Errata for the 1.3 Errata


General Discussion


Rather than making separate threads, I'll make one thread with all the typos and obvious errors I've found.

Errata Page 8

Quote:
Page 300—In Spending 1 Hero Point, change everything after “spend 1 Hero Point to” to “return to 1 Hit Point. As normal for gaining HP when dying, you lose the dying condition, become conscious, and are slowed for 1 round.”

Dying and recovery no longer involves being slowed, so this is a holdover from 1.1.


In the update 1.3 for multiclasses the paladin gets all armor and shield. I reckon it should be just one upstage None-> Light -> Medium -> Heavy and not get shield as the other multiclass classes has changed to.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
worg64 wrote:
In the update 1.3 for multiclasses the paladin gets all armor and shield. I reckon it should be just one upstage None-> Light -> Medium -> Heavy and not get shield as the other multiclass classes has changed to.

In the Friday night stream Jason mentioned that Paladin was now the route to get the best armor multiclass benefit (and other classes got reduced armor benefits), so it looks like it's probably intentional.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I don't think that's a mistake. The level 12 feat increases heavy armor and shield proficiency to expert, which wouldn't make sense if you didn't get heavy armor and shield proficiency from the dedication.


Chemlak wrote:
In the Friday night stream Jason mentioned that Paladin was now the route to get the best armor multiclass benefit (and other classes got reduced armor benefits), so it looks like it's probably intentional.

Correct. The Fighter got the Weapon proficiencies and a bump in Armor. The Paladins now have the Armor proficiencies. Jason implied that if you were going to multiclass so far, it's been hands down as Fighter to take all the armor, so they wanted to spread things out across all 12 classes more evenly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It just doesnt make any sense to get all armor and shield for one mulitclass feat. That is if you have the requirment needed compared to get them by using 1 feat for each armor level and also 1 feat to get shield.
Example a sorceror would get Heavy armor and shield for just 1 feat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I don't really get it. If the fighter feat was changed specifically to avoid a one feat grab of all armor, providing a different feat to do the exact same thing defeats the purpose.

As a bonus it still begs the question of why pally=armor training anyway


Paladin is meant to be the 'armor master' class in PF2E.

(Not saying I agree with this or not.)

As a side benefit, it buffs the Sorcerer mildly--who sorely needs it--by giving them a wonderful 2nd-level feat.

Sorcerers in Full Plate... go.

The number of LG-ish Sorcerers is going to inexplicably rise because of this.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorcerers in full plate doesn't bother me. Having them all have LG alignement is more of a problem IMO

Do Paladins need to be LG ? They should more reflect the alignement of their deity, shouldn't they ?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Given that there is an Antipaladin in The Lost Star which demonstrates they already know what a CE Paladin's features would look like... I am sure the final rulebook's version will have either two or four paths (LG & CE, or all four corner alignments).

Of course, if they give Antipaladin it's own entry instead, there is a chance they'll be focused on weapon mastery instead of armor mastery.

Why does Paizo hate heavy armor so much? I just want to play a knight in shining armor... that hurls fireballs from the back of their pegasus... Why is that so hard!?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Zarkias wrote:

Sorcerers in full plate doesn't bother me. Having them all have LG alignement is more of a problem IMO

Do Paladins need to be LG ? They should more reflect the alignement of their deity, shouldn't they ?

To be fair, Paladin Multiclass doesn't actually care about alignment as long as you don't take Paladin Spell Point options or Righteous Ally, as those are the only things upset by breaking the code. The Dedication doesn't have an alignment restriction.


Basic Sorcerer Spellcasting has "Bard Dedication" as a requirement.


Shinigami02 wrote:
Zarkias wrote:

Sorcerers in full plate doesn't bother me. Having them all have LG alignement is more of a problem IMO

Do Paladins need to be LG ? They should more reflect the alignement of their deity, shouldn't they ?

To be fair, Paladin Multiclass doesn't actually care about alignment as long as you don't take Paladin Spell Point options or Righteous Ally, as those are the only things upset by breaking the code. The Dedication doesn't have an alignment restriction.

I welcome our CE sorcerer/paladin overloards. ;)


Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
graystone wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:
Zarkias wrote:

Sorcerers in full plate doesn't bother me. Having them all have LG alignement is more of a problem IMO

Do Paladins need to be LG ? They should more reflect the alignement of their deity, shouldn't they ?

To be fair, Paladin Multiclass doesn't actually care about alignment as long as you don't take Paladin Spell Point options or Righteous Ally, as those are the only things upset by breaking the code. The Dedication doesn't have an alignment restriction.
I welcome our CE sorcerer/paladin overloards. ;)

Sure, as soon as CE paladins exist. I suspect that some of the exact language in the Paladin Dedication feat was meant to be future proofing for when such a thing might exist in the future.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pretty sure the fighter dedication feat is mostly taken to make casters relevant. +X returning javelin/trident or shortbow is the new magic missile.


David knott 242 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:
Zarkias wrote:

Sorcerers in full plate doesn't bother me. Having them all have LG alignement is more of a problem IMO

Do Paladins need to be LG ? They should more reflect the alignement of their deity, shouldn't they ?

To be fair, Paladin Multiclass doesn't actually care about alignment as long as you don't take Paladin Spell Point options or Righteous Ally, as those are the only things upset by breaking the code. The Dedication doesn't have an alignment restriction.
I welcome our CE sorcerer/paladin overloards. ;)

Sure, as soon as CE paladins exist. I suspect that some of the exact language in the Paladin Dedication feat was meant to be future proofing for when such a thing might exist in the future.

It works as is without taking future proofing into account: You have no alignment prerequisite so a CE sorcerer can take the paladin multiclass feat with the only restriction the inability to use 'magic' abilities. So nothing stops you from that CE sorcerer/paladin ;).


Starfox wrote:
Dying and recovery no longer involves being slowed, so this is a holdover from 1.1.

The replacement Unconscious section for Conditions on page 7 of the errata also has the same holdover from 1.1.

Errata Page 7 wrote:

Unconscious

You’ve been knocked out. You can’t act. You also take a –4
conditional penalty to AC and have the blinded, deafened,
and flat-footed conditions. When you gain this condition, you
fall prone and drop items you are wielding or holding unless
the effect states otherwise or the GM determines you’re in a
position in which you wouldn’t. If you ever return to 1 Hit
Point or more, you become conscious. If you were dying
when you regain conscious, you’re slowed for 1 round, with
a slowed value equal to the dying value you had just before
you returned to 1 HP.
When you’re unconscious and at 0 HP
but no longer dying, you naturally return to 1 HP and awaken
after sufficient time passes. The GM determines how long you
remain unconscious, from at least 10 minutes to several hours.


graystone wrote:
It works as is without taking future proofing into account: You have no alignment prerequisite so a CE sorcerer can take the paladin multiclass feat with the only restriction the inability to use 'magic' abilities. So nothing stops you from that CE sorcerer/paladin ;).

No explicit alignment restrictions, but you have to "choose a deity as if you were a Paladin", which creates an implicit one. Not many Paladin compatible deities that also accept CE worshippers (without bothering to check, I suspect the number is zero).

_
glass.


"You become bound by your deity’s anathema and must abide by the paladin’s code of conduct and alignment requirements." (Multiclassing Archetypes; Pg 5)
Said Code of Conduct stipulates:
"You must be lawful good and worship a deity that allows lawful good clerics."

Once you're dedicated though you can Fall (change alignment and deity) without secular penalties. You don't lose the proficiencies you gained and can continue to take Paladin Archetype feats.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The Paladin flavoring here is perhaps my least favorite class re-envisioning. When I think Paladin I think "divine champion of law and goodness" not, "dude that wears heavy armor". I get their is a mechanical niche for the defense focused heavy armor warrior, but you don't really need to shove the existing paladin into that niche. The ranger also seems a bit off target for me as well.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

Spontaneous casting archetypes don’t feel very spontaneous at all until you sink 3 or 4 feats to get more slots


1 person marked this as a favorite.
glass wrote:
graystone wrote:
It works as is without taking future proofing into account: You have no alignment prerequisite so a CE sorcerer can take the paladin multiclass feat with the only restriction the inability to use 'magic' abilities. So nothing stops you from that CE sorcerer/paladin ;).

No explicit alignment restrictions, but you have to "choose a deity as if you were a Paladin", which creates an implicit one. Not many Paladin compatible deities that also accept CE worshippers (without bothering to check, I suspect the number is zero).

_
glass.

Cantriped wrote:

"You become bound by your deity’s anathema and must abide by the paladin’s code of conduct and alignment requirements." (Multiclassing Archetypes; Pg 5)

Said Code of Conduct stipulates:
"You must be lawful good and worship a deity that allows lawful good clerics."

Once you're dedicated though you can Fall (change alignment and deity) without secular penalties. You don't lose the proficiencies you gained and can continue to take Paladin Archetype feats.

"Choose a deity" comes before "You become bound by your deity’s anathema and must abide by the paladin’s code of conduct and alignment requirements." So NOTHING prevents you from picking your deity, gaining your code and anathema and immediately failing to meet the code, be it for alignment, not worshiping your god or anything else. Nothing says you have to meet the code BEFORE you take it, just what happens if you fail to meet it. So I see no reason you ever have to be LG or worship any god to take the paladin multiclass feat.


graystone wrote:
glass wrote:
graystone wrote:
It works as is without taking future proofing into account: You have no alignment prerequisite so a CE sorcerer can take the paladin multiclass feat with the only restriction the inability to use 'magic' abilities. So nothing stops you from that CE sorcerer/paladin ;).

No explicit alignment restrictions, but you have to "choose a deity as if you were a Paladin", which creates an implicit one. Not many Paladin compatible deities that also accept CE worshippers (without bothering to check, I suspect the number is zero).

_
glass.

Cantriped wrote:

"You become bound by your deity’s anathema and must abide by the paladin’s code of conduct and alignment requirements." (Multiclassing Archetypes; Pg 5)

Said Code of Conduct stipulates:
"You must be lawful good and worship a deity that allows lawful good clerics."

Once you're dedicated though you can Fall (change alignment and deity) without secular penalties. You don't lose the proficiencies you gained and can continue to take Paladin Archetype feats.

"Choose a deity" comes before "You become bound by your deity’s anathema and must abide by the paladin’s code of conduct and alignment requirements." So NOTHING prevents you from picking your deity, gaining your code and anathema and immediately failing to meet the code, be it for alignment, not worshiping your god or anything else. Nothing says you have to meet the code BEFORE you take it, just what happens if you fail to meet it. So I see no reason you ever have to be LG or worship any god to take the paladin multiclass feat.

That's largely how I read it (at least by RAW), but I think worshiping the chosen deity is more crucial to taking the feat than you seem, although nothing specifies the alignment of worshipers of a deity, only the clerics they grant magic to. Though I could see raising an eyebrow at a CE character who chooses to follow Iomedae. But in the case of a TN character, I can't really put up an argument that they couldn't follow Sarenrae or Abadar, or even Erastil or Iomedae, even though none of those allow TN clerics. So it's hard to come up with a RAW argument against it, even if it feels counter to RAI. And that's not even counting NG Sarenrite MC paladins, who no one could argue couldn't worship a deity who would allow paladins, so even if they fail the Code of Conduct immediately, there's even less RAW support that they couldn't take the archetype.


Zarkias wrote:

Sorcerers in full plate doesn't bother me. Having them all have LG alignement is more of a problem IMO

Do Paladins need to be LG ? They should more reflect the alignement of their deity, shouldn't they ?

That particular can of worms needs to atay unopened, until the survey comes back.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / Errata for the 1.3 Errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion