Errata questions


General Discussion

201 to 250 of 310 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

On page 180, I noticed that the Bastard Sword only deals d8 Piercing Damage, is this correct? Or is it supposed to be Versatile like the Short Sword, Longsword and Greatsword?


Whoever wrote the Rogue feats Perfect Distraction and Implausible Infiltration back-to-back neglected to include any reference to The Long Run or Trent the Uncatchable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

On p. 228, the spell Grim Tendrils comes before Grease.

Minor alphabetical quibble, I know.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ghost Dust (pg 392) says it casts 8th level invisibility. I think it might mean the 8th level Disappearance spell, which perhaps used to be a heightened version of invisibility.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

On page 188, Table 6-16: Spellcasting Services only goes up to 9th-level spells, even though 10th-level spells exist. I realize it's implausible that you could hire someone to cast one, but come on, like you could hire someone to cast a 9th-level spell either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Midnightoker wrote:
That may be what you define it as in your head, but there is no book definition for a Will DC at all, it is a completely foreign term. Despite that it may be possible to infer what it is means, this would be the only ability in the book I've read thus far that uses "Will DC" as a term.

FWIW, p. 8 of the Rulebook (under "Your Difficulty Class") says:

Quote:
Often, you roll dice against a Diffculty Class determined by the GM. But when a creature or situation is testing your character’s ability, it attempts a check against a Difficulty Class based on the most relevant of your character’s statistics. The DC for any statistic is 10 plus all the same modifers you’d add to a d20 roll using that statistic.

"Will DC" certainly appears to be implied there.

Also, I saw references to "Will DC" in the Make an Impression use of the Diplomacy skill (p. 150) and the Coerce and Demoralize uses of the Intimidate skill (pp. 150-151). "Will DC" is also referenced under the Group Coercion and Group Impression feats (p. 166), and the Scare to Death feat (p. 170). There was one more reference to "Will DC" on the Gorget of the Primal Roar (p. 392).

All of that said, yeah. I'd still like it called out somewhere, maybe as an example in the "Your Difficulty Class" paragraph.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Playtest Rulebook page 194 wrote:

Enchantment

Enchantments affect the minds and emotions of other creatures, sometimes to influence and control behavior, and other times to bolster them to greater heights of courage.

Since "bolster" is a technical term now, it shouldn't be used here.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Playtest Rulebook page 294 wrote:

HIT POINTS AND HEALING

All creatures have Hit Points (HP). Your maximum Hit Point value represents your health, wherewithal, and heroic drive when you are in good health and rested. Your maximum Hit Points include the HP you gain at 1st level from your race and class, those you gain at higher levels from your class, and any you gain from other sources (like the Toughness general feat). When you’re dealt damage, you reduce your current Hit Points by a number equal to the damage dealt.

What is this "race" you speak of? I know of no "race." I know only "ancestry."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Do sorcerers start with 2 1st level spell slots or 3 1st level spell slots? The rulebook says you get an extra spell slot from your bloodline when you learn a spell of a new level. At first level, you are learning 1st level spells. I assume you gain the extra spell slot, but maybe I'm wrong.


PrinceofPerdition wrote:
Do sorcerers start with 2 1st level spell slots or 3 1st level spell slots? The rulebook says you get an extra spell slot from your bloodline when you learn a spell of a new level. At first level, you are learning 1st level spells. I assume you gain the extra spell slot, but maybe I'm wrong.

Two freely chosen, one from bloodline. Three total.


Drain Arcane Focus only specifies prepared spells, and as written doesn’t foreclose using it on cleric spells gained through an archetype.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Playtest Rulebook page 15, Character Sheet wrote:
Then, for skills in which you are trained, add your proficiency modifier to your ability modifier to determine the modifier your character has for each skill roll. For the rest of your character’s skills, subtract the proficiency modifier for being untrained (your level – 2) from the relevant ability modifier, and record those totals on the lines below the respective skill names.

"Subtract the proficiency modifier" is garbage; that would mean that at 20th level (untrained prof mod +18) you would have untrained skill mods of ability mod MINUS 18. It should be PLUS 18. There's no reason for trained and untrained skills to be calculated differently at all; the quoted section should read

Then, for each skill, add your proficiency modifier to your ability modifier to determine the modifier your character has for that skill, and record those totals on the lines below the respective skill names.

(Or even better "Then, for each skill, add your proficiency modifier to your ability modifier to determine the skill modifier, and record...." But now I'm editing.)


Mr.Fishy wants to know where animate dead went. Mr.Fishy has a bunch of adventurers coming over and his necromancer can't make any extra skellies, or zambos without that spell.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Playtest Rulebook page 176 wrote:

Check Penalty

You take this untyped penalty to Strength-, Dexterity-, and Constitution-based skill checks, except for those that have the attack trait. Armor that is better than standard quality has a lower check penalty, as described on page 190.
Playtest Rulebook page 142 wrote:

Armor and Skills

Some armor imposes a penalty on specific skill checks and DCs. If a creature is wearing armor that imparts a skill penalty, that penalty is applied to Dexterity- and Strength-based skill checks and skill DCs, unless the use has the attack trait. Check penalties from armor are detailed in Chapter 6: Equipment on page 176.

Since there aren't any Con-based skills at the moment I assume page 176 is futureproofed, which is fine by me, but either both sections should mention Con-based skills or neither should.

Like 5e the skills section explicitly calls out alternative skill stat combos as being possible, so it's probably best for both sections to include it.


Playtest Rulebook page 198 wrote:

WALLS

Some spells create walls. Each spell lists the depth, length, and height of the wall, and specifies how it can be positioned. Some walls can be shaped, meaning that you can manipulate the wall’s shape into a form other than a straight line, choosing its path square by square. Each square of the wall’s length must be adjacent with the square or squares next to it, so walls cannot be shaped to make a diagonal line. The path of a wall can’t cover the same space more than once, but it can double back so one section is adjacent to another section of the wall.

Pretty sure you don't really want to implicitly define "adjacent" such that diagonals don't qualify, because it's a term with very general use. You want something like "Each square must share an edge with the next square, so walls cannot be shaped to make a diagonal line."


An apparent contradiction as to whether a power has a tradition or not. I'm pretty sure I understand what you mean by it, but it still looks bad and could be confusing.

Playtest Rulebook page 193 wrote:

Spellcasters with Powers

If you are a spellcaster, your powers are the same tradition of spell as the class that gave you the power, so a wizard’s powers are arcane, a cleric’s are divine, and a sorcerer’s are determined by their bloodline.
Playtest Rulebook page 198 wrote:

READING SPELL LISTS

The spell lists on the following pages present the spells for the four magical traditions (though not powers, which are granted by class features and belong to no specific tradition).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

feral mutagen (the class feat) or beastial mutagen (the item) needs some cleaning in it's text (apart from changing to bestial to actually apply).

Specifically:

Quote:

Your feral mutagen truly brings out the beast

lurking within you. Whenever you’re affected by a feral mutagen,
you gain the mutagen’s item bonus to your Intimidation checks.
You also gain two new unarmed Strikes: one with your claws
and one with your jaws. Your claws and jaws both have the agile
weapon trait. Your claws deal slashing damage equal to 1d6 plus
your Strength modifier (plus the extra dice from your mutagen),
while your jaws deal piercing damage equal to 1d8 plus your
Strength modifier (plus the extra dice from your mutagen).
Quote:

Benefit You gain a +2 item bonus to Athletics checks and

unarmed attack rolls. Your damage dealt by unarmed
attacks increases to three damage dice, unless it would
otherwise have more damage dice.

basically, unlike potency runes which are writen as they ADD dices, beastial mutagens are written as changing dices TO.

Unless the intent was for feral to add an additional die (as an example 1d8+3d4 with the lesser version) But that wouldn't make sense.

edit:
Also, are "natural weapons" finessable? They modify Unarmed which is, but they don't list it in their traits in this particular occasion, while they list Agile which unarmed already is.


Monsters with innate spells probably need a rule substituting somatic for material components for spells like invisibility.


Mr.Fishy wrote:

Mr.Fishy wants to know where animate dead went. Mr.Fishy has a bunch of adventurers coming over and his necromancer can't make any extra skellies, or zambos without that spell.

They said animate dead isn't going to be in the playtest so you might have to create your own version for now :(


Playtest Rulebook page 210, Charming Touch wrote:
Heightened (4th) You can target any type of creature, not just humanoids, as long as they would find you attractive.

One, it is inconsistent that the bolded phrase appears in the "charm monster" version but not the "charm person" version before it.

Two, the bolded phrase is totally undefined. Would a dragon ever find a human attractive? Is this supposed to be gender- and orientation-based? Now there's an unnecessary can of worms.

I suggest dropping the phrase, but if you keep it, provide guidance.


On page 210, Charming Words lists the results of the target's save in the wrong order (fail, crit fail, success, crit success).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild, Tales Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Playtest Rulebook page 210, Charming Touch wrote:
Heightened (4th) You can target any type of creature, not just humanoids, as long as they would find you attractive.
Two, the bolded phrase is totally undefined. Would a dragon ever find a human attractive? Is this supposed to be gender- and orientation-based? Now there's an unnecessary can of worms.

Not in the slightest. Leaving it undefined and up to the players and GM works perfectly fine. Attraction is on a case by case basis.


On page 215, Dimension Door really, really should allow you to bring your own darn familiar with you.

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

PrinceofPerdition wrote:
Do sorcerers start with 2 1st level spell slots or 3 1st level spell slots? The rulebook says you get an extra spell slot from your bloodline when you learn a spell of a new level. At first level, you are learning 1st level spells. I assume you gain the extra spell slot, but maybe I'm wrong.

My sorcerer player was confused about this as well. Since all the bloodlines grant you an extra spell slot, why doesn't the table just include them?


Tamago wrote:
PrinceofPerdition wrote:
Do sorcerers start with 2 1st level spell slots or 3 1st level spell slots? The rulebook says you get an extra spell slot from your bloodline when you learn a spell of a new level. At first level, you are learning 1st level spells. I assume you gain the extra spell slot, but maybe I'm wrong.
My sorcerer player was confused about this as well. Since all the bloodlines grant you an extra spell slot, why doesn't the table just include them?

So that Alternate Classes (aka PF1 archetypes) can replace them I expect, or specific bloodlines can; just like the Wizard can trade Specialization slots for Generalist benefits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spiritual Weapon is on the Occult list, and therefore the restrictions on deity's weapon and shared proficiency may need an alternate choice for Bard's who have no deity or who aren't proficient in their favored weapon.


Tamago wrote:
PrinceofPerdition wrote:
Do sorcerers start with 2 1st level spell slots or 3 1st level spell slots? The rulebook says you get an extra spell slot from your bloodline when you learn a spell of a new level. At first level, you are learning 1st level spells. I assume you gain the extra spell slot, but maybe I'm wrong.
My sorcerer player was confused about this as well. Since all the bloodlines grant you an extra spell slot, why doesn't the table just include them?

Also for the purpose of spells known. Because every time you get a spell slot, you also get a new spell known, if it was written directly on the table, there'd have to be a line counting the bloodline spell for that purpose.


On page 225, Fleet Step's "You are accelerated 30, but this applies only to your Speed" seems likely to make a lot of people go "Huh?" for lack of the (admittedly technically redundant) qualifier "land" before "Speed." It did to me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
page 228, Grim Tendrils wrote:
You deal 2d4 negative damage and 1 persistent bleed damage to living creature in the line, depending on their Fortitude saves.

Pluralize.


page 239, Money Talks wrote:
You can substitute an equal value of gp for the spell’s cost.

Almost sure you want "currency" instead of "gp."

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sturdy Shields, with how objects work I see no reason to ever by the legendary heavy steel over the Master Adamantine

Quoted from rulebook:
"Type master heavy adamantine; Level 12 (Uncommon); Price
1,800 gp; Hardness 18; Craft Requirements Initial raw materials
must include 350 gp of adamantine.

Type legendary heavy steel; Level 17; Price 14,000 gp;
Hardness 17"

It seems inferior in every way... even price.


Christopher Van Horn wrote:

Sturdy Shields, with how objects work I see no reason to ever by the legendary heavy steel over the Master Adamantine

Quoted from rulebook:
"Type master heavy adamantine; Level 12 (Uncommon); Price
1,800 gp; Hardness 18; Craft Requirements Initial raw materials
must include 350 gp of adamantine.

Type legendary heavy steel; Level 17; Price 14,000 gp;
Hardness 17"

It seems inferior in every way... even price.

It has superior availability, since the master heavy adamantine is uncommon.


Does not legendary quality also affect the max enchant it can get?


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

On page 83, Woodland Stride appears in the list of 4th level Druid feats. However, the number in the box next to the title says it's a first-level feat. Which is correct?


gustavo iglesias wrote:
Does not legendary quality also affect the max enchant it can get?

Oh yeah! It can get potency up to +5 (instead of +4) and up to 3 properties (instead of 2). See page 370.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

(Very) Minor one: Reorder the step-by-step instructions for ability score generation (pages 19-20) to class, ancestry, background, free.
This means the more fixed scores (and the scores that'll most determine your character's effectiveness) are put in first, letting you see what to put in later to round stuff off etc.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Does not legendary quality also affect the max enchant it can get?
Oh yeah! It can get potency up to +5 (instead of +4) and up to 3 properties (instead of 2). See page 370.

I don't think shields qualify for potency runes, so the advantage of a legendary shield is reduction of penalty for it.

playtest rulebook wrote:

Shields

Unlike magic armor, magic shields can’t be etched with runes granting potency or properties. All magic shields are specific items with a wide variety of protective effects, as described in their entries.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Does not legendary quality also affect the max enchant it can get?

Only weapons and armor, shields are "always specific", a little like magical ammunition. Sturdy isn't a 'property rune' you can transfer for example, it is a specific shield with lots of permutations. Indestructable only 'applies to' Legendary Adamantine Heavy Shields.


playtest rulebook page 255, Shield Other wrote:
The target’s essence and your own become linked. The target takes half damage from all sources that deal Hit Point damage, and you take the remainder of the damage. When you take damage through this link, don’t apply any resistances, weaknesses, and the like that you have to that damage; you simple take that amount of damage. The spell is dismissed if the target is ever more than 30 feet away from you.

It doesn't say whether to apply the target's resistances/weaknesses/etc before or after splitting the damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Monster skills in the Bestiary were calculated using the wrong formula:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9zg?Monster-Skills-A-Serious-Problem#33

which, among other things, leads to this:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9zg?Monster-Skills-A-Serious-Problem#22


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mats Öhrman wrote:

Monster skills in the Bestiary were calculated using the wrong formula:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9zg?Monster-Skills-A-Serious-Problem#33

which, among other things, leads to this:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v9zg?Monster-Skills-A-Serious-Problem#22

even the "2 points off" is excessive. It makes "trained" skills obsolete if everything is balanced around optimized skills


playtest rulebook page 256, Skin of Thorns wrote:
Your body sprouts a coat of brambly thorns. Adjacent creatures that hit you with a melee attack, as well as creatures that hit you with unarmed strikes, take 1 piercing damage each time they do.

I understand things that say "a weapon or an unarmed strike" because some (though not all) of the rules say an unarmed strike isn't a weapon, but surely there's no question that an unarmed strike is a melee attack?

Oh, I see, creatures that hit you with unarmed strikes take damage whether they're adjacent or not. IMHO that's not obvious enough; it should be "as well as creatures that hit you with unarmed strikes from any distance" or something.


playtest rulebook page 260, Stoneskin wrote:
The target’s skin hardens like stone. It gains resistance 5 to physical damage (any bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage) and weakness 5 to adamantine. Each time the target is hit by a bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing attack, stoneskin’s duration decreases by 1 minute.

I think if the resistance reduces the damage to zero that the hit is negated and won't trigger that clause, but I'm not positive. If I'm right, it should probably be "takes damage from" instead. If I'm wrong, it should probably say "...even if it does no damage."


On page 262, Swamp of Sloth uses the obsolete term "Diminutive."

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Rogue gets Blind-fight as an option at level 6, but a prereq is mastery in Perception which she gets a level later.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't believe the term "enemy" is defined anywhere, yet many spells rely on it.

playtest rulebook page 262, Synaptic Pulse wrote:
You emit a pulsating mental blast through the minds of all enemies in the area, with effects depending on their Will saves.

Is an enemy anyone hostile towards you, whether you know it or not? That is, anyone who perceives themselves as an enemy? Then you can use such spells to blast hidden traitors in the party and quite possibly reveal them. Is that RAI?

Is an enemy anyone you perceive as such? Then such spells will presumably not affect any creatures of whose presence you are unaware. Is that RAI?

These things will lead to many FAQs if the rulebook doesn't clarify it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
playtest rulebook page 263, Telekinetic Haul wrote:
Targets one object weighing up to 500 pounds and with no dimension longer than 20 feet

Dudes, if you're going to use Bulk instead of weight, be consistent about it.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Was wondering why the Main-gauche has the Piercing with versatile Slashing and the Rapier does not have versatile Slashing?
The Main-gauche is a shorter (dagger-like) version of the Rapier.

Just my 2 cents.

Scarab Sages

Also noticed that there is a lot of 1d4 damage type weapons, a few 1d6, and one 1d8 in the simple melee weapon area.

What happen to the Morningstar and Mace (heavy mace) dealing 1d8 damage, and the light mace dealing 1d6 damage?

I like using the maces in the past system!


playtest rulebook page 268, Veil wrote:
You disguise the targets as other creatures of the same body shape and roughly similar height (within 6 inches) and weight (within 50 pounds).

You mean "of the same body shape and size category," right?

201 to 250 of 310 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / Errata questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.