| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I noticed in the PRD that "riding dog" is not on the list for summon monster I, although it appears on the list in my Core Rulebook (1st printing). I checked a 5th printing and found "riding dog" had been eliminated there.
I figured there was an errata that changed this, but I did not find one in the official errata document. I did however find an entry for eliminating "riding dog" from the 1st level list of summon nature's ally.
I don't know when this was changed, but I see a lot of riding dogs being summoned at Pathfinder Society games. They are indeed one of my favorite monsters to summon as well.
Yea, it's errata that wasn't announced. It was meant to be done at the same time as SNA. It's too good for SM I.
Do you think this is an oversight? Does this thread warrant an FAQ?
The change was fully intentional. At best, we could use an updated errata, but they never have contained every single change.
When our DM banned the riding dog from the Summon Monster I list not one of us complained. At third level when you summon 1d3 of these bastards it was a game changer.
Perhaps. The only other change I know of that actually affects the rules was the change of 'cleric' to 'divine caster' in the magic chapter. But that's another case where it technically changes the rules, but everyone knew what was going on sinceit was obvious.
I see that summon monster I in the Player's Handbook allowed a caster to summon a celestial dog. It would seem that the inclusion of riding dog in the Core Rulebook was a complete mistake.
Should I hit the FAQ button? I mean nobody is actually asking the question since there is no need to; given that the Core Rulebook offers a riding dog and there is no errata prohibiting it.
Does the PRD trump the Core Rulebook? People paid for the rule book.
It's rather odd to not include all the changes in the errata documents (at least those that actually alter rules, rather than being simple typos), considering the purpose of errata documents is so people with the older printings will be able to apply the errata'd text, and then have the same text as the newer printings.
Lakesidefantasy: The newest printing of the CRB is equal to the PRD in this regard; the only problem is that the errata documents don't reflect the change.
This appears to be an oversight in the errata document that has persisted since the 4th printing update. I'm hitting the FAQ.