|
(nipping at the heels of my last post)
Page 211 of the Core Rulebook describes Enchantment spells as affecting the mind. The first sentence of the second paragraph specifically says "All enchantment spells are mind-affecting spells." The following enchantment spell(s) from Ultimate Magic are missing their mind-affecting descriptor:
- bungle (page 209)
- delay pain (page 216)
- utter contempt (page 246)
Additionally, the Core Rulebook also describes the two subschools of the enchantment school, compulsion and charm, and while it doesn't say all enchantment spells belong to one of these subschools, all of the ones in the core rulebook do, leading me to believe that's not a coincidence. The following enchantment spell(s) from Ultimate Magic don't have a subschool:
- delay pain (page 216)
- utter contempt (page 246)
|
|
Page 210 of the Core Rulebook describes Conjuration spells in detail. The very first sentence says "Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools." The following conjuration spell(s) from Ultimate Magic are missing their subschool:
- burst of nettles (page 210) {It's probably creation}
- ki arrow (page 225) {It's probably creation, although I still think this spell is a little odd as a conjuration spell and not a transmutation spell}
Page 243 - Temporary resurrection spell
Two things:
1) This spell is missing its Saving Throw and Spell Resistance lines. If it's anything like the other resurrection type spells then it would be "none; see text" and "yes (harmless)" respectively, where the "see text" section of Saving Throw refers to a line about the spell automatically failing if the target is unwilling, which this spell doesn't mention either.2) This spell fails to mention what sort of condition the body needs to be in in order for this to be cast on it. Logically it seems a relatively intact corpse is required, but it should say so just like raise dead, resurrection, and true resurrection do. Also what sort of appearance does a person temporarily revived in this way have? Do they appear alive, healthy, and unblemished or is it more of a Pushing Daisies scenario where they still bare the wounds of their demise (if any)?
Also it would be good if either the spell or a FAQ entry explained how Temporary Resurrection and breath of life interact.
|
|
Page 86 - Opposition research arcane discovery
Was this arcane discovery also supposed to remove the penalty to Spellcraft checks made to identify, learn, and prepare spells from an opposition school? The only reason I call it out is because I can see how this could have been overlooked when designing this ability, since this penalty isn't mentioned in the wizard section of the core rulebook, but rather in the Spellcraft skill description itself.
|
|
Page 121 - Spellbooks
(I apologize in advance if this issue has already been beaten to death but I didn't notice it specifically addressed in this thread)
Caribet mentioned this back on page 3, but he only mentioned the fact that the preparation ritual wasn't factored into the cost. It's more than just that, however.
As an example, let's take a look at the very first book, the Defensive Primer, valued at 160 gp:
18 cantrips = 90 gp
7 1st-level = 70 gp
Spellbook = 15 gp
Average lock = 40 gp
The book's value would actually be 215 gp
page 228- Marionette Possession
The spell lists "Saving Throw Will negates (see text)," but nothing about the will save is mentioned in the text. Not only that, it also has this line: "Target one willing creature. I assume the will save line was a hold over from magic jar, which the short description of Marionette Possession references. Should it instead be "Saving Throw none"?
|
|
I'm new here, so I'm not sure how to go about this, but I need a clearification.
On page 162 of Ultimate Magic, under Learning Words of Power, in the section for Magi, Witches, and Wizards; It states that witches and wizards start with al 0-level effects and meta words for their respective classes, but it doesn't meantion what the Magus has in terms of 0-level effects and meta words in its spellbook. Does this mean that a Magus wordcaster knows no cantrips, and has to learn them as 1st-level spells, or is this a typo and they were also supposed to start with all 0-level effects and meta words? If it were the first case then I can't imagine why anyone would play a magus wordcaster if they are so heavily disadvantaged compared to their classic counterpart.
The reason I ask this is because I haven't seen anyone else comment on this and I'm curious about trying to play a Magus Wordcaster but before I bring it up to my GM I would like to have a clarification so as to avoid a possible arguement.
Looks to me like a straight-up oversight, and I'd rule it as such as a GM. Mechanically there's no reason why magi wordcasters wouldn't get these word cantrips.
|
|
Page 30 - Variant channeling
The harm effect of the Monsters variant channeling is an effect that enhances creatures friendly to the channeler. I suppose that one could assume that the negative energy burst made to harm deals half the normal channel damage to living creatures while granting undead minions in the blast the bonus from this, but this goes against normal rules for channeling energy.
|
|
Page 31 - Variant channeling
The Undeath variant channeling doesn't make any sense:
1) Heal effect: Heals undead and those with negative energy affinity. Only clerics who channel positive energy can use the Heal effect of the variant channel, but I suppose this could mean when you take this variant channel your burst somehow heals living creatures for 50% and undead for 150%. This does, however, go against the core rules of channeling only working for one type of creature at a time, living or undead. This probably means that when a positive channeling cleric with undeath variant channeling heals, she ONLY heals undead.
2) Harm effect: works like a standard channel (not halved). Meaning it does nothing different. A negative energy cleric would use this variant channel as if they hadn't chosen a variant channel ability anyway. Ok...
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
This has been mentioned before on this thread and it does not appear to be included in the recent errata document or the FAQ link of UM; seems like a significant oversight:
The preparation rituals that are noted in the section about spellbooks are really cool but there is no discernable system presented for how to evaluate the cost, what types of things can be made into a preparation ritual, and new question, what does a wizard or alchemist player character have to do or spend to obtain a preparation ritual for their use and / or develop their own preparation ritual?
This section has spurred a lot of creative thought at the game table but it would be nice to have this section of the book fleshed out consistent with other game mechanics; perhaps in a post here or in the FAQ for Ultimate Magic?
Corrosive Touch is a Conjuration (Creation) spell that is affected by Spell Resistance.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Like the most recent Core Rulebook errata, the most recent (and don't get me wrong, Paizo, very appreciated) errata to Ultimate Magic didn't quite catch all of the things we've been tossing out there in this thread. Below in the spoiler I have compiled all of the not-mentioned errors we've stumbled upon that didn't make it into the official errata:
Page 48: Bladebound archetype, Life Drinker ability, last sentence, "must have" should be changed to "must have at least".
Page 55: Metal mystery, bonus spells, 14th-level spell statue, the part in parenthesis should be changed from "(metal statue instead of iron)" to "(metal statue instead of stone)."
Page 70: Header for the Arial wild bloodline should be changed to "Aerial."
Page 85: Hedge Witch archetype, Spontaneous Healing ability, 2nd sentence, "an orison" should be changed to "a cantrip".
Page 98: Optional: Benefits of Harmful Conditions section, Bleed paragraph, last sentence, "when using an inflict wounds spell" should be changed to "when using an inflict wounds spell to cause damage".
Page 101: Wizards, Sorcerers, and Summoners section, first sentence, "binding insiders" should be changed to "binding outsiders".
Page 112: Bestiary and Bestiary 2 Construct table, doesn't include the new construct added to the first Bestiary via errata, the Cold Iron Cobra.
Page 115: Construct Armor, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence, says "regains all the hindrances" but the FAQ says this should say "retains all the hindrances".
Page 119: Pig stat block, wrong XP value. "XP 100" should be changed to "XP 135".
Page 122: Book of the Grave, 3rd-level spells, the spell vitriol does not exist.
Page 123: Tome of the Transmuter, 1st-level spells, the spell hush does not exist. The errata had another book with this spell change it to forced quiet.
Page 124: Manuscript of Jack Were-Son, 2nd-level spells, the spell metabolize does not exist. The errata had another book with this spell change it to accelerate poison.
Page 124: Insights of Far-Seeing Taernis, 2nd-level spells, the spell fantastic reach does not exist. The errata had another book with this spell change it to alter self.
Page 124: Insights of Far-Seeing Taernis, 2nd-level spells, the spell metabolize does not exist. The errata had another book with this spell change it to accelerate poison.
Page 127: Library of the Dancer of Skins, 6th-level spells, the spell lightning field does not exist. The errata had another book with this spell change it to chain lightning.
Page 127: Library of the Dancer of Skins, 5th-level spells, the spell comet does not exist. The errata had another book with this spell change it to life bubble.
Page 135: Depletable Statistics sidebar, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence, "-10 penalty on her Wisdom saving throw" should be changed to "-10 penalty on her Will saving throw".
Page 144: Greater Blighted Critical table entry, prerequisites, "Greater Blighted Critical" should be changed to "Blighted Critical" (in other words, it shouldn't have itself as its own prerequisite).
Page 147: Concussion Spell metamagic feat, "Concussion" should be changed to "Concussive".
Page 147 and 158: Toppling Spell metamagic feat, table on page 147 says the spell affects spells with the [sonic] descriptor, but the feat description on page 158 says it affects spells with the [force] descriptor.
Page 196: Antipaladin spells, 1st-level antipaladin spells, summon minor monster, all of the summon monster spells available to the antipaladin in the Advanced Players guide have a special mention in parenthesis saying "(evil creatures only)". This should as well.
Page 208: Bestow grace of the champion spell, [law] descriptor should be changed to [lawful].
Page 208: Bestow grace of the champion spell, Saving throw line says "yes (harmless)". This is not a valid saving throw entry.
Page 208: Blessing of the mole spell, Area entry, should actually say "Target" instead of "Area"
Page 209: Bungle spell, Core Rulebook says all enchantment spells are [mind-affecting] spells, so it needs this descriptor.
Page 210: Burst of nettles spell, all conjuration spells belong to one of the 5 conjuration subschools. This one is probably (creation).
Page 210: Caustic eruption spell, first sentence of description says the spell originates from your space but the range of the spell is medium range.
Page 211: Cold ice strike spell, the errata implemented only part of the FAQ update for this spell, saying to add a Components entry with "V, S". The FAQ, however, mentions a third component of "M (a small crystal or glass rod)".
Page 213: Create demiplane spell, description mentions gp required to make permanent with a permanency spell, but not the minimum caster level required. Going by other spells of this level that can be made permanent, it's likely CL 17.
Page 214: Create demiplane, greater spell, description mentions gp required to make permanent with a permanency spell, but not the minimum caster level required. Going by other spells of this level that can be made permanent, it's likely CL 18.
Page 214: Create demiplane, lesser spell, description mentions gp required to make permanent with a permanency spell, but not the minimum caster level required. Going by other spells of this level that can be made permanent, it's likely CL 16.
Page 215: Curse of disgust spell, Compulsion should be moved from the list of descriptors and made into the spell's subschool.
Page 216: Delay pain spell, Core Rulebook says all enchantment spells are [mind-affecting] spells, so it needs this descriptor. Additionally the book doesn't say so, but all enchantment spells in that book belong to a subschool, and it's likely this one's supposed to, too.
Page 218: (Possibly not errata) Ear-piercing scream spell, based on the description, a 1st-level character actually wouldn't do any damage with this spell, but they would pull off the dazing ability of the spell. It's hard to tell if this was intentional or not.
Page 218: Eldritch fever spell, casting time says "1 standard" but should be "1 standard action".
Page 219: Fickle winds spell, missing its Components entry and its Range entry. The Components entry should be "V, S" as stated in the FAQ (but somehow left out of the errata). The Range entry is still up in the air. The spell doesn't mention specifically mention the words "this spell functions like wind wall except..." but it does mention that spell, so it's possible the range was intended to be medium like that spell. Lastly, the Targets line should have the words "or more" deleted.
Page 225: Ki arrow spell, all conjuration spells belong to a subschool. (Creation) seems the most logical choice. Additionally the Saving Throw entry just says "Fortitude (object)" and leaves out the key words negates, partial, half, etc. It's most likely "negates".
Page 227: Mad hallucination spell, Range entry. says "close (20 ft.)" but close range is not simply 20 ft. it's 25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels.
Page 228: Mad monkeys spell, 4th sentence of the description, mentions oracles and how Wisdom is used to determine the effects of the spell for them but 1)Oracles use Charisma for that stuff and 2)Oracles can't cast this spell.
Page 228: Malfunction spell, transformation school should be changed to "transmutation".
Page 228: Marionette possession spell, Saving Throw entry says "Will negates (see text)" but this spell can only be cast on willing creatures, so why would they need a saving throw.
Page 229: Monstrous physique I spell, 1st paragraph of description, last sentence says "you gain the aquatic and amphibious subtypes" but it should say "you gain the aquatic subtype and the amphibious special quality." Additionally there is a section for Small monstrous humaonids, but the only ones from the three bestiaries are the charda (Bestiary 2), kappa, and pukwudgie (both Bestiary 3). It's uncertain if applying the Young Creature simple template to Medium monstrous humanoids is allowed for this spell.
Page 229: Monstrous physique II spell, has a section for Tiny monstrous humanoids, but in all three bestiaries, there are no Tiny monstrous humanoids. The only way would be to apply the Young Creature simple template to the charda (Bestiary 2), kappa, or pukwudgie (both Bestiary 3), but it's uncertain if this is allowed.
Page 229: Monstrous physique III spell, has a section for Diminutive monstrous humanoids, but in all three bestiaries, there are no Diminutive monstrous humanoids, or Tiny ones that could be made smaller using the Young Creature simple template as described in the previous entry. There is also a Huge monstrous humanoid section. The only Huge monstrous humanoid in all three bestiaries is the Thriae Queen from Bestiary 3. It is uncertain if applying the Giant Creature simple template to Large monstrous humanoids is allowed when casting this spell.
Page 233: Protective penumbra spell, the S in the Components entry has a suggestive little comma after it. It's uncertain if this is a typo or if there was supposed to be an additional component. The penumbra cantrip that was cut from the book had a material component in the form of "a bit of soot."
Page 237: Shard of chaos spell, the chaos descriptor should be changed to "[chaotic]".
Page 238: Smug narcissism spell, has two, conflicting Duration entries.
Page 241: Summon minor monster spell, as mentioned before, the last sentence of this spell should have ", except for antipaladins which may only apply the Fiendish Creature template" added to the end of it.
Page 241: Surmount affliction spell, the Range entry and the Target entry should be exchanged.
Page 241: Symbol of revelation spell, since it operates like faerie fire, it's possible it should have the [light] descriptor.
Page 243: Temporary resurrection spell, doesn't have a Saving Throw or Spell Resistance entry like other resurrection-type spells have. Usually it should say "Saving Throw none; see text; SR yes (harmless)" where "see text" refers to a section in the description that mentions that if a target is unwilling to return from the dead, the spell fails (which this spell doesn't mention, either). Additionally the spell fails to mention what condition the corpse needs to be in first. Also, and this may be strictly a flavor thing, it doesn't really say what the appearance of the temporarily resurrected creature has, whether it looks good as new or if it still bears the marks of its demise or decay.
Page 246: Utter contempt spell, Core Rulebook says all enchantment spells are [mind-affecting] spells, so it needs this descriptor. Additionally the book doesn't say so, but all enchantment spells in that book belong to a subschool, and it's likely this one's supposed to, too.
Page 249: Youthful appearance spell, fails to mention a Saving Throw and Spell Resistance entries.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Page 25: Animal Speaker archetype for the bard gets an ability at 3rd level called soothing performance...[/ooc]
True. Noted. (IMO, the "soothing performance" Core Rulebook ability is poorly named.)
The "must have at least" language isn't actually needed. A 20 HD opponent has 10 HD and qualifies as a valid target for life drinker, in the same sense that a 20 Str opponent has 13 Str and qualifies for Power Attack.
When we compile errata for a book, we sort it into two categories: stuff that affects the rules, and stuff that doesn't affect the rules (like typos, misplaced commas, and so on). We make all of the corrections in the file that goes to the printer, but only the stuff that affects the rules gets posted as the errata for the book. I'm holding a 2nd printing Ultimate Magic, and the entry you're talking about has been changed to "metal statue instead of stone," so the error was fixed, it's just not listed in the game-affecting public part of the errata. I'll make a note to have it moved to the other category, as "instead of iron" vs. "instead of stone" is a rule-affecting change.
This is in the typo category, and is corrected in the 2nd printing.
This is in the typo category, and is corrected in the 2nd printing.
Clarification not really needed.
Typo, corrected in second printing (hereafter I'll just say "typo" in response to this sort of thing).
We don't design new content for a book's next printing in response to material added to another book in errata; that way lies madness.
Typo.
Noted for errata. More XP for the heroic pig-killers out there!
Noted for errata. It should be vitriolic mist.
Noted for errata. It should be time stop. Just kidding.
Noted for errata.
Noted for errata.
Noted for errata.
Noted for errata.
Noted for errata.
Typo.
Good catch, noted for errata.
Meh, doesn't really matter, the metamagic feat names don't follow a consistent style. Some are regular verbs (Extend, Maximize), some are adjectives (Elemental, Focused), some are gerund verbs (Bouncing, Burning).
The feat description is correct and the table was corrected in the 2nd printing, but it looks like the public errata document doesn't include it, as if it were a typo. I'll make a note to have the public errata document fixed.
Hmmm. I see the point of making that consistent, but adding that text would make that spell run over to a 2nd line, and that would shift everything down one line, in particular the 3rd-Level Antipaladin Spells header, and that would just leave 1 line of spell text before the column break, and publishers generally don't do that. So I'll note it, but I don't think it'll actually get changed because it'll affect the spell lists for the rest of this chapter Cleric 1, Druid 5, Inquisitor 3, and Ranger 1 would also be affected by this change).
Noted for errata.
Heh, nice. Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
Noted.
That's how centered-on-you spells are written; Range is how far from you the spell can reach, not necessarily how far away from you the origin can be. See prayer as another example.
I cut the material component when creating the errata. I'll update the FAQ. Thanks!
... which is the minimum level to cast the spell for all classes except summoner (CL 16th). Doesn't matter, really.
Considering that you can't cast the spell until CL 17th, it doesn't really matter.
As above, doesn't matter, really.
Noted.
Noted. It should be a compulsion subschool spell.
Not errata.
Noted.
Hmm, I had this noted for errata in my 1st printing copy of the book, but it didn't make it into the errata. I'll note it again. Range should be Medium. The "or more" in the Targets line is correct. Noted.
Noted and noted.
Noted.
Typo.
Typo.
Noted (should be "none").
Amphibious: noted.
Small: just because few such creatures exist in the hardcovers doesn't mean the spell can't allow you to do it for future/AP/3rd-party content.
Templates: from the Core Rulebook, "Polymorph spells cannot be used to assume the form of a creature with a template or an advanced version of a creature."
See above.
See above.
Typo.
Noted.
Noted (the non-instantaneous duration is correct).
Meh.
Noted.
Noted.
Save: true (should be same as resurrection).
Body condition: true (ditto).
Flavor: You've been resurrected, so you don't look beat up. The spell doesn't say you look beat up, so it's safe to assume that it's like other resurrection-type spells, just temporary.
Noted (it should be a compulsion).
Noted (Fort negates, yes).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A whole bunch of stuff
Pfft, gee, thanks Sean. You know if I wanted to feel rewarded for my work I'd just do my job while at work instead of making big long forum posts about RPG splatbook errata while on the clock. What are you trying to do, make me think someone cares or is listening?
(Seriously, though, thank you!)
|
|
(IMO, the "soothing performance" Core Rulebook ability is poorly named.)
Agreed.
Page 122: Book of the Grave, 3rd-level spells, the spell vitriol does not exist.
Noted for errata. It should be vitriolic mist.
Don't forget you'll have another issue if you change it since that spell is 4th-level, not 3rd.
Page 219: Fickle winds spell, missing its Components entry and its Range entry. The Components entry should be "V, S" as stated in the FAQ (but somehow left out of the errata). The Range entry is still up in the air. The spell doesn't mention specifically mention the words "this spell functions like wind wall except..." but it does mention that spell, so it's possible the range was intended to be medium like that spell. Lastly, the Targets line should have the words "or more" deleted.
Hmm, I had this noted for errata in my 1st printing copy of the book, but it didn't make it into the errata. I'll note it again. Range should be Medium. The "or more" in the Targets line is correct. Noted.
I only mentioned the "or more" thing cause I figured any multiple target stuff would be implied by the "1 per level" part of the target line.
Meh.
Meh, indeed.
|
|
Page 147: Concussion Spell metamagic feat, "Concussion" should be changed to "Concussive".
Meh, doesn't really matter, the metamagic feat names don't follow a consistent style. Some are regular verbs (Extend, Maximize), some are adjectives (Elemental, Focused), some are gerund verbs (Bouncing, Burning)
Right, I only mentioned it cause it's called a "Concussive" spell later in the chapter.
|
|
Pgs. 37-40 Various Animal Shaman archetypes
The various animal shaman archetypes (Dragon [yes, I know not an animal], Saurian, and Shark) all get an ability at 2nd level called totem transformation. Jason Nelson, designer of the original animal archetypes from the APG, said he had intended to write that they replace woodland stride.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Pg. 55 - Dance of the Blades ability for Metal Mystery
APG had errata that clarified that an oracle with the lame oracle curse couldn't take Cinder Dance from the Flame mystery, presumably because the speed increase would effectively offset the detriments of the curse.
The Metal mystery from Ultimate Magic has a revelation called Dance of the Blades, which also increases base speed. It may also need this clarification.
Of course the cinder dance revelation could have been banned from lame oracles for different reasons, but it seems like this was the reason.
|
|
I'm curious whether the Magus and 0-level word issue was ever resolved. I don't have the new printing myself, and I haven't seen anything posted about it.
assuming you're talking about the words of power chapter and the paragraph about magi, witches, and wizards on page 162, then yes, the latest errata clarified it.
In short, change "Witches and wizards" to "Magi, witches, and wizards" in the first sentence, and at the end of that same sentence change "3 + the witch's or wizard's Intelligence modifier" to "3 + their Intelligence modifier." Finally, the second sentence, the one that starts with "Magi begin play with", should be deleted outright.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Variant Channeling, pp. 28-31
The Undeath variant is still all screwed up (as xevious573 pointed out) because of a single sentence.
A variant channeling either modifies positive channeled energy when used to heal or modifies negative energy when used to harm.
As written, that excludes half of all channeling: positive to harm [undead], and negative to heal [undead]. (See p. 40 of the CRB.) You can't fix the Undeath variant without addressing that. The current version of Undeath would simply have no effect, since it gives a bonus to how much undead are healed when you're channeling negative energy to harm the living, which is 150% of zero in the PFRPG.
I think that you would be opening a great big can of worms if you made it so that the "Heal" and "Harm" clauses apply to both polarities. It's really safest just to change the Undeath variant, and here's a proposal.
Undeath: This variant affects the opposite kinds of channeling of the usual. Positive to Harm—This works like a standard channel (not halved). Negative to Heal—The healing effect is enhanced (see page 28) for undead creatures and those with negative energy affinity.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Pgs. 29-31 - Variant Channeling effect duration
While I was trying to figure out the Undeath variant, I couldn't help noticing that some variants don't list durations for their non-instantaneous effects. (No seriously, I just can't stop myself from noticing things.) I went back later and examined them all, so here's the list.
Farming: This is an iffy one. You should be able to figure out from the Heal section how the Harm works (1 minute, see page 28). Just listing it for completeness.
Freedom: I can only guess how long the channel bonus from Heal lasts.
Madness: Ditto.
Monsters: I can only guess how long the channel penalty from Harm lasts.
Nightmares: Ditto.
Sun: How long does the channel bonus from Heal last?
Weather: Ditto?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Pgs. 29-31 - Variant Channeling effect duration
...
Farming: This is an iffy one. You should be able to figure out from the Heal section how the Harm works (1 minute, see page 28). Just listing it for completeness.
I noticed it said you're fatigued as if experiencing starvation so I looked in those rules to see if the explanation resided in there, and I ended up with more questions than I started with. Starvation rules state you are fatigued if you take nonlethal damage from starvation, but that the nonlethal damage goes away if you eat or drink something. Does that mean the fatigue goes away, too, or does that only go away if you rest (the standard method of relieving fatigue)?
Likewise, how does this apply to this variant channeling? If it isn't a 1-minute duration, then does the fatigue only lift if the victim eats or drinks, or does it require rest?
I... did not notice that about the Farming variant. Good thing I like to be thorough! :)
However, I just realized that even if Undeath is fixed to have an upside, it still won't have a downside -- because "undead creatures and those with negative energy affinity" are *everything* that can be healed with negative energy. So it would be 150% for all, and 50% for none; compare with the example of Nature, where the effects are enhanced for animals and fey, but reduced for non-animal non-fey.
As such, please ignore my proposal three posts up. It would be worse than no change at all. The only way that I can see to fix it is to make a unique rule for that unique variant -- and while you're at it, maybe allow a cleric of a neutral deity with death in their portfolio (like Pharasma) to exercise their hatred of undeath.
Undeath: This variant affects all kinds of channeled energy. Positive—The harmful effect is enhanced (see page 28), but the healing effect is halved without any offsetting benefit. Negative—The healing effect is enhanced, but the harmful effect is halved without any offsetting penalty.
|
|
Pg. 16 - Grand Cognatogen discovery
In the last sentence of the Grand Cognatogen discovery paragraph, delete "or class ability". This was a copy-paste error it seems, as there is no greater cognatogen class feature, only a discovery by that name. The copy likely came from either the greater cognatogen discovery two paragraphs below it (which was referring to the cognatogen class feature of the mindchemist archetype), or from the greater mutagen discovery text from the Advanced Player's Guide.
EDIT: mentioned the wrong book.
|
|
Pg. 18 - Vestigial Arm discovery
In the vestigial arm discovery paragraph, in the fifth sentence, it says:
"The arm has its own 'hand' and 'ring' magic item slots (though the alchemist can still only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time)."
Emphasis mine. This is a little misleading, as an alchemist doesn't really get two hand magic items, but many of those hand magic items come in pairs (gloves, gauntlets, etc.). Not including any items from Advanced Race Guide (as I haven't finished looking through my copy), the only hand magic items that only cover a single hand are the assisting glove, glowing glove (APG), glove of storing, and gauntlet of rust (CRB), and even then you can't put a different hand magic item on the opposite hand, as there's only one Hands magic item slot (See the Core Rulebook chapter about Magic or the new Character Folio product).
Actually, what happens with Small characters and this spell? It fails to mention.Page 219 - Fickle winds spell
Aside from missing components line (which has been mentioned and remedied by SKR), and the missing range line (which has been mentioned and not yet fixed), the Targets line is a little wonky.
"Targets one or more Medium creatures/level..."
Should probably just be one Medium creature/level, as its hard to calculate more/level. :)
Also, the description mentions it creates a cylinder (and a mobile one at that!), but there is no description on the height of the cylinder or movement qualities of the resulting cylinder. Is this a target(s) spell or a cylinder area spell? If the cylinder is truly meant to be mobile, can it be used to push Small or smaller creatures? Mobility would a nice bit of utility on top of this spell.
|
|
If you wanted to derive the height of the spell, you could look to the wind wall spell for those parameters since it says it protects like it. The bigger issue, however, is like you said: how can this both be a cylinder and target spell? Sure it says the targets can't be more than 30 ft. apart, insinuating that the cylinder is 30 ft. in diameter, but wouldn't it being a cylinder in the first place give it the ability to target every creature that sits in its area, instead of the limited number of creatures dependent on your caster level?
I think that I get where you two are coming from, and I think that I have identified the error. The spell is just written from a more gamist than simulationist perspective. It isn't a 30' cylinder of wind; it's a 30' sphere of spell effect, in which some creatures become protected by a personal cylinder of wind and others maybe don't. Because winds are fickle, dontcha know!
Pg. 220 - fickle winds
You create a mobile cylinder of wind encompassing every target of the spell and protecting them as wind wall, but not interfering with them in any way.
Should probably be something more like...
You create one or more mobile cylinders of wind, protecting each target of the spell as wind wall, but not interfering with them in any way.
The alchemist's Plague Bomb says: "The effects of the smoke created by an alchemist's bomb duplicates the effects of contagion instead of fog cloud, filling an area equal to twice the bomb's splash area for 1 round per level."
Should that say something like "in addition to" instead of "instead of"? Otherwise it's not clear whether the plague bomb actually creates any smoke/fog or not.
I was going to ask this question, but I thought I'd do a quick search on it first. I totally forgot I asked about it a year ago! Ha!
|
|
So I couldn't help but notice that in the PRD, every mystery listed for the Oracle in both the APG and UM sections has had its deity section deleted. The APG's is missing all together, whereas the UM's have had the deities deleted, but still have the Deities subentry header following the mystery title. Is this because oracles are supposed to not simply venerate a single deity, but all deities to some degree for their divine gifts, and removing these deity lists does away with the confusion about whether or not oracles are supposed to pick a specific deity?
So I couldn't help but notice that in the PRD, every mystery listed for the Oracle in both the APG and UM sections has had its deity section deleted. The APG's is missing all together, whereas the UM's have had the deities deleted, but still have the Deities subentry header following the mystery title. Is this because oracles are supposed to not simply venerate a single deity, but all deities to some degree for their divine gifts, and removing these deity lists does away with the confusion about whether or not oracles are supposed to pick a specific deity?
The PRD removes any Golarion-specific information.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I hope this hasn't been asked.
Disguise Other has a range of touch but lists no save or SR
Should you be able to change a creatures appearance with no save?
or is this only on willing targets.
Damn switching to Pathfinder is giving me a headache.
Another simple question
Haunting Mists list a range of 20ft however the text reads "An illusion of misty vapor inhabited by shadowy shapes arises
around you."
Can this be at range or is it centered on the caster.
As it says nothing about the caster being unaffected why would you want this centered on you? You would have to immediately have to make a will save or lose Wisdom and become shaken.
Damn switching to Pathfinder is giving me a headache.
I sympathize. It would be nice if they would reference relevant rules. It seems kind of confusing, how even if you cast haunting mists 20 ft. away, you're still in its radius. But here's the thing...
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.
So the caster is automatically unaffected by everything except how the spell obscures sight and provides concealment. But I had to flip around through the CRB to figure that out. So keep on asking questions! That was an excellent point about disguise other.
Page 76:
the Mammoth eidolon model suggests that the eidolon take the Slam evolution; but that requires Limbs (Arms) (which 1: isn't suggested to be taken, and 2: wouldn't fit well on a mammoth model). (Noticed this as I was trying to make a mammoth eidolon myself, and wanted to give it a slam with its trunk.)
|
Perhaps I should post this here?
...As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty)...
Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack...
As written, this would allow a magus to spell combat/spellstrike spells from wizard (or other class) slots, as long as they are spells on the magus spell list. Curiously, Broad Study uses the same wording:
The magus can use his spellstrike and spell combat abilities while casting or using spells from the spell list of that class.
This is certainly self-consistent and has a clear meaning: A magus/wizard can spell combat with shocking grasp from a wizard slot, but not, for instance, burning arc. But he can if he takes broad study -- potentially useful for, say, a Magus/Wizard/Eldritch Knight that would rather have the wider wizard spell list than magus class features or something (although they'll need to take three levels in Magus and won't see EK until 9th level if they want to cast wizard-only spells while stabbing things.) Likewise, a magus/cleric could spell combat with Obscuring Mist or Infernal Healing from his cleric slots, but not with Cure Light Wounds unless he takes the arcana.
Common interpretation seems to be that all three of these wordings are meant to read '_____ spells' or 'spells recieved from the _____ class' instead of 'spells from the _____ spell list', as in
...He can cast magus spells while wearing light armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance...A multiclass magus still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance for arcane spells received from other classes.
Which would make it so that the magus only casts spells from magus spell slots with spell combat, and Broad Study lets him use other classes' slots. (If the wording is changed in Spell Combat/Spellstrike and not in Broad Study, Broad Study becomes useless)
Was the wrong wording used in these three places, or am I misunderstanding the meaning of 'spells from the _____ spell list', or is my reading correct?
That was very confusing. I'm still not sure that I understand your meaning, so here's my reading of the rules:
The Spell Combat and Spellstrike class features are cool with anything on the magus spell list, regardless of how he gets it. But the Weapon and Armor Proficiency isn't; sounds like you'd incur an arcane spell failure chance for a spell cast from a wizard spell slot, even if it's on the magus spell list. Comparing both of those with Broad Study from the Magus Arcana, it looks like Broad Study basically expands what you can use Spell Combat and Spellstrike with, but not what you can cast without incurring an arcane spell failure chance.
1. Magus spell: Spell Combat, Spellstrike, and no arcane spell failure chance in light armor.
2. Other class's spell that's on the magus spell list: Spell Combat and Spellstrike, but also an arcane spell failure chance.
3. Other class's spell that's not on the magus spell list: Arcane spell failure chance. No Spell Combat or Spell Strike.
4. Broad Study class's spell that's not on the magus spell list: Treated like #2 instead of #3. Spell Combat and Spellstrike, but also an arcane spell failure chance.
If that doesn't answer your question, then please re-phrase it briefer and clearer.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If that doesn't answer your question, then please re-phrase it briefer and clearer.
That's my reading too.
The issue is most people I talk to seem to feel that this is an error, and that Rules As Intended is that #2 should be treated like #3, and you need to take Broad Study with a class to remedy this.At first I, too, intuitively felt this was how the magus worked, but the more I look at the wording, the more our interpretation seems obvious.
I guess I'm hoping that maybe a designer will happen by and clarify things, because nothing else will resolve an RAI argument (and if the more restrictive interpretation _is_ correct, I don't want to be doing something munchkiny by trying to follow RAW)
I think there is a spell in Ultimate Magic that needs some Errata: Call Construct. It acts and reads like a Conjuration (summoning) spell and it states that it functions as Instant Summons from CRB, which is a Conjuration (summoning) spell. I think it was mistakenly classified as Conjuration (teleportation).
My full logic and reasoning about this can be found THIS THREAD, which could also use some official input.
CALL CONSTRUCTSchool conjuration (teleportation); Level cleric 8, sorcerer/wizard 8
Casting Time 10 minutes
Components V, S, M (a sapphire worth 1,000 or 5,000 gp; see text)
Range touch
Target construct touched
Duration permanent until discharged
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
This spell functions as instant summons, except it can only summon a construct you control. For constructs such as golems that are immune to magic, the value of the specially inscribed sapphire must be at least 5,000 gp. For other constructs, a 1,000 gp sapphire suffices.
If the construct is no longer under your control or destroyed, the spell fails, but you know roughly where the construct or its remains are located.
To be fair, yes, the spell description does say Conjuration (teleportation) and that supports this point you have against my argument. However, it is virtually identical, and even refers to, the spell Instant Summons from the CRB, which as I stated above is a Conjuration (Summoning) spell.
Instant Summons
School conjuration (summoning); Level sorcerer/wizard 7
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (sapphire worth 1,000 gp)
Range see text
Target one object weighing 10 lbs. or less whose longest dimension is 6 ft. or less
Duration permanent until discharged
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
You call some nonliving item directly to your hand from virtually any location.
First, you must place your arcane mark on the item. Then you cast this spell, which magically and invisibly inscribes the name of the item on a sapphire worth at least 1,000 gp. Thereafter, you can summon the item by speaking a special word (set by you when the spell is cast) and crushing the gem. The item appears instantly in your hand. Only you can use the gem in this way.
If the item is in the possession of another creature, the spell does not work, but you know who the possessor is and roughly where that creature is located when the summons occurs.
The inscription on the gem is invisible. It is also unreadable, except by means of a read magic spell, to anyone but you.
The item can be summoned from another plane, but only if no other creature has claimed ownership of it.
Based on the fact that it evolved from a Conjuration (Summoning) spell, refers back to that Conjuration (Summoning) spell in its description, and reads almost identically to that same Conjuration (Summoning) spell, IMO Call Construct should also be a Conjuration (Summoning) spell and its classification as a Conjuration (Teleportation) spell is a mistake on the writer’s part. I will be posting about it in the UM Errata thread after I post this.