Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition Errata


Rise of the Runelords

701 to 719 of 719 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We're at a new page to this thread, so for any overwhelmed newcomers checking out this thread that skipped to the last page, here's a link to the master-errata doc for the Anniversary Edition of Rise of the Runelords.

RotR:AE Errata document

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ckdragons wrote:
Running this campaign a 2nd time for a new group of players. Using Hero Lab this time around for the NPCs and monsters. Trying to create Skinsaw Man in Hero Lab. How are his stats generated? Tried creating a Human Aristocrat/Rogue and then adding a ghast template. Also tried starting with ghast as race and adding levels. Also used both NPC heroic and Monster levels. Neither seem to add up to the stats in his stat block. What am I missing? Thanks.

I usually have to ignore stat-math for any creature's stats when they have the "unique" tag in their creature type entry since that can mean they're about to follow their own rules.


I think I've found (another) problem with Nualia's stats. The errata correctly identifies her composite longbow as being a masterwork composite longbow [+3]. (It seems odd to me she has a +3 when her base strength modifier is +1, but hey). This means that in her Base Statistics (page 62), her attack bonus for the composite longbow is incorrect. The description for the composite longbow includes this line:

PFRPG Core Rulebook wrote:
If your Strength bonus is less than the strength rating of the composite bow, you can't effectively use it, so you take a –2 penalty on attacks with it.

Since her base strength modifier is +1, she should take a -2 penalty to attack rolls with her composite longbow [+3].

The base statistics show her attack bonus with it as being +5: [BAB]5 + [Dex]-1 + [mwk]1 = 5. However, there should be a -2 penalty in there due to her not having the required strength to wield it properly. So the attack bonus should instead be +3: [BAB]5 + [Dex]-1 + [mwk]1 + [insufficient strength]-2 = 3.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Skater901 wrote:
I think I've found (another) problem with Nualia's stats. The errata correctly identifies her composite longbow as being a masterwork composite longbow [+3]. (It seems odd to me she has a +3 when her base strength modifier is +1, but hey). This means that in her Base Statistics (page 62), her attack bonus for the composite longbow is incorrect. The description for the composite longbow includes this line:
PFRPG Core Rulebook wrote:
If your Strength bonus is less than the strength rating of the composite bow, you can't effectively use it, so you take a –2 penalty on attacks with it.

Since her base strength modifier is +1, she should take a -2 penalty to attack rolls with her composite longbow [+3].

The base statistics show her attack bonus with it as being +5: [BAB]5 + [Dex]-1 + [mwk]1 = 5. However, there should be a -2 penalty in there due to her not having the required strength to wield it properly. So the attack bonus should instead be +3: [BAB]5 + [Dex]-1 + [mwk]1 + [insufficient strength]-2 = 3.

Yep, added to the doc.


Thanks to all parties for the work that went into this, and thanks Strife for compiling it all.

Apologies if I seem ungrateful, but is there a way to download this as a PDF by any chance? I'd like to throw it onto my iPad and use it offline, etc.
I'm beginning a herculean version of RotR Anniversary in a couple of weeks, over an extended weekend getaway.

Herculean Version:
Basically it's mashed up with part 5 of Shattered Star and part 4 of Giantslayer, as well as some modules like Dragon's Demand and Tomb of the Iron Medusa, etc. We began with Crypt of the Everflame as a prelude as a test run awhile back.


Here you go


Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I'm not sure if I ever said thank you either, and I really should! I used the errata extensively through all six parts of GMing the AP, and really appreciate all the hard work that went into it.


kadance wrote:
Here you go

Says URL not found. :/


That's disappointing. I'll try again.


Thanks so much, that worked :)

Grand Lodge

You're all welcome. I've got one of those ADHD brains that half-ignores everything in my life except for one thing I choose to become laser-focused on. Fortunately it's RPG errata.

Grand Lodge

Strife2002 wrote:

Pgs. 178, 405 - Annis Hag (Bestiary 3 16)

- Possibly not an error, but it's been discussed that the annis hag's rend damage is exceptionally high for her challenge rating, not to mention it also simply doesn't follow the normal rules of damage rend usually deals. There is some speculation in the community that her rend damage is a copy-paste error from when her stat block was copied from the now-obsolete Bonus Bestiary. If it is an error, then her rend damage would likely be something along the lines of "1d6+10".

Found some evidence that the rend damage is incorrect and is a relic of the time before Pathfinder's rules were finalized. The annis hag was one of the example creatures used for the boreal template on page 56 of Campaign Setting: Irrisen, Land of Eternal Winter and in that book the rend damage is 1d6 instead of 2d6, as is normal per the rules.


On page 117, Ironbriar's footlocker is mentioned under 'treasure' but not in the description of the room or anywhere else. I assume most GMs let the footlocker sit under the desk but it should be added to the description of area D7.

Grand Lodge

Lawrencelot wrote:
On page 117, Ironbriar's footlocker is mentioned under 'treasure' but not in the description of the room or anywhere else. I assume most GMs let the footlocker sit under the desk but it should be added to the description of area D7.

For my games I added the following sentence to the end of the description of D7:

"In the northeast corner sits a footlocker with surprisingly little dust, covered with a plain table runner and various bric-a-brac as if it were a low table."

Grand Lodge

Pg. 203 - A5 Longtooth's Cave (CR 11) treasure

In area A5's treasure description, the last few sentences mention a set of silver idols sitting on a ledge worth 600 gp each. They are:

- A wyvern and its human rider
- A human warrior trampling a demon underfoot
- A centaur dressed in plate mail armor
- A leaping fish with a wide mouth filled with teeth

The last two sentences then says:

Last two sentences say wrote:
A sixth idol is in fact made of platinum. It depicts Runelord Karzoug, and is worth 5,000 gp.

Based on the count here it seems that should say "fifth idol". The only other thing I could think of would be the wyvern and its human rider were supposed to be two separate idols, but I would think that's strange - they're idols, not action figures.


In Sins of the Saviors area A9, Outer Sanctum, the Scribbler's Suggestion trap creates a suggestion spell effect. Suggestion is language-dependent, but the trap doesn't specify what language is used. However, the only languages that the Scribbler speaks are Abyssal and Thassilonian, so whichever one is chosen, it's unlikely that many of the PCs will be affected by this trap.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Callum wrote:
In Sins of the Saviors area A9, Outer Sanctum, the Scribbler's Suggestion trap creates a suggestion spell effect. Suggestion is language-dependent, but the trap doesn't specify what language is used. However, the only languages that the Scribbler speaks are Abyssal and Thassilonian, so whichever one is chosen, it's unlikely that many of the PCs will be affected by this trap.

Personally, I would actually rule that language doesn't matter in this case. Because the suggestion trap was placed as part of the guards and wards spell placed on the whole area, the suggestion is delivered mentally. Because of this, I would treat the suggestion similar to how telepathic creatures communicate. Telepathy doesn't require a shared language (something I learned recently myself), so in this case I would say the suggestion is telepathically communicated and enters the mind of whatever the creature's primary language or means of communication is.


Pg. 307 - B1 The tailings (CR 14) treasure

The +2 crossbow bolts of distance shouldn't have the "distance" special ability because it's exclusive to ranged weapons. I suggest to replace them with +2 crossbow bolts of seeking.

Grand Lodge

AsterITA wrote:

Pg. 307 - B1 The tailings (CR 14) treasure

The +2 crossbow bolts of distance shouldn't have the "distance" special ability because it's exclusive to ranged weapons. I suggest to replace them with +2 crossbow bolts of seeking.

Nice, I agree. Of the special qualities available to ammunition, seeking seems the most appropriate replacement. Added to master doc.

701 to 719 of 719 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Rise of the Runelords / Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition Errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rise of the Runelords