Errata / Mistakes


Round 1: Cavalier and Oracle

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

At least in my copy of the downloaded pdf version, the 'a' in oracle does not appear in the title for the class description.

I might also suggest putting "waves" in quotes when using it as a sample focus in the focus section. It made me stumble a bit when reading it. I know this is supposed to be play test... but I can't help myself.

Grand Lodge

Draeke Raefel wrote:

At least in my copy of the downloaded pdf version, the 'a' in oracle does not appear in the title for the class description.

I might also suggest putting "waves" in quotes when using it as a sample focus in the focus section. It made me stumble a bit when reading it. I know this is supposed to be play test... but I can't help myself.

Are you by chance using a Mac? I know there has been a problem with the letter "A" in Preview.

Dark Archive

Andrew Betts wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:

At least in my copy of the downloaded pdf version, the 'a' in oracle does not appear in the title for the class description.

I might also suggest putting "waves" in quotes when using it as a sample focus in the focus section. It made me stumble a bit when reading it. I know this is supposed to be play test... but I can't help myself.

Are you by chance using a Mac? I know there has been a problem with the letter "A" in Preview.

Yes, in fact I am using a mac :) I had never noticed it before though in other paizo pdfs.


found one I think

Clouded Vision: Your eyes are obscured, making it
difficult for you to see. You cannot see anything beyond
30 feet, but you can see as if you had darkvision. At 5th
level, this distance increases to 60 feet. At 10th level, you
gain blindsense out to a range of 30 feet. At 15th level, you
gain blindsight out to a range of 15 feet

That looks reversed

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

found one I think

Clouded Vision: Your eyes are obscured, making it
difficult for you to see. You cannot see anything beyond
30 feet, but you can see as if you had darkvision. At 5th
level, this distance increases to 60 feet. At 10th level, you
gain blindsense out to a range of 30 feet. At 15th level, you
gain blindsight out to a range of 15 feet

That looks reversed

Nope, those are correct. At 15th level, you would have darkvision out to 60 ft, blindsense out to 30 ft, and blindsight out to 15 feet...

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


Just a simple typo page 9, first paragraph, first sentance.
An oracle’s selection of spells is extremely limited. An
oracle begins splay knowing four 0-level spells and two
1st-level spells of her choice.

Dark Archive

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

found one I think

Clouded Vision: Your eyes are obscured, making it
difficult for you to see. You cannot see anything beyond
30 feet, but you can see as if you had darkvision. At 5th
level, this distance increases to 60 feet. At 10th level, you
gain blindsense out to a range of 30 feet. At 15th level, you
gain blindsight out to a range of 15 feet

That looks reversed

I thought that too, except it is blindsense and blindsight

As a side note, I believe the Final Revelation of Fire should specify whether or not you have to already have one of those feats or if you can apply the feat without already having taken it. I believe the intention is that you can apply any one of those feats to each spell, possibly picking a different feat each time, even if you have not selected it as one of your known feats.


Draeke Raefel wrote:
Andrew Betts wrote:
Are you by chance using a Mac? I know there has been a problem with the letter "A" in Preview.
Yes, in fact I am using a mac :) I had never noticed it before though in other paizo pdfs.

FWIW, I'm using a Mac, viewing the file with Preview, and it looks fine.


Mighty Pebble from the Stone Focus (Oracle) says

Quote:
you can charge a pebble (or other stone of similar size) with elemental power so that it detonates when it strikes a target as a ranged attack.

However, the ability makes no mention as to the damage type of the "elemental power"

Dark Archive

Caedwyr wrote:

Mighty Pebble from the Stone Focus (Oracle) says

Quote:
you can charge a pebble (or other stone of similar size) with elemental power so that it detonates when it strikes a target as a ranged attack.
However, the ability makes no mention as to the damage type of the "elemental power"

That's a good point. I was assuming the elemental power simply caused the rock to explode, so the damage would be from the shrapnel. Thus physical damage and not turned into an energy form.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Mighty pebble should state that its damage is bludgeoning damage.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Mighty pebble should state that its damage is bludgeoning damage.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Similar question for the "thunderburst" power under Wind - it doesn't specify the type of damage. If it's similar to the stone power I'm inferring it should also be bludgeoning, but the "peal of thunder" flavor text could be read to imply sonic damage.


Draeke Raefel wrote:

I thought that too, except it is blindsense and blindsight

yep this is what I did, sorry bout that

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

With the "fluid travel" power for Waves, the basic power is walking on top of liquids (specifically including acid, lava, etc., though you still take damage).

The higher-level version of the same power gives you a swim speed and the ability to breathe in water. Is this specifically and only water per se, or does it also apply to being able to swim and breathe normally in any other kind of liquid (again, still taking damage if it's something inherently damaging like acid or lava)?

The Exchange

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Draco Caeruleus wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Andrew Betts wrote:
Are you by chance using a Mac? I know there has been a problem with the letter "A" in Preview.
Yes, in fact I am using a mac :) I had never noticed it before though in other paizo pdfs.
FWIW, I'm using a Mac, viewing the file with Preview, and it looks fine.

Not to derail:

Spoiler:
There's a few forums posts about this. Essentially it's a Snow Leopard thing (10.6), and doesn't affect someone running the earlier versions. Solution it affects you is to: A. ignore it B. Used Acrobat reader if you must have your A's.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Jason Nelson wrote:
Similar question for the "thunderburst" power under Wind - it doesn't specify the type of damage. If it's similar to the stone power I'm inferring it should also be bludgeoning, but the "peal of thunder" flavor text could be read to imply sonic damage.

It too, does bludgeoning damage.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Jason Nelson wrote:

With the "fluid travel" power for Waves, the basic power is walking on top of liquids (specifically including acid, lava, etc., though you still take damage).

The higher-level version of the same power gives you a swim speed and the ability to breathe in water. Is this specifically and only water per se, or does it also apply to being able to swim and breathe normally in any other kind of liquid (again, still taking damage if it's something inherently damaging like acid or lava)?

Just water.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


Some items I have noticed:

The order of the dragon
Under skills, the writing to describe his resistance to intimidate checks is not as clear as it could be.
Perhaps… ‘Cavaliers of the order of the dragon are difficult to intimidate, requiring a DC of 10 + his HD + wisdom modifier + charisma modifier in order to succeed against him.’
- - - -

The order of the sword
Under the description, you note men tend to swear service to a lady, although women…. This is an odd sentence. It should be cleaned up. Perhaps ‘ while female cavaliers tend to swear service to a lord’ Better yet, remove the sex reference altogether and replace it with ‘Most cavaliers swear an oath of service to a lord or lady, while some choose a religious order or laity.’
- - - -

The bones foci

Spontaneous classes will benefit the least from create undead spells ( 7th, 13th, & 17th level options). Perhaps you should replace them with: vampire touch or fear, circle of death or eyebite, and horrid wilting?

Resist life – you make mention of the oracle not being subject to channeling unless you are undead. Shouldn’t their be some benefit if you are an undead oracle of bones? Perhaps a +x save vs channeling or reduced damage?
- - - -

The Stone foci
The steelbreaker skin ability is overly complicated – if the oracle is under attack from multiple foes, you are adding a LOT of rolls. Simply have the weapons take ‘x’ damage, with the exception being adamantine and magic weapons take ½ that instead. Or better yet, require the weapon to save or gain the broken condition, with the save determined by material & magic (say, DC 15 save for weapon, +3 to roll for ea plus and +5 if adamantine). If the weapon hits multiple times in a round, just add 2 to the DC per additional hit made that round and roll just one save. A broken weapon that fails its save is destroyed if it fails the save.
- - - -

The Water foci
The water sight ability has the word normal misspelled.

:)

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Thanks Beholderbob, I will take a look at these issues.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Lantern Lodge

Thunderburst also does not have a range to it. I hope it's not centered on the Oracle. I don't think that would be good for the group.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

WhiteTiger wrote:

Thunderburst also does not have a range to it. I hope it's not centered on the Oracle. I don't think that would be good for the group.

It should have a range. Lets go with Medium for the time being (100 ft + 10 ft per level)

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


The Firestorm revelation (page 13) should be a supernatural ability.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Ics wrote:
The Firestorm revelation (page 13) should be a supernatural ability.

Indeed... good catch.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


The dodge bonus for the Cockatrice's 8th level Tactics ability does not appear to have a duration.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Prince That Howls wrote:
The dodge bonus for the Cockatrice's 8th level Tactics ability does not appear to have a duration.

It should be 1 round.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Prince That Howls wrote:
The dodge bonus for the Cockatrice's 8th level Tactics ability does not appear to have a duration.

It should be 1 round.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Figured as much.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Cavalier, Order of the Sword, Edicts: "...those who havew ronged him..."


Cavalier Mount: "The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount, such as a boar, camel, dog, horse, pony, or wolf (depending on his size and level, as such, boars and dogs are not suitable until 4th level)." just doesn't seem like ideal wording to me. Why not simply spell out the requirements: i.e., larger size than the Cavalier and sufficient carrying capacity, and ditch the whole confusing issue of if these are 'examples' and exactly why boars and dogs aren't suitable until 4th level. If the guidelines are clear, you don't need examples. If examples are "needed", why not include higher-power examples, like flying Mounts, given the Cav has full Companion progression? Otherwise people might assume you're not supposed to use those types.

Oath of Greed: It might be clarified to say "gains possession of X wealth WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT", which I took was the general intent, to exclude spending his own gold to BUY a qualifying item. I would think acquiring wealth in whatever form (i.e. a hoard of gold coins and gems) would also qualify, but the wording indicates needing a singular item that meets the value requirement.

Tactics (Order of Cockatrice): "an immediate move action that must be spent on movement"
I don't believe 'immediate move action' is an actual game term, so it's better to stick to the actual game terms and just say "an immediate action that allows movement up to their Move Rate". A little more flavor for this ability might be nice to give it more of a 'visual', and perhaps restrictions (able to see/hear/communicate with Cav).

Braggart (Order of Dragon): I think just saying it works like Dazzling Display is simple and also conveys the fact that a Dragon Cavalier doesn't really need to take Dazzling Display. Additional effects/limitations could be mentioned afterwards, of course.

Resolute (Order of Shield): "...whenever the cavalier takes damage from a melee or ranged attack while wearing heavy armor, the cavalier can convert 1 point of lethal damage to 1 point of nonlethal damage. He can use this ability once each time he takes damage."
I think the wording on this could be alot clearer. Why not express it as DR/- that stacks with any other DR, but then applies the same amount as non-lethal damage? Otherwise, great ability and very flavorful.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

This is errata-style stuff from my thread, nothing new for now.

  • Oath of Chastity need rewording, or at least some clarification of what constitutes "physical contact" (perhaps "intimate contact"), or you're going to have a lot of making-the-paladin-fall shenanigans. A female knight should be able to shake hands with the king (or slay male orcs with a sword!)
  • Does Expert Trainer apply to other peoples' mounts? I'm just wondering if it's meant to apply to his animal companion or just riding animals in general. It's kind of vague.
  • Act as One is confusingly worded. Under what circumstances does "This movement and attack can be made as a charge if the movement qualifies" apply?
  • Ride doesn't have an armor check penalty unless the rider is non-proficient in his armor, so the first line of Mounted Mastery does nothing.
  • Maybe rephrase this so it doesn't imply that you are immune to Staggered in general? "You are not disabled if you are reduced to exactly 0 hit points and you do not gain the staggered condition."
  • The ability to ignore the prereq for Diehard belongs in the level 7 sentence, not after the level 11 sentence. As written, it implies you don't get the feat until level 11 unless you have the prereqs.
  • Combat Healer should specify what level spell slots you need to expend. I assume it's two of the appropriate level, but I don't know if it could be higher-level or even lower-level.
    Iron Skin should specify that you don't need the diamond dust.
  • If Battlefield Clarity allows a second save against a spell/effect with multiple effects, do you save against all of it? For example, the Order's Wrath chain.
  • Battlefield Clarity needs to say that it is a free action you can take outside of your own turn. Remember, "Unless otherwise noted, activating the power of a revelation is a standard action." I imagine a lot of abilities have this problem; I didn't think to check all of them.
  • Bleeding Wounds should probably specify Death's Touch and not channel energy, as cleric/oracle is an unlikely multiclass and it generates confusion about using Undead Servitude to deal damage (when it can't).
  • Does Raise the Dead need raw material? What sort of skeleton or zombie does it raise?
  • Clearer distinctions need to be made on what you're vulnerable to with Resist Life: Which of these spells work on you and why? Disrupting Weapon/Disrupting magical weapons, Disrupt Undead, Control Undead, and Detect Undead.
  • Spirit Walk doesn't have a clear limit. Right now, you can turn yourself incorporeal, stay like that for [level] rounds, and do it again. This needs to specify that it's [level] rounds per day.
  • What kind of action is needed to douse someone on fire from Burning Magic?
  • Clobbering Strike needs to specify that they don't get to trip you back.
  • Is throwing the pebble part of the standard action of Mighty Pebble? It needs to be clearer.
  • What is "shapechange (water only)" supposed to mean? Aquatic creatures only, water elementals only, what?
  • With Blizzard, you should probably mention how long the ground remains icy, and what the game effect of this is.

  • Liberty's Edge

    Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
    A Man In Black wrote:
  • Ride doesn't have an armor check penalty unless the rider is non-proficient in his armor, so the first line of Mounted Mastery does nothing.
  • This is not the case.

    RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    Shisumo wrote:
    This is not the case.

    That's dumb for reasons not worth getting into in this thread, and all of the str and dex skills except Ride have "ARMOR CHECK PENALTY" prominently placed in their headers. *sigh*


    Draeke Raefel wrote:

    At least in my copy of the downloaded pdf version, the 'a' in oracle does not appear in the title for the class description.

    I have the same problem using the default viewer on Ubuntu (linux).

    The fix is to view Paizo PDFs with acrobat reader.

    Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

    A Man In Black wrote:
    Shisumo wrote:
    This is not the case.
    That's dumb for reasons not worth getting into in this thread, and all of the str and dex skills except Ride have "ARMOR CHECK PENALTY" prominently placed in their headers. *sigh*

    Um... it IS right there in the header.

    p. 103 of the PF RPG

    "RIDE (Dex: Armor Check Penalty)"

    The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    Jason Nelson wrote:

    Um... it IS right there in the header.

    p. 103 of the PF RPG

    "RIDE (Dex: Armor Check Penalty)"

    Yup. Got that in mine too.

    Try the PRD...

    RIDE(Dex: Armor Check Penalty

    Yup.

    /hopes that's enough to defuse the word dumb and the sigh of contempt. It's the weekend! Lighten up a bit man!


    A Man In Black wrote:

    This is errata-style stuff from my thread, nothing new for now.

  • Act as One is confusingly worded. Under what circumstances does "This movement and attack can be made as a charge if the movement qualifies" apply?

    That would probably be, "at least 10 feet of movement over normal (not difficult) terrain.

  • Maybe rephrase this so it doesn't imply that you are immune to Staggered in general? "You are not disabled if you are reduced to exactly 0 hit points and you do not gain the staggered condition."

    Honestly, if this description gives you difficulty, I can't imagine how you play the game...

  • Combat Healer should specify what level spell slots you need to expend. I assume it's two of the appropriate level, but I don't know if it could be higher-level or even lower-level.

    Yes, to fit the standards of writing d20 rules it could be phrased clearly as: "by expending two spell slots of a level equal to the spell being cast". But seriously folks, this isn't the A,B,C's....people who call this into question must be allowing players to cast a swift 'Cure Critical Wounds, Mass' with two first level spell slots...come on.

    Iron Skin should specify that you don't need the diamond dust.

    This is a Supernatural ability, it is not a spell being cast. (Su)'s just do what their descriptions say.

  • If Battlefield Clarity allows a second save against a spell/effect with multiple effects, do you save against all of it? For example, the Order's Wrath chain.

    There is no chain, you are either a chaotic creature and receive ONE will save to halve the damage and negate the daze, or you aren't and the save only halves the half damage (no daze here) and so Battlefield Clarity doesn't apply.

    In any case, it says "whenever you fail a saving throw" so once per save.

  • Battlefield Clarity needs to say that it is a free action you can take outside of your own turn. Remember, "Unless otherwise noted, activating the power of a revelation is a standard action." I imagine a lot of abilities have this problem; I didn't think to check all of them.

    It is noted otherwise: "Once per day, whenever you fail a saving throw...(etc)...you may attempt that saving throw again....(etc)."

    Note: I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just think if we were as critical of the wording in the Core Rulebook (or for that matter 3.5 D&D) as people are being of these class writeups, that book would be 850 pages of handholding and would never have been published.

  • RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    Can'tFindthePath wrote:
    Honestly, if this description gives you difficulty, I can't imagine how you play the game...

    Kindly refrain from being a snide jerk in an errata thread. The point of the playtest is to find rough spots in the rules, such as ambiguous rules.

    Anyway.

    Quote:
    [Iron Skin] is a Supernatural ability, it is not a spell being cast. (Su)'s just do what their descriptions say.

    I know that. However, it's probably not a good idea to assume that people know that offhand, especially since Pathfinder just fiddled with how material components and spell-likes work with each other.

    Quote:
    There is no chain, you are either a chaotic creature and receive ONE will save to halve the damage and negate the daze, or you aren't and the save only halves the half damage (no daze here) and so Battlefield Clarity doesn't apply.

    I was thinking of Holy Smite, not Order's Wrath. (And it is a chain, one for each alignment domain.) Holy Smite does X damage and blinds, with save for X/2 damage and no blind. It needs to be stated that you can reroll a save even if blinding, deafening, etc. is only one of the effects of failing the save.

    And it might be worth mentioning if you can use Battlefield Clarity on follow-up saves, like the Glitterdust save on later rounds.

    Quote:
    It is noted otherwise: "Once per day, whenever you fail a saving throw...(etc)...you may attempt that saving throw again....(etc)."

    It doesn't say it doesn't require a standard action, so as written you need to ready an action to do it. That's retarded, granted, but either all of the abilities that are not standard actions need to say that they are not standard actions or the "standard action unless otherwise noted" needs to go. I'm thinking the latter is probably a good idea.

    -----

    Writing for clarity is vital. We don't want another Vital Strike or Spring Attack.


    Can'tFindthePath wrote:
    Honestly, if this description gives you difficulty, I can't imagine how you play the game...

    It seems a valid critique to me.

    There's plenty of ways to get Staggered without being at 0 or below HPs (Crit Feats, etc...).
    You might also notice: MiB's wording IS SHORTER (though it should probably add '...Staggered, such as when at 0 hp')

    Quote:
    Quote:
    [Iron Skin] is a Supernatural ability, it is not a spell being cast. (Su)'s just do what their descriptions say.
    I know that. However, it's probably not a good idea to assume that people know that offhand...

    While complete clarification/ rule re-iteration in every case might SEEM to be ideal, it WOULD result in doubling the size of the rule books, which in fact would be a detriment to rules clarity for most players.

    Quote:
    Writing for clarity is vital. We don't want another Vital Strike or Spring Attack.

    Very true.

    And Jason is well aware of this, which is why he welcomed feedback on wording issues.


    A Man In Black wrote:
    Can'tFindthePath wrote:
    Honestly, if this description gives you difficulty, I can't imagine how you play the game...

    Kindly refrain from being a snide jerk in an errata thread. The point of the playtest is to find rough spots in the rules, such as ambiguous rules.

    I wasn't being snide, I wasn't suggesting that you can't roll dice without drooling on yourself. With the rules as they are written from 3rd Ed to Pathfinder, I would imagine that you have trouble like this all the time. There are so many rules written like this, that I literally can't imagine how you play the game.

    Anyway.

    Quote:
    [Iron Skin] is a Supernatural ability, it is not a spell being cast. (Su)'s just do what their descriptions say.

    I know that. However, it's probably not a good idea to assume that people know that offhand, especially since Pathfinder just fiddled with how material components and spell-likes work with each other.

    How exactly did they "fiddle" with it. Spell-likes do not nor have they ever required material components. Granted, supernaturals usually don't directly mimic a spell, but the baseline is that supernatural does not = spell-like even if it does mimic a spell.

    Quote:
    There is no chain, you are either a chaotic creature and receive ONE will save to halve the damage and negate the daze, or you aren't and the save only halves the half damage (no daze here) and so Battlefield Clarity doesn't apply.

    I was thinking of Holy Smite, not Order's Wrath. (And it is a chain, one for each alignment domain.) Holy Smite does X damage and blinds, with save for X/2 damage and no blind. It needs to be stated that you can reroll a save even if blinding, deafening, etc. is only one of the effects of failing the save.

    Well, you did say Order's Wrath, and mentioned chain in context with discussion of multiple-save spells....so I thought you meant "chain of effects that call for a save". But I don't think it does need clarification. It says right there that that you get to make that save again. I think you are looking for a standard of clarification that has no existed since the dawn of 3rd Ed. It took me and my game group many (sometimes agonizing and confusing) months to realize that the way the d20 rules were written was "explanation by omission". In other words, if it doesn't say that rule X applies differently than normal, then it doesn't. If it doesn't say that you can't use that feat in combination with feat or maneuver X, then you can. This is vague and all to arguable in a few instances, but it was reinforced by the language added to Whirlwind Attack (and only Whirlwind Attack)

    Quote:
    It is noted otherwise: "Once per day, whenever you fail a saving throw...(etc)...you may attempt that saving throw again....(etc)."

    It doesn't say it doesn't require a standard action, so as written you need to ready an action to do it. That's retarded, granted, but either all of the abilities that are not standard actions need to say that they are not standard actions or the "standard action unless otherwise noted" needs to go. I'm thinking the latter is probably a good idea.

    Again, I think you are looking for specifics where none is needed (or where they already exist). By simply saying "whenever" and "you may" they are noting otherwise. This is often the case throughout the rules.

    -----

    Writing for clarity is vital. We don't want another Vital Strike or Spring Attack.

    RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    Can'tFindthePath wrote:
    How exactly did they "fiddle" with it. Spell-likes do not nor have they ever required material components. Granted, supernaturals usually don't directly mimic a spell, but the baseline is that supernatural does not = spell-like even if it does mimic a spell.

    Spell-likes now require material components from summoned creatures, and were never a really well-understood mechanic to begin with.

    I don't see why adding "(No material component is needed to use this ability.)" is going to break the wordcount, guys.

    Quote:
    Again, I think you are looking for specifics where none is needed (or where they already exist). By simply saying "whenever" and "you may" they are noting otherwise. This is often the case throughout the rules.

    I am looking for specifics in cases where the general rule should not apply. I'm thinking the general case should just be disposed of, however; almost all of the abilities that should be a standard action already say "As a standard action..."

    So, can we just lose "Unless otherwise noted, activating the power of a revelation is a standard action" and make sure to add "As a standard action" to anything that needs it?


    Quandary wrote:
    Can'tFindthePath wrote:
    Honestly, if this description gives you difficulty, I can't imagine how you play the game...

    It seems a valid critique to me.

    There's plenty of ways to get Staggered without being at 0 or below HPs (Crit Feats, etc...).
    You might also notice: MiB's wording IS SHORTER (though it should probably add '...Staggered, such as when at 0 hp')

    Actually, MiB's wording is a verbatum quote from the document.

    There are, in fact, many ways to gain the Staggered condition, but only one appears in this sentence, and in this context.


    Spell-likes now require material components from summoned creatures, and were never a really well-understood mechanic to begin with.

    I'm not sure quite what you're saying here. I just triple-checked the spell-like abilities entry in the Core Rulebook and the 3.5 PH and they are the same. No material components.

    I don't see why adding "(No material component is needed to use this ability.)" is going to break the wordcount, guys.

    Certainly that would work as well as any of the other inconsistent ways that some rules are clarified and others are not. I don't have a problem with clarified text, but until now if you had a question about how something works with other rules you had to dig around and look at all pertinent entries (i.e. Glossary, MM Abilites, and Conditions).

    Quote:
    Again, I think you are looking for specifics where none is needed (or where they already exist). By simply saying "whenever" and "you may" they are noting otherwise. This is often the case throughout the rules.

    I am looking for specifics in cases where the general rule should not apply. I'm thinking the general case should just be disposed of, however; almost all of the abilities that should be a standard action already say "As a standard action..."

    So, can we just lose "Unless otherwise noted, activating the power of a revelation is a standard action" and make sure to add "As a standard action" to anything that needs it?

    I'm down with that, I think that EVERY ability, spell, etc. should have an "action entry" that tells exactly which action it takes. But I'm just saying that the books (old and new) aren't written that way, and aren't going to be until we RISE UP AS ONE PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK OUR BLESSED D&D AND RESTORE IT TO GLORY.....woh....sorry.

    RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    Can'tFindthePath wrote:

    Actually, MiB's wording is a verbatum quote from the document.

    There are, in fact, many ways to gain the Staggered condition, but only one appears in this sentence, and in this context.

    I suggest rewording it to "You are not staggered or disabled if you are reduced to zero hit points or less." Shorter and clearer.

    Quote:
    I'm not sure quite what you're saying here. I just triple-checked the spell-like abilities entry in the Core Rulebook and the 3.5 PH and they are the same. No material components.

    It's under summoned creatures. Why are you fighting about this in an errata thread?

    Quote:
    I'm down with that, I think that EVERY ability, spell, etc. should have an "action entry" that tells exactly which action it takes. But I'm just saying that the books (old and new) aren't written that way, and aren't going to be until we RISE UP AS ONE PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK OUR BLESSED D&D AND RESTORE IT TO GLORY.....woh....sorry.

    Um, okay, but half of the abilities already say "As a standard action". For example:

    Quote:

    Raise the Dead (Su): As a standard action, you can summon a single skeleton or zombie to serve you.

    Spirit Walk (Su): As a standard action, you can become incorporeal and invisible.
    Fire Breath (Su): As a standard action, you can unleash a 15-foot cone of flame from your mouth.

    RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

    A Man In Black wrote:
    I suggest rewording it to "You are not staggered or disabled if you are reduced to zero hit points or less." Shorter and clearer.

    Dang, I'm staggered. Could you put me at the brink of death? I'll stop being staggered if I'm at 0 hit points or less. ;)

    I'd go with, "Being reduced to 0 hit points or less does not cause you to become staggered or disabled."


    Apologies in advance, if the following have already been mentioned in another thread.

    Cavalier
    Challenge: Should the challenge really not apply to attacks that deal non-lethal damage? This would seem to be an alignment- or situational thing. If so, perhaps the Oath of Justice would allow for the challenge to inflict non-lethal damage?

    Oaths: I assume the actual verbiage of swearing an oath is "not an action", or essentially an immediate action? This could affect the cavalier who swears an Oath of Loyalty immediately before aiding another... or one who swears an Oath of Vengeance before bringing his sword down upon that ogre who's been reduced to 3 hit points.

    Cavalier's Charge/Mighty Charge/Supreme Charge: Just wondering if the mount should also gain these benefits? (If the mount does gain the abilities, I suspect it would not gain the free combat maneuver for Mighty Charge, nor the stunning attack for Supreme Charge. Two such attempts at CMs or stuns seems too much.)


    A Man In Black wrote:
    It's under summoned creatures. Why are you fighting about this in an errata thread?

    Because you're wrong. Why are you fighting over it in an errata thread?

    For the record, the summoned creature entry states that summoned creatures have to use the material components required for any spells or spell like abilities they cast. Since SLAs don't require material components unless otherwise stated, this doesn't change anything: they use the required material component (nothing) for any SLA they cast.

    RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    tejón wrote:
    I'd go with, "Being reduced to 0 hit points or less does not cause you to become staggered or disabled."

    Well, heh, you can read the ability that way, but since it's suicidally dumb, I don't think many people will. Your wording is better, though.

    Quote:
    For the record, the summoned creature entry states that summoned creatures have to use the material components required for any spells or spell like abilities they cast. Since SLAs don't require material components unless otherwise stated, this doesn't change anything: they use the required material component (nothing) for any SLA they cast.

    Who knows what it means? All the more reason to do some editing for clarity this time around.


    Hello:
    These are some of the points that I believe need clarifying/amended to the cavalier’s special abilities:

    Quote:

    Mount:

    Mount (Ex): A cavalier gains the service of a loyal and trusty steed to carry him into battle. This mount functions as a druid’s animal companion, using the cavalier’s level as his effective druid level. The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount, such as a boar, camel, dog, horse, pony, or wolf (depending on his size and level, as such, boars and dogs are not suitable until 4th level). A cavalier’s mount does not gain the share spells special ability. A cavalier’s bond with his mount is strong, with the pair learning to anticipate each other’s moods and moves. Should a cavalier’s mount die, the cavalier may find another mount to serve him after 1 week of mourning. This new mount does not gain the link, evasion, devotion, or improved evasion special abilities until the next time the cavalier gains a level.

    Proposed Amendment:

    Mount (Ex) A cavalier gains the service of a loyal and trusty steed to carry him into battle. This mount functions as a druid’s animal companion, using the cavalier’s level as her effective druid level. This mount is usually a heavy horse (for a Medium cavalier) or a pony (for a Small cavalier), although more exotic mounts, such as a bear, boar, camel, or dog are also suitable, depending on his size and level. For example, boars and dogs are not suitable until 4th level. Unlike normal animals of its kind, an animal companion’s Hit Dice, abilities, skills, and feats advance as the cavalier advances in level. If a character receives an animal companion from more than one source, her effective druid levels stack for the purposes of determining the statistics and abilities of the companion. Most animal companions increase in size when their druid reaches 4th or 7th level, depending on the companion.
    A cavalier’s mount does not gain the share spells special ability. Should a cavalier’s mount die, the cavalier may find another mount to serve him after 1 week of mourning. This new mount does not gain the link, evasion, devotion, or improved evasion special abilities until the next time the cavalier gains a level.

    The sentence "A cavalier’s bond with his mount is strong, with the pair learning to anticipate each other’s moods and moves." should be eliminated because there is no logical clausal relationship to the previous sentence or paragraph, that is, it is a Non sequitur.

    The proposed changes put the cavalier's mount ability on par with the druid's, paladin's, and ranger's special abilities by standardizing the terminology dealing with animal companions/mounts.

    In the Oaths section, page 3,

    Quote:
    " Whenever the cavalier completes an oath, he can swear another or he can keep his existing oath, if it is still applicable. A cavalier can abandon an oath, but he cannot swear a new oath to replace the abandoned oath for at least 24 hours."

    The proposed change should be:

    Whenever the cavalier completes an oath, he can swear another or he can keep his existing oath, if it is still applicable. A cavalier can withdraw an oath, but he cannot swear a new oath to replace the withdrawn oath for at least 24 hours.

    I would not believe a cavalier would "abandon" an oath, he would withdraw it or revoke it in favor of a new one.

    Same section,

    Quote:
    "Some oaths require the cavalier to keep the oath to maintain the bonus and must be abandoned to select a different oath."

    Should be amended to:

    Some oaths require the cavalier to keep the oath in order to maintain the bonus while other oaths must be withdrawn (revoked) to select a different oath.

    In the Order of the Lion, page 6:

    Quote:
    "A cavalier who belongs to this order has pledged himself to a sovereign, be it a king, queen, or even the local warlord." (Incorrect colon usage, needs a semi-colon after "sovereign").

    Should be amended to:

    A cavalier who belongs to this order has pledged himself to a sovereign; be it a king, queen, or even the local warlord.

    In the Order of the Star, page 7

    Quote:
    For the Faith (Ex): At 8th level, the cavalier can call upon his faith to bolster himself in combat. As a free action, the cavalier can call out the name of his deity, granting him a morale bonus on attack rolls equal to his Charisma modifier for 1 round.

    Should be amended to:

    For the Faith (Ex): At 8th level, the cavalier can call upon his faith to bolster himself in combat. As a free action, the cavalier can invoke the name of his deity, granting him a morale bonus on attack rolls equal to his Charisma modifier for 1 round.
    ***********************************************************************

    I have only really checked out the cavalier; I believe its a great class with a lot of potential. the proposed amendments could help clarify some points, especially with the mount special ability.
    I hope this helps.

    I have posted this on the C/O message board, but found it appropriate to reproduce it here. BTW, Pathfinder ROCKS!!!


    Said, that I really like these new classes, for they've been a real great job (and I'm looking forward to seeing how the Summoner will be, in particular), I'll post again some questions that I've entered in wrong places (or so it seems).

    1. (Oracle, Curses)
    Haunted Curse's text reports:
    "Retrieving any stored item from your gear requires a move action, unless it would normally take longer."
    But retrieving stored items already was a move action (as noted in the Combat chapter of the Core Rulebook), so... was it meant to be that the curse turns the action to a standard one or is it correct (and in this case, what's the difference from not having it)?

    2. (Oracle, Bones Focus)
    "Soul Siphon (Su): As a ranged touch attack, you can unleash a ray that causes a target to gain one negative level.", etc.
    Actually, the text does not say what the range of this ability is.

    3. (Oracle, Bones Focus)
    Spirit Walk's text does not specify if the ability can be used only once, consuming all the available time, or if that time can be divided into multiple uses.

    Liberty's Edge

    Irrlicht wrote:


    1. (Oracle, Curses)
    Haunted Curse's text reports:
    "Retrieving any stored item from your gear requires a move action, unless it would normally take longer."
    But retrieving stored items already was a move action (as noted in the Combat chapter of the Core Rulebook), so... was it meant to be that the curse turns the action to a standard one or is it correct (and in this case, what's the difference from not having it)?

    This mostly refers to drawing weapons and such, as drawing a weapon (or weapon-like object) is a part of a move action if you have a +1 or higher BAB, and is a free action with Quick Draw. The haunted curse prevents the quick draw feat from even functioning.

    1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest / Round 1: Cavalier and Oracle / Errata / Mistakes All Messageboards