I found some errors on my first read-through.
---On the Orange Dragon, the Challenge Rating line says "See table" and the Advancement line lists the Challenge Rating. And it's missing the CR of an Adult orange dragon.
---The Bodak and Ghastly templates are missing Challenge Rating lines and modifiers.
---The Orange, Purple, and Yellow Dragons are missing spellcasting entries about them being able to choose Cleric spells as arcane spells, and what cleric domains they have access to for the purpose of choosing spells. They're also missing additional class skills beyond the normal class skills of dragons, as they are listed in the Monster Manual. Unless, of course, none of the 3 dragons truly don't have original class skills beyond their norm.
---The Purple dragon is described as being supremely intelligent and powerfully charismatic. It's Charisma progression looks right, but it's Intelligence progression seems low compared to the descriptive text. Gold, silver, and a few other dragons match or have higher intelligence still. Unless, the descriptive text was just for pure flavor?
That's all I could find, for now that is.
Ummm....any writer of the Compendium planning to share the fixes to what I stated above? Or will there be an errata soon?
Contributor
|
Ummm....any writer of the Compendium planning to share the fixes to what I stated above? Or will there be an errata soon?
Well, since there are technically more than 50 writers for the compendium, how about if one of the editors responds? ;)
We're monitoring this thread and watching to see how many more little slips pop up. There will most likely be errata posted at some point (either here or elsewhere).
We will, of course, let you know. :)
Also, on the fumble table, the second and third entries are identical.
They sholud hire more proofreaders and less playtesters.
Oh, the irony... anyway...
I'd rather have balanced game mechanics than perfect editing it's not hard to fill in the gaps with minor errors that can be fixed with errata or even just taken as is. If you consider the repeated entries deliberate, the table still works.
Do people actually hire playtesters? Vic, are there any openings?
GGG
They sholud hire more proofreaders and less playtesters.
Playtesters? Honestly, people, how lucrative do you think the gaming business is? : P
-James
I can't think of any company that pays playtesters. But hey, if you find out about one, G-cubed, let us know! ;D
You guys don't need to pay me; I'll playtest for free! :D
Do people actually hire playtesters? Vic, are there any openings?I can't think of any company that pays playtesters. But hey, if you find out about one, G-cubed, let us know! ;D
There's always working for product.
;)
G-to-the-Three
|
|
Scalding Faith of the Sun feat seems to be written as per it's original 3.0 format. It states that normally paladins turn undead as clerics two levels lower than their paladin level. The normal rule in 3.5 is three level lower not two i.e in 3.0 Pal3 -2 means turns as Clr1, in 3.5 Pal4 -3 is Clr1. I assume the intent is still to allow the Pal4 (or Pal6 assume straight class a feat at 6th lvl) to turn as a Clr of their Pal lvl?
Also, although it would make my fiance's day, I'm fairly sure the Force Missile Mage shouldn't get d8 hit die.
I'm guessing, anyway.
By the way, for fear of letting this thread get too negative, let me just chime in with the fact that, despite these errors, I've found this book to be more than worth the cost, and I'm eagerly awaiting an announcement of Volume 2. :)
I'll ditto that. I figure listing errata will make it quicker for the compilation thereof, and perhaps any reprints can be corrected?
was the battle dancer supposed to have a "performance" ability like that of bards and jesters?
Maybe I overlooked this, but my question is in regards to the Death Master. I didn't see anything conclusive regarding how the class receives its spells. Does a Death Master get 2 spells for free at each level and then has to purchase the rest like a wizard does? Or does he just have access to all of them (but does have to pay the cost to scribe them in his book) like a cleric does? Any insight on this would be appreciated.
Maybe I overlooked this, but my question is in regards to the Death Master ... Any insight on this would be appreciated.
While I have no answer to offer Ledax, I do have a similar question. Yesterday I added a post to the Great Stuff thread concerning the CL of the Savant. You can read my question in detail here. I also appreciate any insight — a definitive answer is prefereable, but opinions from the esteemed membership of these boards will do. ;-)
Per the request from Mike McArtor, I am re-submitting this post from the "Great Stuff" thread. This is the original post by Tramarius:
I too am impressed with the Savant. I even slapped together a Wizard 7 / Cleric 7 / Rogue 6 just to compare the power levels. Pretty impressive.
Maybe I'm just dense, but something's bugging me: what's the Savant's caster level? Say, for example, I have a 14-level Savant. Is he CL 14 for both his arcane and divine spells, or is he CL 10 for arcane and CL 5 for divine?
I'm anal and like it when details like this are nailed down explicitly. Since the description is silent on this matter I get the impression he'd be CL 14, but for a guy who's just "tinkering" with magic via compiling notes and guess-and-test experimentation (as I envision it) to suddenly gain CL 5 to cast his first ever arcane spell and then suddenly gain CL 10 to do the same with divine magic seems to (IMO) stretch even fantasy credibility.
My major concern is when, if ever does he meet the prerequisites for the item creation feats. Can he start forging rings right away at 12th? Just curious.
And this is the reponse that I posted on that thread:
I'm not seeing anything about CL for the Savant. If you look at the other classes that get spell casting as secondary abilities, such as the Ranger and Paladin, their CL is 1/2 of their class level. This wouldn't work for the Savant due to being both an Arcane and Divine caster at different levels. Without having any sort of official word, I would go with the Arcane CL being Savant level -4 and Divine CL being Savant level -9. So to go with your example of a 14th level Savant, the Arcane CL would be 10 and the Divine CL would be 5.
As far as item creation feats, this would put it kinda far off. You wouldn't be able to get Forge Ring until you were a 16th level Savant. To me, this makes sense. As a Savant, you are a "jack-of-all-trades" so item creation feats would be further out of your reach as compared to a normal spell caster.
I hope this helps you out. Wish I could have something more official instead of just my opinion on it.
Per the request from Mike McArtor, I am re-submitting this post from the "Great Stuff" thread....
Looks like you just squeaked this in ahead of me, Ledax. Thanks. :-D
And thanks for looking into this Mike. My opinion on this matter is identical to Ledax's. I very much look forward to your official word on it.
Will corrections be made in a future printing of the book or will there be at least an official errata we can download and print off once all the bugs are found?
Tibbit Racial Trait error
• Darkvision: Tibbits can see in the dark up to 60 feet. Darkvision is black and white only, but it is otherwise like normal sight, and lupins can function just fine with no light at all.
Thanks for bringing it to our attention without being harsh. :)
No problem at all. I totally understand that sometimes things are missed and/or left out on projects like this. It was definitely a big undertaking to complete this project and I truly appreciate you guys compiling this compendium for those of us that love this game. Just don't forget about my question on the Death Master. : )
And you're welcome Tramarius.
In regard to the Savant and other spellcasters in the DRAGON Compenium, I was wondering if blurbs might be included in the (hopefully) forthcoming erratum about the criteria used to define their spell lists so we can more easily add spells from other sourcebooks. This idea was prompted by Wizards' new Spell Compendium (look here). I've quoted an example below:
Fatemaker (Planar Handbook): The fatemaker's spell list is intentionally narrow. Carefully consider the consequences of expanding the list. If you choose to expand the spell list, the spells you add should focus on personal empowerment as opposed to defense or smiting foes from afar.
In the mountebank class, the table lists an ability called "Sudden Strike" at 15th level, but this is not mentioned in the text.
I also had a question about the Mountebank, other than the sudden strike thing. I'm currently playing one right now and really enjoy the class, but I have some issue with the class's hit die. The class has a sneak attack style ability that is much less powerful than the rogue's, in addition to two less skill points than the rogue, but shares the same hit die. I understand the class gets other abilities, but a d6 HD seems a bit weak to me. I feel that the HD needs to be a d8 considering that the cleric has a d8 HD and is fully capable of casting spells, while the mountebank has access to a small number of spell-like abilities. I could be wrong in this, but I would appreciate it if the editors would look it over.
I'm really enjoying the Compendium and appreciate the editors taking the time to attend to this forum.
Thanks!
|
I don't really get how the battle dancer's Dance of Death's Embrace works. The dance itself is a full-round action, and then the battle dancer does +2d6 damage on each attack against the designated opponent, plus auto-confirmed criticals. Does this effect apply for a certain number of rounds after performing the dance, or does the full-round action of the dance include an attack of some kind?
Also, are you guys planning to put up a Web Enhancement? An epic progression with a few epic feats for the new classes would be much obliged. :)
The Lupin Race is missing it's level adjustment.
the Force Missile Mage has D8 hit dice in the compendium, but only D4 in the original article - i assume this is an error.... as did others here i see. when will the official answer be known?
|
|
A few random items:
pp. 55-56: Fire gen should have 1d8 HD, water gen should have 1d8+2 HD.
p. 82: Kong soo treats the monk's hands as a Large weapon for disarming. Shouldn't it be +1 size category, similar to lung soo?
p. 203: I think this was already mentioned, but ghastly creatures should have a CR of "Same as base creature +2".
p. 231: Middle of 2nd column, in "Analysis" paragraph, "10" should be ".10".
My guess is that at one time, the battle dancer had a class feature called "battle dancer's performance", which included all of the other "dance of..." abilities as it went up in level. Later, they probably decided to just break them up into their component abilities.
I could be completely wrong, but it seems logical. :)
|
Contributor
|
My guess is that at one time, the battle dancer had a class feature called "battle dancer's performance", which included all of the other "dance of..." abilities as it went up in level. Later, they probably decided to just break them up into their component abilities.
I could be completely wrong, but it seems logical. :)
You're right. Oops. ^_^
Are you hinting at a second, revised printing? If so, glad to hear that sales have warranted another print run. Great work team Paizo!
This might not be a miss, but why does the Lupin have Darkvision 60 ft. I would guess that a race living not underground would at most have low-light vision if even that.
|
Contributor
|
I found some errors on my first read-through.
Razz, some of these things will be addressed shortly. Others I'll address right now. :) Thanks for starting this thread, btw.
---The Orange, Purple, and Yellow Dragons are missing spellcasting entries about them being able to choose Cleric spells as arcane spells, and what cleric domains they have access to for the purpose of choosing spells. They're also missing additional class skills beyond the normal class skills of dragons, as they are listed in the Monster Manual. Unless, of course, none of the 3 dragons truly don't have original class skills beyond their norm.
The lack of skills might be an error. I'll check into that. The lack of domains is not an error. Chromatic dragons lack cleric domain spells more often than they receive them.
---The Purple dragon is described as being supremely intelligent and powerfully charismatic. It's Charisma progression looks right, but it's Intelligence progression seems low compared to the descriptive text. Gold, silver, and a few other dragons match or have higher intelligence still. Unless, the descriptive text was just for pure flavor?
Heh. Well... uh... they're smart compared to humans. ;D
|
Contributor
|
I don't think it's just the FMM. Is the osteomancer supposed to have d8 HP? (I'm not certain this is a mistake, as I am with the missile mage; just wondering.)
Actually, the osteomancer is supposed to have a d8 HD. The FMM, of course, is supposed to have a d4.
Thanks for pointing out the blessed of Gruumsh and battle dancer errors. :)
|
Contributor
|
What's the Savant's caster level? Say, for example, I have a 14-level Savant. Is he CL 14 for both his arcane and divine spells, or is he CL 10 for arcane and CL 5 for divine?
Even though it's not the perfect solution, I think the correct solution (especially for the sake of ease of play) is to make the CL 1/2 the savant level. Although the savant begins casting arcane and divine spells at different levels, the levels at which gains the ability to cast spells of a higher level are not too far off. He begins casting 1st level divine spells 5 levels after he begins casting arcane spells, assuming he has at least a 12 Intelligence. He gains 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-level spells only 3 levels apart. While he never really catches up with divine spells, he caps at 4th level spells in both types of magic, so at 20th level he casts 4th level arcane spells and 4th level divine spells. With a CL = 1/2 savant level he casts those spells as a 10th-level caster.
So unless I hear a very compelling argument against it, I think that our future errata will say CL = 1/2 savant level. It's easy to remember and easy to use. And sometimes that's just the best way to go. :)
So unless I hear a very compelling argument against it, I think that our future errata will say CL = 1/2 savant level. It's easy to remember and easy to use. And sometimes that's just the best way to go. :)
I totally agree with the ease of play concept. There is one thing that I'd like to throw out there about this issue. It doesn't seem right that when a Savant is first able to cast Cure Light Wounds, he's doing 1d8+5 due to his caster level being 5 while a Cleric isn't that powerful until he's been casting that same spell for 5 levels. The same would be true with a fireball or magic missle. As soon as he's able to cast it, he's doing it as good as a wizard who's been casting it the same spell for many levels. I apologize if any of my numbers are off, I don't have my book in front of me. I can definitely see doing it either way, I'm not trying to say that you're wrong, I just wanted to toss out another viewpoint on it.
Since you've gone through and addressed some of the issue posted Mike, like the Savant question from Tramarius, is there any word on my question regarding the Death Master? Here's is what my post had stated:
Maybe I overlooked this, but my question is in regards to the Death Master. I didn't see anything conclusive regarding how the class receives its spells. Does a Death Master get 2 spells for free at each level and then has to purchase the rest like a wizard does? Or does he just have access to all of them (but does have to pay the cost to scribe them in his book) like a cleric does? Any insight on this would be appreciated.
|
Contributor
|
I totally agree with the ease of play concept. There is one thing that I'd like to throw out there about this issue. It doesn't seem right that when a Savant is first able to cast Cure Light Wounds, he's doing 1d8+5 due to his caster level being 5 while a Cleric isn't that powerful until he's been casting that same spell for 5 levels. The same would be true with a fireball or magic missle. As soon as he's able to cast it, he's doing it as good as a wizard who's been casting it the same spell for many levels. I apologize if any of my numbers are off, I don't have my book in front of me. I can definitely see doing it either way, I'm not trying to say that you're wrong, I just wanted to toss out another viewpoint on it.
I agree that such a thing can cause consternation. Like I hope I mentioned, it's not the perfect solution. Like the ranger and paladin casting their spells beginning at CL 2nd, it's just a part of the savant class. Because of the wide range of abilities available to the savant it's easy to think of him as someone who has multiclassed several times. A 10th level savant, however, has been with the same class for 10 levels and should be rewarded for that singularity of purpose. He should cast his spells at a higher level than a fighter 3/rogue 3/wizard 3/cleric 1, even if he has roughly the same spellcasting flexibility as that multiclassed character.