FAQ on Errata

Thursday, August 20, 2015


Illustration by Dmitry Burmak

As many of you are probably well aware, we have had a number of update documents drop in the past few weeks, correcting a wide array of issues with some of our rulebooks. Seeing that some of these have caused some controversy among players and GMs alike, I thought I would take a moment to talk about the process of creating these documents and give you all some insight on how we decide on the changes made to the game.

No book is perfect. It's an unfortunate reality of the publishing industry. Despite all of our best efforts and countless hours spent poring over proof copies and making corrections, every time we send a book to the printer, it is with the nagging knowledge that there are at least a few mistakes lurking in its pages. Almost without fail, we spot one within a week of getting the first printed copies shipped to our office, well after it is possible for us to fix it. At this point, the first internal correction file is made. As the staff here at Paizo starts using the book, we usually find a few more, and the file grows. Then the book ships out to the public and the questions begin in earnest.

After that point, we primarily rely on the FAQ system and forum threads to point out errors in our books that need to be addressed. When people on the forums notice problems, post threads, and click the FAQ button, we get notified through our system. About once per week we take a look at some of the most pressing issues, answering them as needed and noting many of them in our corrections file.

Finally, when it comes time for us to actually assemble the updates document that you see for each printing of our books, we get together as a team to discuss each issue. While many of the problems are straightforward mistakes that are easy to fix, some require us to rework a rule or make an adjudication on how it actually works in play. These can be contentious issues, both on the forums and internally, but we are always trying to do what is in the best interest of the game. Which brings me around to the most recent update document that is releasing today, making more corrections to Ultimate Combat.

And the Crane Wing feat.

Many of you might remember the conflict over this feat when Ultimate Combat was first released. We felt it was just too good for a heavily defensive build, so when the second printing of the book was released, we made changes to bring it more inline. Some people on the forums let us know that they felt we went too far in "nerfing" the feat and at the time, we said that we would keep an eye on it and see if it required further adjustment.

As it turns out, the feat did need some work, so we changed it so that it provides a +4 bonus to AC until you are missed by 4 or less (at which point it turns off until the start of your next turn). You can still use it to deflect an attack when taking the total defense action. This is an improvement and one that we hope makes the feat a more viable choice.

Of course, this is only one of a number of changes we made to various rules in Ultimate Combat. There were changes to the Musket Master and Pistolero archetypes, removing an ability that allowed them to ignore misfires at 13th level and double-barreled guns saw a change to balance them as well. The Myrmidarch and Titan Mauler both saw changes that strengthened them, allowing them to work better as originally intended, while the Master of Many Styles was altered a bit to make it more rewarding to those that stuck with it, as opposed to just dipping into the class for quick benefits. You can download the appropriate update document below, or from the Free Downloads or product page.

The process of updating our books is never simple and it is a job we take very seriously. We know that many of you are invested in these rules and the characters that rely upon them. Hopefully this gives you a little bit of a better understanding about the process of updates. If you have any thoughts or comments about the most recent Ultimate Combat update, please post them in this thread (as opposed to making a bunch of individual threads) and we will try to answer your questions.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Dmitry Burmak Frequently Asked Questions Monks Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Sajan
201 to 250 of 690 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I hope the next update will replace Spell Mastery's wizard prerequisite with a more generic "spellbook" or "prepared arcane caster that record his spells" or something along these lines

Also, Wildblooded Archetype needs to go away in favor of a Subdomain-like structure, but this would be a too big change for something that stands as an Errata maybe.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hrothdane wrote:

Is there confirmation that the MoMS can no longer take feats in a style chain past the initial feat for their level 1 and 2 bonus feats?

Only the initial feats have the style descriptor, and the language that allowed you to take feats further down the chain was removed.

Yes, that plus the powerful new other abilities that kick in starting at 6th (and especially 8th) are what Jason meant by "the Master of Many Styles was altered a bit to make it more rewarding to those that stuck with it, as opposed to just dipping into the class for quick benefits."

I don't actually feel like I'm being rewarded for sticking with the archetype. Whereas before a MoMS could pick out their perfect set of styles, now they awkwardly only get a few sets and only get them when a non -MoMS could get them. I had a PFS build that went Crane Snake Panther and it took a lot of work to even get them useable by level 8. Now I can't access Crane's chain fully until 6, and Snake's until 9th, and the wildcard slots just feel bad. It seems like the change wanted MoMS to be more flexible, but the end result is that I see no reason to go MoMS over Unarmed Fighter who gets more feats, better BAB, and access to more combat feats.

Very disappointed. I feel like I was punished because others abused the dip potential.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Robert Jordan wrote:
Vic, from a different view point I agree that C is the winning option for how to handle things. The issue is that the updates aren't just hitting PFS, they're going to the source material instead of a PFS reference document. Some of my players will buy the PDF or a more recent physical copy than the source I have on my shelf. That causes conflict at tables outside of PFS, where it really shouldn't. PFS is it's own strange beast with it's own esoteric rules and adjustments and that is perfectly fine, when it flows out and begins to twist the rest of the game it becomes a problem.

Following that logic, you would prefer we were selling new players the exact same Core Rulebook that we introduced several years ago, complete with all the problems that we've identified and fixed in the years since? I'm not a fan of that plan.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:

However, it also kind of makes a RPG subscription not worth bothering with, since it guarantees you a 1st printing, which continues to become more and more obsolete.

Hell, that kind of errata policy makes buying a print copy at all pointless. You're far better off just getting the PDF, where you only have to pay once for a product that is kept up-to-date.

Perfectly happy with my subscriber copies. I can put a sticky red dot in the margins where a change has been made and keep a copy of the errata doc inside the back cover. Plus I get the latest PDF for free and can use it on the iPad when I am away from the hardcopy. My experience is different to yours it seems.

Scarab Sages

LilyHaze wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hrothdane wrote:

Is there confirmation that the MoMS can no longer take feats in a style chain past the initial feat for their level 1 and 2 bonus feats?

Only the initial feats have the style descriptor, and the language that allowed you to take feats further down the chain was removed.

Yes, that plus the powerful new other abilities that kick in starting at 6th (and especially 8th) are what Jason meant by "the Master of Many Styles was altered a bit to make it more rewarding to those that stuck with it, as opposed to just dipping into the class for quick benefits."

I don't actually feel like I'm being rewarded for sticking with the archetype. Whereas before a MoMS could pick out their perfect set of styles, now they awkwardly only get a few sets and only get them when a non -MoMS could get them. I had a PFS build that went Crane Snake Panther and it took a lot of work to even get them useable by level 8. Now I can't access Crane's chain fully until 6, and Snake's until 9th, and the wildcard slots just feel bad. It seems like the change wanted MoMS to be more flexible, but the end result is that I see no reason to go MoMS over Unarmed Fighter who gets more feats, better BAB, and access to more combat feats.

Very disappointed. I feel like I was punished because others abused the dip potential.

The wildcard feats still ignore prerequisites. Also with the 8th level fuse style the bonus to hit allows the MoMS to stay relevant, when it was not able to being a 3/4 BAB class with no accuracy booster.

The problem with your perfect set of styles, is that MoMS could pick a Feat that can normally only be picked at 12th level at 2nd. Other classes that have bonus feats that bypass prerequisite like ranger cannot take a feat like Improved Precise Strike or Shield Master until 6th level.

The errata brings the MoMS in line with other bonus feat classes, and makes a single class MoMS more flexible and competitive with a single class monk, while not being a mandatory dip class for every brawler and unarmed fighter out there.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:

Could someone please clarify what the final functionality of Crane Wing and Crane Riposte are? The way I'm reading it, is that we no longer can deflect attacks, yet the new Errata refers to deflecting an attack...

I'm pretty sure I'm missing something here.

You do technically "deflect" an attack, but you do it preemptively instead of reactively. That's what that +4 AC that goes away when an attack misses you by 4 or less represents.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Robert Jordan wrote:
Vic, from a different view point I agree that C is the winning option for how to handle things. The issue is that the updates aren't just hitting PFS, they're going to the source material instead of a PFS reference document. Some of my players will buy the PDF or a more recent physical copy than the source I have on my shelf. That causes conflict at tables outside of PFS, where it really shouldn't. PFS is it's own strange beast with it's own esoteric rules and adjustments and that is perfectly fine, when it flows out and begins to twist the rest of the game it becomes a problem.
Following that logic, you would prefer we were selling new players the exact same Core Rulebook that we introduced several years ago, complete with all the problems that we've identified and fixed in the years since? I'm not a fan of that plan.

I'm going to repeat what I said in an earlier thread, because I am not in a good mood now and so I think copying what I said earlier will lead to a less hostile post:

I wrote:

Unless you know what the rules said pre-errata, ignoring errata isn't always feasible. If different group members own different printings of a book, or don't own it at all and use the srd, the errata document doesn't always give enough information to 'reverse engineer' the errata and figure out what the 1st printing rules were.

I've considered tracking all errata and putting 'anti-errata house rules' in my house rules document...but that means I have to keep track of all the errata when I didn't want to use it to begin with just so I can tell players what not to use. And that's assuming I have access to the first printing of every book to begin with, which I don't. The extra hurdles involved in 'not using errata' are what ultimately convinced me to stop running pathfinder.

Now, one idea I've suggested in the past was that Paizo could sell PDF versions of earlier printings. That way, any GM who doesn't want to deal with the continually changing rulebooks can just say "first printings only". Any player who doesn't own the first printing can just put down 10 bucks for a PDF of the first printing core rulebook/whatever book they are looking for. Paizo gets more money selling PDFs that they already have, and people who don't want to use errata can avoid doing so much more easily.

But unless and until Paizo implements my idea, not using errata requires tracking down old printings of hardcovers which become increasingly difficult to find the more time passes. Particularly for books which have gone through several heavy revisions like the Core Rulebook.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
brock wrote:
Perfectly happy with my subscriber copies. I can put a sticky red dot in the margins where a change has been made and keep a copy of the errata doc inside the back cover. Plus I get the latest PDF for free and can use it on the iPad when I am away from the hardcopy. My experience is different to yours it seems.

As my experience is different from yours. I canceled my subscriptions in part because I didn't want the first printings with all the errors they entailed. I'd rather pay the PDF price and maybe pick up the hardcovers if they got a second printing with errata. Naturally, the updates to the third printings are frustrating as well, now that I have the second printings.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
LilyHaze wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hrothdane wrote:

Is there confirmation that the MoMS can no longer take feats in a style chain past the initial feat for their level 1 and 2 bonus feats?

Only the initial feats have the style descriptor, and the language that allowed you to take feats further down the chain was removed.

Yes, that plus the powerful new other abilities that kick in starting at 6th (and especially 8th) are what Jason meant by "the Master of Many Styles was altered a bit to make it more rewarding to those that stuck with it, as opposed to just dipping into the class for quick benefits."

I don't actually feel like I'm being rewarded for sticking with the archetype. Whereas before a MoMS could pick out their perfect set of styles, now they awkwardly only get a few sets and only get them when a non -MoMS could get them. I had a PFS build that went Crane Snake Panther and it took a lot of work to even get them useable by level 8. Now I can't access Crane's chain fully until 6, and Snake's until 9th, and the wildcard slots just feel bad. It seems like the change wanted MoMS to be more flexible, but the end result is that I see no reason to go MoMS over Unarmed Fighter who gets more feats, better BAB, and access to more combat feats.

Very disappointed. I feel like I was punished because others abused the dip potential.

The wildcard feats still ignore prerequisites. Also with the 8th level fuse style the bonus to hit allows the MoMS to stay relevant, when it was not able to being a 3/4 BAB class with no accuracy booster.

The problem with your perfect set of styles, is that MoMS could pick a Feat that can normally only be picked at 12th level at 2nd. Other classes that have bonus feats that bypass prerequisite like ranger cannot take a feat like Improved Precise Strike or Shield Master until 6th level.

The errata brings the MoMS in line with other bonus feat classes, and makes a single class MoMS more flexible and competitive with a single class...

The MoMS "can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats in those styles' feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as long as he meets the prerequisites."


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

All in all I think I'm more upset about all the character sheets I have to update now than I am the actual errata changes themselves.

That's a good thing I guess.

Entryhazard wrote:
I hope the next update will replace Spell Mastery's wizard prerequisite with a more generic "spellbook" or "prepared arcane caster that record his spells" or something along these lines.

I would totally support such a change!


We'll probably see more dwarf gunslingers with the FCB to reduce the misfire chance of guns. Combine that with reliable/greater reliable and you're back down to 0 misfire chance. However, the costs involved in getting there are considerable.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rhatahema wrote:
I have mixed feelings about the saving throws added to the Litany Spells. On the one hand, they looked a bit too strong without a save. On the other, Paladins are going to have relatively terrible DCs given how low their spell levels are compared to their character level, plus the need to disperse their stat boosts. In particular, Litany of Sloth was of most use against casters, but now it targets their strongest save.

This. I don't know if there's any particular 'trick' to boosting Paladin spell DC's to a level that would have spells actually have a chance of working, but if the only option really is to boost the hell out of Charisma, then I don't really see the point of the class having any offensive spells requiring saves at all.

Personally, instead of adding saves to the spells, I'd have just made them higher level spells in both the Anti/Paladin and Inquisitor lists to compensate for their overall strength. I'm honestly not fully sure why this change was even made be honest.

Scarab Sages

Falkenhayn wrote:


This. I don't know if there's any particular 'trick' to boosting Paladin spell DC's to a level that would have spells actually have a chance of working, but if the only option really is to boost the hell out of Charisma, then... ...I don't really see the point of the class having any offensive spells requiring saves at all.

It depends on build. I have seen CHA-based paladins designed to focus on Lay on Hands and Smite. Starting CHA of 20. They were sub-par against anything not evil, but they would have a hell of a DC for spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LilyHaze wrote:
Very disappointed. I feel like I was punished because others abused the dip potential.

Honestly, I do kind of wish Pathfinder would just make a rule against dipping (like bringing back the 3.5 multiclassing penalties). Right now so many classes are held back from getting core features for several levels because the devs don't want any dip-friendly classes.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
brock wrote:
Perfectly happy with my subscriber copies. I can put a sticky red dot in the margins where a change has been made and keep a copy of the errata doc inside the back cover. Plus I get the latest PDF for free and can use it on the iPad when I am away from the hardcopy. My experience is different to yours it seems.
As my experience is different from yours. I canceled my subscriptions in part because I didn't want the first printings with all the errors they entailed. I'd rather pay the PDF price and maybe pick up the hardcovers if they got a second printing with errata. Naturally, the updates to the third printings are frustrating as well, now that I have the second printings.

Add me as another happy subscriber. I use the books to read but I do not want to lug all of them around with me all of the time. The pdf's work fine from my Nook tablet for the most part. The game needs to fix issues and grow, so the changes in a few errata are fine for me. In a home game, you set the framework and the way stuff works (ala MOMS was banned in our home game). The only place where these changes really go immediately into effect is PFS.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Alceste008 wrote:
Add me as another happy subscriber.

I'm glad it works for you. I no longer lug any books to gamedays or conventions save maybe the CRB. I just bring my PDFs.

Scarab Sages

Chess Pwn wrote:
The MoMS "can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats in those styles' feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as long as he meets the prerequisites."

Well, crap. I missed that. The I wish it was able to bypass Skill prerequisites at least, Monk doesn't have enough ranks to justify the skill output for advanced styles.

Boar Shred: 9 Ranks intimidate
Dragon Roar: 8 ranks acrobatics
Snake Fang: 6 Ranks acrobatics, 9 ranks Sense Motive
Or the worst, Kirin Path: 12 ranks Knowledge Arcana, 5 ranks in Knowledge: something else.

Still, I like it more than the pre-errata version.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Cleanthes wrote:
I would assume that for every hardcore PFS player who watches rules changes closely, there's a dozen (a hundred?) people who buy the books that interest them, take them home, use them how they use them

You would be correct. I'm a store owner, a player, a GM, and of the 50+ local players I know playing pathfinder weekly I'm one of 2 or 3 that post on the forums monthly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Hrothdane wrote:

Is there confirmation that the MoMS can no longer take feats in a style chain past the initial feat for their level 1 and 2 bonus feats?

Only the initial feats have the style descriptor, and the language that allowed you to take feats further down the chain was removed.

Yes, that plus the powerful new other abilities that kick in starting at 6th (and especially 8th) are what Jason meant by "the Master of Many Styles was altered a bit to make it more rewarding to those that stuck with it, as opposed to just dipping into the class for quick benefits."

That's...somewhat disappointing. It'll take some tinkering to see whether this is overall better, worse, or just different.

My main concern is with some very key Styles being "off rhythm", Dragon and Snake especially given that now both an extra Feat needs to be worked in (the anachronistic Snake Sidewind, which has zero to do with the other Feats in the chain), and they're BOTH pushed far, far back in levels (Snake Fang being available 3-7 levels later than before hurts, a lot).

If this was the route you were going it may have been better to grant extra Bonus Feats, since the Monk ones are at very odd levels without the prerequisite ignoring. Rather than 1/2/6/10/14/18, a more Psychic Warrior-ish progression of 1/2/5/8/11/14/17/20 would have opened up more options for branching out into new Styles with Wildcard Styles while still having a number of normal Feats to play with (since 1st and 2nd HAVE to be tied up in getting the base Style Feats, there's no other way to get them early on without ignoring prereqs).

As-is the MoMS is now forced to spend most of his level-up Feats on Style Feats too if he wants to truly specialize in a few Styles rather than Wildcard-ing a bunch. This is a straight nerf to the class for anyone without a desire for that extra flexibility.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Falkenhayn wrote:


This. I don't know if there's any particular 'trick' to boosting Paladin spell DC's to a level that would have spells actually have a chance of working, but if the only option really is to boost the hell out of Charisma, then... ...I don't really see the point of the class having any offensive spells requiring saves at all.

It depends on build. I have seen CHA-based paladins designed to focus on Lay on Hands and Smite. Starting CHA of 20. They were sub-par against anything not evil, but they would have a hell of a DC for spells.

I don't know that I'd call it a "hell of a DC" considering that the spell in question, litany of righteousness, is already 2 spell levels behind a dedicated caster, and even if a Paladin completely built himself like a caster, he'd still end up with his best spells having DCs at least 5 lower than a true 9 level caster's best spells and at least 2 lower than a 2/3 caster's best spells. Actually, litany of righteousness would be at least 3 lower than a 2/3 caster, since Inquisitors get it as a 3rd level spell.

I'd be curious to know how that particular errata came to be.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Robert Jordan wrote:
Vic, from a different view point I agree that C is the winning option for how to handle things. The issue is that the updates aren't just hitting PFS, they're going to the source material instead of a PFS reference document. Some of my players will buy the PDF or a more recent physical copy than the source I have on my shelf. That causes conflict at tables outside of PFS, where it really shouldn't. PFS is it's own strange beast with it's own esoteric rules and adjustments and that is perfectly fine, when it flows out and begins to twist the rest of the game it becomes a problem.
Following that logic, you would prefer we were selling new players the exact same Core Rulebook that we introduced several years ago, complete with all the problems that we've identified and fixed in the years since? I'm not a fan of that plan.

There are sites with programming documentation that come to mind that show the most current version of the documentation, however it is the case that people will be using older versions, there is options in the corners that let me change the version of the documentation I am reviewing. I'm not sure if that would be the best choice here, but at the moment the system leans towards making people even outside PFS use the errata whether they want to or not if they rely on PDFs or the various reference sites.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So another gunslinger problem besides the obvious changes. The errata killed the mysterious stranger's shtick,the dead shot deed. The intent of the deed as far as I can see is to give the gunslinger a scaling, slightly better vital strike. Now while it was never the optimal choice, it could outperform vital strike and had some benefits over a full attack routine. With the change to the double barrel firearm mechanics, I feel that dead shot has moved from non-optimal to complete trap. Vital strike with a double-barrel weapon will yield more damage than a dead shot now and do it for a lesser action. Why take a full attack when you can use a standard and then do something else?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish Final Embrace hadn't been rendered impossible to take on a PC. I know there were some intimidating-looking Constrict builds out there, but it was a really cool combat style...

My Gun Priest is really wishing he had just been an archer right now. Double-barreled guns were perhaps unbalanced, but without them the math looks pretty bleak compared to just filling the air with arrows.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Melkiador wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
The archaeologist is not intended to gain additional rounds of its luck ability as it levels. It receives a number of other abilities to balance out the loss of bardic performance.
This is one of those things like investigator's using wands. It's an ability that sounds like it should be there to such a degree, that it really needs to say you don't get it. Otherwise people out of the loop will just assume the omission is a mistake.

Funny, I always read it that way.

I feel the Archaeologist is wonderfully balanced. While I might try the unchained rogue, I'd take an archaeologist over a core rogue any day of the week. And depending on party composition, over a lot of the other bard types.

Oh, and one other love of the errata. Half elf bards can start with a weapon that can do lethal damage out to 15' *or* threaten normally. Yes please.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Lab_Rat wrote:
So another gunslinger problem besides the obvious changes. The errata killed the mysterious stranger's shtick,the dead shot deed. The intent of the deed as far as I can see is to give the gunslinger a scaling, slightly better vital strike. Now while it was never the optimal choice, it could outperform vital strike and had some benefits over a full attack routine. With the change to the double barrel firearm mechanics, I feel that dead shot has moved from non-optimal to complete trap. Vital strike with a double-barrel weapon will yield more damage than a dead shot now and do it for a lesser action. Why take a full attack when you can use a standard and then do something else?

I don't know that I'd ever seen anyone use Dead Shot anyways, so I don't think it's too big a deal. Also, they still have their own merits; Dead Shot doesn't cost you the additional -4 for firing two barrels simultaneously, and you don't have to take any additional feats to use it. It also doesn't cost you the not-insubstantial cost to purchase a double-barrel weapon and then enchant both barrels.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
The change to Feral Combat Training invalidates this faq. Since the line “as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike” is missing, that means FCT no longer allows monk unarmed strike damage. The FAQ should be removed or updated to use the new rule.

This is also true for several of the other UC FAQ items.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
FLite wrote:

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?

Have we got an answer to this?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:
Lab_Rat wrote:
So another gunslinger problem besides the obvious changes. The errata killed the mysterious stranger's shtick,the dead shot deed. The intent of the deed as far as I can see is to give the gunslinger a scaling, slightly better vital strike. Now while it was never the optimal choice, it could outperform vital strike and had some benefits over a full attack routine. With the change to the double barrel firearm mechanics, I feel that dead shot has moved from non-optimal to complete trap. Vital strike with a double-barrel weapon will yield more damage than a dead shot now and do it for a lesser action. Why take a full attack when you can use a standard and then do something else?
I don't know that I'd ever seen anyone use Dead Shot anyways, so I don't think it's too big a deal.

A lot of people undersold dead shot with a mysterious stranger. Mainly because they saw all the stupid theoretical dpr numbers, and a couple of peoples personal opinions, and bought in. I had a Mysterious stranger 7 / divine hunter 13 build that, while not competitive damage wise with an optimal pistolero, held his own damage wise, could one shot enemies on occasion, and was very hard to kill.

Ssalarn wrote:
Also, they still have their own merits; Dead Shot doesn't cost you the additional -4 for firing two barrels simultaneously, and you don't have to take any additional feats to use it.

The -4 to hit isn't a big deal. Remember that vital strike does all damage off of full BAB while dead shot uses iterative attacks that get progressively worse.

The feats are a bonus in Dead shots case.

Ssalarn wrote:
It also doesn't cost you the not-insubstantial cost to purchase a double-barrel weapon and then enchant both barrels.

Its debatable. I have seen opinions on both sides. But yes, there would be an extra cost if they are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:

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.

The number of things they change is pretty small, but the things they change tend to be bridging abilities that let you mix one set of options with another set of options to get something new. Changing feral combat to not mix with unarmed abilities makes it a bland buff rather than one such bridging ability. Same goes for specifically turning off methods of using something other than unarmed attacks for pummeling style, forcing an empty hand for slashing grace and many other things. Removing bridging abilities isn't removing one option, but a host of related options.

I understand the designer's desire to have design intent obeyed, but culling all bridging options rather than balancing them makes designing a character far less interesting. These sort of changes also run against the game designer's role of creating and balancing options for players and DMs and turns more reducing options to make balancing easier. Since the DM's role at the table is to maintain balance between players and the game, and to ensure adequate and rewarding challenge, character power is too varied for that to be handled by the rules alone. I think I've watched enough games start to suck and die under option reducing design philosophies, I'd rather avoid it.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I am curious what this new version of the MoMS can do, though. One thought that occurs to me is dipping into Unarmed Fighter to snag another style feat and armor proficiency, and using Brawling Armor to make up for some of the lost accuracy. If you combine that with Monk of the Sacred Mountain you ditch Evasion for defensive boosts you keep with armor. I think you can also combine Hungry Ghost to recover ki. All that together would seem to alleviate much of the need for WIS, and if Monk of the Four winds fits in there you can trade in Stunning Fist for Elemental Fist. Free extra damage, no crappy save. That just leaves fast movement as things you lose when wearing armor, which is harsh but probably something you can live with.

But I'm not really sure what to do with combining the styles themselves, haha. And waiting until level 8 for the fuse style attack bonus is harsh.

Scarab Sages

Exguardi wrote:
I wish Final Embrace hadn't been rendered impossible to take on a PC. I know there were some intimidating-looking Constrict builds out there, but it was a really cool combat style...

Well, you can still take it as a Naga Aspirant Druid. But yeah, all the Anaconda's coils and white haired witch builds got nerfed.

Athough, you can get the same effect with a Warpriest with sacred weapon armor spikes and kraken style. Just sayin.


Captain Morgan wrote:

I am curious what this new version of the MoMS can do, though. One thought that occurs to me is dipping into Unarmed Fighter to snag another style feat and armor proficiency, and using Brawling Armor to make up for some of the lost accuracy. If you combine that with Monk of the Sacred Mountain you ditch Evasion for defensive boosts you keep with armor. I think you can also combine Hungry Ghost to recover ki. All that together would seem to alleviate much of the need for WIS, and if Monk of the Four winds fits in there you can trade in Stunning Fist for Elemental Fist. Free extra damage, no crappy save. That just leaves fast movement as things you lose when wearing armor, which is harsh but probably something you can live with.

But I'm not really sure what to do with combining the styles themselves, haha. And waiting until level 8 for the fuse style attack bonus is harsh.

Probably go with Dragon Style + Pummeling Style + Mantis Style. Easy intimidation, powerful hits, mobility, fat stunning fists...

If Unchained Monk is available, you don't need Pummeling Style to flurry and move, so you could replace it with an Elemental Style or Monkey Style (which has synergy with Mantis Style).

Another option for a more defensive build would be Crane Style + Mantis Style + Snake Style. Or maybe Archon Style in place of Snake or Mantis.

Scarab Sages

Secret Wizard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

I am curious what this new version of the MoMS can do, though. One thought that occurs to me is dipping into Unarmed Fighter to snag another style feat and armor proficiency, and using Brawling Armor to make up for some of the lost accuracy. If you combine that with Monk of the Sacred Mountain you ditch Evasion for defensive boosts you keep with armor. I think you can also combine Hungry Ghost to recover ki. All that together would seem to alleviate much of the need for WIS, and if Monk of the Four winds fits in there you can trade in Stunning Fist for Elemental Fist. Free extra damage, no crappy save. That just leaves fast movement as things you lose when wearing armor, which is harsh but probably something you can live with.

But I'm not really sure what to do with combining the styles themselves, haha. And waiting until level 8 for the fuse style attack bonus is harsh.

Probably go with Dragon Style + Pummeling Style + Mantis Style. Easy intimidation, powerful hits, mobility, fat stunning fists...

If Unchained Monk is available, you don't need Pummeling Style to flurry and move, so you could replace it with an Elemental Style or Monkey Style (which has synergy with Mantis Style).

Another option for a more defensive build would be Crane Style + Mantis Style + Snake Style. Or maybe Archon Style in place of Snake or Mantis.

You could also make an impressive grappler with Snapping Turtle Style + Kraken Style + Grabbing Style, and possibly adding Mantis Style + Jawbreaker. I don't know if it would beat the tetori, but it would be pretty impressive.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

All in all I think I'm more upset about all the character sheets I have to update now than I am the actual errata changes themselves.

That's a good thing I guess.

Entryhazard wrote:
I hope the next update will replace Spell Mastery's wizard prerequisite with a more generic "spellbook" or "prepared arcane caster that record his spells" or something along these lines.
I would totally support such a change!

That broad a requirement would open up spell mastery to classes it should not be intended for. The one I'm thinking of is the witch, which does not really use a spellbook.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Secret Wizard wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:

I am curious what this new version of the MoMS can do, though. One thought that occurs to me is dipping into Unarmed Fighter to snag another style feat and armor proficiency, and using Brawling Armor to make up for some of the lost accuracy. If you combine that with Monk of the Sacred Mountain you ditch Evasion for defensive boosts you keep with armor. I think you can also combine Hungry Ghost to recover ki. All that together would seem to alleviate much of the need for WIS, and if Monk of the Four winds fits in there you can trade in Stunning Fist for Elemental Fist. Free extra damage, no crappy save. That just leaves fast movement as things you lose when wearing armor, which is harsh but probably something you can live with.

But I'm not really sure what to do with combining the styles themselves, haha. And waiting until level 8 for the fuse style attack bonus is harsh.

Probably go with Dragon Style + Pummeling Style + Mantis Style. Easy intimidation, powerful hits, mobility, fat stunning fists...

If Unchained Monk is available, you don't need Pummeling Style to flurry and move, so you could replace it with an Elemental Style or Monkey Style (which has synergy with Mantis Style).

Another option for a more defensive build would be Crane Style + Mantis Style + Snake Style. Or maybe Archon Style in place of Snake or Mantis.

Would style strikes work at all without Flurry though?

Mantis Style seems fine if you want Stunning Fist, but the MoMS has the potential to ditch it entirely and dump WIS... I'm skeptical of it. The new MoMS can combine Pummeling with Dragon and Boar for maximum damage when it needs to charge, and then switch Pummeling to Jabbing once the distance is closed for even more damage.

Or if it's fighting something that needs to be crippled, it can combine Wolf Style with Mantis Style to debuff the hell out of it.

Or it could switch over to defensive AoO thing when it is fighting something dumb enough to trigger them.

And the same build can potentially do ALL OF THAT. Although looking through the feats, it seems dumping WIS would limit options a lot.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's a hilarious one:

Charging Stag Style, Kobold Style, Kraken Style with the Monk of the Sacred Mountain archetype

Charge them, grapple them, prone them, jump atop of them, throttle them to death and ALL WHILE BEING IMMOVABLE, so they can never remove you from being on top of them.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Secret Wizard wrote:

Here's a hilarious one:

Charging Stag Style, Kobold Style, Kraken Style with the Monk of the Sacred Mountain archetype

Charge them, grapple them, prone them, jump atop of them, throttle them to death and ALL WHILE BEING IMMOVABLE, so they can never remove you from being on top of them.

Name the character Rodrigo- or as as their enemies know and fear- "The Immovable Rod".


Secret Wizard wrote:

Here's a hilarious one:

Charging Stag Style, Kobold Style, Kraken Style with the Monk of the Sacred Mountain archetype

Charge them, grapple them, prone them, jump atop of them, throttle them to death and ALL WHILE BEING IMMOVABLE, so they can never remove you from being on top of them.

What's Charging Stag Style from?


Imbicatus wrote:
Athough, you can get the same effect with a Warpriest with sacred weapon armor spikes and kraken style. Just sayin.

I'd forgotten armor spikes. If there's a weapon property applied to armor spikes, will it be applied on the grapple damage?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Secret Wizard wrote:

Here's a hilarious one:

Charging Stag Style, Kobold Style, Kraken Style with the Monk of the Sacred Mountain archetype

Charge them, grapple them, prone them, jump atop of them, throttle them to death and ALL WHILE BEING IMMOVABLE, so they can never remove you from being on top of them.

What's Charging Stag Style from?

Taking a stab, based on how I haven't heard of it, it is something newer and likely Heroes of the Wild.


So my group is about to hit Giantslayer and I'd like to know if the Titan Mauler archetype actually works now?


LazarX wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

All in all I think I'm more upset about all the character sheets I have to update now than I am the actual errata changes themselves.

That's a good thing I guess.

Entryhazard wrote:
I hope the next update will replace Spell Mastery's wizard prerequisite with a more generic "spellbook" or "prepared arcane caster that record his spells" or something along these lines.
I would totally support such a change!
That broad a requirement would open up spell mastery to classes it should not be intended for. The one I'm thinking of is the witch, which does not really use a spellbook.

Except that the Dev team has said that making Spell Mastery available to witches is a "perfectly reasonable house rule."

There's also the Magaambyan Arcanist, a Pathfinder Campaign Setting prestige class that both (a) requires spell mastery and (b) discusses adding spells learned through the class to a witch's familiar.

So we've got a 1st party PrC that apparently presumes witches can take spell mastery. =P

Witch, arcanist, and magus are all classes that honestly should be able to take spell mastery.

Alchemist and investigator are weirder, because they aren't really arcane casters...

Re Charging Stag: Yep, it and, more importantly, Stag Horns are from Heroes of the Wild.

Grand Lodge

Not 100%, but after a quick read through, it looks like the master of many styles is taking it's rightful place as a monk option. Not good.


Imbicatus wrote:
I have to say I love the changes to Master of Many Styles. It removes the two level dip for Pummeling Charge and makes it actually worthwhile to play on it's own with the attack boost per active style. It's still a good dip, but it's not overwhelming like it was before.

Actually, it looks like everyone is misreading this errata,

"In the Master of Many Styles archetype, change the
Bonus Feat ability to the following:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels
thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus
style feat or the Elemental Fist feat (Advanced Player’s
Guide 158). He does not need to meet the prerequisites of
that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat.
Starting at 6th
level, a master of many styles can choose to instead gain
a wildcard style slot. Whenever he enters one or more
styles, he can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats
in those styles’ feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as
long as he meets the prerequisites. Each time he changes
styles, he can also change these wildcard style slots. This
ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

You can still get the two style feats (such as Pummeling Charge) without the prereq. You only need to meet prereqs for your wildcard feat.


Xethik wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
... blink... master of many styles needed a buff? Did i miss something?
You actually need to pick multiple styles and can't use the early bonus feats for later "style" feats. I believe only the first feat of the chain is flagged as a Style feat.

Nope, the entire chain of feats are flagged: Combat, Style.

Scarab Sages

JasonX wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
I have to say I love the changes to Master of Many Styles. It removes the two level dip for Pummeling Charge and makes it actually worthwhile to play on it's own with the attack boost per active style. It's still a good dip, but it's not overwhelming like it was before.

Actually, it looks like everyone is misreading this errata,

"In the Master of Many Styles archetype, change the
Bonus Feat ability to the following:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels
thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus
style feat or the Elemental Fist feat (Advanced Player’s
Guide 158). He does not need to meet the prerequisites of
that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat.
Starting at 6th
level, a master of many styles can choose to instead gain
a wildcard style slot. Whenever he enters one or more
styles, he can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats
in those styles’ feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as
long as he meets the prerequisites. Each time he changes
styles, he can also change these wildcard style slots. This
ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

You can still get the two style feats (such as Pummeling Charge) without the prereq. You only need to meet prereqs for your wildcard feat.

No, Pummeling Charge is not a style feat. It's a feat that is in the pummeling style's feat path. Only the initial feat in each style chain is actually tagged a [style] feat.

Grand Lodge

JasonX wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
I have to say I love the changes to Master of Many Styles. It removes the two level dip for Pummeling Charge and makes it actually worthwhile to play on it's own with the attack boost per active style. It's still a good dip, but it's not overwhelming like it was before.

Actually, it looks like everyone is misreading this errata,

"In the Master of Many Styles archetype, change the
Bonus Feat ability to the following:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels
thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus
style feat or the Elemental Fist feat (Advanced Player’s
Guide 158). He does not need to meet the prerequisites of
that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat.
Starting at 6th
level, a master of many styles can choose to instead gain
a wildcard style slot. Whenever he enters one or more
styles, he can spend his wildcard style slots to gain feats
in those styles’ feat paths (such as Earth Child Topple) as
long as he meets the prerequisites. Each time he changes
styles, he can also change these wildcard style slots. This
ability replaces a monk’s standard bonus feats."

You can still get the two style feats (such as Pummeling Charge) without the prereq. You only need to meet prereqs for your wildcard feat.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Scarab Sages

JasonX wrote:
Xethik wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
... blink... master of many styles needed a buff? Did i miss something?
You actually need to pick multiple styles and can't use the early bonus feats for later "style" feats. I believe only the first feat of the chain is flagged as a Style feat.
Nope, the entire chain of feats are flagged: Combat, Style.

Look again:

ACG wrote:

Pummeling Charge (Combat)

Your charge ends with a mighty haymaker.

Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Pummeling Style; base attack bonus +12, brawler level 8th, or monk level 8th.

Benefit: When using Pummeling Style, you can charge and make a Pummeling Style attack at the end of your charge as part of the charge action.

Normal: Making a Pummeling Style attack is a full-round action.

Note the missing (Style).


Imbicatus wrote:
JasonX wrote:
Xethik wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
... blink... master of many styles needed a buff? Did i miss something?
You actually need to pick multiple styles and can't use the early bonus feats for later "style" feats. I believe only the first feat of the chain is flagged as a Style feat.
Nope, the entire chain of feats are flagged: Combat, Style.

Look again:

ACG wrote:

Pummeling Charge (Combat)

Your charge ends with a mighty haymaker.

Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Pummeling Style; base attack bonus +12, brawler level 8th, or monk level 8th.

Benefit: When using Pummeling Style, you can charge and make a Pummeling Style attack at the end of your charge as part of the charge action.

Normal: Making a Pummeling Style attack is a full-round action.

Note the missing (Style).

That's what I get for using charts instead of looking further :)

They are listed as Style feats in the chart preceding those entries.


Fortunately my DEX fighter only took the one level dip for the IUS and meets the other prereqs.

201 to 250 of 690 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Paizo Blog: FAQ on Errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.