Oni (Ogre Mage)
Speed 40 ft., fly 60 ft. (good)But it has Armour (Chainshirt) and no reduced speed add on.
A chainshirt is light and doesn't reduce speed though.
Elasmosauras Companion Stats are listed at the end of Deionychus instead of after Elasmosaurus itself.
Dolphin Stats are in wrong order:
Under "Dolphin", it proceeds to list Orca Stats & Companion Stats, THEN Dolphin Stats & Companion Stats, and at the end we see the "Dolphin, Orca/ The sleek black whale...".
Electric Eel/Giant Moray Eel seem to be similarly mis-ordered:
After the heading "Electric Eel", the Giant Moray Stats are given, with Electric Eel stats at the end, leaving the "Giant Moray Eel" heading hanging at the end.
Shark Stats are misplaced to the Shambling Mound section, preceding Shambling Mound Stats
The Shark entry reads "Shark" <no stats> "Shark, Dire" <stats>
All the Animal Companion Stats listed in the Core Rules (Wolf, Deionychus, Big/Small Cat, etc) should probably be added to their appropriate Creatures: Currently, those Animals don't list any Companion Stats.
It would be EXTREMELY useful to have a page directly listing Animal Companion Stats, either replicated or directly linking to their location.
Creative Director
|
Elasmosauras Companion Stats are listed at the end of Deionychus instead of after Elasmosaurus itself.
That's not an error, really. That's because of the way that the page was laid out, there was no room to put the elasmosaurus stats under its stat block, but there WAS under the deinonychus. I won't bore you with the boring and complex reasons why we couldn't place the deinonychus art in another place in order to make room. Alas, when the words were exported into the PRD, they look a lot more confusing and out of order.
All the Animal Companion Stats listed in the Core Rules (Wolf, Deionychus, Big/Small Cat, etc) should probably be added to their appropriate Creatures: Currently, those Animals don't list any Companion Stats.
An interesting idea. There's no room to do so in the Bestiary itself, but it could be an interesting thing to add to the PRD entries.
|
Creative Director
|
In any case, I'd like to keep the error reports here limited to actual errors in the print copy of the book or the PDF. Errors in the PRD online at paizo.com should be reported in their own thread (a thread that I'm pretty sure no one's started up yet); reporting PRD errors in this thread only confuses us.
One minor gripe is that Plant Shape III lists regeneration 5 as one of the abilities granted, yet there are no plant creatures with regeneration in either the bestiary or bonus bestiary.
Considering that the primary benefit for wild shape in general are the various abilities of the creatures the wild shaped player can use, especially for druids that aren't front-line fighters, it would seem that you would include at least one creature in the core bestiary if it's provided in the core rulebook.
On the other hand, we really don't need to be handing out Regeneration as a class ability. It's one of the strongest abilities in the game.
But... isn't it the editor's job to catch OTHER people's mistakes? Letting an editor's brain turn into mush sounds like a quick way to lose quality.Yup.
Someone page Aberzombie. I'm sure he could round up some succulent nourishing brains for Mr. Jacobs to snack on that would get him feeling nice and energenic again ...well, maybe in that 28 Days kind of energenic, but he wouldn't need sleep anymore. You'd probably have to keep him chained up with the Cave Raptors.
|
In any case, I'd like to keep the error reports here limited to actual errors in the print copy of the book or the PDF. Errors in the PRD online at paizo.com should be reported in their own thread (a thread that I'm pretty sure no one's started up yet); reporting PRD errors in this thread only confuses us.
Good idea because I'm seeing problems with that site as well. Namely the half-celestial.
|
Creative Director
|
One minor gripe is that Plant Shape III lists regeneration 5 as one of the abilities granted, yet there are no plant creatures with regeneration in either the bestiary or bonus bestiary.
Not yet. Some day there will be. (and I'm not sure that "regeneration 5" is REALLY meant to be in there with plant shape III cause it IS a pretty bad-ass powerful ability...)
Shouldn't Bugbears have stat modifiers?
They are supposedly the largest of the goblinoid races, yet the average hobgoblin is about as strong. And the 1/3 CR orc are physically stronger, though smaller.
Shouldn't Bugbears have stat modifiers?
They are supposedly the largest of the goblinoid races, yet the average hobgoblin is about as strong. And the 1/3 CR orc are physically stronger, though smaller.
Only races that didn't get racial hit dice got character blocks.
In any case, I'd like to keep the error reports here limited to actual errors in the print copy of the book or the PDF. Errors in the PRD online at paizo.com should be reported in their own thread (a thread that I'm pretty sure no one's started up yet); reporting PRD errors in this thread only confuses us.
The PRD errata thread I try to redirect people toward is here.
|
Creative Director
|
Shouldn't Bugbears have stat modifiers?
They are supposedly the largest of the goblinoid races, yet the average hobgoblin is about as strong. And the 1/3 CR orc are physically stronger, though smaller.
Bugbears are large, but their thing is stealth, not strength. They're strong, but that's not what they rely on to murder folks.
In any event, they DO have stat modifiers. All monsters do. As a general rule, monsters are built assuming scores of 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, arranged however among their scores; their modifiers change these rolls into the actual stats they're printed with on the page (we just don't bother listing these modifiers).
Shouldn't Bugbears have stat modifiers?
They are supposedly the largest of the goblinoid races, yet the average hobgoblin is about as strong. And the 1/3 CR orc are physically stronger, though smaller.
Bugbears are large, but their thing is stealth, not strength. They're strong, but that's not what they rely on to murder folks.
In any event, they DO have stat modifiers. All monsters do. As a general rule, monsters are built assuming scores of 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, arranged however among their scores; their modifiers change these rolls into the actual stats they're printed with on the page (we just don't bother listing these modifiers).
Yep,
Bugbear stat mods are :Str +6, Dex +2, Con +2, Cha -2
However...
They aren't large, just medium.
I disagree that Bugbears rely on stealth, with their strength, they may prefer stealth, but with just a +4 bonus to stealth, it's their str that makes them dangerous. If they had +4 Dex and +4 Str, I'd agree, but with that Str score, and only a +4 bonus to stealth... while culturally they prefer stealth (cowardice as a racial attribute?), they aren't really set up for it. Goblins are actually better at stealth, and they use it more (because they can't muscle through if they fail).
Just my $0.02 worth, but I've never been in a game or run where where the Goblins weren't much more effective in stealth than the Bugbears.
|
Creative Director
|
I disagree that Bugbears rely on stealth, with their strength, they may prefer stealth, but with just a +4 bonus to stealth, it's their str that makes them dangerous. If they had +4 Dex and +4 Str, I'd agree, but with that Str score, and only a +4 bonus to stealth... while culturally they prefer stealth (cowardice as a racial attribute?), they aren't really set up for it. Goblins are actually better at stealth, and they use it more (because they can't muscle through if they fail).
Just my $0.02 worth, but I've never been in a game or run where where the Goblins weren't much more effective in stealth than the Bugbears.
Goblins might be mechanically better at stealth, but emotionally and motivationally they're not. As in... the iconic bugbear is a shadowy boogeyman who steps out of the darkness to shiv you. The iconic goblin is a maniac who runs into your house and kills you with your own dead dog wielded as a torch.
Goblins might be mechanically better at stealth, but emotionally and motivationally they're not. As in... the iconic bugbear is a shadowy boogeyman who steps out of the darkness to shiv you. The iconic goblin is a maniac who runs into your house and kills you with your own dead dog wielded as a torch.
LOL
Speaking of goblins, I love the goblin artwork on/in the bestiary. They remind me of Gremlins from the Gremlins movie. :) Was that intentional?
Most of the races are just awesome...
However...
The troll on the cover... LOL... The only way he can survive is to be the pet of those goblins. That mutated lower jaw of his is a foot longer than his upper jaw, so all those wonderful razor sharp teeth never can meet anything to chew against. :) The one in the book is slightly better, but he'd still have trouble eating.
Goblins remind me of a quote from Minsc in Balder's Gate 2, "None shall see me pass, though my battle cry may give me away."
They are stealthy until they come screaming out of the darkness in a mob of fire and dogslicers.
Remember: a goblin's idea of a good hiding place is inside the stove.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The look of the goblins was designed by Wayne Reynolds—amusing story, that! He had a misshapen spherical sponge in his hand in the shower and as he squeezed it, it folded in the middle and made a shape kind of like what you see now as a goblin's head—an egg-shaped head with a wide mouth down the middle.
There's more than a passing resemblance in them to Stitch as well, I'd say!
As for Trolls... trolls don't chew. They just gulp down big chunks of things they tear apart with their tusks. Trolls, keep in mind, are not monsters that evolved naturally as much as evolved magically. They're basically, from a conceptual viewpoint, a hideous man-mutant giant that's SUPPOSED to look monstrous. If his lower jaw unsettles the viewer, it's doing the right job.
This may help you:
Bugbears are large, but their thing is stealth, not strength. They're strong, but that's not what they rely on to murder folks.
In any event, they DO have stat modifiers. All monsters do. As a general rule, monsters are built assuming scores of 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, arranged however among their scores; their modifiers change these rolls into the actual stats they're printed with on the page (we just don't bother listing these modifiers).
Yep,
Bugbear stat mods are :Str +6, Dex +2, Con +2, Cha -2
You should just apply those modifiers atop whatever base/point-buy you want for your villain. I think using the same point-buy as the PCs is a good way to go for recurring uber-villains. Making the villain super-lethal (especially when the PCs first encounter them) shouldn't have to mean the PCs get TPK'd: You just need to set up the scenario in a way that allows the PCs to escape, or distract the villain enough so killing upstart adventurers isn't worth his time (etc). Having players willing to run away/retreat rather than fight to the death help here of course (I think 3E's dynamic sort of reduced the popularity of this approach and moved towards a more video-game dynamic... [/rant])
|
On the subject of Bugbears, the stats or equipment listing is incorrect.
They are listed as having hvy wooden shield as equipment but only get a shield bonus of +1. So they are either equipped with light shields or their AC value is wrong (should be 18)
While also on the subject of BBears, it seems that there are some issues with the total skill points and the values listed.
Assuming they get 2SP per HD, they should have 6 total SP. When I started trying to break down the points I noticed some numerical errors.
They have a listed intimidate of +8 which doesn't really add up:
They get a racial Intimidate of +4, the have Intimidating Prowess which allows them to use their Str(+3)in addition to their Cha (-1) for a net bonus of +2. Since it is listed as a skill, it is assumed again that it follows the class skill rules if at least one point is invested (+3). So if they have 1SP invested in Intimidate their score should be at least +10 (+4 racial, +1 SP, +3 racial skill, +2 net Intimidating Prowess), and if no points are invested then it should be +6 (+4 racial, +2 net Intimidating Prowess) and not the listed +8.
Correct me if I got anything wrong on this.
Edit: unless Intimidate is not considered a racial skill (even though they have points in it? That way it could be +2 SP, +4 racial, +2 Net Intimidating prowess. Yes?
Actually, it looks like 2SP per skill, but for some reason Intimidate is not a racial skill even though the creature starts out with it. I am only basing this off of the guidlines from the creature creating rules in the back of the book "Any skill that you put points into is considered a class skill for the creature." (pg 292)
You should just apply those modifiers atop whatever base/point-buy you want for your villain. I think using the same point-buy as the PCs is a good way to go for recurring uber-villains. Making the villain super-lethal (especially when the PCs first encounter them) shouldn't have to mean the PCs get TPK'd: You just need to set up the scenario in a way that allows the PCs to escape, or distract the villain enough so killing upstart adventurers isn't worth his time (etc). Having players willing to run away/retreat rather than fight to the death help here of course (I think 3E's dynamic sort of reduced the popularity of this approach and moved towards a more video-game dynamic... [/rant])
Yep,
For anything that should be a major challenge (the commander of a group, an elite group, etc) I roll stats for them and then apply the racial mods.The funniest thing I've seen in my game recently was I had 5 level 6 characters attacked by 3 bugbears who each had 5 goblins in tow. The goblins all had bows and stealthed into tree's around the ambush area. The bugbears were hiding in thickets. The two scouts missed them (and they missed the stealthy scouts) so the scouts were 300 feet away when the ambush happened. Fifteen goblins open up with shortbow attacks, and the three bugbears leap out and attack the biggest baddest of the characters (per their thinking, the Duerger in full plate and the kobold in full plate) and ignored the Centaur in leather armor. That was a mistake, since the centaur was a warmage with a halbard.
It was hilarious though, the goblins calling out insults to the trapped PC's. The scouts running full out to get back to help. The Kobold cursing in draconic, the Duerger duskblade rolling 3 or 4 on every attack die (this is normal for the player). The goblins did more damage to the bugbears than the players did the first 3 rounds (had 5 natural ones that confirmed as critical failures, so they shot their own bugbear allies). It was hilarious. Took the druid and scout/warlock scouts returning to run off two of the bugbears and the rest of the goblins.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Xill racial description is cut off in my hardcopy of the bestiary.
"Evil and alien, the plane-shifting xills possess impressive intelligence and a totalitarian, militaristic culture all their own. Though they see most other life forms as incubators, they particularly prize phase spiders for this purpose."
Bolded portion is in the PRD, but not in the hard copy.
Yep,
For anything that should be a major challenge (the commander of a group, an elite group, etc) I roll stats for them and then apply the racial mods.The funniest thing I've seen in my game recently was I had 5 level 6 characters attacked by 3 bugbears who each had 5 goblins in tow. The goblins all had bows and stealthed into tree's around the ambush area. The bugbears were hiding in thickets. The two scouts missed them (and they missed the stealthy scouts) so the scouts were 300 feet away when the ambush happened. Fifteen goblins open up with shortbow attacks, and the three bugbears leap out and attack the biggest baddest of the characters (per their thinking, the Duerger in full plate and the kobold in full plate) and ignored the Centaur in leather armor. That was a mistake, since the centaur was a warmage with a halbard.
It was hilarious though, the goblins calling out insults to the trapped PC's. The scouts running full out to get back to help. The Kobold cursing in draconic, the Duerger duskblade rolling 3 or 4 on every attack die (this is normal for the player). The goblins did more damage to the bugbears than the players did the first 3 rounds (had 5 natural ones that confirmed as critical failures, so they shot their own bugbear allies). It was hilarious. Took...
I have but one thing to say to you!
The kobold was in half-plate!
(For those curious, I was the kobold in half-plate).
|
|
I think there's an error in the ooze subtype entry, for acid says that if the acid would damage armor the damage is 10+half hit die+con, but looking at all the oozes that deal damage like the grey ooze and the black pudding they just deal the acid damage of their attack say 1d6 for grey ooze. My question is, is the entry for the ooze subtype supposed to be the formula for the Reflex save against the damage? Otherwise the Grey oozes damage is way off, it only deals 12 damage when it should deal 20 damage per round. Actually the black pudding is correct, but then there's no formula for the reflex saves against the grapple at all so is that made up for each monster because it seems to be the same formula for the black pudding and grey ooze, but the ooze subtype entry doesn't mention one at all?
I have but one thing to say to you!The kobold was in half-plate!
(For those curious, I was the kobold in half-plate).
Do you really want me to bring up the story of how you ended smelling like a Hill-giant's butt? Or perhaps a soggy owlbear's butt?
:)
|
Creative Director
|
The Xill racial description is cut off in my hardcopy of the bestiary.
"Evil and alien, the plane-shifting xills possess impressive intelligence and a totalitarian, militaristic culture all their own. Though they see most other life forms as incubators, they particularly prize phase spiders for this purpose."
Bolded portion is in the PRD, but not in the hard copy.
Yeah... this happened to the Glabrezu too. I'm not sure why, but these two errors are hands down my two LEAST FAVORITE ones in the book. Grr.
When folk whisper frightened tales of the demonic, what most envision is a towering figure of fire and flesh, a horned nightmare armed with flaming whip and sword flying through the night in search of its latest victim.
When folk whisper frightened tales of the demonic, what most envision is a towering figure of fire and flesh, a horned nightmare armed with flaming whip and sword flying through the night in search of its next victim.
The look of the goblins was designed by Wayne Reynolds—amusing story, that! He had a misshapen spherical sponge in his hand in the shower and as he squeezed it, it folded in the middle and made a shape kind of like what you see now as a goblin's head—an egg-shaped head with a wide mouth down the middle.
There's more than a passing resemblance in them to Stitch as well, I'd say!
Somehow, any time I see a Goblin, an image of Stewie from the Family Guy Animated Series pops up into my mind…
Anyway, there are some errors I found in the Bestiary PDF (incidentally, some of these are related to Goblins or their relatives…)
Angel, Solar (page 12):
The entry for the Ranged attacks is missing the iterative attacks (!), it lists only “Ranged +5 composite longbow (+9 Str bonus) +31 (2d6+14 plus slaying arrow)”. The value is correct, but it should be “+31/+26/+21/+16”
Barghest, Greater (page 27):
The entry for the Melee attacks is wrong; basically, the Claws have a +1 to hit which is not justified in any way. It lists “Melee bite +14 (1d8+6), 2 claws +15 (1d6+6)” ; while the entry for the Bite is correct (+9 BaB, -1 Size, +6 Str), the Claws have an additional +1 (and there is no Weapon Focus (Claw) to justify this). The number of feats is correct – either the Size penalty was not applied on the Claws, or a Weapon Focus was added and later removed.
Goblin (page 156):
Goblin Entry, page 156
Size bonus is not added into the attack modifier for the short sword attack (but it is apparently there for the short bow).
Actually, both the entries are lacking the size bonus. The entry shows “Melee short sword +1 (1d4/19–20); Ranged short bow +3 (1d4/×3)”, but the Goblin has BaB +1, Str +0, Dex +2 and Size +1. So, it should really be “Short Sword +2; Short Bow +4”
(I already noticed and posted this error two months ago here while I was looking at the Bestiary Preview I, but obviously it was already too late to correct the printed version, sadly…)|
|
Quasit:
Is the Bite a secondary attack? Should be +2 not +7 then.
I think the poison DC should be 11 (10 + 1/2HD + con bonus) - unless it basically breaks that rule.
I assume one of the 4 additional class skills (being an outsider) is Intimidate. We could do with knowing what the other three are for those Quasits that go up levels.
All the best
Richard
|
The look of the goblins was designed by Wayne Reynolds—amusing story, that! He had a misshapen spherical sponge in his hand in the shower and as he squeezed it, it folded in the middle and made a shape kind of like what you see now as a goblin's head—an egg-shaped head with a wide mouth down the middle.
There's more than a passing resemblance in them to Stitch as well, I'd say!
I always thought the Golarion goblins looked and behaved more like demonic toddlers. For some reason, I picture them running with that unsteady gait, laughing like maniacs as they go.
As for Stich, I think the kobold looks more like him. :)
The look of the goblins was designed by Wayne Reynolds—amusing story, that! He had a misshapen spherical sponge in his hand in the shower and as he squeezed it, it folded in the middle and made a shape kind of like what you see now as a goblin's head—an egg-shaped head with a wide mouth down the middle.
There's more than a passing resemblance in them to Stitch as well, I'd say!
Frankly, when I think of Golarion Goblins I'm always reminded of This.
The little guy, not the dog.
Surprised no one else's mentioned that yet. Seriously.
Sorry for being OT, but we were talking about goblins, and I'm fond of them. n.n;
|
Creative Director
|
I think there's an error in the ooze subtype entry, for acid says that if the acid would damage armor the damage is 10+half hit die+con, but looking at all the oozes that deal damage like the grey ooze and the black pudding they just deal the acid damage of their attack say 1d6 for grey ooze. My question is, is the entry for the ooze subtype supposed to be the formula for the Reflex save against the damage? Otherwise the Grey oozes damage is way off, it only deals 12 damage when it should deal 20 damage per round. Actually the black pudding is correct, but then there's no formula for the reflex saves against the grapple at all so is that made up for each monster because it seems to be the same formula for the black pudding and grey ooze, but the ooze subtype entry doesn't mention one at all?
I fear that the information in the back about the ooze acid damage to weapons and armor is an artifact of a previous draft of the book, or more likely, from the SRD. Oozes generally have very high Con scores, and following that 10 + 1/2 HD + Con mod formula makes lower CR oozes simply too good. We'll figure out what to do with that in the errata (my guess is we'll simply excise that whole section from ooze type and let acid damage to gear be something we just spell out in individual ooze stat blocks, especially since not all oozes have acid attacks).
Best solution: Just use the ooze stat blocks as they stand and don't worry about that confusing acid stuff in the type description for now. (of course... ANYTHING in a monster's generic rules for its type are subject for change once you build a monster if you get down to it...)
I don't think I have seen this one yet.. Couatl (p. 49) lists obscuring mist as both a level 0 and level 1 Sorcerer spell known.
|
Director of Narrative
|
Bite is a primary attack.I thought creatures could only have one primary attack (claws, bite, whatever)?
Another question: is a Vermin an Animal w.r.t. Beast Shape? i.e. can a Druid turn into a Giant Spider?
And what about swarms?
Richard
Beast shape allows the caster to turn into a single creature of the animal or magical beast type. That would rule out critters of the vermin type. Swarms would be out as well since they are thousands of critters and not just a single critter.
...but damn it'd be fun.
|
|
Shame.
I wondered when I saw you could tremorsense and web at Beast Shape IV whether the intention hadn't been to let you turn into a giant spider.
--- On another subject:
Varhouille is missing size modifiers to BAB and AC. I also, I have to say, am a little puzzled about feats and skills here. Why give skill focus (Stealth) and not bother at least putting 1 skill point into what is, after all, an outsider's skill?
Richard
Page 55, Darkmantle
The Melee attack is listed as Slam +6 (1d4+4 plus grab)
CMB is listed as +4 (+8 grapple), CMD is listed as 14
BAB is +2, Str bonus is +0, Dex bonus is +2, Size bonus is +1 (or -1 for CMB/CMD)
Melee attack should be Slam +3 (1d4 plus grab)
CMB should be +1 (+5 grapple), CMD should be 13
|
Creative Director
|
Bite is a primary attack.I thought creatures could only have one primary attack (claws, bite, whatever)?
Another question: is a Vermin an Animal w.r.t. Beast Shape? i.e. can a Druid turn into a Giant Spider?
And what about swarms?
Richard
In 3.5, you could only have one primary attack. In Pathfinder, the TYPE of attack determines if it's a primary or secondary attack; see page 302 of the Bestiary.
OK, take two. The boards ate this post before, so...
The gnoll's equipment is wrong. Their attack stats reflect a spear (like in the picture), but their defensive stats and equipment list the shield, axe and longbow from the SRD.
Not necessarily a mistake, but a bit of a puzzler. Why does the ice golem have a higher caster level than the higher CR-ed flesh golem? Both require the same 6th level spell, geas/quest, in their construction, and flesh golems require the 7th level limited wish!
Wolves are a higher CR than riding dogs, despite having the same HD. Wolves have a better AC (by one point) and are faster than riding dogs, but the dog has a higher to-hit and damage, and is better at their shared signature attack, tripping.
Bugbears got the shaft in comparison to the other two "stealthy humanoids" in the book, dark creepers and morlocks. Although bugbears have a slightly higher AC and can dish out more base damage than either a dark creeper or a morlock (assuming the morlock doesn't hit with both of its attacks), both creeper and morlock have more hp, better saves (much better in the case of the morlock) and racial sneak attack dice. Both of them also have actual SQs that fit their stealthy profile, whereas all bugbears have is a provision about class skills (which doesn't matter, because in Pathfinder, if something is a class skill once, it's always a class skill). Bugbears aren't even unique in having scent!
Bugbears are clearly better than the CR 1 humanoids, gnolls and lizardfolk, so I'm not suggesting that they'd fit in on CR 1. But they definitely need some boosting in order to bring them to par. I'd suggest giving them one or both of the bugbear feats from Classic Monsters Revisited as SQs, giving them more options for their Intimidate skill. That would also ground them as the "scary serial killer" humanoid, which is what was clearly the intention.
More stuff:
The hyena doesn't have the listed bonus to Sense Motive from its Alertness feat. Perhaps Skill Focus (perception) would be a better choice?
The lizardfolk has the stats for carrying a shield, but the attack line lists a weapon and a claw attack.
The nagas all have X/day 0 level spells, rather than the unlimited in Pathfinder.
The dark naga only deals +1 damage with his primary bite attack, not +2.
Awesome Blow, page 314.
Maneuver is misspelled as manuever. What's funny is not only is this a spellcheck catch, but the word is spelled correctly in the same sentence. :)
Swarm subtype description page 313
- Swarm Attack paragraph
"A swarm's statistics block has "swarm" in the Attack and Full Attack entries, with no attack bonus given."
The "Attack" and "Full Attack" entries are gone. I'd guess it should simply mention the "Melee" entry now.
