|
Where does those rules say or imply that splash damage scales with creature size as claimed?
They're referring to the area hit, not the actual damage numbers, which their quoted text demonstrates is true.
Here's everywhere within 5 feet of a Medium creature:
XXX
XXX
XXX
Here's every space within 5 feet of a Large creature:
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
The same is true of every space within 10 feet, only more so (25 squares when targeting a Medium creature, 36 when targeting a Large one).
Now, I in no way see this as a problem or anything in need of correction, personally, but it's certainly a true statement.
Ah! I thought the claim was that splash damage hurt larger creatures more than smaller creatures. Thanks muchly!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is a bit odd but I don't see to much of a problem with splash as gameplay wise its easier to figure out. Normal splash is one square around the target and improved is 2 squares around the target. So you get a bit more bang for your buck on bigger targets but effectively is the same. Hits stuff adjacent or hits stuff two squares out. Otherwise you are trying to figure out point of impact and drawing a circle around it which also does not make much sense because the spray is not going inside the target.
The rod of cancellation from P1E is mentioned in the P2E wall of force spell, but I can find no more mention of it anywhere in P2E's published content.
Is it an error of omission, or are there plans to include the rod of cancellation in a future product?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Read Lips Feat gives special function for deaf characters, but actual impact isn't clear:
You can read lips of others nearby who you can clearly see. When you’re at your leisure, you can do this automatically. In encounter mode or when attempting a more difficult feat of lipreading, you’re fascinated and flat-footed during each round in which you focus on lip movements, and you must succeed at a Society check (DC determined by the GM) to successfully read someone’s lips. In either case, the language read must be one that you know.
If you are deaf or hard of hearing and have Read Lips, you recognize the lip movements for the spoken form of your languages. You can also speak the spoken form of your languages clearly enough for others to understand you.
It's not clear what the 1st sentence of 2nd paragraph actually does that is different from normal function.
Plausibly, the difference is that it doesn't require a Society check, but if that's the case it should really spell that out by stating you can always do this automatically (even in encounter mode). Simply stating "you can" (without even specifying encounter mode) doesn't make that clear, since that is nearly identical to the first 'flavor' sentence of 1st paragraph.
If intent is also to bypass fascinated/flat-footed condition while in encounter mode, that also seems preferable to make explicitly clear.
Yeah, but since detect magic is a cantrip, after taking the arcane sense feat, I can cast it infinitely. So having detect magic(which cannot even be heightened to 4th level) on constantly doesn't seem like that good to me. Simply taking arcane sense sounds like a better idea.Detect magic does not have a duration. It's a single ping for magic within 30 ft that tells you if there is any unfamiliar magic around or not. If you want to keep a constant scan for magic up, you need to use the exploration activity Detect Magic, and be reduced to half speed. This is noisy, because detect magic has a verbal component which has to be spoken in a "strong voice". I would also rule that just like the more generic Repeat a Spell activity, doing so for too long would be fatiguing - essentially, you're taking three actions per two rounds (two actions to detect magic one round, one action to Stride the next) instead of the default exploration movement of taking a single action per round (Stride).
Magic Sense gives you an always-on detect magic. If there's any unfamiliar magic within 30 ft, you know it. You can then Seek and in addition to the normal Seek effects, you gain the benefits of 3rd-level detect magic on things you see - this means you know what item/location has what aura, instead of just "There's a Transmutation effect nearby." That's a pretty big power-up compared to the spell. Should you need to scan for unseen magic, you can then take the time to cast detect magic normally and gain the benefits of a 4th level spell as well.
Hmm. Then magic sense wouldn't be as useless as I thought. Actually I'm trying to make a sorcerer character with the imperial bloodline. But the bloodline grants me detect magic as a free cantrip. While magic sense is clearly better than detect magic, would it be a huge waste of feat to take magic sense if I already have detect magic as a bonus cantrip?
Now, I in no way see this as a problem or anything in need of correction, personally, but it's certainly a true statement.
It is more that it is a very strange interaction and could have weird knock on effects.
In an example i saw elseswhere. Targeting a muspore "even the smallest is over 100ft long"
Or how maxmising bomb effectiveness in mass combat could be to throw them at enlarged allies who have immunities depending on how many foes there are.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
^ Is this remotely plausibly on topic? This thread seems useful as place to post concise Errata issues to bring to Paizo's attention for Errata/FAQ process. Getting into random discussion/advice on build choices disrupts the usability of thread for that purpose.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some places in the Bestiary lists equipment in the singular whereas others list it in the plural.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Companion Items" on page 604 is unclear as to whether an item must have the companion trait for a companion to use it. (Obviously many items are disqualified on grounds of body parts, but there's always aeon stones.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or a link.
Bestiary page 343.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The 12th-level Ranger feat Lightning Snares is a straight upgrade to the 6th-level feat Quick Snares, yet the former does not have the latter as a prerequisite. That's going to lead to a lot of retraining among 12th-level snare users.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The 14th-level Ranger feat Warden's Guidance involves gesturing or calling out to your allies, but lacks the usual verbiage about how this gives it the visual or auditory trait.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The 12th-level Ranger feat Lightning Snares is a straight upgrade to the 6th-level feat Quick Snares, yet the former does not have the latter as a prerequisite. That's going to lead to a lot of retraining among 12th-level snare users.
Seeing as how retraining is now a core part of the game I don’t really see the issue for a 12th level feat being better than one half its level.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shout-out to the Paizo staffers reading this thread! I take it that even if these won't be added to the GitHub, it's more helpful to keep our typo collections all in one place, rather than make new threads for each and every sourcebook as they come out.
For player use, and GM use, it's actually very handy to have information cross-posted to the product page for the sourcebook as well as a thread that staff are monitoring.
Six months or a year from now, if you're just picking up the sourcebook for the first time, it's handy to know what to check for in the version you've got in your hand.
It's impossible to find that information if it's not on the product page.. No matter how well things are errata'd, being able to start there and track all the FAQs and Errata book by book is important.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've forked the repository to split the corrections by book and updated the list up to Syri's post above (linked in the ReadMe for reference if someone posts while I'm typing this post).
You can find it here: https://github.com/alexbrault/Pathfinder2EOversights
There's a few posts upthread that I didn't include, justified below.
Then I'm really not sure why does the magic sense feat exist in the first place. The arcane sense feat simply allow me to cast detect magic at will. I can even heighten it to 4th level. So can I assume that magic sense is a trap feat that should be avoided at all cost?
As has been mentioned upthread, both feats have different tradeoffs, benefits and downsides.
Some places in the Bestiary lists equipment in the singular whereas others list it in the plural.
I don't understand what you're referring to. Could you provide an example or two of each?
Electric Arc seems far better than other cantrips. It seems balanced if it only hit one target. Is it really meant to hit two targets?
Wizard and other prepared casters don't have the same restriction of spontaneous casters that can't get more spell slots or cast 10th level outside of the lvl 20 feat that gives a second spell slot, this means that a Specialist Wizard will technically have 3 spells slots at the moment that reaches lvl 19 (Drain Arcane Bond, Specialist Slot, normal slot).
That is really right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've forked the repository to split the corrections by book and updated the list up to Syri's post above (linked in the ReadMe for reference if someone posts while I'm typing this post).
You can find it here: https://github.com/alexbrault/Pathfinder2EOversights
There's a few posts upthread that I didn't include, justified below.
Then I'm really not sure why does the magic sense feat exist in the first place. The arcane sense feat simply allow me to cast detect magic at will. I can even heighten it to 4th level. So can I assume that magic sense is a trap feat that should be avoided at all cost?As has been mentioned upthread, both feats have different tradeoffs, benefits and downsides.
Some places in the Bestiary lists equipment in the singular whereas others list it in the plural.I don't understand what you're referring to. Could you provide an example or two of each?
Hey, thanks for doing this. The main reason I didn't want to increase the scope to the other books was because I didn't want to sign up for tracking it all for much longer since this was already noticeably big, lol. So I appreciate someone else taking it up with there being interest in doing this for future books.
Apologies to everyone for disappearing there for a bit. The list should be pretty current at least for the Core book. Unfortunately September was a pretty crazy month for me, both in running three different 2E games to introduce people to the system, and unfortunately also personal life.
I do plan to at least update my repo with more of the entries struck through as the official errata comes out and addresses it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Electric Arc seems far better than other cantrips. It seems balanced if it only hit one target. Is it really meant to hit two targets?
Each of the elemental cantrips has a different strength:
Ray of Frost has a lot more range
Electric Arc targets two enemies
Acid Splash deals splash damage, which is extra effective against swarms
Produce Flame also has a melee mode
So yeah, I don't think it's a mistake.
Dispelling Sliver: Although it mentions interaction with (Rogue) Dispelling Slice, Dispelling Sliver itself doesn't give info on how to resolve the Counteract check in terms of what your modifier would be (just giving spell level). Using a similar formula to Rogue Dispelling Slice (Class DC-10) could make sense, or just using the attack bonus used for the weapon attack could also (which would advantage martial characters over casters).
Dispel Magic: There seems slight confusion in terms of what 'success' means in context of Counteract check:
Attempt a counteract check against the target (page 458). If you succeed against a spell effect, you counteract it. If you succeed against a magic item, the item becomes a mundane item of its type for 10 minutes.
A counteract check actually can end/suppress the target effect even on a Failure, Crit/Success/Fail just determines what relative levels can be countered. So using "Success" here seems inadvisable, since it doesn't seem to actually care about Check Success per se.
Saying "If you succeed against a spell effect, you counteract it" doesn't actually convey useful info, what is needed is to know what a Counteract DOES. Of course, the standard rules for Counteract say "Successfully counteracting an effect ends it unless noted otherwise." but if this is to be mentioned at all here, saying it "ends the spell effect" seems the relevant info, not ~'if you succeed a counteract check, you counteract it'.
For magic items, it should not say "Success" (for above reasons), but say "Counteracting a Magic Item causes it to become mundane for 10 minutes".
Greater Mental and Vital Evolution Feats: They only have Arcane and Divine Traits, respectively, but since Occult and Primal both qualify for them, they should probably have "Arcane or Occult" and "Divine or Primal" traits.
Wizard Clever Counterspell says Prereq is "Quick Recognize" should be "Quick Recognition".
OK, this covers just about every Multiclass option for Focus spell which have something like this wording:
(Sorceror Multiclass)
If you don’t already have one, you also gain a focus pool of 1 Focus Point, which you can Refocus without any special effort.
AFAIK, the "can Refocus without any special effort" only applies "If you don't already have" a Focus pool, so if you DID already have a Pool, the RAW doesn't seem to grant new Refocus method. I had strong impression having multiple tradition's Focus spells was supposed to allow using ANY of their refocus methods to Refocus, but RAW isn't doing that now. This applies to each multiclass' special Refocus method.
Cleric is slightly different due to no explicit Multiclass Focus Feat, just relying on base Cleric Feat, which is worded differently.
Core Rulebook page 57
The human ancestry feat Adapted Cantrip has the prerequisite "spellcasting class feature." As far as I can tell this isn't a properly defined game term and looks to me like a carryover from an earlier draft.
Perhaps "cast a spell activity," is the proper prerequisite under the current rules philosophy.
spellcaster A spellcaster is a character whose class or archetype grants them the
spellcasting class feature. The ability to cast focus spells or innate spells does not
by itself make a character a spellcaster. -- CRB, page 636.
"Spellcasting" is listed under "Class Features" for each of the five spell casting classes. In each case the word is preceded by an appropriate adjective — Arcane, Divine, Occult, Primal, or (in the case of the Sorcerer) Sorcerer. Spellcasting is not listed as a class feature for any of the other classes.
Also:
Some archetypes grant you a substantial degree of spellcasting, albeit delayed compared to a character from a spellcasting class. In this book, the spellcasting archetypes are bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, and wizard, the multiclass archetypes for the five main spellcasting classes, but future books might introduce spellcasting archetypes that aren’t multiclass archetypes. -- CRB, page 219.
Whether this means that a character with a spellcasting archetype can take feats with "spellcasting class feature" as a prerequisite is, I suppose, subject to debate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a reason I used "well-defined game term," rather than just defined. For example, Hellknight Armiger Dedication's prerequisite of Heavy Armor Proficiency appears similar at first glance. But Proficiency is a strict game term you with a specific interpretation for game purposes. Class Feature is a far more vague term that can create confusion. It's very unlike any other kind of prerequisite in the game.
Seems to me that ever class description in the book contains a section labeled "class features" which contains a list of class features. I would say then that stuff in that list (or those lists) is/are class features, and other stuff is not. Frankly, I don't see why this should be a problem.
I've noticed a few scattered places where typos and other mistakes that people have found are mentioned, so I thought it might be more helpful to Paizo if there was a central thread [...]
Hopefully this can be helpful to the Paizo devs for maybe at least updating the PDFs and places like Archives of Nethys.
In this thread, errata and even possible errata are potentially useful to the devs; discussion of whether reports are really errata are not. The devs are perfectly capable of figuring it out for themselves and will do so whether we discuss it or not, so discussion here accomplishes nothing except to clutter the thread.
AFAIK, the "can Refocus without any special effort" only applies "If you don't already have" a Focus pool, so if you DID already have a Pool, the RAW doesn't seem to grant new Refocus method. I had strong impression having multiple tradition's Focus spells was supposed to allow using ANY of their refocus methods to Refocus, but RAW isn't doing that now. This applies to each multiclass' special Refocus method.
From the sidebar on Pg 302 of the core book: "Focus Points are not differentiated by source; you can spend any of your Focus Points on any of your focus spells. Likewise, when you Refocus, you get back a point as long as you follow the guidelines of any abilities that granted you focus spells."
From the sidebar on Pg 302 of the core book: "Focus Points are not differentiated by source; you can spend any of your Focus Points on any of your focus spells. Likewise, when you Refocus, you get back a point as long as you follow the guidelines of any abilities that granted you focus spells."
OK thanks, that confirms the intent re: shared Focus pool/Refresh techniques, but the problem with Multiclass wording still exists:
If you don’t already have one, you also gain a focus pool of 1 Focus Point, which you can Refocus without any special effort.
If we "follow the guidelines" of that ability, the new Refocus technique is NOT gained if we already have Focus pool.
All that's needed to remove that undesirable linkage is breaking the Refocus clause into new sentence,
which could actually be shorter (without 'which'), or attach it to first 'gain bloodline spell' with 'and'.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you have a focus pool, you can make a Refocus activity, because you gained that activity when you got your focus pool. So per the sidebar on page 301 CharlieIAm quoted, you don't need a new Refocus activity.
Don't make things harder than they have to be.
|
|
Updated to the latest post: https://github.com/alexbrault/Pathfinder2EOversights
In this thread, errata and even possible errata are potentially useful to the devs; discussion of whether reports are really errata are not. The devs are perfectly capable of figuring it out for themselves and will do so whether we discuss it or not, so discussion here accomplishes nothing except to clutter the thread.
I realise I'm guilty of the same from some pages ago, but I agree. Discussion within this thread makes it harder to find what's a new entry is suggested.
I also try my best to be as liberal as possible when it comes to what makes it in the repo (I actually talked myself out of excluding a few things in my first update when I realised I couldn't actually justify my reasoning)
And speaking of justifying my reasoning,
Electric Arc seems far better than other cantrips. It seems balanced if it only hit one target. Is it really meant to hit two targets?
As has been mentioned, other offensive cantrips have different benefits. I'll grant you that Electric Arc is probably the most powerful of the lot, but it's not overwhelmingly so to the point that it looks like a mistake.
But if someone else feels strongly enough about that, chime in and I'll override my veto.
I just feel like Electric Arc should penalize the DC for at least the 2nd target, if not both.
And possibly have the "Attack" trait to accrue/suffer MAP. But I'm not going to say anymore :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hello again, forgot to post this last time.
The Ranger Class feature Nature's Edge (page 169) says that: "Enemies are flat-footed to you if they’re in natural difficult terrain, on natural uneven ground, or in difficult terrain resulting from a snare."
However, the section on Uneven Ground (Page 476) states "You are flat-footed on uneven ground," which makes part of the feature redundant.
The target might NOT be flat-footed because of an ability like Rock Runner and Steady Balance or using a Jade Cat.
Can you change gnome flickmace to be 1d6 with disarm, reach, trip?
Its current iteration seems against guidelines of reach losing one damage die and advanced weapons adding one minor property