CN_Minus |
I'm looking for an official ruling or something to show I am justified in the belief I am about to detail:
I have a couple players who own a Mask of Stony Demeanor. I checked the sheets and saw that they both purchased it for 500gp, after the ARG errata that details the new cost of 8000gp. Because it has two official sources (ARG/UE), why weren't they both errata'd at the same time?
Does this mean that a play who purchased the MoSD from the ARG must pay 16x more gold than a player who bought the same mask from UE?
If someone owned the mask before the errata, are they allowed to keep it? Sell it back for the new half? Sell it back for the old full price? Sell it back for the old half price?
If there is some sort of custom or guideline I can follow here to clear this up, I would appreciate it.
terry_t_uk Venture-Captain, United Kingdom—England—Coventry |
CN_Minus |
They were not both errata and Ultimate Equipment is the newer printing. This was noted when the errata for the price change occurred in ARG. It costs 500 or 8000 gp depending on source.
Why would they even bother adding the increased price to the ARG errata, then? They are not attempting to garner funds from the Mask of Stony Demeanor audience. So, they essentially just did it for no reason whatsoever?
To be honest, I find that hard to believe. Regardless, thanks for the input. Skirting the rules by owning another book is silly to me.
John Compton Pathfinder Society Lead Developer |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It should be 8,000 in both books. Paizo traditionally issues errata when a new printing of a hardcover book begins shipping out to customers (or thereabouts), so until a new printing of Ultimate Equipment is distributed(or even ordered—I don't know what the timeline might be on it), it is unlikely to be updated officially in that book. It can, jowever, be officially updated in Pathfinder Society; it is the higher price.
It may be that we need to provide an update in the Campaign Clarifications in the short term until then.