Sha'ir Archetype Please FAQ

[Alric Rahl]

Hello everyone. First off Mark has already answered this question is his >>ASK Mark Seifter all your questions here<< thread. But im creating this thread to FAQ it. So please FAQ this thread as many times as possible. Ill be honest im being selfish in wanting this FAQ'd so that I can present it to Wolf Lair so that they can fix their Code for the Archetype in Herolab. Onto the Clarification.

The Sha'ir Archetype states;

Quote:

Each of these jin is connected to one of the eight schools of magic, just like an occultist implement, but also to the air, earth, fire, or water school (Advanced Player's Guide 142). Each jin works like a living implement for both of its schools.

However in the Description of the Jin ability it states

Quote:

The elemental schools don't have focus powers or resonant powers.

Does this mean that the normal 8 schools of magic are considered Elemental for the purposes of the archetype and therefore lose their focus powers?

Or is it that only the elemental school you choose doesn't get focus powers. But the Magic School still does?

So for example if I chose Transmutation would I still get the Enhancement Resonant Power and the Base Focus Power, as well would I also get to choose the addition Focus Power. In Addition would I still get to choose an additional Focus Power at 3rd and every 2 levels thereafter?

Again Please FAQ this.

[Chess Pwn]

There's nothing to FAQ. The jin gives the transmutation and fire schools. The fire school has no focus or resonant, but the transmutation still does. Nothing indicates you'd lose anything.

[Bacondale]

What was Mark's answer?

[Alric Rahl]

@ Bacondale: Mark said exactly What Chess Pwn said and exactly how the class is Written.

My problem is is that the folks over at Lonewolf Developements/Herolab seem to think differently. This is why I want it officially FAQ'd because they said and I quote

" Paizo needs to make this an errata or a FAQ before we can use it as a rules source."

Despite the fact that I have presented them with substantial evidence, logic and Marks own post, they are adamant that that is not how it works. And they are missing the Focus Powers ability from the Sha'ir's code, which is another sign that they have it wrong.

Believe when I say that I went up one side and down the other of them in two emails, which clearly stated, outlined and presented them with the logical conclusion of reading the Archetype as written, and the response has still been "Nope thats not how it works"

[Chess Pwn]

Then too bad for Herolab and people who use it, they want to be dumb and have their product wrong so be it. You'll never gain the support for a FAQ as a lot of people wont want to "waste" a FAQ on something already so clear.

[Alric Rahl]

Thanks Chess im glad I spent so much money on a product they can't bother to maintain properly, which I use explicitly because I suck at math and it makes the multitudes of choices available so much easier to pick through. Yes too bad for me and others who deserve a proper product from a developer.

I'm sure if Paizo screwed up in their works and you saw something that needed changing and you brought it to their attention, but they adamantly said "nope sorry your wrong" You would feel as terrible as I do right now and would want the problem rectified.

And I have seen at least one other person who thought the Sha'ir didnt get any powers. So obviously while its clear to you and me, its not so clear to some others. So the FAQ would not be a waste.

[Urath DM]

Unfortunately, I had a similar experience with Pathfinder Unchained, the Automatic Bonus Progression. In the Blog preview for magic items, there was a system that was not included in the final book (paying costs to enable secondary abilities in addition to the enhancement powered by attunement). When I presented that to the LoneWolf staff, they replied that "it's probably for an older version of the book".

I think what is needed more than getting a FAQ is for the communication between LoneWolf and Paizo to be improved on some of these items. An easier way to get verification for LoneWolf would be best, I think.. and the PDT may need to be more pro-active in responding definitely when an issue with HeroLab is involved. Unless I am mistaken in my understanding that Paizo would like to use it internally, and it would be good for it to work correctly in that case.

[Quandary]

While I sympathize with your situation, this isn't remotely FAQ worthy...
There is literally nothing wrong or confusing or ambiguous with the rules text,
it's written exactly as it SHOULD be, and that 100% conveys the function you believe (and Seifter has confirmed),
nothing is remotely suggesting the normal school is treated as an elemental school,
and nothing removes the focus/resonant powers from the normal schools...
AFAIK neither is anything being removed from elemental schools here, it's just re-iterating that there aren't any powers available for them.

Realistically, it seems like Herolab programmed a certain function to describe the archetype
which ended up lumping the two schools together, and they misunderstood that the line:
"The elemental schools don't have focus powers or resonant powers." is actually doing anything, when it's not,
it is just "friendly reminder text", which is clear because in the base Occultist class "Elemental Schools" are nowhere mentioned,
and Focus/Resonant Powers for them are simply not printed anywhere... So they aren't actually being "taken away" in the first place...
But EVEN IF THEY WERE, the RAW is not taking them away from the NORMAL School you also are using,
nor treating that school IN ANY WAY as an Elemental School... Again, that seems like an artifact of how they programmed it,
and they basically are refusing to look at actual RAW, and instead are insisting their CODING is the "true law".

Look, even if they now turn around and change this function, that is not a company I would ever want to use/buy their products.
Instead of begging for Paizo to act as fire-man and deal with this one problem situation,
you're better of paying a poor but knowledgeable player/user of the boards here to be your personal character build assistant,
rather than depend on giving money to Herolab for their obviously substandard product.
(I would sympathize with them for the cases where Paizo RAW is lacking, but that isn't remotely the case here)
Instead of requesting a FAQ, if anything, Paizo should write Herolab a letter and state that if they will withdraw their license to Pathfinder trade markings etc,
if Herolab continues to misrepresent their product with error prone code that does not reflect the clear rules text.
But ultimately it's not really Paizo's issue here, and they have enough other stuff on their table to do (including their own Errata).

You might want to seek out alternate providers of this type of program...
Honestly, it could be developed as open source and maintained by community ala d20pfsrd and Nethys' Archive,
with mistakes being corrected similar to how those projects or wikipedia do things.
It really isn't that impressive a thing that Herolab is offering, and if they can't do it decently, they certainly shouldn't be suppoted.

[Alric Rahl]

Most of what Wolf Lair has done is accurate and has made Pathfinder much easier to play. I agree that Paizo as a company needs to step in and deal with the issue as Wolf Lair is misrepresenting them by refusing to acknowledge that they could be wrong and should check into. I stated as much in one of emails to them.

At this point I feel as though they know their mistake and are just refusing to change it, as they never did acknowledge that the code was missing the Focus Powers ability, despite mentioning it in one of the earliest emails. the more I emailed them the more frustrated I got and the more it came out in the text of the email, while I never said anything derogatory towards the staff member responding to me, it feels as though out of spite said member is not going to present the issue to the rest of the team to get it checked into for errors.

Despite this one Hiccup, Herolab has made my Adventuring career much easier and I will continue to use what I already have though I doubt I will buy any more content from them until im satisfied my issue has been resolved.

[Quandary]

Urath DM wrote:

Unfortunately, I had a similar experience with Pathfinder Unchained, the Automatic Bonus Progression. In the Blog preview for magic items, there was a system that was not included in the final book (paying costs to enable secondary abilities in addition to the enhancement powered by attunement). When I presented that to the LoneWolf staff, they replied that "it's probably for an older version of the book".

Not clear what you're saying, that Herolab included functionality that was only in a Blog Preview/Beta, but not real book?

I mean, the answer to that is really "Oh, what older version would that be? There is only one printing/edition of the book."
Regardless, unless they are allowing people to optionally select different editions/errata version to use,
I would expect the product should reflect the most recent version/errata, period.

[Chess Pwn]

Alric Rahl wrote:

Thanks Chess im glad I spent so much money on a product they can't bother to maintain properly, which I use explicitly because I suck at math and it makes the multitudes of choices available so much easier to pick through. Yes too bad for me and others who deserve a proper product from a developer.

I'm sure if Paizo screwed up in their works and you saw something that needed changing and you brought it to their attention, but they adamantly said "nope sorry your wrong" You would feel as terrible as I do right now and would want the problem rectified.

And I have seen at least one other person who thought the Sha'ir didnt get any powers. So obviously while its clear to you and me, its not so clear to some others. So the FAQ would not be a waste.

You're buying a product that is based on another product. And when the third party messes up go complain to them. This is why lots of people recommend not trusting or relying on herolab. I think herolab can be great for some things, but I've only heard bad things about their support and fixing of incorrect stuff. If I made a product that said that Pathfinder's Power attack gave a -5 to attacks and -10 to damage and said I needed a FAQ to fix it I'm a poor producer, and there's likely never a FAQ to "fix" this.

We're you even around for when the ACG was released with tons of broken and unusable stuff and we had to wait a year before we had the improved("fixed") version?

Paizo issues FAQs to fix things. We've had stuff BLATENTLY broken/unworkable that takes years to get fixed, and many things that still don't work well that frequently get asked that still doesn't have an answer. I deal, and I immagine so do all the other people that use Pathfinder. They either talk with GM/players to make it work or they stay away from it and never use it.

Did you not realize what I said? I said many people would feel it's a "waste" to get this as the weekly FAQ instead of getting say, how do alternate classes work? How much is mithral barding? What is the deal with "hands"? How do SLA work with different feats and such? etc... We've even had a Dev clarify on this question if anyone has any questions about this. So I'm sorry that herolabs support is so bad, but I really doubt you'll get into the double digits, let alone win the FAQ race.

Please know that I'm not trying to bash you or demean you in any way. I'm just showing things in perspective.

[Alric Rahl]

@ Chess Pwn and I apologize for my attitude as well. Ive just been so frustrated with 10+ emails for a single bug report to Wolf Lair. I have tried to deal with the company in question and was looking into alternatives.

I appreciate your input. and based on what you have presented I agree this may not get FAQ'd ever and Im fine with that. But it didnt hurt to try anyway.

I guess im really just frustrated that I know the class works wonderfully and would make an awesome PC, but because of the third party I can't use it. I could do paper copy but I really do suck at math and trying to remember all the bonuses and stuff haha.

Oh well. Thanks for the honesty.

[Quandary]

Right, and apparently even if they fix the issue you're requesting Paizo to FAQ, they are still missing a major class ability completely, meaning it would still be a huge pain in the ass to use if you want to play ANY type of Occultist.

How exactly would this FAQ read, anyways?
"This ability works exactly as it's written, even if you are incompetent shill at Herolab making money off of other people's product."?
(to be fair, IF Herolab was 100% competent, they would still have incredible frustration on Paizo rules that aren't 100% clear/functional)

[Urath DM]

Quandary wrote:

Urath DM wrote:

Unfortunately, I had a similar experience with Pathfinder Unchained, the Automatic Bonus Progression. In the Blog preview for magic items, there was a system that was not included in the final book (paying costs to enable secondary abilities in addition to the enhancement powered by attunement). When I presented that to the LoneWolf staff, they replied that "it's probably for an older version of the book".

Not clear what you're saying, that Herolab included functionality that was only in a Blog Preview/Beta, but not real book?

I mean, the answer to that is really "Oh, what older version would that be? There is only one printing/edition of the book."
Regardless, unless they are allowing people to optionally select different editions/errata version to use,
I would expect the product should reflect the most recent version/errata, period.

Sorry.. I thought i was clearer. The blog post contained an option that was not included in the book printing. Normally, the HeroLab team accepts Blog Posts as sources for corrections, but in this case it was dismissed as being based on an older, pre-release draft, despite the fact that Mark Seifter pointed me to it as the solution when I raised the problem.

Aside from that, your rant about HeroLab is unjustified. These are 2 incidents out of many. HeroLab is accurate in many cases where people report problems.. because the people mis-read or otherwise failed to "get" the rules text they were reporting.

It is not perfect by any means. There have been bugs, and there will be bugs in future releases. That's life with software. By and large, the HeroLab team at LoneWolf is receptive to reports, investigates them, and corrects them as quickly as they can manage. Some really complex issues have been pending for a long time, but overall they are very good at fixing things when they are reported. There is hardly a need to break out the pitchforks and torches. What is at issue is the expectation of a FAQ or Errata for this kind of problem; that's an unrealistic expectation that needs to be addressed, preferably by both Paizo and LoneWolf working out a better method for responding to such issues.