|
The problem is, quite a few people will notice threads like this one and go "oh no, this book is full of errors, I'm not that stupid, I'm gonna wait for 2nd printing".
Given that 2nd printing happens only after the first one is out of stock, this is actually shooting the chances of 2nd print in the foot.
|
Various Pages - Missing spell component pouch
Not including iconics, all bards, clerics, experienced paladins, experienced rangers, and wizards are missing their spell component pouches in their gear.
Iconics missing theirs include Seelah the paladin in later levels and Harsk the ranger in later levels.
The problem is, quite a few people will notice threads like this one and go "oh no, this book is full of errors, I'm not that stupid, I'm gonna wait for 2nd printing".
Given that 2nd printing happens only after the first one is out of stock, this is actually shooting the chances of 2nd print in the foot.
My question is: how many hardcovers have gone to 2nd printing? Obviously the CRB has gone through numerous but what about APG? UC, UM?
And, I agree that nitpicking minor things like skill ranks (honestly how many of you use all of an NPCs skills) or a +1 or +2 here and there. Knowing the people I play with, they are also off by +1 or +2 quite often and we don't make a big deal of it.
Pointing out glaring issues (oh noss - his AC is off by 4!) that could change the encounter drastically is all that really needs to be pointed out.
Further: why compile a public list to deter people from buying the book? Write it all up on your computer then email it to paizo quietly.
|
|
The problem is, quite a few people will notice threads like this one and go "oh no, this book is full of errors, I'm not that stupid, I'm gonna wait for 2nd printing".
Given that 2nd printing happens only after the first one is out of stock, this is actually shooting the chances of 2nd print in the foot.
My question is: how many hardcovers have gone to 2nd printing? Obviously the CRB has gone through numerous but what about APG? UC, UM?
And, I agree that nitpicking minor things like skill ranks (honestly how many of you use all of an NPCs skills) or a +1 or +2 here and there. Knowing the people I play with, they are also off by +1 or +2 quite often and we don't make a big deal of it.
Pointing out glaring issues (oh noss - his AC is off by 4!) that could change the encounter drastically is all that really needs to be pointed out.
Further: why compile a public list to deter people from buying the book? Write it all up on your computer then email it to paizo quietly.
For many of us error-reporting regulars (chopswil, astral wanderer, myself), we see it as a service to not only Paizo, but to players and GMs, as well. Paizo has said time and time again that they appreciate fan feedback (probably more than any company in this biz before, given their behemothic playtesting practices), and that they DO use fan-found errors when correcting their new printings. We don't do this for a living, so yeah, we get stuff wrong sometimes (read: a lot), just like the guys that do do this for a living. When I find an error, I post it not for Paizo, but for other GMs that are as meticulous as I am and like to update their books while they wait for the official errata to make it...er...official.
Yeah, a thread 500 posts deep does seem intimidating. However, 99% of the errors we've reported since day one of the Core Rulebook coming out haven't been game breaking ones. Even the ones that do grind things to a halt should be overcome in seconds by GM intercession. People that are going to get "scared off" by a post-heavy errata thread are far and few between, especially when you consider that the majority of people buying these books won't set virtual-foot in the messageboards, anyway.
SKR has been a saint for his patience with us, especially when you consider everything else the man no doubt has on his plate. The reason we don't just send private messages full of errata is because if we all did this, they'd be flooded with people reporting the same errors. Plus having it in one thread ensures it's all in one place. For what it's worth, though, on behalf of all of us I'd like to apologize to him and the rest of the staff for adding to the workload.
Oh and to answer your question, the latest printing of the RPG series of books are:
CR: 5th printing
APG: 2nd printing
GMG: 2nd printing
UM: 2nd printing
UC: 1st printing
B1: 3rd printing
B2: 2nd printing
B3: 1st printing
UE: 1st printing
ARG: 1st printing
NPCC: 1st printing
** spoiler omitted **...
Maybe we could find a way to indicate "Trivial" errors (typos or odd flavor text), "Minor" errors (within maybe +2), "Major" errors (can have a strong effect on an encounter), and "Critical" errors (part of an encounter doesn't work at all). If we could do colors, I'd suggest colors.
|
|
Arcane Experimenter p. 19
Skill Points Exceeded : -2
Skills Ranks: 45 = 42 class skills +3 Favored class
Total Ranks Used 47Favored Class: Barbarian
Favored Class Points: 14
Favored Class Points Devoted to HP: 11Acrobatics +17 = +14 ranks, +3 Dex, +3 class skill, -3 Armor Check Penalty
Climb +6 = +1 ranks, +5 Str, +3 class skill, -3 Armor Check Penalty
Craft (alchemy) +5 = +3 ranks, -1 Int, +3 class skill
Knowledge (arcana) +0 = +1 ranks, -1 Int
Perception +20 = +14 ranks, +1 Wis, +3 class skill +2 Race Mod
Spellcraft +0 = +1 ranks, -1 Int
Stealth +5 = +1 ranks, +3 Dex, -3 Armor Check Penalty +4 Small
Survival +5 = +1 ranks, +1 Wis, +3 class skill
Use Magic Device +18 = +11 ranks, +1 Cha +3 SkillFocus
She's a gnome, chop. She's got that +2 to a Craft or Profession skill, in this case Craft (alchemy).
Also with UMD it should be +6 Skill Focus. Nonetheless you listed the correct amount of skill ranks, anyway.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **...Maybe we could find a way to indicate "Trivial" errors (typos or odd flavor text), "Minor" errors (within maybe +2), "Major" errors (can have a strong effect on an encounter), and "Critical" errors (part of an encounter doesn't work at all). If we could do colors, I'd suggest colors.
Not a terrible idea. For what it's worth I've given up reporting basic typos. Probably won't get color changing options in the boards, though. I do have a record of every confirmed error from all of the aforementioned boards. I'd like to make a site to display them all eventually.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not a terrible idea. For what it's worth I've given up reporting basic typos. Probably won't get color changing options in the boards, though. I do have a record of every confirmed error from all of the aforementioned boards. I'd like to make a site to display them all eventually.
** spoiler omitted **...Maybe we could find a way to indicate "Trivial" errors (typos or odd flavor text), "Minor" errors (within maybe +2), "Major" errors (can have a strong effect on an encounter), and "Critical" errors (part of an encounter doesn't work at all). If we could do colors, I'd suggest colors.
I've yet to see anyone from Paizo say "don't do errata threads"
From having done this about as long as Strife2002, they do fixes in the next printing even down to the petty "CMD is off by 1" or "Craft[bellybutton lint] is off by 2"
Actually you've been doing it longer! :)
|
|
SCARRED WANDERER p. 25
This dwarf doesn't list darkvision 60 feet in his senses line.
per Shield Master feat "You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your shield’s enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus."
so there should be no penalties for two-weapon fighting with the shield
Melee Attack Bonus-+5 heavy spiked shield: Computed: 31 Stat Block: 29
BAB + AbilityBonus + SizeMod + EnchantmentBonus
20 + 6 + 0 +5and if there are no penalties for two-weapon fighting on the shield can there be penalties assessed to the waraxe? (not too sure about this one)
Melee Attack Bonus-+1 dwarven waraxe: Computed: 27 Stat Block: 25
BAB + AbilityBonus + SizeMod + EnchantmentBonus
20 + 6 + 0 +1Missing Skill: Fly, has fly speed
at least to sum up the modsSkill HD Max:Acrobatics: Computed: 21 HD: 20
Skill:Survival: Computed: 2 Stat Block: 6Favored Class: Barbarian
Favored Class Points: 20
Favored Class Points Devoted to HP: 20Skill Points Exceeded : -1
Skills Ranks: 80 = 80 class skills
Total Ranks Used 81Acrobatics +22 = +21 ranks, +2 Dex, +3 class skill, -4 Armor Check Penalty
Climb +20 = +15 ranks, +6 Str, +3 class skill, -4 Armor Check Penalty
Intimidate +20 = +19 ranks, -2 Cha, +3 class skill
Linguistics +3 = +3 ranks, +0 Int
Perception +25 = +20 ranks, +2 Wis, +3 class skill
Profession (miner) +5 = +3 ranks, +2 Wis
Survival +2 = +0 ranks, +2 Wis
Skill points come out fine. Remember that the armor check penalty's only -3, since it's magic breastplate and gets the masterwork benefit.
You know, I thanked SKR earlier in this thread, but I should also thank everyone who works on finding errors and posting them in this thread. I especially thank chopswil, for scrutinizing so many stat blocks, including the ones I've been using. Being too lazy to search for errors myself, I thank you for sparing me the work. I just incorporated some corrections into my notes.
Also, Strife2002, thank you for pointing me to those other errata threads. I wish I had known the location of those threads earlier.
I just want you all to know that your efforts are appreciated. You've probably heard it before, but in case one more person might make any difference, thanks.
|
|
Pgs. 26, 32, 33, 36, 38, 39, 43 - Various bards
The bards on these pages are missing their musical instruments in their other gear (although the cruel instructor and seance medium on 32 and 33 respectively would be hard pressed to carry a piano around). On page 26, only the street performer is sans instrument, the tavern singer's fine.
On a related note, the courtesan on page 35 has a mstwk harm for Perform (string) but nothing for her Perform (wind) skill.
|
|
STREET PERFORMER p. 26
perform(wind) and versatile performance (wind) but no wind instrument in gear???
Skill HD Max:Sleight of Hand: Computed: 3 HD: 2
Favored Class: Bard
Favored Class Points: 2
Favored Class Points Devoted to HP: 1Skill Points Unused : 2
Skills Ranks: 13 = 10 class skills +2 race mod +1 Favored class
Total Ranks Used 11Acrobatics +5 = +1 ranks, +2 Dex, +3 class skill, -1 Armor Check Penalty
Bluff +7 = +1 ranks, +3 Cha, +3 class skill
Diplomacy +8 = +0 ranks, +0
Handle Animal +8 = +0 ranks, +0
Knowledge (local) +4 = +1 ranks, -1 Int, +3 class skill + 2 /2 + Bardic Knowledge(Level /2)
Perception +5 = +1 ranks, +1 Wis, +3 class skill
Perform (wind) +8 = +2 ranks, +3 Cha, +3 class skill
Sense Motive +5 = +1 ranks, +1 Wis, +3 class skill
Sleight of Hand +7 = +3 ranks, +2 Dex, +3 class skill, -1 Armor Check Penalty
Stealth +5 = +1 ranks, +2 Dex, +3 class skill, -1 Armor Check Penalty +0 Medium
There's another issue here. Notice the HP. It says "2d8+1" but he has Con 13. At 2nd level, that'd be 2d8+2 at least. Unless you decide to put a favored class bonus into hp, that'd be hp 15 (2d8+2) and 14 total skill points to throw around.
|
|
CON ARTIST p. 29
Spell Count-Bard Level: 0: Computed: 6 Stat Block: 4
with Perform(string) +13 you'd think there would be a masterwork string
instrument there somewhere for the +2
Perform (string) comes out ok, to me.
Perform (string) +13 = 6 ranks + 3 (class skill) + 4 (Cha)Sense Motive would be +16 instead of +10 when using versatile performance.
Lastly, skills seem off. They'd work fine if the bard had used all of her favored class bonuses in skill points, but with a Con of 8, she had to put them all in hp to avoid subtracting 1 each HD.
If you simply change Sense Motive to +16 via versatile performance, that gets rid of the 6 skill ranks put into it, and makes everything work fine.
|
|
TAUNTING COMEDIAN p. 27
forgot size mod for small, this affects AC, weapon size, weapon HD,
attacks bonus, damage, CMD, CMB which are all incorrectSkill:Stealth: Computed: 6 Stat Block: 7
Intimidate is listed as +9. However versatile performance (act) makes it a +11.Favored Class: Bard
Favored Class Points: 4
Favored Class Points Devoted to HP: 4Skill Points Unused : 8
Skills Ranks: 28 = 28 class skills
Total Ranks Used 20Acrobatics +11 = +4 ranks, +3 Dex, +3 class skill, -1 Armor Check Penalty +2 Race Mod
Bluff +11 = +0 ranks, +0
Climb +1 = +0 ranks, +0 Str, -1 Armor Check Penalty +2 Race Mod
Diplomacy +8 = +1 ranks, +4 Cha, +3 class skill
Intimidate +11 = +0 ranks, +0
Knowledge (local) +10 = +4 ranks, +1 Int, +3 class skill + 4 /2 + Bardic Knowledge(Level /2)
Perception +1 = +0 ranks, -1 Wis +2 Race Mod
Perform (comedy) +11 = +4 ranks, +4 Cha, +3 class skill
Sense Motive +4 = +2 ranks, -1 Wis, +3 class skill
Spellcraft +6 = +2 ranks, +1 Int, +3 class skill
Stealth +6 = +0 ranks, +3 Dex, -1 Armor Check Penalty +4 Small
Use Magic Device +10 = +3 ranks, +4 Cha, +3 class skill
So here's the pattern I'm seeing here. When calculating skills for bards, the devs ignore versatile performance since a character may choose to substitute the skill. Naturally, if it's higher, why wouldn't they, but still.
All of the bard skill stat blocks ignore versatile performance and the skill bonuses you see are with ranks and bonuses factored in only*. In the Taunting comedian's case, the skill points work out fine in this case, but only if you don't factor in the size bonus to Stealth (just like the rest of the stat block ignored the size bonuses and penalties).
This means the only real change to this character's stat block would be changing Stealth from +7 to +11.
*The exception to this (so far that I've seen) is the street performer on page 26, who had her Handle Animal skill factored in via versatile performance (or they accidentally factored it in as a class skill).
|
|
I think this is because the are "empowered"Fury of Flame, p. 73
5th level - empowered fireball listed in two non-domain slots, domain spells not on a spell list can't be used except in domain slots
1. You're doing a fantastic job.
2. Unless there is an errata I missed, metamagic doesn't change the rule (CRB p. 41) that you must use a domain slot for non class list spells.
3. Just realized that there are two fireballs listed for the level three spells, also an error.
Hey there. First off I use the *heck* out of this tome - so thank you! Excellent reference and great value.
As the errata is generated, I did not see the following mentioned - I don't believe Adepts get 0 level spells "At Will" (although if I'm wrong, it would help me to know that).
Cheers,
~D
@ Chopswil, next sentence, actually. "If a domain spell is not on the cleric spell list, a cleric can prepare it only in her domain spell slot." CRB, p 41.
So, no multiple casting of domain spells NOT on the class's spell list.
I noticed the same thing and posted it. I ran my group against this guy and caught it.
If the spell isn't on you class list you can only memorize it using your domain slot.You can empower, but that takes up the newly adjusted slot. So only one fireball and one empowered fireball.
Has anyone pointed out yet the fire cleric on page 52 is using a heavy shield?
It's my understanding to cast spells you need a light shield or a buckler. Heavy shields are too ... Heavy.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6, Contributor
|
GRIFFON RIDER p. 85
she carries "bit and bridle, exotic military saddle, masterwork studded leather barding" around wherever she goes? seems kind of awkward and heavy.
Melee Attack Damage-mwk lance: Computed: 1d8+5 Stat Block: 1d8+4
+3 Str Bonus Used +2 weapon trainingflail appears in melee attacks but not in gear
composite bow doesn't show Str bonus, appears to be +2
1) Puts them on her griffin when it's activated, to my knowledge equipment does not meld with a deactivated figurine. See "before combat".
2) lance is one-handed rather than two-handed. 1d8+2 (Str) + 2 (weapon training). She has a shield, and the stat block assumes she's fighting mounted.
3) flail legitimately missing, should adjust her gold down to 39 as well. Ah well, I do cross-off checks for equipment blocks, but 70 stat blocks is a lot to check :)
4) composite bow shows the Sr bonus where it goes, in her equipment line. Not aware of this being needed in the Attack line, where it's a waste of space.
I appreciate the error checking, but 1 for 4 on this one, your errata needs errata perhaps.
The racial requirement for the Arcane Archer was removed/errata'd out sometime between the first printing of the core rulebook and now. (Note that the entry for the Arcane Archer in the PRD doesn't have it.)
|
|
The racial requirement for the Arcane Archer was removed/errata'd out sometime between the first printing of the core rulebook and now. (Note that the entry for the Arcane Archer in the PRD doesn't have it.)Are we sure? I just checked that link and I think it may have been forgotten rather than errata'd.
"Alignment: Arcane archers can be of any alignment. Elf or half-elf arcane arches tend to be free-spirited and are rarely lawful. Similarly, it is uncommon for elven arcane archers to be evil, and overall the path of the arcane archer is more often pursued by good or neutral characters."
They left that in in the alignment section which is why I question the errata. Still says "Elf or half-elf".
Yes. The devs have said on here themselves that they intentionally removed the race requirement for the arcane archer because they didn't agree with the limitation. That text you quoted, for one, just MENTIONS elf and half-elf arcane archers specifically, but doesn't say anything about the class being exclusive to them.
|
|
Do you happen to have a link for the arrata itself? Or one where the developers posted that? I had looked all over before I posted and I couldn't find it. Would be much appreciated. Thanks.Yes. The devs have said on here themselves that they intentionally removed the race requirement for the arcane archer because they didn't agree with the limitation. That text you quoted, for one, just MENTIONS elf and half-elf arcane archers specifically, but doesn't say anything about the class being exclusive to them.The racial requirement for the Arcane Archer was removed/errata'd out sometime between the first printing of the core rulebook and now. (Note that the entry for the Arcane Archer in the PRD doesn't have it.)Are we sure? I just checked that link and I think it may have been forgotten rather than errata'd.
"Alignment: Arcane archers can be of any alignment. Elf or half-elf arcane arches tend to be free-spirited and are rarely lawful. Similarly, it is uncommon for elven arcane archers to be evil, and overall the path of the arcane archer is more often pursued by good or neutral characters."
They left that in in the alignment section which is why I question the errata. Still says "Elf or half-elf".
I'll do you one better. It's in the bloody errata document. Download one of the earlier edition errata documents (1st to 5th or 2nd to 5th) and do a search for "arcane archer". You'll see it.