. She can also regain these points through the consume spells class feature and some arcanist exploits. The arcane reservoir can never hold more points than the maximum amount noted above; points gained in excess of this total are lost.

The text consistently refers to it as gaining points in the arcane reservoir.

The feat says you gain 3 more. The text describing the reservoir says you gain 3 + 1/2 arcanist level.

Seems pretty straight-forward that both the day's beginning value (when you gain the points) and the maximum value go up by 3.

1/5

Each day, when preparing spells, the arcanist's arcane reservoir fills with raw magical energy, gaining a number of points equal to 3 + 1/2 her arcanist level. Any points she had from the previous day are lost.

if you gained three each day or when you regain gain three more or something. but I don't see in there where it alters the ability above


Quote:
You gain three more points in your arcane reservoir, and the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount.

I see that as affecting the starting amount "and" the max.

It specifically says you gain 3 more points in your arcane reservoir, which would be whatever you currently have. As an example if you only have 1 point left then you have 1 point in your arcane reservoir. <-----that handles the current amount explanation.

It also specifically calls out in a seperate section that the max increase--> "the maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by that amount"

If your max only increases then the part about the increase to your arcane would not even be needed. They could have just said "The maximum number of points in your arcane reservoir increases by 3", and called it a day.

1/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm kinda hoping that the mutation warrior becomes legal now

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Chess Pwn wrote:
I'm kinda hoping that the mutation warrior becomes legal now

Same. I have a concept that was dependent on it...

Silver Crusade 3/5

Chess Pwn: what do you think Extra Ki does?

Extra Ki wrote:

Prerequisites Ki pool class feature.

Benefit Your ki pool increases by 2.

Special You can gain Extra Ki multiple times. Its effects stack.


So wait, back to Slashing Grace a moment, does the finessability of the weapon go away if you use an off-hand weapon or do you just lose Dex bonus to damage?

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Totes McScrotes wrote:
So wait, back to Slashing Grace a moment, does the finessability of the weapon go away if you use an off-hand weapon or do you just lose Dex bonus to damage?

The way it's worded suggests that you lose all of the aforementioned benefits if you break the conditions.

So, if it's only finessable because of Swashbuckler's/Champion's Finesse, then you would lose that benefit (since you're no longer treating it as a one-handed piercing weapon).

1/5

toughness and extra ki and extra anything else don't modify a mechanic that has a set regain lower than the max. HP goes to full, ki goes to full, extra anything else goes to full. when you take the feat you gain three more in your pool right then. Then when you prepare spells you gain 3+1/2 your level.


Kalindlara wrote:
Totes McScrotes wrote:
So wait, back to Slashing Grace a moment, does the finessability of the weapon go away if you use an off-hand weapon or do you just lose Dex bonus to damage?

The way it's worded suggests that you lose all of the aforementioned benefits if you break the conditions.

So, if it's only finessable because of Swashbuckler's/Champion's Finesse, then you would lose that benefit (since you're no longer treating it as a one-handed piercing weapon).

Yep, Picaroons are just borked then. Especially dwarves using the Favored Class bonus, which now makes no sense.

The Exchange 2/5

Chess Pwn wrote:
toughness and extra ki and extra anything else don't modify a mechanic that has a set regain lower than the max. HP goes to full, ki goes to full, extra anything else goes to full. when you take the feat you gain three more in your pool right then. Then when you prepare spells you gain 3+1/2 your level.

LOOOOLL that's hilarious!!

...the "common sense" assumption fails again... But hey who needs role playing, when you've got Rule playing right??

I'm going back to Succubus in a Grapple thread; where more legit discussion of game mechanics is happening.

sheesh

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
when you take the feat you gain three more in your pool right then. Then when you prepare spells you gain 3+1/2 your level.

... Whut?

If you believe the first half of the feat Extra Reservoir is a single time, one instance benefit gained when you take the feat, then I am afraid your comprehension of the rules is so... different... from my own that I cannot engage in conversation on this rules topic with you (and possibly many, many others.)

For anyone who reads the feat the way I and many others do (that it grants 3 points to your daily pool and increases your max by 3), my breakdown above exists and is usable, to a degree. It's up to you whether you decide doing your main thing 3 times a day is enough or not.

/walks away, shaking his head with a slightly confused expression

Nefreet wrote:
I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

Eh, I'd rather get my period of slamming my head into my desk over with in a single sitting than in multiple sit downs. Saves me trips to the hardware store for new desks...

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Nefreet wrote:
I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

Same.

I wasn't really surprised by the response... but it's interesting to contrast the current mood to the previous one.

4/5 Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

Same.

I wasn't really surprised by the response... but it's interesting to contrast the current mood to the previous one.

The thing is, when it's your character, it's really easily to be emotionally affected by a change, in a big way. I know it; I've felt it myself. That's why it's pretty much guaranteed that there will be such a response to any FAQ or errata (unless it's to an option nobody wanted to play), and it's why we all need to be extra understanding toward anybody who is feeling upset right now. I know that I'll personally be doing my best to do so, for my part.

1/5

I think the major complaint was the changing of so many things that we didn't find broken.

Silver Crusade 1/5 Contributor

Mark Seifter wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

Same.

I wasn't really surprised by the response... but it's interesting to contrast the current mood to the previous one.

The thing is, when it's your character, it's really easily to be emotionally affected by a change, in a big way. I know it; I've felt it myself. That's why it's pretty much guaranteed that there will be such a response to any FAQ or errata (unless it's to an option nobody wanted to play), and it's why we all need to be extra understanding toward anybody who is feeling upset right now.

I absolutely understand; I have several characters who were affected. I didn't mean to be flippant.

I've tried to keep my own responses muted; you guys are catching plenty of heat, and I'd rather not add to that. If you asked my opinion of many of the changes, though, I'd have done things differently.

Sorry if this came off the wrong way. ^_^

Silver Crusade 3/5

Thanks, Mark.

4/5 Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

Same.

I wasn't really surprised by the response... but it's interesting to contrast the current mood to the previous one.

The thing is, when it's your character, it's really easily to be emotionally affected by a change, in a big way. I know it; I've felt it myself. That's why it's pretty much guaranteed that there will be such a response to any FAQ or errata (unless it's to an option nobody wanted to play), and it's why we all need to be extra understanding toward anybody who is feeling upset right now.

I absolutely understand; I have several characters who were affected. I didn't mean to be flippant.

I've tried to keep my own responses muted; you guys are catching plenty of heat, and I'd rather not add to that. If you asked my opinion of many of the changes, though, I'd have done things differently.

Sorry if this came off the wrong way. ^_^

Oh not at all! You weren't posting in a way contrary to that in the least. Just thought I'd mention it in response there, since it's useful to remember. When something happens to one of our characters (I use "our" here to mean a fellow community member, as we are one community in this together), we need to show empathy and compassion. It happens to us all, including me, even during the time I've been a designer (I lost my -6 character to the true primitive ban, for instance), and it's not fun to be the person affected at the time.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Totes McScrotes wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Totes McScrotes wrote:
So wait, back to Slashing Grace a moment, does the finessability of the weapon go away if you use an off-hand weapon or do you just lose Dex bonus to damage?

The way it's worded suggests that you lose all of the aforementioned benefits if you break the conditions.

So, if it's only finessable because of Swashbuckler's/Champion's Finesse, then you would lose that benefit (since you're no longer treating it as a one-handed piercing weapon).

Yep, Picaroons are just borked then. Especially dwarves using the Favored Class bonus, which now makes no sense.

Okay, but lets just be clear here. Picaroons are borked on a lot of swashbuckler stuff even before the errata because they didn't trade away a lot of features that just don't work when you make them a TWF.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

I just didn't see the change to Arcanist's Consume Spells/Magic Items coming at all. Was this something that was talked about beforehand?

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Mark Seifter wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
I think having so many options errata'd at once has a bigger immediate negative impact than addressing them one at a time, but that's what we get as a community for screaming for the entire book to be errata'd =P

Same.

I wasn't really surprised by the response... but it's interesting to contrast the current mood to the previous one.

The thing is, when it's your character, it's really easily to be emotionally affected by a change, in a big way. I know it; I've felt it myself. That's why it's pretty much guaranteed that there will be such a response to any FAQ or errata (unless it's to an option nobody wanted to play), and it's why we all need to be extra understanding toward anybody who is feeling upset right now. I know that I'll personally be doing my best to do so, for my part.

Just to be clear, I have exactly 0 characters that have been affected by the ACG errata so far. I still think that a lot of the rule changes were unnecessary nerfing of character options in order to make sub-optimal classes seem more appealing. As a player I want more decent options to make characters out of, not more trap options.

1 to 50 of 254 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Advanced Class Guide errata is up! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.