Halfling and Orc Weapon Familiarity are missing the line "For the purpose of determining your proficiency".
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@VestOfHolding: maybe it's actually not such a bad idea to also track FAQ candidates in this repo? The Paizo forums are basically a swamp into which questions sink away.
Or, alternatively, use this as a central location for developer clarifications etcetera, rather than relying on a raft of bookmarks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Equipment - Torch
The torch doesn't list a duration, lanterns and other items list 6 hours but a torch has no duration. I don't believe this is intentional as an everburning torch still exists and sunrods exist.
The rules language for what happens when a character is reduced to zero hit points has some weird effects when a character is downed by another creature's reaction. There is also no explanation of what is supposed to happen when a character is downed by an effect not created by any combatant in the fight.
Here is a good suggested rewording of the rule mentioned above.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since I haven't read the entire thread,You might want to do that, especially on a thread about collecting mistakes.Nah, I'll simply wait until somebody collates all the relevant entries in a single place.
I simply took for granted you did that as you collected all the info from the various discussions, which is why I asked where.
Apparently not. Yet anyway.
I'm not quite sure whether to read that as a response to me, or the person you're actually quoting, but please see the following replies to your last post all providing what you asked for in different forms:
The second link is the most helpful if you have any trouble seeing the color difference on links.
I didn't see this in the archives of nethys, but my CRB pg 135 gives Poison Resistance the 1 action symbol.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't see this in the archives of nethys, but my CRB pg 135 gives Poison Resistance the 1 action symbol.
With no duration, I guess you do the action once and it lasts forever. ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
core rulebook page 331 disrupt undead is missing the cantrip tag.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not quite sure whether to read that as a response to me, or the person you're actually quoting, but please see the following replies to your last post all providing what you asked for in different forms:You should most definitely see it as a response to the person I was quoting. He seemed to get upset by my ask for some reason, so I wanted to explain to him that reading through the entire thread was obviously never going to be an option. All the info-collating threads I'm used to reserve the first post for a continually-updated summary without having to read all the discussion. Since I believe this particular forum software locks posts after a certain time, I wanted to ask the thread where these summaries were kept instead. I never doubted they existed, and so I found his dismissive response to just read the thread to be moderately ludicrous.
Had he instead responded in a friendly constructive way, like you did, he would instead have gotten the response I do direct toward you: thank you! :-)
Sorry, squire, but I have to back Rysky up on this: by your own admission, you came to this thread, didn’t find what you wanted in the first place you looked, didn’t bother checking if anyone was doing collation, and then stated essentially “because I didn’t look at everything, here’s something I’ve noticed that might already have been noticed but I can’t be bothered to check if it’s been mentioned already”.
That feels very dismissive of the work everyone else has put into the thread. While you might not have intended it that way, your post wasn’t friendly or constructive, but feels lazy and dismissive.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a discrepancy between the description of the Bard class, page 96, and the text about substituting components in the Magic chapter, page 303.
The former indicates that you can play instruments instead of speaking for spells requiring verbal component, which thus seems to stay relevant and the spell would keep the Concentration trait.
The latter states that playing an instrument can replace the verbal component. In this case, the spell does not get the Concentration trait.
My guess is that the latter is correct, since playing an instrument instead of speaking would bring almost zero benefits otherwise. Also the first wording is a bit ambiguous, while the second is clearer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The beginning of the Environment section has table laying out Minor/Moderate/Major/Massive Environmental damage, which standardizes what different situations would do, although they can add their own nuances beyond that, the basic damage tiers are universal. Like Basic Saving Throws or Basic Spellcasting Archetype progression.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My guess is that the latter is correct, since playing an instrument instead of speaking would bring almost zero benefits otherwise. Also the first wording is a bit ambiguous, while the second is clearer.
Doesn't sound right, playing an instrument (perform skill) has the concentration tag. I cannot imagine using it while crafting magic would become less taxing than both verbally speaking chanting the spell and playing the instrument normally.
Doesn't sound right, playing an instrument (perform skill) has the concentration tag.
My guess is that the latter is correct, since playing an instrument instead of speaking would bring almost zero benefits otherwise. Also the first wording is a bit ambiguous, while the second is clearer.
It's not the perform skill/action unless you're making a roll. "You are skilled at a form of performance, using your talents to impress a crowd or make a living": you're neither playing to impress or make a living [or even necessarily anything pleasant].
I cannot imagine using it while crafting magic would become less taxing than both verbally speaking chanting the spell and playing the instrument normally.
Your way would make it HARDER than either as it would then have 2 traits [manipulate and concentrate] so the substitution would be one never used as there's almost no benefits in doing so. [only someone physically mute gains a benefit]
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alas. Mark Seifter clarified that the Concentration trait stays even if verbal is substituted.
If so, I question why anyone would use it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alas. Mark Seifter clarified that the Concentration trait stays even if verbal is substituted.If so, I question why anyone would use it.
The only mechanical reason to ever cast a spell with an instrument is to bypass material components. They threw in the other options for verbal and somatic for thematic reasons (what do you mean I have to waive my instruments around in mystical patterns while I play and take my mouth off my wind instrument to mutter a word?), not for additional mechanical benefit.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bestiary pages 166-167, Ghost.
In the general presentation, Frightful Moan is a 2-action activity, but in both detailed stat blocks p167 (commoner and mage), it is a 1-action option.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fall of Plaguestone, page 5:
(I don't think this is much of a spoiler, but putting in in a spoiler tag just in case.)
** spoiler omitted **
Going by the posts following Shadowfoot's question here, its an error that probably refers to an earlier draft of an NPC's name. Will need to scroll down a bit, as I can't seem to link directly to that post.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Death's Call Domain Power p. 391
Seeing another pass from this world to the next invigorates you. You gain temporary Hit Points equal to the triggering creature’s level plus your Wisdom modifier. If the triggering creature was undead, double the number of temporary Hit Points you gain . These last for the duration of the spell, and the spell ends if all the temporary Hit Points are depleted earlier.
Is that based off Wisdom even if it's not your casting stat, such as Champion?
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The spell Charm (Core rules, PDF, add the page later) has its entries for successes and failures in the wrong order (critical failure describes the effect of a critical success, same for success and failure).
Charm isn’t an attack you roll, the target has to make a Will Save, the 4steps are describing what happens when they do.
Bestiary
* p.112: The Ancient Red Dragon is Huge, not Gargantuan as it's supposed to be.
I'm quite sure one of the dev team already confirmed it as a real error in an another thread, but I want to make sure that it will be fixed ASAP in he 2nd printing, hence the reprisal here.
I took a quick look and see this anywhere. If I take a spellcaster and multiclass into another caster, can I take a feat like Cantrip Expansion from my original class AND my multiclass one? I assume it's the same feat even if it shows up on different lists [meaning I couldn't take it twice], but it wouldn't hurt for it to be clarified.
|
|
Ugh. Sorry. I must have still been in "New Edition Confusion" when I read that spell. :-/The spell Charm (Core rules, PDF, add the page later) has its entries for successes and failures in the wrong order (critical failure describes the effect of a critical success, same for success and failure).Charm isn’t an attack you roll, the target has to make a Will Save, the 4steps are describing what happens when they do.
No worries, we're all still there ^w^
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
FAQ candidate
Poison weapon rogue feat [4] states it requires a free hand but does not state that it draws the poison.
Is the RAI that it is meant to use an already drawn poison but reduce the action cost of application from 3 to 1, or does the feat make the character able to draw the required poison from any location (Such as a backpack) as a part of the action?
RAW it cannot be used to poison anything as it doesn't state it draws an item and it cannot work if you already have a weapon and poison in hand.
|
|
I think the bard's "lingering performance" probably shouldn't have the "focus pool" prerequisite. While playing in bard you'll always have a focus pool, if you're MC'ing in, this is a first level feat that doesn't seem like it should be prohibited from MC (all the other bard schools aren't...).
On top of this, if things do stay the same, clarification on whether as an MC bard if you take the "Multifarious Muse" feat and go maestro, if you are still required to have the prerequisites.
1) Lingering Composition is a Focus Spell, so you need Focus Points to even use it.
2) You'd get it, but couldn't use it without Focus Points.
3) This thread is for collecting typos and mistakes, not discussing the altering of abilities to be more appealing.
|
|
I think the bard's "lingering performance" probably shouldn't have the "focus pool" prerequisite. While playing in bard you'll always have a focus pool, if you're MC'ing in, this is a first level feat that doesn't seem like it should be prohibited from MC (all the other bard schools aren't...).
On top of this, if things do stay the same, clarification on whether as an MC bard if you take the "Multifarious Muse" feat and go maestro, if you are still required to have the prerequisites.
1) Lingering Composition is a Focus Spell, so you need Focus Points to even use it.
2) You'd get it, but couldn't use it without Focus Points.
3) This thread is for collecting typos and mistakes, not discussing the altering of abilities to be more appealing.
2) You're wrong, it's unclear whether you'd get it. The prerequisite is "Focus Pool", it's unclear whether it could be selected without meeting that prerequisite. Once selected, however, it would clearly "increase your focus pool by 1" so from 1 to 0.
3) It's for discussing mistakes. I think it's worth asking if that was a mistake vs a design decision. In the playtest the feat worked differently, so it's a fair question to ask...
Please consider what I've said before you accuse me of trying to make something more appealing and not contributing to the actual topic...
2) It's not unclear at all, you pick Maestro Muse through Multifarious you get it, there's no Focus Pool prerequisite for it. Cut and dry.
3) Again, this is a thread is for collecting typos and mistakes. "I don't like this/i think it should work like this" deserves its own thread.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
please see the following replies to your last post all providing what you asked for in different forms:
The second link is the most helpful if you have any trouble seeing the color difference on links.
Unless I'm mistaken all three links lead to the same summary?
Thank you, but that wasn't really what I wanted - it contains every little spelling mistake and what not.
While that's great, what I'm looking for is the short list of errors with game impact only. Something you can hand out to your players.
Maybe I'm in the wrong thread, but I couldn't find anywhere else where this stuff was discussed. So let me ask while I'm here:
Does a curated list of things that really need errata exist yet?
I'm now very confused, and you are indeed in the wrong thread. Please read more of the thread next time.
I did some updating yesterday, and the list is now caught up to Crushed Moth's post about the lesser frost vial.
EDIT: Ok, to back up a little, you will note that there is a list of possible FAQ/Errata/etc material at the bottom of all of these links. I think that's the closest you'll get. Just note that it's more haphazard, and, as stated in the first post of this thread, is not necessarily the main focus of this.
|
|
Can you provide a rules reference that when something lets me choose a feat, I don't need to meet that feat's prerequisites?
Multifarious Muse does not have any prerequisites other than being a Level 2 Bard Feat.
FEAT 2 BARD Your muse doesn’t fall into a single label. Choose a type of muse other than that of your own. You gain a 1st-level feat that requires that muse, and your muse is now also a muse of that type, allowing you to take feats with the other muse as a prerequisite. You don’t gain any of the other effects of the muse you chose. Special You can take this feat multiple times. Each time you do, you must choose a different type of muse other than that of your own.
Emphasis bolded.
You take Multifarious Muse (no prereqs), you pick Maestro (no prereqs), you get Lingering Compostion, it wouldn't matter how many prerequisites Lingering Composition might have. You're not picking it. You're picking Maestro and Maestro gives you Lingering Composition.
|
|
But the thing is it's not a misreading of interpretation A vs Interpretation B, I quite literally misread one word as another that completely changed how the feat functioned.
Since it's letting you pick, rather than giving you a feat straight out you still need to meet the prerequisites. And since the prerequisite is having a Focus pool so you can take something that costs Focus I don't believe it is in error.
I don't know how Bards worked in the Playtest but I'm guessing Resonance, which every class had, not just the casters, so that's why the perquisite was added.