
Oddman80 |
10 people marked this as a favorite. |

A wee bit melodramatic, no?
Keeping in mind Poe's Law....
Have you no decency sir? Can you not just let us mourn in peace?Yeah - of course its melodramatic. But I am just helping people get through the last two stages of grief.
At first people didn't believe people when they were told about the FAQ's or Errata changes. "What!?!?" they said. "No, you must be mistaken - Paizo wouldn't have changed it like that!" That is the first stage - Denial.
Then there was the total FLAME OUT of angry posts accusing Paizo of conspiracies to weaken old classes/archetypes in order to make new ones (occult Adventures) more desirable. There was the raging that people would never purchase another Paizo product again after this... That was the second stage - Anger.
Then you saw a series of posts where people were requesting that Paizo reconsider their answers to the FAQs and Errata the Errata. That was the third stage - Bargaining.
Now we come to the fourth stage - Depression.
There are those characters that we would love to keep playing - but they are no longer PFS legal and must go away. Or we have home games with DM's that like to stick to RAW, and are telling us we must now change them. Or they were NPCs in games we are running ourselves - but we no longer think it would be fair to let them have feats/classes/archetypes/items work a way other than what we will allow others to do moving forward. Whatever the reason, we feal a loss... and we are saddened...
This post was simply a place where people, like myself, can comfortably lay these characters to rest, so that we all can move on to the fifth and final stage - Acceptance
Please don't crash a funeral and tell the mourners that they are wrong to grieve.
(╯︵╰,)

Scrapper |
Haven't suffered that in Pathfinder yet as I keep away from Archetypes in general, but I do remember the d20 version of Star Wars and the change over to Saga edition, I was playing a Fringer, which suddenly no longer existed, I recall the rest of the players poking fun "Did you hear some thing from Engineering?" "Nope..." *silent scream from my Fringer Engineer*

Oddman80 |

Well...
Bazu Dreadmaw was a Scareed Witch Doctor. He had, in fact, been reworked the week before as a result of the change to the Mutation Warrior archetype, in the ACG errata. He switched to Mutagenic Mauler instead - but alas... One week later and his stats and purchases no longer made sense due to the ARG errata the following week.
Mr. Whiskers had been brought to an end by the Slashing Grace, Pummeling Style/Pummeling Charge errata, as well as the Wild Armor FAQ.
And most recently, Finny 2-10 was taken out due to the rules of Slashing Grace and how it interacts both with TWF, as well as move action "steal" abilities of the Filcher Rogue.... Oh... And my Mask of Stony demeanor is no longer affordable and was taken away.

Gisher |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Well...
Bazu Dreadmaw was a Scareed Witch Doctor. He had, in fact, been reworked the week before as a result of the change to the Mutation Warrior archetype, in the ACG errata. He switched to Mutagenic Mauler instead - but alas... One week later and his stats and purchases no longer made sense due to the ARG errata the following week.
That one. Just... ouch. And then ouch again. That is just not right. You have my deepest sympathies.

RDM42 |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well...
Bazu Dreadmaw was a Scareed Witch Doctor. He had, in fact, been reworked the week before as a result of the change to the Mutation Warrior archetype, in the ACG errata. He switched to Mutagenic Mauler instead - but alas... One week later and his stats and purchases no longer made sense due to the ARG errata the following week.Mr. Whiskers had been brought to an end by the Slashing Grace, Pummeling Style/Pummeling Charge errata, as well as the Wild Armor FAQ.
And most recently, Finny 2-10 was taken out due to the rules of Slashing Grace and how it interacts both with TWF, as well as move action "steal" abilities of the Filcher Rogue.... Oh... And my Mask of Stony demeanor is no longer affordable and was taken away.
Huh. My general rule of thumb, if I am going to apply errata, is that if it invalidates a currently being played character the errata will be applied in subsequent campaigns but not that one. Guess that wouldn't be an option for PFS.

On the Other Hand |

I had a similar issue with my half orc scarred witchdoctor. I got lucky and am running him in a home game. We mixed 3.5 stuff and so forth so my character has survived but only barely and with a loss of a feat to pick up a 3rd party Lost Tradition for Con to all Int casting issues. We are just trying to determine if I now count my Con as +2 for caster level in place of Int.

Oddman80 |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

The ONLY one that I know of that was Grey Area was using Feral Combat Training to allow my Kitty Cat Druid Ninja Monk (Mr Whiskers) the ability to use claws with Pummeling Style.
There had been no "grey area" with the cost of the Mask of Stony Demeanor, the ability to use a second hand with Slashing Grace, not suffering ACP's with a Wild Armor when in Wild Shape, or being a con casting Scarred Witch Doctor prior to the FAQ/Errata.
The changes to all of those things literally required that the Pathfinder Design Team rewrite the rules so that they would function differently....
Honestly though... Do you go to strangers' funerals and mutter insults about them to others attending?
I have said it earlier in the thread, and I will say it again here - I made the thread so people (who had characters ruined by the rulings) had a place to give their fallen PCs a proper send off. It was not intended to be a debate thread - we have had plenty of those. If you do not have a character to add to the list, please remain respectfully silent, or add your condolences (thank you Gisher). We don't need any Wesborro Baptist-Style protests in these here grounds. :P

![]() |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

A wee bit melodramatic, no?
Maybe.
I did not have a character who was negatively affected by the errata.
But I can understand others' frustration on exactly how the errata was handled. I'd say about half of the changes were fair, the other half were overly punitive, as if Paizo wanted to erase a page in their history altogether (despite folks - some admittedly overzealous - being invested in it). That many options, instead of being brought down a notch were brought down several notches seems to me a lazy design decision. Like removing the squeaky wheel instead of applying some oil to it. To me, the errata represents a lot of lost opportunities to come up with creative solutions. Add to that the fact that Paizo holds the "it's up to the DM to balance things" line while turning around and creating the reason this thread ought be made.
Have some respect for the dead, eh?

Kaouse |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

Kaouse wrote:Can somebody tell me what happened or give me a link or something?They are no longer CON based, but INT based.
Their effective INT score is their real INT score +2 for witch abilities (I think).
Errata link --> http://paizo.com/include/PZO1121-Errata-20150728-1.0.zip
God dangit.
So now they're more like Witch+ instead of caster with the ability to wade into melee? Another subpar option erased to make room for more caster love. Damn it all. Damn it all to New Jersey.

thejeff |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
AlaskaRPGer wrote:Kaouse wrote:Can somebody tell me what happened or give me a link or something?They are no longer CON based, but INT based.
Their effective INT score is their real INT score +2 for witch abilities (I think).
Errata link --> http://paizo.com/include/PZO1121-Errata-20150728-1.0.zip
God dangit.
So now they're more like Witch+ instead of caster with the ability to wade into melee? Another subpar option erased to make room for more caster love. Damn it all. Damn it all to New Jersey.
Well, for an actual Orc (Int+2) just counters the Orc's Int penalty. If you let half-orcs play them though, they can start with an effective Int +4 (+2 racial) (+2 for witch abilities) - A 22, if they want to push it.
Joy.
SheepishEidolon |

Honestly though... Do you go to strangers' funerals and mutter insults about them to others attending?
I might actually do that - if the funeral is as public as this thread. Do you want a stranger's public funeral in your street? Probably every day? Ignoring unwanted public events is not always possible, sadly...
There are multiple approaches to deal with characters who heavily suffer from errata, as already pointed out. As GM I'd simply allow a free rebuild and assist the player doing it. For PFS, probably something can be figured out with the responsible people (likely allowing one of the approaches here).

Gisher |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

One of the players in my Saturday game had their tiefling go from being a young adult to dying of old age thanks to that errata.
Then he rolled a tiefling wizard and that character died of old age during chargen.
Assuming you are serious, that errata seems to be an error.
David knott 242 wrote:James Jacobs wrote:The reason these ages were corrected in the reprint is, as noted above, because they were errors.Have you by any chance had a look at the changes as they were actually issued in the errata and PRD? I cannot help thinking that there must have been a miscommunication somewhere. Here is what we got:
Base age: Changed from 60 or 110 to 20.
Random dice added to base age: Left unchanged, including the +10d6 added to starting age of Dhampir in a trained class.Aging effects: Set to human values.
What were the actual intended changes?
Sigh.
No.
Looks like they forgot to change the random dice element. Very, very frustrating.

Pixie, the Leng Queen |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Pixie, the Leng Queen wrote:Or occultist arcanists...Right, because not having Consume Magic more than once per day totally breaks that archetype...
Well not jhaving a way to replenish your pool consistantly your not really gonna be able to.use your SM very much... like.. at all...

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Rest in peace, dear unnamed character, using the Synthesist to be the copy of "The Mask" of Jim Carry fame. The character he changed into is a shadow if his unrealized glory, having turned into a Celebrity Bard with a voice of a radio DJ.
"Oh, that's gotta hurt!"

swoosh |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Assuming you are serious, that errata seems to be an error.
Entirely serious.
In the first instance he had a 130 year old tiefling rogue, which went from below middle age to above maximum age once the errata was applied.In the second he rolled low on his maximum age and rolled high on his wizard's starting age (as tiefling wizards start at venerable) to the point that the latter was higher than the former.
Good to see they're going to errata the errata. Still a dumb change.

thejeff |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gisher wrote:
Assuming you are serious, that errata seems to be an error.Entirely serious.
In the first instance he had a 130 year old tiefling rogue, which went from below middle age to above maximum age once the errata was applied.In the second he rolled low on his maximum age and rolled high on his wizard's starting age (as tiefling wizards start at venerable) to the point that the latter was higher than the former.
Good to see they're going to errata the errata. Still a dumb change.
Any GM, even in PFS, who applies the changed age limits to an existing character without allowing the player to modify the characters age is a dick.
Any GM requiring a player to roll age on the obviously overlooked starting age tables is also being a dick.
I get that people are frustrated because concepts don't work with new limits, but anyone imposing actual old age character deaths is just a sign to walk away from that game.