Scarecrow

Strife2002's page

2,498 posts. Alias of Michael Hendrick.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,498 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pg. 168 - Grasping tendril fleshcraft

The arm-replacement version of this fleshcraft can be used as a secondary natural attack that deals "1d4 points of damage". I guess we're to assume this does bludgeoning damage. Also, I'm not sure if this was intentional but one thing it doesn't mention is if Small characters deal 1d3 damage instead. Other fleshcrafts that grant natural attacks do make this Small-character distinction.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 168 - Claw gauntlet fleshcraft

Based on the wording throughout the fleshcraft's description, this fleshcraft is apparently purchased one-at-a-time (so applying it to replace both of a humanoid's hands would cost double what's listed and require a second set of checks and saves). The opening sentence of the description suggests both hands are affected (pluralizing "hands") with this craft. The rest of the wording beyond this sentence suggests 1 hand is affected, however.

Grand Lodge

Not sure if this is a holdover from the 3.5 days of the cards' existence, but the definition of bleed should say the damage happens at the start of an affected creature's turn, not at the end.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 132 - Fugue of oblivion occult ritual

This ritual should have the mind-affecting descriptor since it's enchantment. At first, going by Occult Adventures, it didn't look like occult rituals had descriptors like spells do, but the seeded doom ritual on the next page suggests otherwise.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 209 - Avoidance ward occult ritual

At first glance, I didn't see this as an error because none of the occult rituals list a descriptor, so I thought it wasn't applicable to them like it is for spells. The seeded doom ritual from Horror Adventures suggests otherwise, and so this ritual should list that it gets the mind-affecting descriptor, since all enchantment spells do...

...In theory. Honestly though looking at the description of this ritual it looks more like abjuration than enchantment, but if it is enchantment then yes, it should have the mind-affecting descriptor.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 129 - Symbol of exsanguination spell

Because this spell says it functions like symbol of death, it's possible it was meant to inherit its status as a spell that can be made permanent with a permanency spell, but it's not explicitly stated. If it can, it's uncertain what the minimum caster level and gp cost would be, but based on other spells at this spell level, it'd probably be CL 10th or 11th, with a gp cost of at least 7,500 gp.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 123 - Night terrors and pessimism spells

Seems strange that 2 spells that don't show up on the spell list of any divine spellcasting class would list a divine focus as part of their components. Possibly this could have been intentional for the random archetype that allows a divine caster to add spells to their spell lists.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 111 - Compelling rant spell

All enchantment spells are mind-affecting. This spell should have the mind-affecting descriptor.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 49 - Void domain and Isolation subdomain

Right before the mention of the Void domain on this page, the paragraph under "New Domain" says who has access to it. It mentions a few Outer Gods and Great Old Ones, then says "as well as various daemon harbingers."

According to Inner Sea Gods, the only daemon harbinger with the Void domain is Uaransaph. Likewise, the Isolation subdomain on this same page says "daemon harbingers with the Void domain" have access to it. While this is in fact true for Uaransaph, two other harbingers have the Isolation subdomain without the Void domain (that happens sometimes) - Mneoc and Roqorolos.

Grand Lodge

Pgs. 46 & 47 - Fight response rage power

The last sentence says that skalds can't grant this rage power to allies with raging song, but this appears to be an unnecessary thing to mention. Per the rules of a skald's rage power selection, he wouldn't even be able to take this rage power since it's one that's activated by spending rounds of rage.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 119 - Relic hunter inquisitor archetype

This archetype replaces the judgment ability, but doesn't replace the 17th-level ability slayer, which requires judgment to function properly.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 133 - Table 3-2: Monstrous Cohorts

This table lists every monstrous cohort that ever appeared in a Bestiary, and then some. There is one not listed though. The following should be added to this list:

Monster: Liminal sprite
Source: B5
Cohort Level: 6th

Grand Lodge

Pg. 248 - Mask of stolen mien

Change the slot on this item from "face" to "head".

Grand Lodge

Pg. 247 - Glittering trinket

In this item's description, second sentence, change "a belt buckle (taking the waist slot)" to "a belt buckle (taking up the belt slot)".

Grand Lodge

Pg. 243 - Table 6-8: Wondrous Items

The glittering trinket and quick-change mask are in the least minor wondrous items list. In Ultimate Equipment, however, this category of wondrous item was reserved for slotless wondrous items that were under 1,000 gp, because there were enough of them. These two magic items aren't slotless, and would therefore fall into the lesser minor wondrous item category.

Grand Lodge

Pgs. 233 & 234 - Quick-change outfit, subversive vest, subversive vestment, and vigilante's kit

These 4 items should have a special footnote on Table 6-2: Adventuring Gear describing how their weight changes for Small characters, as is the norm with similar items.

For the quick-change outfit, subversive vest, and subversive vestment, as is typical with articles of clothing, they should weigh a quarter of the Medium-sized weight when made for Small characters.

For the vigilante's kit, as is the norm for all other class-item kits, it should note it weighs three-quarters of the Medium-sized weight when made for Small characters.

Grand Lodge

Old as time, but just noticed chakram was added to heavy blades, so it's on both the heavy and light blades list. seems weird.

Edit: Also repeating hand crossbow listed twice.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 226 - They know spell

Add "mind-affecting" to the list of descriptors. All enchantment spells require the mind-affecting descriptor.

Grand Lodge

Pgs. 206 & 207 - Conditional favor spell

This spell is missing its range line. Judging by the description, it should probably be "Range see text".

Grand Lodge

Strife2002 wrote:

Pg. 204 - Auditory hallucination and audiovisual hallucination spells

Because these spells are on the bard/skald list, the components line should include that bards and skalds have an added verbal component to them, since all bard spells do/are required to.

Same goes for complex hallucination on page 206 and scripted hallucination on page 224.

EDIT:
Here are all the other spells in this chapter that are bard/skald spells that technically would require a verbal component for them to cast:

Conjuration foil - pg. 207
Disrupt silence - pg. 212
Fabricate disguise - pg. 214
Matchmaker - pg. 220
Obscure poison - pg. 220
Quieting weapons - pg. 223

Grand Lodge

Pg. 204 - Auditory hallucination and audiovisual hallucination spells

Because these spells are on the bard/skald list, the components line should include that bards and skalds have an added verbal component to them, since all bard spells do/are required to.

Grand Lodge

Melkiador wrote:
Strife2002 wrote:
Just came across this and yeah, it's an issue. The only non-combat teamwork feat I was able to find was Collective Recollection.
Stealth Synergy is pretty cool. Maybe you want your staff to move quietly about the manor while cleaning it.

Kek. Actually found another - Ensemble would work I guess.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 41 - Dandy archetype

This archetype replaces the favored enemy ability, but the 20th-level ability master hunter remains despite relying on favored enemy to function properly. As such all it really does now is allow using Survival at full speed.

Grand Lodge

Berselius wrote:
The Intrigue Oracle Mystery needs to have the Perform Skill in it's list of Class Skills.

Why?

I don't mean to be rude I'm genuinely asking. I can't find any revelation that would require Perform be used.

Grand Lodge

Yondu Volche wrote:

As i see Teisatsu Vigilante can bring unchained monk Ki power,

In Unchained monk i found Qinggong Power (Su).
So can a Teisatsu Vigilante get Qinggong Power (Su) like Scorching ray?

This belongs in a separate thread, specifically in the Player Companion forums under an errata thread for the Spymaster's Handbook. In any case, I don't see why it couldn't get one of these. Nothing indicates they shouldn't receive a spell-like ability if a qinggong monk power grants it.

Grand Lodge

Taskmaster78 wrote:

From Page 35: Majordomo Archetype: Delegate

Ultimate intrigue wrote:

In order to perform all the necessary tasks of her household, a majordomo quickly learns how to delegate. At 1st level and every 3 investigator levels thereafter, a majordomo gains a bonus teamwork feat. As a standard action, she can grant all allies within 30 feet who can see or hear her one of these teamwork feats (even if they don't meet the prerequisites) for a number of rounds equal to 3 + her investigator level. She can use this ability once per day at 1st level, plus an additional time at 4th level and every 3 levels thereafter.

At 4th level, a majordomo can use her delegate ability and designate a single noncombat task that could make use of the teamwork feat (for instance, designating the Cooperative Crafting feat and a session of crafting).

Cooperative Crafting is not a Teamwork Feat. Looking over the Teamwork feats, most of them were meant for combat. So for clarity:

Can the staff provide an actual example of a Teamwork Feat that is used to complete a single noncombat task?

Will the staff release noncombat Teamwork Feats that will make this archetype more viable?

Or was the ability meant to be understood as something else altogether?

As an example, "this ability uses noncombat feats, like Cooperative Crafting, to complete noncombat activities as if they were teamwork feats to allies."

Just came across this and yeah, it's an issue. The only non-combat teamwork feat I was able to find was Collective Recollection.

Grand Lodge

Squiggit wrote:

Might be intended, but Arcane Striker doesn't include Corrosive or Corrosive Burst.

Seems like an oversight because Mystic Bolts can deal acid damage and get the elemental damage enhancements for every other damage type they can have.

This is made even further confusing when you look at the elemental armor talent right after it, and it ALSO leaves off acid from its list of options.

It makes me wonder if "acid" should have actually been left off of the original mystic bolts ability.

Grand Lodge

FWCain wrote:

(I originally posted this message in a separate thread -- https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42l2e?extra-Granary-in-same-Settlement-UltCamp -- before I discovered this dedicated thread.)

In Ultimate Campaign's rules on building a settlement, the Granary's entry mentions that you can store surplus food (i.e. excess reduction of Consumption) for use in later turns, up to a max. of five BP saved.

Is that max. PER GRANARY? Or is it PER SETTLEMENT?

The precise wording is ambiguous -- it could be interpreted either way, as I see it. I would presume this is per Granary (as this makes the most sense, from a logical, thematic, and in-character point-of-view), but I wanted to ask, to get a second opinion...

Thanks!
Franklin

Truthfully I haven't used the settlement building rules yet in a game so I'm not 100% confident in my understanding of them, but my guess would be per granary as you mentioned, as it makes the most sense.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 98 - Cruoromancer archetype; perfect infusion ability

In the last sentence of the perfect infusion ability, change "20th-level wizard bonus spell" to "20th-level wizard bonus feat". There is nothing gained at 20th-level that could be described as a "bonus spell".

Grand Lodge

Pg. 67 - Battle companion ability from Plant blessing

Just like the Animal blessing above, animals stop showing up on the summon nature's ally lists after summon nature's ally VII, effectively "capping" this ability at 16th level (2 levels after Animal blessing since this list starts at summon nature's ally IV instead of V).

Grand Lodge

Pg. 66 - Battle companion ability from Good blessing

Not as bad as the issue with the Animal blessing listed above, but it's worth mentioning that, assuming the warpriest's restrictions on casting spells of opposing alignments to their deity applies to blessing abilities, any warpriest of a good deity with this blessing will have a "dead level" at 18th level in regards to this ability, as no animal or good outsider is on the summon monster VIII list. All will be well again once they hit 20th level, however.

EDIT: one ray of hope, however, is if your GM allows alternate summon lists introduced in other books. Assuming that GM is also kind enough to ignore the specific word "animal" in this ability's description and replace it with "any creature marked with an asterisk" (in other words, those creatures you apply the celestial, entropic, fiendish, or resolute templates to), then a celestial young cloud giant would be available.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 63 - Battle companion ability from Animal blessing

Animals stop being available after summon nature's ally VII, and since you can only summon one animal with this ability (and not multiple animals when summoning creatures from a lower-level list as per the spell), this ability is basically "capped" once you reach 14th level.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 65 - Acid strike ability from Earth blessing

In the last sentence of the acid strike ability for the Earth blessing, it should mention its additional damage also doesn't stack with the corrosive burst weapon special ability, like Fire, Water, and Weather blessings mention for their associated "strike" abilities.

Note that the Earth Blessing is missing its header (it blends into the very end of the Destruction blessing), as has already been mentioned in this thread.

Grand Lodge

I'm inclined to agree. The only thing left that has me perplexed is frightful presence. On paper it looks like it should stay based on the fact that it's an extraordinary ability and "improves a melee attack", but I'm not sure if logically it should. I saw in one published adventure (which one escapes me) where an owlbear skeleton lost its grab ability attached to its claws, and I thought surely that should mean frightful presence gets the axe, but losing grab may have been an error on the writer's part.

Grand Lodge

(TL;DR tag at the end - seriously, sorry. Didn't meant for this to end up so long)

Didn't realize this was even an issue until one of my players absconded with a recently slain juvenile red dragon corpse and cast animate dead on it and I discovered while writing up its stats the debate that's been going on for years on these forums about what exactly a dragon skeleton actually gets to keep from its original form (and KUDOS to Paizo for never weighing in on a single forum topic despite repeated FAQ requests). Specifically, here's the choice parts:

FROM THE SKELETON TEMPLATE
1) Type: Retains subtype other than alignment subtypes and subtypes related to the original creature (in the case of a humanoid). Also, text says "Uses all the base creature's statistics and special abilities except as noted here."
2) Defensive Abilities: Loses base creature's defensive abilities and gains DR 5/bludgeoning and immunity to cold, as well as undead traits.
>>>> Ok so already we have a weird situation where a skeleton red dragon keeps the fire subtype, but LOSES immunity to fire and weakness to cold. Whatever, that's not the worst thing ever.
3) Special Attacks: A skeleton retains none of the base creature's special attacks.
>>>> Great, so no breath weapon. I have to assume that's the only thing lost by this point, since nothing else is listed on the "special attacks" line for the juvenile red dragon.
4) Special Qualities: Skeleton loses most special qualities of the base creature. It retains any extraordinary special qualities that can improve its melee or ranged attacks.
>>>> Here's where things get crazy. Pathfinder doesn't have anything defined regarding what the difference between Special Attacks and Special Qualities are, and if they include things that aren't listed in the SQ line in a creature's stat block (like low-light vision and in the case of this example, frightful presence). On paper, frightful presence seems like it should stick with the skeleton - it's an extraordinary ability and it specifically "improves melee attacks" since its activated during a melee attack and therefore makes that melee attack a more dangerous thing. Saying it out loud, however, with everything else a skeleton loses, it feels like frightful presence SHOULD go away.

Lost in all this is what exactly happens to spells and spell-like abilities. There doesn't seem to be a general consensus on what happens to a creature's spell-like abilities when it becomes a skeleton. Are spells and spell-like abilities special attacks? No not really, they're not listed in the special attacks line and not all spells are meant for combat. Are they a special ability? That depends on the creature, but some creatures list their spellcasting abilities IN their special abilities section, while others don't. The Juvenile red dragon, for instance, does list its spell-like abilities in its special abilities section, but not its spells (that's covered in the general dragon write-up). Are they special qualities? Nope, they're never listed in the SQ line of a stat block. The best we have so far to an official ruling on this are the random stat blocks that have appeared in various adventures Paizo has published where a SLA-having creature was skeletonized. A derro skeleton from Ironfang Invasion lost its SLAs. Another adventure has a skeleton cloud giant and it also lost its SLAs.

Spells are a different story, however. Dragons cast like they're sorcerers, so they cast with Charisma (and therefore don't lose spellcasting by virtue of becoming mindless). Charisma drops to 10 for a skeleton, so in theory if a red dragon kept its spellcasting it could only cast cantrips. A bloody skeleton, however, gets a Charisma of 14, so it would in theory keep its spellcasting prowess. Is all this a moot point, however, and spellcasting is lost also the way SLAs were in those 2 creature examples from published sources?

The Juvenile red dragon lists the following in its "Special Abilities" column of the table on page 98 of the Bestiary by the time it's a juvenile:
- Fire subtype (listing it here as a special ability implies IT WOULD BE LOST! *facepalm*)
- Smoke vision (presumably lost)
- Detect magic (SLA, so presumably lost)
- Frightful presence (unknown if lost)
- Pyrotechnics (SLA, so presumably lost)
- Not listed or listed in the general dragon write up beforehand: dragon senses.

TL;DR If you apply the bloody skeleton template to a juvenile red dragon, what of its original abilities would it actually keep? Specifically, its dragon senses, smoke vision, spell-like abilities, spells, and frightful presence?

Grand Lodge

Joana wrote:
Strife2002 wrote:

While making my own reference documents for each class, realized that despite the years and years of people making threads about it and FAQing the hell out of it, nobody at Paizo has yet to weigh in and finally clarify how in the hell the swashbuckler's 15th-level ability dizzying defense is supposed to work.

In other words I would love a regular day of the week where the editing team gets their own blog post to clarify stuff that maybe hasn't shown up in official errata yet or never will because there won't be reprints.

I don't know if you're aware, but Mark Seifter has been doing something like this, answering some of the P1e FAQs that are never going to be answered otherwise, in an unofficial manner.

Fun Fact, I DIDN'T know about that. checking now.

Grand Lodge

Strife2002 wrote:

Knowing me, just following through with proposed corrections and implementing changes not proposed but which should be obvious, like clerics with the Rune domain getting arcane mark added to their list of orisons so that they can actually use their instant summons domain spell correctly, or allowing gunslingers to apply weapon-specific feats (Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, etc.) to firearm categories (one-handed, two-handed, siege) instead of individual firearms so they don't become "locked" into their starting battered firearm.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and get rid of the Appraise skill, maybe fold it into something else. Make languages harder to learn. PCs end up learning way too many, ESPECIALLY if you're using the background skill system.

EDIT #2: Make is so that friendly harmless spells targeting characters with inherent spell resistance, like high-enough-level monks, automatically get through, assuming the character allows it.

EDIT #3: Clerics with the Weather domain should get Survival as a class skill (it is used to predict the weather, after all).

While making my own reference documents for each class, realized that despite the years and years of people making threads about it and FAQing the hell out of it, nobody at Paizo has yet to weigh in and finally clarify how in the hell the swashbuckler's 15th-level ability dizzying defense is supposed to work.

In other words I would love a regular day of the week where the editing team gets their own blog post to clarify stuff that maybe hasn't shown up in official errata yet or never will because there won't be reprints. We'll call it Fix-it Fridays. It could include notifying everyone that the design team is stewing over something that has been reported as not working right, just so everyone who doesn't fine-tooth-comb through the forums can also be made aware of it if they haven't encountered it yet in their games (obviously a FAQ update would happen eventually, but this would be the "we're working on this and wanted you all to be aware" early warning first).

It could also be for fun stuff though! Like "boy there certainly have been a lot of player companions and campaign settings books that released before we printed Advanced Class Guide! here's all the spells from those books you can add to the bloodrager and shaman spell lists."

Grand Lodge

Pg. 33 - Inevitable eidolons

Inevitable eidolons apparently gain immunity to sleep twice - once at 12th level and then again at 20th level. Not sure which is correct (I'm leaning towards 12th level staying and 20th-level mention being deleted) or if one of those was meant to be something different.

Grand Lodge

Just realized my post above doesn't actually pose a question.

Were those spell-like-ability-granting evolutions from Ultimate Magic meant to be available options for unchained eidolons?

Grand Lodge

(TL;DR summary at the bottom)

Hello! I brought this up in the Pathfinder Unchained errata thread a couple years ago or so, but it didn't get any input from the devs and now it's creeping up in my game.

An azata eidolon gains an energy form it can switch back and forth from at 20th level. The text says that in this form, it becomes incorporeal, doubles its fly speed, but can't make any natural or manufactured weapon attacks. It can, however, activate any spell-like ability evolutions it possesses.

That bold part brings up an issue. None of the evolutions listed in Pathfinder Unchained grant spell-like abilities, and the azata eidolon doesn't gain any automatically, either. Before Pathfinder Unchained, however, there were some evolutions introduced in Ultimate Magic that granted spell-like abilities, specifically basic magic, minor magic, major magic, and ultimate magic. Unfortunately, the unchained summoner's evolutions now have base form and subtype prerequisites, and only the evolutions from Advanced Player's Guide got a reprinting and tweaking for Pathfinder Unchained, leaving out the evolutions from Ultimate Magic and the two from the fetchling section of Advanced Race Guide.

TL;DR summary: the 20th-level azata eidolon ability mentions it can use any spell-like ability evolutions while in its energy form, however none of the spell-like-ability-granting evolutions from Ultimate Magic are apparently eligible to be taken by unchained summoners, as they weren't included in the write-up for it and therefore weren't given base form/subtype prerequisites for the unchained eidolon's new mechanics.

Grand Lodge

Strife2002 wrote:

Pg. 75 - Genie eidolon model

To get a janni eidolon, I'd recommend them taking flight, resistance fire (instead of immunity), and weapon training (martial) (instead of energy attacks). This results in a 21-point cost, like the marid.

Correction it looks like 22 points, like the efreeti and djinni.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 76 - Vermin eidolon model

The vermin eidolon model says to get a Huge vermin or spider its 22 points or 24 points, respectively. This is incorrect as it forgot to include the cost of going Large, first. It should say "26 or 28 points (Huge)", with 26 being the point total for a Huge vermin eidolon and 28 points being the point total for a Huge spider, specifically.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 75 - Genie eidolon model

The genie eidolon model specifically calls out creating a eidolon that looks like a djinni, efreeti, janni, marid, or shaitan. It then gives specific movement, energy attack type, and immunity type evolutions that need to be taken to get the model of each of these - except for janni.

To get a janni eidolon, I'd recommend them taking flight, resistance fire (instead of immunity), and weapon training (martial) (instead of energy attacks). This results in a 21-point cost, like the marid.

Grand Lodge

Strife2002 wrote:

Pg. 72 - Angel eidolon model

The end of the angel eidolon model says "ultimate magic* (cure serious wounds, daylight, or tongues) or dimension door."

Notice the dimension door spell at the end. Should that have been deleted or included as one of the possibilities to be selected with the ultimate magic evolution?

Nevermind, not sure how I missed that dimension door is its own evolution.

Grand Lodge

Pg. 72 - Angel eidolon model

The end of the angel eidolon model says "ultimate magic* (cure serious wounds, daylight, or tongues) or dimension door."

Notice the dimension door spell at the end. Should that have been deleted or included as one of the possibilities to be selected with the ultimate magic evolution?

Grand Lodge

ckdragons wrote:
Strife2002 wrote:

As for CMB, from what I can tell you're correct and it should be "+27", however mentioning haste is unnecessary since that spell doesn't affect CMB at all. Adding that to the master doc.

You're also right about CMD, and in that case mentioning haste as a possible reason it was listed incorrectly is valid. Adding to the master doc.

I believe you are incorrect about haste not adding to CMB. Page 199 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook says, "When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects."

Doh, not sure how I forgot about that (or missed it when I literally looked up CMB rules to make sure I was right). In any case, both listed CMB and CMD values are incorrect and should be changed as he mentioned. Once the potion of haste is quaffed, then the listed values in the book are correct.

Grand Lodge

Adjoint wrote:

Pg. 349

Viorian Dekanti's stats

Chellan attacks should start from +38 attack bonus (18 BAB + 9 Strength + 5 enhancement + 4 weapon training + 2 feats)

CMB should be +27 (18 BAB + 9 Strength); haste bonus shouldn't be yet included

CMD should be 43 (10 + 18 BAB + 9 Strength + 3 Dex + 3 Sihedron ring); haste bonus shouldn't be yet included

Attack roll looks correct as written. Don't forget to factor in two-weapon fighting penalties for her off-hand weapon being a +5 heavy steel shield (-4 penalty; the attack roll penalty isn't applied to the shield thanks to the Shield Master feat [we corrected that in an earlier post and the shield's attack bonus should be "+35"]).

As for CMB, from what I can tell you're correct and it should be "+27", however mentioning haste is unnecessary since that spell doesn't affect CMB at all. Adding that to the master doc.

You're also right about CMD, and in that case mentioning haste as a possible reason it was listed incorrectly is valid. Adding to the master doc.

Edit: I think I might know why this happened. Look at her +1 composite longbow in her gear. It has a +10 Str rating, so maybe at one point her Str was 30. What's bizarre though is that if you reverse-engineer her ranged attack bonus, that -2 penalty for the Str rating being too high is actually calculated in as if it was done on purpose. Essentially she has a ranged weapon that is literally giving her a penalty to attack with no further bonus other than what it should be granting, seemingly for no reason.

Grand Lodge

Looks like I missed it on Archives of Nethys the first time I looked, but it's a ranger 2 spell there, so I'll believe what the card says.

Grand Lodge

Thanks! For some reason I just completely missed it on AoN.

Grand Lodge

I put this in the accessories forum but maybe it belongs here:

Not sure if this is the right spot for it, but the condition cards come with a new spell, soothing word. My copy of the cards lists it as a ranger 2 spell (among other classes), however d20PFSRD's website lists it as a ranger 3 spell.

Normally I'd chalk it up to a mistake on d20pfsrd's part since they're not official, but I know the condition cards have gone through a few reprints where there were some mistakes, then the mistakes were corrected, then the mistakes were added back in on accident for the latest printing.

For everyone's info, my cards came with the box that say "PATHFINDER CARDS" on them rather than "GAMEMASTERY", and the errors on the Confused and Fatigued cards are still there, so it looks to be the latest printing (where the box was changed but the errors that were removed from previous printings snuck back in).

1 to 50 of 2,498 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>