Typos / Mistakes / Etc in 2E Books Collection


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

451 to 481 of 481 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Regarding goblin song:

CRB page 48 wrote:

You sing annoying goblin songs, distracting your foes with

silly and repetitive lyrics. Attempt a Performance check
against the Will DC of a single enemy within 30 feet. This has
all the usual traits and restrictions of a Performance check.

I'd suggest either clarifying the flavor text to include other things besides singing or clarifying the rules text to say "Performance (Sing) check".


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Bestiary page 39 - The giant bat's wing attack is listed as doing piercing damage, but this should probably be bludgeoning.


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

The Demilich (Bestiary p.222) has a Trap Soul ability. When a targeted creature succeeds its Fort save against Trap Soul, it becomes enervated 2. Enervated has been removed as a condition.

Dark Archive

Staves:
The staff of fire appears under statted compared to all other staffs. Likely should cost 90 gp and be level 4.

The rare staff of power likely should have a rare cost premium applied of at least 50% in line with the staff of the magi.


This text from Chapter 7 on spellbooks seems like it is out of tune with actual rules:

Quote:
Although spellbooks play a central role in a wizard’s daily routine, other prepared spellcasting classes have been known to use spellbooks to record uncommon or even rare spells. Such a resource allows a caster to treat the spell like any other common spell, so long as they can reference the book during their daily preparations.
Yet Learn a Spell says:
Quote:
If you have a spellbook, Learning a Spell lets you add the spell to your spellbook; if you prepare spells from a list, it’s added to your list; if you have a spell repertoire, you can select it when you add or swap spells.

There is no requirement to scribe them into spellbook (although that doesn't seem to cost any extra) and have that spellbook on hand when preparing spells. When I first read this I thought "wow what a change, Clerics using spellbooks", but if that concept was considered at one point it doesn't seem to have consistently translated to actual rules.

(the Chapter 7 sidebar seems more like "background explanation" than authoritative rules, but I can't say which SHOULD be correct)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Core Rulebbook p. 304 - Sustain a Spell action

Omits information regarding whether you can sustain multipe spells at once, or whether you can sustain the same spell multiple times in the same round.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

Core Rulebbook p. 304 - Sustain a Spell action

Omits information regarding whether you can sustain multipe spells at once, or whether you can sustain the same spell multiple times in the same round.

What is the effect of sustaining a spell? Depending on the exact wording, sustaining a spell more than once in the same round might not do anything.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

Core Rulebbook p. 304 - Sustain a Spell action

Omits information regarding whether you can sustain multipe spells at once, or whether you can sustain the same spell multiple times in the same round.

What is the effect of sustaining a spell? Depending on the exact wording, sustaining a spell more than once in the same round might not do anything.

It's relevant for things like Spiritual Weapon, where when you sustain, you attack. Note that by RAW, you can sustain multiple times in a round. I think that was likely intentional, but it'd be good to have clarification (probably doesn't need errata if that's the intention).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
tivadar27 wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

Core Rulebbook p. 304 - Sustain a Spell action

Omits information regarding whether you can sustain multipe spells at once, or whether you can sustain the same spell multiple times in the same round.

What is the effect of sustaining a spell? Depending on the exact wording, sustaining a spell more than once in the same round might not do anything.

It's relevant for things like Spiritual Weapon, where when you sustain, you attack. Note that by RAW, you can sustain multiple times in a round. I think that was likely intentional, but it'd be good to have clarification (probably doesn't need errata if that's the intention).

This. I believe there is nothing wrong with maintaining multiple spells. However, if you can sustain the same casting of a spell in the same round, then flaming sphere just became the most powerful evocation spell in the game.

For example, at 3rd level it could do 9d6 damage (3d6 damage three times) without having to deal with limitations others do, like the multiattack penalty.


In the Lost Omens Character Guide, all the Uncommon human ancestry feats (starting page 11) have their Uncommon tag in the wrong color (red not orange), at least in the PDF. I haven't check the rest of the Guide exhaustively but it's correctly orange in at least some places.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

It is arguably inconsistent that the elven ancestry feat Ancestral Longevity (CRB page 40) has a prereq of "at least 100 years old," while the elven heritage Ancient Elf (LOCG page 25) has no such prereq. Apparently you can't be born long-lived, but you can be born ancient.

This actually matters a tad in that half-elves probably shouldn't ever be able to pick up Ancient Elf via their ancestry feat Elf Atavism. (Or maybe their ~150-year lifespan is long enough. I don't care much which way it goes, but an age prereq would make it clear.)


Lost Omens Character Guide page 45, Cunning Climber wrote:
You can take the Legendary Climber feat even if you don't have the Quick Climb feat, provided you meet its other prerequisites.

AFAICT the CRB, LOCG, and LOWG do not contain a Legendary Climber feat, nor anything with Quick Climb as a prereq.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to suggest a couple things, feel free to disagree, but with an update coming out on Wednesday:
1. We postpone additional suggestions until we see what's in that update, it may cover some of them.
2. We close this thread and open a new one for errors still remaining. May require reposting some things, but at least we'd have an idea what had already been addressed.
3. We start different threads for different books... Probably 1 thread per book is a good idea.

Thoughts? We've got 2 full days to decide :-P.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I like the "1 thread per book" option best because it helps future-proof these threads.

When you buy a new book (in the future) the possible errata are easier to look through, and make notes in your copy of that book.

Also, it might be useful to ask Paizo to lock this thread once the errata come out. No one can "close" a thread but them.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Write in a book?! Horrors!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ed Reppert wrote:
Write in a book?! Horrors!

I know, right?

What I actually do is cover the pages with little sticky notes with circles and arrows and a paragraph explaining what each one is.

And colors. Different colors of sticky notes mean different things (typo versus error versus unclear).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

That's what PDFs are for. They're easy to highlight, strikethrough, annotate, etc.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber

Ok, I hope this is ok but I have some items that need clarification from some other sources and they were not mentioned in the errata podcast. They might be FAQ items but I think they need changed in the book to clarify. I also suspect that one might be errata for certain spells and only have a couple examples of something that I think might be multiple spells.

1. Do spells and other actions or activities require a flat check for concealment even if they do not have an attack roll. example magic missile or ranger "hunt prey." I'm assuming no, but this should be clarified.

2. Do spells that have the "attack" trait add to multiple attack penalty even if they do not include an spell attack roll? Examples include the spell "Chill Touch."

3. I suspect because of the above question that some of the spells are missing the "attack" trait and other spells should not have that trait but do. I think this trait was intended to indicate that it has a spell attack roll. Examples include "Abyssal Plaque" has attack trait but doesn't have spell attack, "Chill Touch" has attack trait but doesn't have spell attack, "Death Knell" has attack trait but doesn't have spell attack, "Disintegrate" doesn't have attack trait but does require spell attack, "Polar Ray" does not have the attack trait but does require an spell attack. There might be more and if this wasn't the intention behind the "attack" trait then I have no idea what that trait means.

4. "Telekinetic Projectile" should have Ranged Spell attack rather than ranged attack.

5. The Wizard dedication archetype "Arcane school spell" does not give access to "Hand of the Apprentice" since universal wizard is not a school of magic. Was this intended?


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

Here is my entire list of spells that need to be looked at for the 'attack trait'

These spells (or focus spells) have the attack trait but do not have a spell attack roll;

Abyssal Plague
Chill Touch
Death Knell
Ghoulish Cravings
Goblin Pox
Mariner's Curse
Outcast's Curse
Spider Sting
Savor the Sting
Touch of Undeath
Force bolt

These spells (or focus spells) do not have the attack trait but do require a spell attack roll;

Disintegrate
Polar Ray
Tangle Foot

It should be noted that similar or almost identical spells such as Force Bolt and Magic Missile are marked differently. Magic missile does not have the 'attack' trait and does not require an attack roll. Force Bolt does have the 'attack' trait, does not require an attack roll but is nearly identical to Magic Missile.

Spiritual Guardian and Spiritual Weapon both have the 'attack' trait and specifically say that they apply to multi attack penalty. Weapon of Judgement does not have the attack trait but also specifically says that it applies to the multi attack penalty.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber

To make this even more complicated. Even though basic attack actions like strike and shove have the attack trait no class obtained attack actions have the trait, such as, Channel Smite, Double Slice, Exacting Strike, Brutish Shove, Snagging Strike ...etc. These are obviously attack actions and should probably contain the 'attack' trait.

If the 'attack' trait is not intended to indicate that something has an attack roll and therefore applies to multi attack penalty then I have no idea what this trait is intended to do...

The biggest problem from this is that there are whole groups of GMs applying multi attack penalties to spells that do not have attack rolls because on page 446 under 'Multiple Attack Penalty' it states, "Every check that has the attack trait counts toward
your multiple attack penalty, including Strikes, spell attack
rolls, certain skill actions like Shove, and many others." This really needs to be addressed since it is too much to errata simply.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The Feats you mentioned don’t have the Attack trait because they’re modifiers on attacks/Strikes, so that would be redundant.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Fires of the Haunted City - page 24.

Age of Ashes AP spoiler:
Forgemaster Halrig is incorrectly referred to as Forgemaster Kalrig.
Quote:

Treasure: With the knowledge that

Brigven was responsible, Forgemaster Kalrig has a
path forward. To reward the PCs, she teaches them the
recipes for a pair of weapon runes: a kin-warding rune
and greater bloodbane rune (see page 73). If the PCs
also secure Brigven’s confession and capture him alive
(whether they fnd him here or later in the Hidden
Forge), Halrig offers to enhance one of the PCs’
weapons into a +2 greater striking weapon for free.


Attack trait pg.629
"An ability with this trait involves an attack. For each attack you make beyond the first on your turn, you take a multiple attack penalty."

If in question, look it up :P

RAW

- If you roll a d20 when using something that has an attack trait it is an attack roll. You also apply your MAP if applicable. (this is described further in the section that outlines what an attack is)

- If you use something with an attack trait, even if you aren't making an attack roll, it increases your MAP.

Dark Archive

Fumarole wrote:
Bestiary page 39 - The giant bat's wing attack is listed as doing piercing damage, but this should probably be bludgeoning.

I noticed the same, but you beat me to it! :)

Indeed, Giant Bat (Bestiary p. 39) lists fangs doing slashing damage and wing does piercing damage; that makes no sense. Other "bat-like" creatures such as the Deculi inflict piercing damage with fangs and bludgeoning with wings.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

I made a quick pass over the errata document to strike out the things that were addressed. There may still be some in the FAQ section, since I wasn't in a great position to look at the thread for what they referred to. We may also want a clearer indication of what's been addressed and what hasn't; I'll experiment with some when I have time.

As usual, the repository is available here: https://github.com/alexbrault/Pathfinder2EOversights/


Core Rule Book pages 80 and 81

True Debilitating Bomb says:

" If you instead apply one of the effects listed in Debilitating Bomb, the target avoids the effect only if the result of its saving throw is a critical success."

Perfect Debilitation says:

" When you use Debilitating Bomb, your target avoids the condition the bomb imposes only if it critically succeeds at its saving throw."

That looks redundant and confusing to me.

Nethys Links:

True Debilitating Bomb

Perfect Debilitation


Rough Rider Goblin Feat: (https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=45)
"You are especially good at riding traditional goblin mounts. You gain the Ride feat, even if you don’t meet the prerequisites."

But the Ride feat has no prereqs.(https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=835)


Spamotron wrote:

Core Rule Book pages 80 and 81

True Debilitating Bomb says:

" If you instead apply one of the effects listed in Debilitating Bomb, the target avoids the effect only if the result of its saving throw is a critical success."

Perfect Debilitation says:

" When you use Debilitating Bomb, your target avoids the condition the bomb imposes only if it critically succeeds at its saving throw."

That looks redundant and confusing to me.

Nethys Links:

True Debilitating Bomb

Perfect Debilitation

Yeah, they need to make it more clear how Perfect combos into True. 'Cause if it doesn't, there no need to take Perfect at all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For those posting things for CRB, please see thread here.

We've both moved this to the rules forum and are trying to make it specific to CRB. For those with issues with other books, I actually suggest starting up a thread in the Rules forum for that particular book...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think we need to have a Lock, please...


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber

I would agree with a lock. We have thoroughly exhausted the thread's original purpose, and other questions that people are finding are more worth the regular smaller threads or Discord/Reddit posts that people normally make.

451 to 481 of 481 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Typos / Mistakes / Etc in 2E Books Collection All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.