P2E Errata!?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion


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

I'm seeing vague rumors of errata that was revealed in a recent stream by the developers, something about shields and how everyone can use them, I think.

Does anybody know more about that, such as what was said or in what stream? (I'm nowhere near a river, so I couldn't begin to know where to look.)


Everybody already can use shields to gain AC.
PCs do need the Shield Block feat to block damage.

The question is were they referring to the former or the latter?


Pathfinder Friday Answers thread in general discussion. They apparently burned a lot of time on simple self evident questions, I guess like the shield thing, but genuinely new info and corrections are in that thread.


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

Watching the Friday Stream now.

1) Humans should get +1 language over what's currently listed.
2) All classes should have proficiency in Unarmed Attacks equivalent to their Simple Weapons Proficiency level (or better in the case of classes like the monk). Wizards should also have unarmed training, even though they don't have Simple Weapons Proficiency.
3) You're supposed to use Wisdom for your monk ki spells.
4) Sorcerer is missing the Resolve class feature, which is identical to the 17th-level ability of the same name that the wizard gets.
5) The Wizard class table is incorrect in stating that they get a 1st-level feat (universalists still get their bonus feat however).
6) The adventurer's pack is supposed to be 1 bulk, not 2.
7) There is a discrepancy regarding hero points and death and dying. Taking a heroic recovery and spending your hero points should bring you to 0 hit points, not 1 hit point, as mentioned in the death and dying section.
8) CURRENTLY UNDEFINED. The definitions of alignment traits and their restrictions (such as whether or not casting evil spells is an evil act) "is not quite right" and will be undergoing review.
9) Dwarven clan daggers are supposed to be super common, not uncommon, within the Golarian campaign setting (they remain uncommon in other campaigns, unless the dictates of the respective campaign say otherwise).

That's it, I made it to the end. Shields never came up, except for a bit of clarification on how shield block works (you AND the shield take the damage after it is reduced by hardness, and you can declare the block AFTER you know how much damage was rolled).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like that bit about humans getting an extra language. It means you can pick up elven or orcish if you're a half-, or your regional language if you like.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

FWIW I believe the terms that the devs used was "update" not errata. Errata will probably be referred to "when they actually update the book for the second printing." I mean errata literally means "an error in printing or writing" or "the published correction to the former."

So they're committed to doing seemingly is to provide game updates before we get the errata.


Ravingdork wrote:
Shields never came up, except for a bit of clarification on how shield block works (you AND the shield take the damage after it is reduced by hardness, and you can declare the block AFTER you know how much damage was rolled)

This is super useful.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

The thing about Clan Daggers is interesting. Since objectively speaking, there should be about as many of them as there are Dwarves, and Dwarves are not hard to come by. However, they are basically impossible to purchase, since it's not like Dwarves manufacture extras to sell. I don't think Dwarves would be really willing to part with their own Clan Dagger barring extreme circumstances. So all the ones on the market belonged to dead Dwarves I guess?

My reading, at least, is "selling your clan dagger" would be considered shameful.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, if I recall correctly it’s not that they should be super-common in a market place, but Dwarves should all have one. Maybe they should remove it as part of the feat and just make it part of the race.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

The thing about Clan Daggers is interesting. Since objectively speaking, there should be about as many of them as there are Dwarves, and Dwarves are not hard to come by. However, they are basically impossible to purchase, since it's not like Dwarves manufacture extras to sell. I don't think Dwarves would be really willing to part with their own Clan Dagger barring extreme circumstances. So all the ones on the market belonged to dead Dwarves I guess?

My reading, at least, is "selling your clan dagger" would be considered shameful.

That, or other people got their hands on a few and started learning how to make them themselves. Likely not to the same standards of the dwarves, who would know all the metallurgy required, but enough to replicate the basic design and sell them to non-dwarves. I doubt that many dwarves would be happy about it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Perpdepog wrote:
That, or other people got their hands on a few and started learning how to make them themselves. Likely not to the same standards of the dwarves, who would know all the metallurgy required, but enough to replicate the basic design and sell them to non-dwarves. I doubt that many dwarves would be happy about it.

Well to make one, you need the formula from a craft book so all you'd have to do is steal one of those and you can make as many as you want. If the knives are common for dwarves then every dwarf that buys a craft book gets that formula for free... That's a lot of craft books floating round with it in.


Dwarf smiths might make clan daggers to sell to other dwarves who aren't themselves skilled in crafting. Thus creating a market without any illicit or unsavory implications to it... but one that is still not going to result in clan daggers being common because A) the number made is likely to stay low and B) non-dwarves looking to buy a clan dagger might have a dwarf telling them "No, that's not for sale to you" in one way or another (likely just by keeping them in reserve, rather than on display, until a dwarf comes looking to buy a dagger for their soon to be born child).


Do monks ever get unarmed attacks better than simple weapons?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnCap Dawg wrote:
Do monks ever get unarmed attacks better than simple weapons?

That's what stances are for it seems. If you're looking for upgrades to your base non-stance attacks, I think you'll be disappointed: use monk weapons.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

They should just add having a clan dagger as a special feature of playing a dwarf (with the option to not have one if you're an exlie or something). They are probably also not easily replaced if stolen/lost/destroyed, so I wouldn't even give all dwarfs automatic access to them (other than the one they already have).

No need to change the rarity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I mean, the Dwarf entry in the rulebook says:

Quote:
Few Dwarves are found without their clan dagger strapped to their belt. This dagger is forged just before a dwarf's birth and bears the gemstone of their clan. A parent uses this to cut the infant's umbilical cord, making it the first weapon to taste their blood.

I feel like unless this dagger was made for a specific dwarf, and cut that dwarf's umbilical cord it's not a clan dagger, not really. There's a ritual to this so they're not going to give the task to unqualified smiths, and there's no reason a Dwarf would part with their personal clan dagger unless they are cutting ties with their clan or their society, something Dwarves are particularly unlikely to do.

So what's going on here is more complicated than the rarity system really encapsulates. All Dwarves, barring special circumstances, should have their clan dagger. No one should be able to buy one through legitimate channels. It's the sort of thing where if it's stolen, you go get it back, if it's broken you carry it anyway and you get it reforged, if it's lost you move heaven and earth to get it back. If a Dwarf dies, the respectful thing is probably to return it to their family or clan.


Yeah, I think people read the Weapon Feat as implying it is needed for Dwarves to get that, but I don't think that's the case, making it just superfluous. The general Dwarf text itself is sufficient to indicate every Dwarf should have had access to their one specific Clan Dagger. So deleting the Weapon Feat text is probably the biggest priority, but since that will still be in people's head they probably will further clarify situation for all Dwarf's Clan Daggers too.


Speaking of Errata. What is the cost of Healing potion, minor? 3gp like on page 293 or 4gp like on page 536 and page 563?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, Dwarves should really get their clan dagger for free. 2gp might not be a lot in the grand scheme of things, but that's 2/15 or 13.33% of the starting wealth. It's probably not a weapon most PCs are going to use much, so that's a sizable chunk for something that's almost entirely flavor.

Also, why are they peircing with versitile blunt? That seems really weird for a dagger. Is it just a heavy spike with no edge? If it cut's umbilical cords, it's probably got an edge, so why blunt and not slashing? Is the dagger on page 284 (right next to the clan dagger entry and looking very dwarfy) supposed to be a clan dagger? That's a choppy looking knife. I supose the blunt is coming from the gem on the pommel. This is not the most vital thing, but I like to know how things are supposed to work. And the current description doesn't explain it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I would assume the blunt attack is bashing your foe over the head with the heavy pommel. I agree dwarves should get a clan dagger automatically at character creation, and not have to pay for it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean, the Dwarf entry in the rulebook says:

Quote:
Few Dwarves are found without their clan dagger strapped to their belt. This dagger is forged just before a dwarf's birth and bears the gemstone of their clan. A parent uses this to cut the infant's umbilical cord, making it the first weapon to taste their blood.

I feel like unless this dagger was made for a specific dwarf, and cut that dwarf's umbilical cord it's not a clan dagger, not really. There's a ritual to this so they're not going to give the task to unqualified smiths, and there's no reason a Dwarf would part with their personal clan dagger unless they are cutting ties with their clan or their society, something Dwarves are particularly unlikely to do.

So what's going on here is more complicated than the rarity system really encapsulates. All Dwarves, barring special circumstances, should have their clan dagger. No one should be able to buy one through legitimate channels. It's the sort of thing where if it's stolen, you go get it back, if it's broken you carry it anyway and you get it reforged, if it's lost you move heaven and earth to get it back. If a Dwarf dies, the respectful thing is probably to return it to their family or clan.

I absolutely love this bit of lore!

I am still wondering how uncommon 'Access' works in Society play though. Do all dwarfs have access to uncommon dwarf items? If you are not a dwarf, but from the Five Kings Mountains as you home can you have access?

Just have an idea that I'm already playing (but still level 1 so can rebuild) for a half-elf who has essentially been adopted by a dwarf clan, and after 10 years with them she was granted her own clan dagger. Just to make things official (as she clearly doesn't have an umbilical to cut) she has a slight scar next to her belly button where it tasted her blood as part of her adoption.


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

One other tidbit they mentioned as not being resolved yet was exactly how they're going to be approaching errata/FAQ this edition.

I don't know if they were raising the possibility of amending the "only publish errata when a book is reprinted" policy or more speaking about exactly how it would be worded.

It didn't sound like they'd actually made any changes - just that they were considering it.

Dataphiles

3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:


So what's going on here is more complicated than the rarity system really encapsulates. All Dwarves, barring special circumstances, should have their clan dagger. No one should be able to buy one through legitimate channels. It's the sort of thing where if it's stolen, you go get it back, if it's broken you carry it anyway and you get it reforged, if it's lost you move heaven and earth to get it back. If a Dwarf dies, the respectful thing is probably to return it to their family or clan.

That presumes you know it's a clan dagger. If you're a non-dwarf or come from an area without many Dwarves you might not know these daggers are special. Or, at least, not know the whole deal with them at the very least. Raiders might take them from victims or adventurers may find them on corpses of Dwarves killed by monsters, traps, or something else.

Actually, finding a half-dozen clan daggers in a second-hand shop might even be the start of an adventure if you've got a dwarf-heavy party since they'll want to return them properly.

Scarab Sages

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:

One other tidbit they mentioned as not being resolved yet was exactly how they're going to be approaching errata/FAQ this edition.

I don't know if they were raising the possibility of amending the "only publish errata when a book is reprinted" policy or more speaking about exactly how it would be worded.

It didn't sound like they'd actually made any changes - just that they were considering it.

I really hope they move faster on FAQs/errata this edition, it was painfully slow last edition and would really benefit from being more agile - especially with the Archives of Nethys deal making the rules available to everyone for free.


Here's an off topic question relating to the bestiary 2e: It refers to creating creatures from ground up using the "standard monster creation rules." However, I have looked and looked and there are currently no standard monster creation rule to be found. Am I just missing it is is it not done yet? If I am missing it can someone direct me to where I can find it? I have a few monsters to create for game this month and would like to have time to do so so I dont have to do it on the fly during game.

Silver Crusade

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

It'll be in the Gamemastery Guide, rather than having to repeat it every Bestiary.

They are currently working on a way to have it out for free so everyone doesn't have to wait months I believe, most likely that means it'll go up on Archives of Nethys when it's set.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean, the Dwarf entry in the rulebook says:

Quote:
Few Dwarves are found without their clan dagger strapped to their belt. This dagger is forged just before a dwarf's birth and bears the gemstone of their clan. A parent uses this to cut the infant's umbilical cord, making it the first weapon to taste their blood.

I feel like unless this dagger was made for a specific dwarf, and cut that dwarf's umbilical cord it's not a clan dagger, not really. There's a ritual to this so they're not going to give the task to unqualified smiths, and there's no reason a Dwarf would part with their personal clan dagger unless they are cutting ties with their clan or their society, something Dwarves are particularly unlikely to do.

So what's going on here is more complicated than the rarity system really encapsulates. All Dwarves, barring special circumstances, should have their clan dagger. No one should be able to buy one through legitimate channels. It's the sort of thing where if it's stolen, you go get it back, if it's broken you carry it anyway and you get it reforged, if it's lost you move heaven and earth to get it back. If a Dwarf dies, the respectful thing is probably to return it to their family or clan.

Since it belongs strictly to the Dwarf who died, I think it should be buried with them.

Which explains nicely why they would be Common for our usual grave-robbing adventurers.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Doktor Weasel wrote:

Yeah, Dwarves should really get their clan dagger for free. 2gp might not be a lot in the grand scheme of things, but that's 2/15 or 13.33% of the starting wealth. It's probably not a weapon most PCs are going to use much, so that's a sizable chunk for something that's almost entirely flavor.

Also, why are they peircing with versitile blunt? That seems really weird for a dagger. Is it just a heavy spike with no edge? If it cut's umbilical cords, it's probably got an edge, so why blunt and not slashing? Is the dagger on page 284 (right next to the clan dagger entry and looking very dwarfy) supposed to be a clan dagger? That's a choppy looking knife. I supose the blunt is coming from the gem on the pommel. This is not the most vital thing, but I like to know how things are supposed to work. And the current description doesn't explain it.

Slashing before cutting. Blunt forever after ;-D

Grand Lodge

Is this the right thread to submit more errata? Like the Field Medic background giving the non-existent "Battle Medic" skill feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Markov Spiked Chain wrote:
Is this the right thread to submit more errata? Like the Field Medic background giving the non-existent "Battle Medic" skill feat.

No, not unless it came from an official source. If you found an error in need of errata take it to this thread.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
Doktor Weasel wrote:

Yeah, Dwarves should really get their clan dagger for free. 2gp might not be a lot in the grand scheme of things, but that's 2/15 or 13.33% of the starting wealth. It's probably not a weapon most PCs are going to use much, so that's a sizable chunk for something that's almost entirely flavor.

Also, why are they peircing with versitile blunt? That seems really weird for a dagger. Is it just a heavy spike with no edge? If it cut's umbilical cords, it's probably got an edge, so why blunt and not slashing? Is the dagger on page 284 (right next to the clan dagger entry and looking very dwarfy) supposed to be a clan dagger? That's a choppy looking knife. I supose the blunt is coming from the gem on the pommel. This is not the most vital thing, but I like to know how things are supposed to work. And the current description doesn't explain it.

Slashing before cutting. Blunt forever after ;-D

Dwarves have addamantine umbilical cords. It blunts the blade permanently. :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Markov Spiked Chain wrote:
Is this the right thread to submit more errata? Like the Field Medic background giving the non-existent "Battle Medic" skill feat.

Don't gripe about 3 missing letters. The feat is Battle Medicine (p258)

More unsettling than 3 missing letters is the fact that the Battle Medicine feat doesn't clearly state that it requires a healer's kit to function, as it should. That alone would be errata worthy.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:
More unsettling than 3 missing letters is the fact that the Battle Medicine feat doesn't clearly state that it requires a healer's kit to function, as it should. That alone would be errata worthy.

This seems likely to be intentional, though it's worthy of clarification either way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Boy. A second thread immediately devolving in a lot of chatter.

What is wrong with you people? 99% of players just want a clean simple list of game-impacting things you have found, with no clutter or minor typos included, no arguments, no discussion and no attribution.

Ravingdorks post above is the FIRST useful post I've seen around here, which is in stark contrast to... just about every other game community I guess? Bravo Ravingdork!!! Still, it was immediately buried in another load of chatter :(

I have come to understand forum limitations prevent us from editing the first post of a thread (continuously over days and weeks), but there really should be a living document with the info we need, and not the cruft 99% of us don't care about. That document should be plain text no frills and could be hosted at Google Docs or pastebin for what I care.

A stickied or continuously bumped thread containing one (1) post with a link to the updated document, and nothing else, is what you guys need to strive for.

Thanks.

PS. Feel free to not respond. I won't be monitoring this thread since it is yet another example of what I'm not interested in. Also, I wasn't offering my opinion or interested in hearing alternative viewpoints - I am merely here to tell you good user communities are super-fast with unofficial errata presented in a clean, crisp manner. It's been weeks, but so far you guys have been an unexpected let-down, as exemplified by how Ravingdork here essentially had to answer his own call!


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Re: dwarven clan daggers: IMO, every dwarf gets one at birth, for free, though his parents may hold on to it for him until they feel he's mature enough to properly handle it. The 2 gp price should be for clan daggers that were lost by or stolen from the dwarf that owned it, and represents what, for example, a dwarf might pay for one so that he can return it to its owner or its owner's clan.

A regular dagger has the agile, finesse, thrown 10 feet, and versatile slashing traits. At first glance, so should a clan dagger But if a clan dagger is by design not sharpened on its edges then I suppose it makes sense that it would have versatile blunt trait. It makes some sense that it have the parry trait too, else the only thing you can do with it is stab. A clan dagger might not have the thrown trait, if it's not balanced for throwing.

A clan dagger is a dagger that lacks the finesse trait. Not sure that makes sense, unless the purpose of the trait is to allow it to be a "dex" weapon for throwing purposes.

Interesting thought: A knife or dagger logically has a blunt aspect even if one or both edges are sharpened. After all, you can hit somebody with the flat of the blade (or the pommel for that matter). Doesn't look like this is contemplated in the rules as written, though.

Exo-Guardians

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sarenrae disapproves of thread necromancy...


Saros Palanthios wrote:
Sarenrae disapproves of thread necromancy...

Your politics bore me. Your demeanor is that of a pouty child.

Grand Lodge

Saros Palanthios wrote:
Sarenrae disapproves of thread necromancy...

I think Pharasma would hate it more.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

I think I hate it most of all...

Especially since there is another similar thread active right now. :)

This thread is locked.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / P2E Errata!? All Messageboards