Errata questions


General Discussion

251 to 300 of 421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Ximmrik wrote:

Also noticed that there is a lot of 1d4 damage type weapons, a few 1d6, and one 1d8 in the simple melee weapon area.

What happen to the Morningstar and Mace (heavy mace) dealing 1d8 damage, and the light mace dealing 1d6 damage?

I like using the maces in the past system!

Tis a design issue, not an ommision. There are basically only having 5 usable tiers of weapon damage (d4 to d12). Martial weapons have to be able to be one tier better than simple weapons (or have added traits), and two-handed weapons need to be at least two tiers better than one handed weapons to justify losing access to a shield or spells.

Thus, Simple weapons are generally limited to d6 if one-handed, or d10 if two-handed (such as a greatclub perhaps).

Personally I think It would provide more wiggle room in weapon design if Two-Handed (and Two-Hand traited) weapons only improved by one die step compared to one-handed weapons, but also gained +1 point of damage per die. (So a Greatsword would deal d10+1s instead of d12s and a Staff would deal d6+1s instead of d8s). That way part of the benefit of using two hands is increasing your minimum damage.


The Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault provides zero action economy benefits under the current handedness rules (one action to put a hand on, a free action to take off), only granting either a +2 damage bonus if your weapon has the two-hand trait, and a die increase if it doesn't.

It's possible that rather than being a terrible damage booster that is worse than attacking twice this was originally an action economy saver when taking a hand off still required an action. If that's the case, recommend making it one action but adding a once per round limitation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Several of the backgrounds grant skill feats that require being trained in the skill and make it difficult to take advantage of using the feat because you do not necessarily gain Trained in that skill.

This is particularly problematic for the background Animal Whisperer where you can't really take advantage of the feat or do common things new players attempt to do (like start with a rideable pet).

Was it intended for the background to grant trained to the skills associated with the bonus feats they grant?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
playtest rulebook page 276, Resurrect wrote:
The creature must have died within the past year. If Pharasma has decided that the creature’s time has come, or it doesn’t wish to return, this ritual automatically fails, but you discover this after the first successful Religion check and can end without paying the cost.

I don't know why it says "first." Only one Religion check is made for this ritual, the primary one, which is the point where the cost is usually paid. So, you have to make all the rolls, and if the result is failure then you don't discover that they don't want to come back (assuming they don't) and you do expend the cost? You basically keep trying the ritual and expending diamonds until you get a success, and then find out the bad news without further cost? This is weird. Maybe it should be "you discover this just before the Religion check" instead.

On a pettier note, the ritual's name is "resurrect" but its text refers to it as "resurrection" in several places.


Another petty one.

playtest rulebook page 280, Basic Cleric Spellcasting wrote:
Even though you can cast spells, the spell level of your cleric cantrips and domain is powers half your level rounded up.

Change to "powers is".


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
Darkvision is infinite range now.

That's ridiculous.

Y'ask me, "Vision" is about ambient light bouncing off objects, entering the eye through the pupil, and impacting on the retina, which generates an electrical signal the brain interprets as whatever objects are involved. "Low light vision" just means the critter's retina doesn't need as much light impacting it to generate a viable signal. "Darkvision" means the critter can see in what a human would call the "infrared" part of the light spectrum, so it's a little different, it can see heat (which might be generated by a living creature). Not "black and white" but more "black and red". Note that if everything is at the same ambient temperature, darkvision would not be able to distinguish individual objects from the general background - which could result in a dwarf running full tilt into a stalagmite (or a stalactite if it extends close enough to the floor/ground). Kinda nerfs the ability in some ways, but so what?

Okay, not canon, and Paizo is not likely to adopt it. But... if darkvision sees in black and white, what things show as black and what as white, and why do they show that way?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
playtest rulebook page 294, Hit Points and Healing wrote:
Villains, powerful monsters, enemies with healers or regeneration, and any other NPCs at the GM’s discretion are knocked out like a PC as well.

So if there's a doctor or cleric among the kobolds I'm slaughtering, they all become dying instead of dead at 0 HP? That's weird. Did you mean something other than "healers" there?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
playtest rulebook page 294, Hit Points and Healing wrote:
Villains, powerful monsters, enemies with healers or regeneration, and any other NPCs at the GM’s discretion are knocked out like a PC as well.
So if there's a doctor or cleric among the kobolds I'm slaughtering, they all become dying instead of dead at 0 HP? That's weird. Did you mean something other than "healers" there?

That is so that you don't have to track dying creatures if there's little to no chance of saving them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seems like being unconscious should deny you your Dex bonus to AC. You could more or less merge that with the -4 conditional penalty it does give AC by saying "and your dexterity is effectively zero, with the normal effects on AC and Reflex saves." (Though I'd think you'd just crit fail any Reflex save automatically.)


Xenocrat wrote:

The Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault provides zero action economy benefits under the current handedness rules (one action to put a hand on, a free action to take off), only granting either a +2 damage bonus if your weapon has the two-hand trait, and a die increase if it doesn't.

It's possible that rather than being a terrible damage booster that is worse than attacking twice this was originally an action economy saver when taking a hand off still required an action. If that's the case, recommend making it one action but adding a once per round limitation.

Isn't Dual-Handed Assault attacking one-handed, changing grip to two handed, then attacking two-handed, then changing grip again back to one-handed? That would be two attacks for two actions, along with an extra bonus, which seems fine to me.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

p227 Glyph of Warding


    This spell is not on any spell lists, so no one can cast it. :)

_______

p221 Energy Absorption

    The Heightened levels start below than the base level.

    Power is Level 4
    Heightened(3rd) <---
    Heightened(6th) ...


playtest rulebook page 297, Duration wrote:
A duration might also end only when a requirement is met or ceases to be true. These effects last while that requirement is met or until it’s met, respectively.

Bolded phrase is in the wrong order.


In the Weapons section,

page 179, leading text wrote:
Attacks that would take a penalty greater than –10 due to range are impossible.

That's nice and non-ambiguous and futureproofed. But

page 297, Range and Reach wrote:
Ranged and thrown weapons have a range increment listed in feet. Attacks with such weapons work normally up to that range. Attacks against targets beyond that range take a –2 penalty, which worsens by 2 for every additional multiple of that range, to a maximum of a –10 penalty after five additional range increments. Attacks beyond this range are not possible.

Does "this range" mean five additional range increments, or a -10 penalty? They could differ if you publish a Far Shot feat or anything else that frobs range penalties. I would replace the last sentence there with a duplicate of the sentence I quoted first.


In the leading text on page 298 the maximum distance a shortbow can manage is given as 300'. It should be 360'.

(-0 up to 60', -2 up to 120', -4 up to 180', -6 up to 240', -8 up to 300', -10 up to 360')


Ed Reppert wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Darkvision is infinite range now.

That's ridiculous.

Y'ask me, "Vision" is about ambient light bouncing off objects, entering the eye through the pupil, and impacting on the retina, which generates an electrical signal the brain interprets as whatever objects are involved. "Low light vision" just means the critter's retina doesn't need as much light impacting it to generate a viable signal. "Darkvision" means the critter can see in what a human would call the "infrared" part of the light spectrum, so it's a little different, it can see heat (which might be generated by a living creature). Not "black and white" but more "black and red". Note that if everything is at the same ambient temperature, darkvision would not be able to distinguish individual objects from the general background - which could result in a dwarf running full tilt into a stalagmite (or a stalactite if it extends close enough to the floor/ground). Kinda nerfs the ability in some ways, but so what?

Okay, not canon, and Paizo is not likely to adopt it. But... if darkvision sees in black and white, what things show as black and what as white, and why do they show that way?

I take it you haven't seen an infrared security camera? They use infrared light to generate a black and white image in conditions of low or no visible light. Here's a YouTube video demonstrating a camera in both regular and ir night mode.


I'm not sure if this has been asked or even if this is where you go to ask this but:

Say you are at Dying 3 and you cast a heal spell on the guy that's dying which brings him up to 8 hit points let's say. Is he still at Dying 3? Or Dying "insert number here" as far as that goes? I figure it would remove it entirely but it's not clear in the rules at all. At least none that I could find.


Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been asked or even if this is where you go to ask this but:

Say you are at Dying 3 and you cast a heal spell on the guy that's dying which brings him up to 8 hit points let's say. Is he still at Dying 3? Or Dying "insert number here" as far as that goes? I figure it would remove it entirely but it's not clear in the rules at all. At least none that I could find.

He's still dying and unconscious.

But because he's at positive HP, his dying condition will get reduced by 1 every time his turn comes up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:
Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been asked or even if this is where you go to ask this but:

Say you are at Dying 3 and you cast a heal spell on the guy that's dying which brings him up to 8 hit points let's say. Is he still at Dying 3? Or Dying "insert number here" as far as that goes? I figure it would remove it entirely but it's not clear in the rules at all. At least none that I could find.

He's still dying and unconscious.

But because he's at positive HP, his dying condition will get reduced by 1 every time his turn comes up.

No, he has to make recovery rolls to become conscious, and then his dying condition will go down 1 at the end of each of his turns. But since he's at positive HP the recovery rolls can't make him get worse. See page 295.

(P.S. this isn't the best thread for rules questions; in the future I suggest you just start a new thread.)


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Scythia wrote:
I take it you haven't seen an infrared security camera?

No I haven't. Thanks for the link.


Bestiary pg 118: The zombie brute has Knockback enhancement. It is not in the list of monster abilities. I'm going to use the barbarian feat equivalent for the time being.

The first question a player asked after grabbing an enemy was how to move them. We made up the drag maneuver that is opposite of the shove maneuver.

With magic items being listed in gold, I am often double checking to make sure somethings cost is in silver of gold, and then checking to make sure that it makes sense and isn't a mistake.

The snake animal companion does not have the grab enhancement. This makes it harder to use the constrict ability. Is this intended?

Distance and circumstance penalties to perception?

Acrobatics to tumble through failure is: you trigger reactions (such as Attacks of Opportunity) as if you had moved out of the square you started in. Does this mean if you start from out of reach you do not trigger reactions? Is there a way to move without triggering reactions other than steps?

The monster Grab enhancement is an auto success. These monsters will need to use athletics to attempt to restrain?

I can't find anything that says flat-footed or other conditions reduces your fortitude or reflex DCs against attacks. (disarming a flanked enemy).


shroudb wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
shroudb wrote:
Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been asked or even if this is where you go to ask this but:

Say you are at Dying 3 and you cast a heal spell on the guy that's dying which brings him up to 8 hit points let's say. Is he still at Dying 3? Or Dying "insert number here" as far as that goes? I figure it would remove it entirely but it's not clear in the rules at all. At least none that I could find.

He's still dying and unconscious.

But because he's at positive HP, his dying condition will get reduced by 1 every time his turn comes up.

No, he has to make recovery rolls to become conscious, and then his dying condition will go down 1 at the end of each of his turns. But since he's at positive HP the recovery rolls can't make him get worse. See page 295.

(P.S. this isn't the best thread for rules questions; in the future I suggest you just start a new thread.)

You don't have to be conscious for the dying condition to lessen, just above 1 HP.

So healing does that even if you fail your saves.

Do you have a cite that says you don't need to be conscious? Here's one that says you do.

playtest rulebook page 295 wrote:

Reducing the Dying Condition

At the end of each of your turns while you have at least 1 Hit Point and are conscious, you reduce your dying value by 1. As with other conditions, when the dying value reaches 0, the dying condition ends.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
shroudb wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
shroudb wrote:
Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been asked or even if this is where you go to ask this but:

Say you are at Dying 3 and you cast a heal spell on the guy that's dying which brings him up to 8 hit points let's say. Is he still at Dying 3? Or Dying "insert number here" as far as that goes? I figure it would remove it entirely but it's not clear in the rules at all. At least none that I could find.

He's still dying and unconscious.

But because he's at positive HP, his dying condition will get reduced by 1 every time his turn comes up.

No, he has to make recovery rolls to become conscious, and then his dying condition will go down 1 at the end of each of his turns. But since he's at positive HP the recovery rolls can't make him get worse. See page 295.

(P.S. this isn't the best thread for rules questions; in the future I suggest you just start a new thread.)

You don't have to be conscious for the dying condition to lessen, just above 1 HP.

So healing does that even if you fail your saves.

Do you have a cite that says you don't need to be conscious? Here's one that says you do.

playtest rulebook page 295 wrote:

Reducing the Dying Condition

At the end of each of your turns while you have at least 1 Hit Point and are conscious, you reduce your dying value by 1. As with other conditions, when the dying value reaches 0, the dying condition ends.

Yeah I reread the passage and deleted my comment (since it was wrong) you must have quoted it in the time it took me to reference the pdf.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
playtest rulebook page 300 wrote:
• Spending 2 Hero Points allows you to reroll a d20 roll. You must use the second result, but if you fail, you regain 1 of the Hero Points you just spent. You can’t spend Hero Points more than once on a single roll. This is a fortune effect.
playtest rulebook page 293 sidebar wrote:
If you are subject to both a fortune effect and a misfortune effect on the same roll, the two cancel each other out and you roll normally.

If you're subject to misfortune and you spend 2 hero points to produce a a fortune effect, the two cancel. So if the (single) roll is a failure, do you get your 1-pt refund, or is that part of what got cancelled out?


playtest rulebook page 303, Sensed wrote:
When targeting a creature that you sense, before you roll to determine your effect, you must attempt a DC 11 flat check. If you fail that check, you don’t affect the target. You’re still flat-footed to the creature whether you successfully target it or not.

Either that "still" doesn't belong there or there's some text missing somewhere, because nothing before that talks about being flat-footed.


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
playtest rulebook page 303, Sensed wrote:
When targeting a creature that you sense, before you roll to determine your effect, you must attempt a DC 11 flat check. If you fail that check, you don’t affect the target. You’re still flat-footed to the creature whether you successfully target it or not.

Either that "still" doesn't belong there or there's some text missing somewhere, because nothing before that talks about being flat-footed.

It reads correctly if you interpret 'still' to mean 'nonetheless'


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
playtest rulebook page 303, Sensed wrote:
When targeting a creature that you sense, before you roll to determine your effect, you must attempt a DC 11 flat check. If you fail that check, you don’t affect the target. You’re still flat-footed to the creature whether you successfully target it or not.

Either that "still" doesn't belong there or there's some text missing somewhere, because nothing before that talks about being flat-footed.

"Still" makes it so that you were before.

If it wasn't there, and you didn't target the sensed creature, you wouldn't be flat-footed without the "still" there.

I guess they used it to save space (1 word vs a whole sentence).


Meophist wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:

The Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault provides zero action economy benefits under the current handedness rules (one action to put a hand on, a free action to take off), only granting either a +2 damage bonus if your weapon has the two-hand trait, and a die increase if it doesn't.

It's possible that rather than being a terrible damage booster that is worse than attacking twice this was originally an action economy saver when taking a hand off still required an action. If that's the case, recommend making it one action but adding a once per round limitation.

Isn't Dual-Handed Assault attacking one-handed, changing grip to two handed, then attacking two-handed, then changing grip again back to one-handed? That would be two attacks for two actions, along with an extra bonus, which seems fine to me.

No, it's one attack for two actions. You put your hand on the weapon, attack (at minimal bonus damage), and take your hand off. Activity complete. It's reeeeal bad. At least Power Attack, the other feat that is worse than attacking twice, gives you an extra die at 10th level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
Meophist wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:

The Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault provides zero action economy benefits under the current handedness rules (one action to put a hand on, a free action to take off), only granting either a +2 damage bonus if your weapon has the two-hand trait, and a die increase if it doesn't.

It's possible that rather than being a terrible damage booster that is worse than attacking twice this was originally an action economy saver when taking a hand off still required an action. If that's the case, recommend making it one action but adding a once per round limitation.

Isn't Dual-Handed Assault attacking one-handed, changing grip to two handed, then attacking two-handed, then changing grip again back to one-handed? That would be two attacks for two actions, along with an extra bonus, which seems fine to me.
No, it's one attack for two actions. You put your hand on the weapon, attack (at minimal bonus damage), and take your hand off. Activity complete. It's reeeeal bad. At least Power Attack, the other feat that is worse than attacking twice, gives you an extra die at 10th level.

The advantage is if you are using Dueling Parry or some other ability that has a condition of requiring you to be wielding a weapon in one hand with one hand free. If you use an action to switch your weapon grip to two handed, those effects would end. Dual Hand Assault specifically allows you to get a 2 handed strike in (with extra damage) while not ending those effects.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Playtest Rulebook page 182 wrote:
Monk Monks can use these weapons with their abilities that normally require unarmed attacks.
Not unless they've taken the Monastic Weaponry monk feat, they can't. Also, even with the feat they can't do so with shuriken, which have the monk trait but are ranged (Monastic Weaponry specifies "melee monk weapons," which may be an error in its own right---what's wrong with a flurry of shuriken?).

From my reading:

Monk allows you to "use these weapons with their abilities that normally require unarmed attacks". This means that you can flurry with shurikens as that's a class ability.

Monastic Weaponry grants you proficiency in the weapons and "you can use melee monk weapons with any of your monk feats or monk abilities that normally require unarmed attacks". This improves the Monk weapon trait by allowing monk feat use with monk feats but disallows the shuriken for some reason.

So, IMO, the statement from the monk trait works. A monk can flurry and use magic strikes with a bo staff without the Monastic Weaponry, they just get a -2 for proficiency and can't use feats like stunning fist.


Scythia wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Meophist wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:

The Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault provides zero action economy benefits under the current handedness rules (one action to put a hand on, a free action to take off), only granting either a +2 damage bonus if your weapon has the two-hand trait, and a die increase if it doesn't.

It's possible that rather than being a terrible damage booster that is worse than attacking twice this was originally an action economy saver when taking a hand off still required an action. If that's the case, recommend making it one action but adding a once per round limitation.

Isn't Dual-Handed Assault attacking one-handed, changing grip to two handed, then attacking two-handed, then changing grip again back to one-handed? That would be two attacks for two actions, along with an extra bonus, which seems fine to me.
No, it's one attack for two actions. You put your hand on the weapon, attack (at minimal bonus damage), and take your hand off. Activity complete. It's reeeeal bad. At least Power Attack, the other feat that is worse than attacking twice, gives you an extra die at 10th level.
The advantage is if you are using Dueling Parry or some other ability that has a condition of requiring you to be wielding a weapon in one hand with one hand free. If you use an action to switch your weapon grip to two handed, those effects would end. Dual Hand Assault specifically allows you to get a 2 handed strike in (with extra damage) while not ending those effects.

Nah. Those effects last until your next turn starts. Only if you’re in the habit of triggering AoOs would that be useful. Pro tip: don’t provoke often enough that you take a terrible offensive feat to maintain weak offense while keeping up your defense.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is it a mistake that Fighters gain Heavy Armor Expertise (increasing the proficiency to Expert) at 13th level, but have to wait until 17th level with Armor Mastery to gain the same level of Proficiency with Medium Armor?

That seems like a design flaw to me.


Xenocrat wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Meophist wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:

The Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault provides zero action economy benefits under the current handedness rules (one action to put a hand on, a free action to take off), only granting either a +2 damage bonus if your weapon has the two-hand trait, and a die increase if it doesn't.

It's possible that rather than being a terrible damage booster that is worse than attacking twice this was originally an action economy saver when taking a hand off still required an action. If that's the case, recommend making it one action but adding a once per round limitation.

Isn't Dual-Handed Assault attacking one-handed, changing grip to two handed, then attacking two-handed, then changing grip again back to one-handed? That would be two attacks for two actions, along with an extra bonus, which seems fine to me.
No, it's one attack for two actions. You put your hand on the weapon, attack (at minimal bonus damage), and take your hand off. Activity complete. It's reeeeal bad. At least Power Attack, the other feat that is worse than attacking twice, gives you an extra die at 10th level.
The advantage is if you are using Dueling Parry or some other ability that has a condition of requiring you to be wielding a weapon in one hand with one hand free. If you use an action to switch your weapon grip to two handed, those effects would end. Dual Hand Assault specifically allows you to get a 2 handed strike in (with extra damage) while not ending those effects.
Nah. Those effects last until your next turn starts. Only if you’re in the habit of triggering AoOs would that be useful. Pro tip: don’t provoke often enough that you take a terrible offensive feat to maintain weak offense while keeping up your defense.

Dueling Parry has a line at the end that says "as long as you continue to meet the requirement." Switch grips and it ends.


playtest rulebook page 317, Detecting Magic wrote:
You cast detect magic while moving at half your travel Speed. You have no chance of accidentally overlooking a magic aura at a travel Speed under 300 feet per minute, but the party could move into a magic aura before you detect it for travel Speeds over 150 feet per minute.

Shouldn't there be only one threshold speed? Right now if you have a travel Speed of 200'/min you both cannot overlook magic auras (because you're under 300'/min) and can do so (because you're over 150'/min). Does this maybe have to do with the leading "half your travel Speed" bit? I'm confused.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Right now it means "You will detect it, but you are already in it" if you travel at 200'/min.


Scythia wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Scythia wrote:


The advantage is if you are using Dueling Parry or some other ability that has a condition of requiring you to be wielding a weapon in one hand with one hand free. If you use an action to switch your weapon grip to two handed, those effects would end. Dual Hand Assault specifically allows you to get a 2 handed strike in (with extra damage) while not ending those effects.
Nah. Those effects last until your next turn starts. Only if you’re in the habit of triggering AoOs would that be useful. Pro tip: don’t provoke often enough that you take a terrible offensive feat to maintain weak offense while keeping up your defense.
Dueling Parry has a line at the end that says "as long as you continue to meet the requirement." Switch grips and it ends.

Yes, and that doesn't matter at all unless you plan to trigger a Reaction through a critical fail on your attack.

Action 1: Dueling Parry
Actions 2-3: Dual-Handed Assault
Enemy Reaction: (you trigger a riposte or something with a critical fail)
Off turn: You still have your +2 AC

Or:

Action 1: Grab weapon with off hand
Action 2: Strike
Free action: release
Action 3: Dueling Parry
Off turn: You still have your +2 AC

You saved a feat at the cost of a miniscule +2 damage, might have been better off just Striking twice at a lower die, and still have your +2 to AC between turns. How often do you expect to trigger a Reaction (you can't move!) so that having that +2 AC is the reason to take this feat?

It's a bad feat (even worse than Power Attack) that might have been good before they changed the actions for hands. Thus the potential errata.


playtest rulebook page 320, Blinded wrote:
You automatically fail or critically fail (whichever’s worse) Perception checks that are fully dependent on sight
playtest rulebook page 321, Deafened wrote:
You automatically fail or critically fail (whichever’s worse) Perception checks based on sound.

When is failing a Perception check worse than critically failing it? If there isn't a critical failure entry at all, it's the same as failure, right?


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
playtest rulebook page 320, Blinded wrote:
You automatically fail or critically fail (whichever’s worse) Perception checks that are fully dependent on sight
playtest rulebook page 321, Deafened wrote:
You automatically fail or critically fail (whichever’s worse) Perception checks based on sound.

When is failing a Perception check worse than critically failing it? If there isn't a critical failure entry at all, it's the same as failure, right?

Yes. If they just said you auto failed people would ask if blind/deaf is a way to avoid critical failure conditions. If they just said you critical failed people would ask what happens if there is not listed critical failure condition.


playtest rulebook page 323 wrote:

Immobile

You can’t use any action, activity, free action, or reaction that has the move trait. If an external force would move you out of your space, it must succeed at a check against either the DC of the effect rooting you or the relevant defense (usually Fortitude DC) of a monster rooting you, as appropriate.

While the meaning is clear from context, each "rooting" probably wants to be "immobilizing" instead.


Xenocrat wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
playtest rulebook page 320, Blinded wrote:
You automatically fail or critically fail (whichever’s worse) Perception checks that are fully dependent on sight
playtest rulebook page 321, Deafened wrote:
You automatically fail or critically fail (whichever’s worse) Perception checks based on sound.

When is failing a Perception check worse than critically failing it? If there isn't a critical failure entry at all, it's the same as failure, right?

Yes. If they just said you auto failed people would ask if blind/deaf is a way to avoid critical failure conditions. If they just said you critical failed people would ask what happens if there is not listed critical failure condition.

If that's it then I have a different erratum to report:

playtest rulebook page 320, Asleep wrote:
You critically fail all Reflex saves you must attempt.

It should say "fail or critically fail (whichever's worse)"; while most Reflex saves include a crit fail condition, I don't believe it's guaranteed.


the sorcerer level 4 feat "Divine Evolution"'s effect reads:
"You can channel energy, per the cleric class feature, once per day. If you already have the channel energy class feature, you instead gain one additional use per day."
currently there is no means to get more than one source of channel energy on a character, as multiclassing doesn't work that way anymore, and the cleric multiclass doesn't grant the channel energy ability.

there is no sorcerer multiclass (at least yet) and I'm not entirely certain there would be enough space in the dedication feats list to give every bloodline-centric feat in such a case (there are generally 6 dedication feats, with the most being 8 feats for cleric and wizard), so even then they'll likely not get access to this feat, so I'm not entirely sure this line is needed even on a futureproofing perspective, as all the usual suspects are already here, and i dont recall any advanced, hybrid, or occult classes that got channel energy either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

is the druid class proficiencies entry supposed to specific light and heavy shields? every other class simply says "shields".

it may want to instead read "trained in shields not made of metal."


AndIMustMask wrote:

the sorcerer level 4 feat "Divine Evolution"'s effect reads:

"You can channel energy, per the cleric class feature, once per day. If you already have the channel energy class feature, you instead gain one additional use per day."
currently there is no means to get more than one source of channel energy on a character, as multiclassing doesn't work that way anymore, and the cleric multiclass doesn't grant the channel energy ability.

there is no sorcerer multiclass (at least yet) and I'm not entirely certain there would be enough space in the dedication feats list to give every bloodline-centric feat in such a case (there are generally 6 dedication feats, with the most being 8 feats for cleric and wizard), so even then they'll likely not get access to this feat, so I'm not entirely sure this line is needed even on a futureproofing perspective, as all the usual suspects are already here, and i dont recall any advanced, hybrid, or occult classes that got channel energy either.

There's no way the eventual Sorcerer multiclass archetype won't require a choice of spell list, and this feat (and all the dedications) simply goes off spell list as prerequisite, so it's a completely valid choice for the generic "pick a Sorcerer feat" advanced option.


Xenocrat wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:

the sorcerer level 4 feat "Divine Evolution"'s effect reads:

"You can channel energy, per the cleric class feature, once per day. If you already have the channel energy class feature, you instead gain one additional use per day."
currently there is no means to get more than one source of channel energy on a character, as multiclassing doesn't work that way anymore, and the cleric multiclass doesn't grant the channel energy ability.

there is no sorcerer multiclass (at least yet) and I'm not entirely certain there would be enough space in the dedication feats list to give every bloodline-centric feat in such a case (there are generally 6 dedication feats, with the most being 8 feats for cleric and wizard), so even then they'll likely not get access to this feat, so I'm not entirely sure this line is needed even on a futureproofing perspective, as all the usual suspects are already here, and i dont recall any advanced, hybrid, or occult classes that got channel energy either.

There's no way the eventual Sorcerer multiclass archetype won't require a choice of spell list, and this feat (and all the dedications) simply goes off spell list as prerequisite, so it's a completely valid choice for the generic "pick a Sorcerer feat" advanced option.

fair enough i suppose. we'll ahve to see how the multiclass handles once the add-on is released later.


Xenocrat wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Scythia wrote:


The advantage is if you are using Dueling Parry or some other ability that has a condition of requiring you to be wielding a weapon in one hand with one hand free. If you use an action to switch your weapon grip to two handed, those effects would end. Dual Hand Assault specifically allows you to get a 2 handed strike in (with extra damage) while not ending those effects.
Nah. Those effects last until your next turn starts. Only if you’re in the habit of triggering AoOs would that be useful. Pro tip: don’t provoke often enough that you take a terrible offensive feat to maintain weak offense while keeping up your defense.
Dueling Parry has a line at the end that says "as long as you continue to meet the requirement." Switch grips and it ends.

Yes, and that doesn't matter at all unless you plan to trigger a Reaction through a critical fail on your attack.

Action 1: Dueling Parry
Actions 2-3: Dual-Handed Assault
Enemy Reaction: (you trigger a riposte or something with a critical fail)
Off turn: You still have your +2 AC

Or:

Action 1: Grab weapon with off hand
Action 2: Strike
Free action: release
Action 3: Dueling Parry
Off turn: You still have your +2 AC

You saved a feat at the cost of a miniscule +2 damage, might have been better off just Striking twice at a lower die, and still have your +2 to AC between turns. How often do you expect to trigger a Reaction (you can't move!) so that having that +2 AC is the reason to take this feat?

It's a bad feat (even worse than Power Attack) that might have been good before they changed the actions for hands. Thus the potential errata.

Now look at level 12 fighter feats. Dueling Dance, which is an Open (used before attacks) and Stance feat. Once you use it you get Dueling Parry for the rest of the encounter, but as Stance description notes the stance ends if you cease to meet the requirements.

Also, I feel like Dual Handed Assault is pretty clearly intended for use with Bastard Sword, or another weapon with a good Two Hand die. Sure a flat +2 isn't impressive, but going from d8 to d12 isn't too bad (especially once potency bonuses come into play).


The Elemental Tempest wizard power needs to clarify that it doesn't work with cantrips, which are "spells" cast at your highest level, so they provide a really offensive boost if they work with this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This was brought up over in a Monk Topic. Might have been brought up here.

Monk's Ki Strike does not list how much Ki it costs to use. Only that you gain a Ki/Spell Points pool equal to your WIS mod, and that you cast it by spending Spell points.

I'm assuming it is 1 point for each Ki Strike but maybe put that into the text.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Glossary entries for arcane/divine/occult/primal describe them in terms of the material, mental, vital, and spiritual essences, but those are not otherwise mentioned (much less defined) anywhere. Either expand on them or (my preference) take out the references entirely and leave the essences to another book.


playtest rulebook page 334, Average Progress wrote:
For tasks that require daily rolls, such as Practicing a Trade or Staging a Performance, treat the remaining days as though the character had rolled a 10 on their checks and multiply the result by the number of days.

I would think that if the character has Assurance in the relevant skill and if using it would get a higher result than taking 10 that they would get to do so, especially at the higher proficiency tiers.

E.g. if you have a +5 total bonus, RAW gives you a daily result of 15, even if you have Assurance and legendary proficiency, which would provide a result of 30.

Maybe this is supposed to be implicit in Assurance itself, but it doesn't really look that way to me. YMMV.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
The Elemental Tempest wizard power needs to clarify that it doesn't work with cantrips, which are "spells" cast at your highest level, so they provide a really offensive boost if they work with this.

Powers don't have needs. :-)

An evocation spell (not a cantrip) cast at the caster's highest level would seem to suffer from the same "problem". Do you suggest that Elemental Tempest shouldn't work with those either?

Okay, cantrips are "unlimited use" in that they don't consume a spell slot. Is that the problem?

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Here is my feedback, from my "first pass attempt" at creating the most basic of characters: a Human Fighter. It was also shared to the Facebook 2ED Feedback forum but I believe it should be cataloged here as well:

1) Page 12, there is a missing word in the last paragraph of the first column before the break. The sentence makes no sense without "the" or "your" before character.

2) I had to flip back and forth through the manual as far as page 291 so many times I lost count. For a section called "Character Creation" the information needed is in all the chapters that follow.
- Perhaps "Read Chapters 2 and 3" and then put "Character Creation" in after them?
- Maybe make one page in the manual with the Proficiency Modifiers Table, the Ability Scores and Modifiers Table, and other "small data" tables together for a "quick reference" page?

3) There is nowhere that I can find to record armor and shields on the character sheet inclusive of their traits. I can put the numbers into the AC/TAC but there isn't a breakout there for Shield and Armor; it's just "Item" (singular, not plural). I can put the name and bulk into equipment, but with only 8 lines a fighter with armor, shield, four melee weapons and two ranged weapons means there is nowhere to write "backpack" let alone catalog the necessary adventuring supplies.

4) As stated above, I've got four melee weapons. There are only three blanks for "Melee Strikes" and only two for "Ranged Strikes". I'd prefer the old style sheets with "Attacks" where you put in what you needed where you wanted it. Do I lead with a Bow and then switch to Longsword and Short sword upon closing range? Yes, so I'll put those two at the top and "other attacks" below them.

5) Ranged Thrown Weapons: Do you put your STR modifier into the "Other Damage" section? What if you have a "Disrupting Dagger"? How do you put the STR increased damage and the Disrupting features on the same line?

6) Where do you put skill points? I've got 4 to allocate, but the Skills section doesn't seem to have anywhere to put a credit value. The "Prof" box is filled in from the TEML set of data... right?

7) If my "Background Feat" is a second level feat, do I still get that as a level 1 PC? Or do I need to wait until I'm level 2?

251 to 300 of 421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / Errata questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.