FAQ on Errata

Oh I'm going to quote your post when nothing valuable is nerfed OK.

There's a really good feat coming up for Ratfolk on the Dirty Tactics Toolbox book.

Does this mean you've sent the book to the printers again, or is there still time for people to "playtest" these changes and see if they're okay at least? I'd hate for interesting options(like Scarred Witch Doctor) to go the way of Scarred Witch Doctor.

There's a really good feat coming up for Ratfolk on the Dirty Tactics Toolbox book.

Yeah, I think I'll just play out of the basic book for awhile till they're done mistaking game play choice for game play imbalance.

It can't be said often enough: Unless you're playing PFS and so have to play by shared standards, you can ignore any and all of these changes in your home game. (Though I do understand that these changes can be a source of player/DM conflict when one of the two was already unhappy with the status quo. Still.)

...but as a retailer I can tell you that 4th edition books really did go from "selling really well" to "literally impossible to sell" once Wizards crossed the power-level-errata threshold Paizo's now teetering on the edge of. 4th had the character builder software you could subscribe to, and players nearly universally used that instead of books because they knew they couldn't trust their books to be right. Paizo has PDFs and the PRD to fill much the same role. This update just pushed me over the edge of beginning to feel like I can't trust my books, and it's making my stomach sink. If people stop trusting their books, they'll stop buying them, which will cause retailers to stop supporting the game, which will dry up demand for the game very quickly. I don't mean to get all doom-and-gloom on you, but the last few updates are perched at the top of a very slippery slope.

That's really interesting, and I hadn't considered things from that angle. That's got to be a very hard line for a company to walk, especially when it has only good intentions in issuing the rule-changes and clarifications in the first place. Somehow it brings to my mind the millennia of Jewish Talmudic commentary on the Torah; somehow all that interpretation and re-interpretation never led the believers to abandon the ur-text. But then, they had a different set of motivations available to keep them attached to the game.

So Looking it over I wonder if there was an oversight with the style master monk. Just checking that he's still good to wear armor and get his style fusion going on. Seems like it might now that the maneuver monk can't do it's thing in armor.

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Secret Wizard wrote:

There's a really good feat coming up for Ratfolk on the Dirty Tactics Toolbox book.

Yeah, I think I'll just play out of the basic book for awhile till they're done mistaking game play choice for game play imbalance.

No, I've seen it too. It's a feat I'm definitely taking. And if you're the only Ratfolk in the party and not a caster, you'll want to take it too.

It all sounds very reasonable when you say it like that, but as a retailer I can tell you that 4th edition books really did go from "selling really well" to "literally impossible to sell" once Wizards crossed the power-level-errata threshold Paizo's now teetering on the edge of. 4th had the character builder software you could subscribe to, and players nearly universally used that instead of books because they knew they couldn't trust their books to be right. Paizo has PDFs and the PRD to fill much the same role. This update just pushed me over the edge of beginning to feel like I can't trust my books, and it's making my stomach sink. If people stop trusting their books, they'll stop buying them, which will cause retailers to stop supporting the game, which will dry up demand for the game very quickly. I don't mean to get all doom-and-gloom on you, but the last few updates are perched at the top of a very slippery slope.

I can sympathize with this. I live in a small city, but we have two places that deal with gaming patrons. However, one of them won't even touch Pathfinder any more (five Core editions was too much for him as he still has copies of the 2nd printing), and the other will only bring in the ones that their distributor says sells incredibly well. Otherwise, you have to special order every individual book, or drive three hours to the capital and hope the one gaming store that still sells Pathfinder and 5th Ed, has what you're looking for. Nowadays, it's either online shopping or PDFs. Ninety percent of Pathfinder around here is PFS, and these errata as of late have forced a lot of characters to retire. Because of that, we're seeing a lot more Core-only games.

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

So Looking it over I wonder if there was an oversight with the style master monk. Just checking that he's still good to wear armor and get his style fusion going on. Seems like it might now that the maneuver monk can't do it's thing in armor.

Doesn't seem gamebreaking. You do lose out on movement and AC Bonus.

ErichAD wrote:

Secret Wizard wrote:

There's a really good feat coming up for Ratfolk on the Dirty Tactics Toolbox book.

Yeah, I think I'll just play out of the basic book for awhile till they're done mistaking game play choice for game play imbalance.

No, I've seen it too. It's a feat I'm definitely taking. And if you're the only Ratfolk in the party and not a caster, you'll want to take it too.

That's mostly irrelevant if the feat can't be relied upon to stick around very long.

Who invited the drama llama?

Paizo has a history of making pretty bad changes when they do make changes, but the list of things they've actually changed is fairly small, the ACG notwithstanding.

Vic Wertz wrote:

Let's see:

Plan A: We ignore the problems, refuse to answer questions that people keep asking, and force people in PFS to deal with balance issues. A lot of the audience is unhappy, but hey, you're happy.

Plan B: We fix the problems and you are forced to incorporate them into your home game. A lot of the audience is pleased, but you aren't.

Plan C: We fix the problems, and so long as you're not playing in Pathfinder Society, you ignore all of these changes. (Or just the ones you want to ignore, if that makes you happier.) Yet everybody who values them can have them, so everybody's happy!

We have decided not to go with Plan A. *I* certainly think Plan C is the best, but it turns out that if you really want to pick Plan B, I can't stop you.

It all sounds very reasonable when you say it like that, but as a retailer I can tell you that 4th edition books really did go from "selling really well" to "literally impossible to sell" once Wizards crossed the power-level-errata threshold Paizo's now teetering on the edge of. 4th had the character builder software you could subscribe to, and players nearly universally used that instead of books because they knew they couldn't trust their books to be right. Paizo has PDFs and the PRD to fill much the same role. This update just pushed me over the edge of beginning to feel like I can't trust my books, and it's making my stomach sink. If people stop trusting their books, they'll stop buying them, which will cause retailers to stop supporting the game, which will dry up demand for the game very quickly. I don't mean to get all doom-and-gloom on you, but the last few updates are perched at the top of a very slippery slope.

My solution to this is rather simple:

Print out the errata file for the edition of book you have (in my case its mostly: first to current).
Go over the book marking any sections with a pencil so that it says 'errata' next to the paragraph that has changed. There's usually space for that word next to the paragraph.
Put the printout in the book.

Should I need to consult the book, it's easy to find the ruling, and if it has changed, there is a 'errata' remark next to it, so I can look in the errata-printout. Doesn't come up all that often.

As a player I have a word-doc that has all the rules-texts of my character for it's current level. All of it. From class-features, to feats to spells to equipment.
If a FAQ or errata is posted, it's there as well.
Has a bestiary style character-sheet on the first page, an index, and is rather long (16pages for a 3rd level psychic detective as of today).
It's updated pretty much after every session, printed out every level.

Look what was not nerfed in this errata guys! Debilitating Portent! Not only does this spell not require a save to be afflicted with, but it also affects every attack in a full attack with a will save that scales with your caster level, as opposed to being set by its spell level. Hooray.

So, the Sohei can still take Mounted Skirmisher at level 1. Good to know.

That's mostly irrelevant if the feat can't be relied upon to stick around very long.

It's the Player Companion series.

My solution to this is rather simple:

Print out the errata file for the edition of book you have (in my case its mostly: first to current).
Go over the book marking any sections with a pencil so that it says 'errata' next to the paragraph that has changed. There's usually space for that word next to the paragraph.
Put the printout in the book.

Should I need to consult the book, it's easy to find the ruling, and if it has changed, there is a 'errata' remark next to it, so I can look in the errata-printout. Doesn't come up all that often.

As a player I have a word-doc that has all the rules-texts of my character for it's current level. All of it. From class-features, to feats to spells to equipment.
If a FAQ or errata is posted, it's there as well.
Has a bestiary style character-sheet on the first page, an index, and is rather long (16pages for a 3rd level psychic detective as of today).

It's updated pretty much after every session, printed out every level.

While I can understand that, the person in question you're quoting is the owner of Redcap's Corner, a fairly well-known gaming store in PHILADELPHIA.

A smaller gaming store, like, say, in Trenton (40 minutes north of Philly) can maybe suggest something like that.

But a store in the 5th-largest city in the US, especially a well-trafficked store like Redcap's, has some serious concerns when the books they're selling are not accurate.

A LOT of gamers go to Redcap's, myself included, and they have a pretty densely-packed corner of the store devoted almost entirely to Pathfinder (there're other RPGs to be found there, sure, including D&D, but Pathfinder takes up the biggest real estate by far).

So if players start to feel that they can't trust older printings of a book to be accurate, or that they feel they should just wait until the newest printing comes in, then sales slow to a halt, and that creates a problem for everyone, both players and owners.

---

Magic the Gathering producing errata for their cards is bad enough - but in MTG's case, said Errata is almost always clarifying errata or updating it to the most-modern wording, and rarely involves actually wholesale changing the text or the card's mechanical functionality.

Things like radically changing the text of printed books can cause serious issues between players and the DM, causing the DM to have to rule which book takes precedent - this is ESPECIALLY true when the text in question radically alters something intrinsic to a character's whole functionality.

A few of the Errata in recent weeks has gone beyond making some builds less optimal than others, and instead made several builds literally unplayable under the new Errata.

Some of this may have been done for PFS purposes, but many people DO take the Pathfinder books as gospel - even if the average casual group takes RAI over RAW, they still use the written-word of the books as the baseline for interpretation.

So when Errata comes out, it has ramifications farther reaching than just PFS and can completely destroy characters in casual games as well (and leave many, many players quite salty as a result).

Look what was not nerfed in this errata guys! Debilitating Portent! Not only does this spell not require a save to be afflicted with, but it also affects every attack in a full attack with a will save that scales with your caster level, as opposed to being set by its spell level. Hooray.

But that's a spell, why would they nerf it?

Genuine question: How many of these problems come from inadequate game-testing? Could Paizo do a soft release in PDF form only, and then sell print editions only after the chief problems have been revealed and (hopefully) solved in play? I know that you already do this to an extent when you release early versions of new classes and rulesets for playtesting and player feedback, but would it be impossible to make the PDF publication of new texts another round of playtesting to make sure you get it right?
Also, how many of the problems arise from the simple fact that, the more feats, classes, spells, magic items, rulesets you create, the more combinations of such become possible, the more complicated the game becomes, and the more corner cases multiply? I certainly remember that happening to 3/3.5. Is the solution then perhaps to just *stop releasing new class collections and new rulesets*, and instead concentrate on all your other lines? (i.e. adventures, campaign setting expansions, game supports like flipmats, cards, minis, etc.?) In the short term it may not produce as much revenue as pushing out a new big rulebook every year, but in the longterm it may generate more revenue because the core game is viewed as stable and dependable, and new players constantly get drawn in to the proven, reliable experience.

For that matter, I'd personally be happy to see Paizo develop a new campaign setting eventually. I certainly don't want to see the kind of fracturing of campaign settings that helped do in TSR, but eventually a campaign setting with a really different feel might be just the thing.

Cyrad wrote:

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

Yup, the Myrmidarch is still missing spell combat with ranged weapons.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Monks are proficient with the club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, sling, and spear.

Monks are not proficient with any armor or shields.

When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.

In the Sohei archetype, change the Weapon and Armor Proficiency entry to the following:

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A sohei is proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with light armor, instead of a monk’s usual weapon and armor proficiencies. This ability alters the monk’s weapon and armor proficiencies.

Temple Sword: Heavy blades typically used by guardians of religious sites, temple swords have distinctive crescent-shaped blades, appearing as an amalgam of a sickle and sword. Many have holes drilled into the blade or places on the pommel where charms, bells, or other holy trinkets might be attached. Monks are proficient with the temple sword.

Question: are Sohei still proficient with the temple sword?

I'm not saying it's the FLGS's responsibility to fix. It's a basic problem of printed books.

I think Paizo's way of handling it (coupling print runs with errata releases) is the most useful, for players and stores alike.

Roleplayers are aware of errata happening. Stores are too.

They buyers should understand if the store says: "Sorry, we wont stock up on new printing if we haven't sold out of the ones on the rack. But you can get the errata doc for free at this adress..."
(I know that some wont buy that)

The errata documents aren't watermarked either, so it's not an issue for the store to print them out and hand them to buyers if they want to.
UC errata first to current is 8 pages. Printed out 2 pages per sheet front and back that's just 2 sheets of paper. (still large enough to read for most people)

Turn the errata into a service!

Also on the Sohei: this means that they do get their Fast Movement bonus while using Armor right?

EDIT: Also, what's up with Mounted Combat feats for the Sohei?

Genuine question: How many of these problems come from inadequate game-testing? Could Paizo do a soft release in PDF form only, and then sell print editions only after the chief problems have been revealed and (hopefully) solved in play? I know that you already do this to an extent when you release early versions of new classes and rulesets for playtesting and player feedback, but would it be impossible to make the PDF publication of new texts another round of playtesting to make sure you get it right?

Also, how many of the problems arise from the simple fact that, the more feats, classes, spells, magic items, rulesets you create, the more combinations of such become possible, the more complicated the game becomes, and the more corner cases multiply? I certainly remember that happening to 3/3.5. Is the solution then perhaps to just *stop releasing new class collections and new rulesets*, and instead concentrate on all your other lines? (i.e. adventures, campaign setting expansions, game supports like flipmats, cards, minis, etc.?) In the short term it may not produce as much revenue as pushing out a new big rulebook every year, but in the longterm it may generate more revenue because the core game is viewed as stable and dependable, and new players constantly get drawn in to the proven, reliable experience.

All I actually hear about the playtests is that no feedback ever gets taken on board and they're only used to generate hype.

Which, y'know. Ain't a good thing if it's true. The Kineticist would probably be less awful if they did, and the Medium might well have more spirits...

Which, y'know. Ain't a good thing if it's true. The Kineticist would probably be less awful if they did, and the Medium might well have more spirits...

Uhm, both of these were adjusted per playtest feedback. The Kineticist didn't get adjusted enough but it certainly got a bump, and the problem with the Medium was the playtest version had a bewildering array of spirits, intended to introduce an exponentially larger number, and only two or three of the ones they had were of any value. They eliminated a ton of chaff and made six good ones, with the possibility of introducing more later.

Raisse wrote:

Calth wrote:

RIP Gunslinger 6-20, no reason to ever even think about taking those levels.

Also, was it intended for the double musket to be the only double-barreled weapon change, or was that an oversight.

Yeah, really confused about this myself. Looks like double-barreled pistols and shotguns still work according to the original text, effectively doing double damage all the time. Errata the errata?

FAQed! Thanks for pointing that out.

You fixed the Myrmidarch. I love you all. Very, very much.

Master of Many Styles changes...I was expecting to say I'm 60000% done at this point, but it seems solid. I expected the ignoring of prerequisites to be removed, but this is just a straight buff. You have put me in a very, very good mood.

...

Of course I could care less about anything but the MoMS buff. =p

I've watched you be disappointed by many, many FAQ's and Errata. I'm happy that you finally got one that you like.

thistledown wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

Yup, the Myrmidarch is still missing spell combat with ranged weapons.

Why do you need it? The new version of Ranged Spellstrike seems to work just fine by itself.

Renlar wrote:

thistledown wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

Yup, the Myrmidarch is still missing spell combat with ranged weapons.

Why do you need it? The new version of Ranged Spellstrike seems to work just fine by itself.

If you start the game at level 11.

Gisher wrote:

Renlar wrote:

thistledown wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

Yup, the Myrmidarch is still missing spell combat with ranged weapons.

Why do you need it? The new version of Ranged Spellstrike seems to work just fine by itself.

If you start the game at level 11.

I guess I don't understand you. The problem with the old level 11 ability was that it couldn't be used due to action economy issues. The new version fixes that problem completely without needing a ranged version of Spell Combat.

Just a Guess wrote:

Gisher wrote:

Renlar wrote:

thistledown wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

Yup, the Myrmidarch is still missing spell combat with ranged weapons.

Why do you need it? The new version of Ranged Spellstrike seems to work just fine by itself.

If you start the game at level 11.

I guess I don't understand you. The problem with the old level 11 ability was that it couldn't be used due to action economy issues. The new version fixes that problem completely without needing a ranged version of Spell Combat.

But before level 11 the myrmidarch can always only shoot one arrow per turn when casting a spell. So while the standard magus can full attack and cast from level 2 on the myrmidarch is limited to single attacks 'till level 11.

Let's see what the damage was...

...Decent errata, all in all, though those 4 Feats still have me scratching my head as to why.

An errata with Rynjin's stamp of approval?

HERESY!!!

Also, I'm glad that the Titan Mauler can finally actually use large 2h weapons. However, the penalties are too harsh. Just look at the titan fighter archetype, which does the same thing, but at level 1 and with smaller penalties.

My main rub with the other recent errata is they changed a BUNCH of stuff, and stuff that didn't need to be changed at all (I just cannot get over Merciless Butchery eating it like that. Why?).

This is more like what an errata should be, a very short document (9 pages total in this case, I think) and containing a relatively small number of actual rules changes, or at least most having a relatively small impact on the function of the thing in question (the Ghost Rager change being a good example here, keeping the scaling of the Rage Power roughly the same, except untying it from Superstition).

For the purpose of the final embrace chain of feats, what counts as "a racial ability?"

Race traits - Obviously yes.

White Hair Witch Constrict - Clearly no.

Anaconda Coils - Clearly No.

Snake, Constrictor Animal Companion (after level 4, and with something to boost it's INT obviously)? - Yes?

Eidolon with the constrict evolution? - Maybe?

Eidolon with the constrict evolution granted by it's sub type (Protean e.g.)? - Yes/Maybe?

Anything else?

Gisher wrote:

Just a Guess wrote:

Gisher wrote:

Renlar wrote:

thistledown wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Horray, the Myrmidarch is finally fixed!

Well, half-way fixed.

Yup, the Myrmidarch is still missing spell combat with ranged weapons.

Why do you need it? The new version of Ranged Spellstrike seems to work just fine by itself.

If you start the game at level 11.

I guess I don't understand you. The problem with the old level 11 ability was that it couldn't be used due to action economy issues. The new version fixes that problem completely without needing a ranged version of Spell Combat.

But before level 11 the myrmidarch can always only shoot one arrow per turn when casting a spell. So while the standard magus can full attack and cast from level 2 on the myrmidarch is limited to single attacks 'till level 11.

Yes, that is true. But that wasn't an error. The Myrmidarch never had a ranged Spell Combat ability. It was never intended to have a ranged Spell Combat ability. What they did have was a 4th level Ranged Spellstrike ability that worked and an 11th level Ranged Spellstrike ability that had apparently passed through the editorial equivalent of a wood-chipper. The 11th level ability now works. It is fixed. It may not be the type of class that you want to play, but it is now fixed.

And the Myrmidarch can still use Spell Combat and Spellstrike in melee combat like a standard Magus. That is why they are excellent switch-hitters.

Will anything come from the questionnaire we answered to Chris Lambertz on that one thread? Like, most importantly more input from the forum for solutions of pieces that are in need of errata (and I still argue it should not be called errata, but rather revision or something). And possibility of including non-errataed versions of things somewhere in the SRD?

From the looks of this, it's actually not a bad errata.

Ohh sweet updates to Ultimate Combat?!

*Looks for update to Empyreal Knight*

G@*+!$mit.

Will anything come from the questionnaire we answered to Chris Lambertz on that one thread? Like, most importantly more input from the forum for solutions of pieces that are in need of errata (and I still argue it should not be called errata, but rather revision or something). And possibility of including non-errataed versions of things somewhere in the SRD?

From the looks of this, it's actually not a bad errata.

It looks like that's started to be implemented on the SRD. Like, if you look on the Divine Protection page, it has the old version crossed out (But legible) under the highlighted-in-yellow new text.

Which is the best thing, because then it still serves as a resource for people who preferred older versions.

necromental wrote:

Will anything come from the questionnaire we answered to Chris Lambertz on that one thread? Like, most importantly more input from the forum for solutions of pieces that are in need of errata (and I still argue it should not be called errata, but rather revision or something). And possibility of including non-errataed versions of things somewhere in the SRD?

From the looks of this, it's actually not a bad errata.

It looks like that's started to be implemented on the SRD. Like, if you look on the Divine Protection page, it has the old version crossed out (But legible) under the highlighted-in-yellow new text.

Which is the best thing, because then it still serves as a resource for people who preferred older versions.

They also managed to get Jason to write this blog post. He hasn't talked to us much recently so this is nice.

It looks like that's started to be implemented on the SRD. Like, if you look on the Divine Protection page, it has the old version crossed out (But legible) under the highlighted-in-yellow new text.

Which is the best thing, because then it still serves as a resource for people who preferred older versions.

I think he meant PRD rather than d20pfsrd. Though I do hope they don't try to do that with the PRD... Would make the site look hideous with all the crossing out everywhere.

Started looking at the errata and then just stopped. There's so much that isn't "errata" but updates and rebalancing to the rules.

While I understand the need to keep things in line for the sake of balance, making my physical book useless at the table (because any given page or feature could have been errated and requires double checking) is a problematic way to do so.

The urge to continually "fix" the game and revise the books didn't do 4th Edition D&D any favours and I don't like it now. Accommodating the revisions causes more disruption to my game than many of the mechanics that were changed.

I think what we are seeing is Paizo stealth-releasing Pathfinder 2nd Edition. Like you say, many of their recent "errata" is less about fixing mistakes than it is about actually changing rules.