
![]() |

In the Abomination Vaults book 1, there is a creature that doesn't exist in Second Edition yet. The book points to the Bestiary page but it's wrong.
What do we do?

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

the majordomo exists as a shadow-like undead who retains her appearance from life, but otherwise functions as a standard shadow.
In other words no issue maybe just poorly labeled. Maybe it should read.
MAJORDOMO Creature 4
Female Shadow Pathfinder Bestiary 289
Initiative Stealth +14

![]() |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |

As for why it was labeled that way:
But yes... it's just a shadow, as far as the stats are concerned. The change to the text happened literally hours before we sent it to the printer, so we had to keep actual changes and additions as noninvasive as possible.

![]() |

As for why it was labeled that way:
** spoiler omitted **
Yah I can see hiw this is a tricky issue. Maybe the Unique tag could work. The Creature section already describes the why. But obviously Different people parse information differently so the book having a specific name and than pointing to a creature that doesn't have that name can be a tad confusing.
So I again suggest in these edge cases the block should read.
MAJORDOMO Creature 4
Unique Female Shadow Pathfinder Bestiary 289
Initiative Stealth +14
Special: See 'Creature:' text above.
Or a neater version. All PF1 blocks even if they were just named or skinned normal creatures their block always said what they were with the bestiry page # after.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

James Jacobs wrote:As for why it was labeled that way:
** spoiler omitted **
Yah I can see hiw this is a tricky issue. Maybe the Unique tag could work. The Creature section already describes the why. But obviously Different people parse information differently so the book having a specific name and than pointing to a creature that doesn't have that name can be a tad confusing.
So I again suggest in these edge cases the block should read.
** spoiler omitted **
Or a neater version. All PF1 blocks even if they were just named or skinned normal creatures their block always said what they were with the bestiry page # after.
Normally we'd do something like that, but this wasn't a normal case. It was me trying to justify an off-model illustration; the option would have been to cut the illustration entirely and keep that creature simply named as its creature name and not the other name we mentioned, but doing that would have caused significant text-flow issues that we didn't have time to address.
And running even a slightly longer stat block like what you suggested wouldn't have worked anyway, due to there not being room to do so without impacting word flow throughout the whole chapter, which would have turned a minor last-minute change into a major one.

![]() |

I was just looking at creature types and creating them in Foundry in the dungeon. My workflow is usually can the pages for creatures/traps, place them on the map, read the details later. This just makes it easier for me/my brain to prep things.
But anyway, thanks for the clarification James and Nicolas, I appreciate it! Now I can go back to prepping :D

![]() |

Fair enough I am by no means a designer or editor just thinking out loud.
The text as is worked for me as I referenced the 'Creature' section before the stat stub and came to the intended conclusion that
I am not sure I can say that I would like a slower schedule but these kind of errors seem to be common because of Paizo's montly release schedule. Although I am sure working from home and not getting to interact with staff has a bigger impact on editorial issues like this.

![]() |

I was just looking at creature types and creating them in Foundry in the dungeon. My workflow is usually can the pages for creatures/traps, place them on the map, read the details later. This just makes it easier for me/my brain to prep things.
But anyway, thanks for the clarification James and Nicolas, I appreciate it! Now I can go back to prepping :D
That makes sense. I have done the same thing when I was making my Roll20 Iron Gods game.
In this case tho since I was trying to fix your issue I read the whole encounter to make sure we weren't missing something silly.

Kasoh |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Normally we'd do something like that, but this wasn't a normal case. It was me trying to justify an off-model illustration; the option would have been to cut the illustration entirely and keep that creature simply named as its creature name and not the other name we mentioned, but doing that would have caused significant text-flow issues that we didn't have time to address.
For what it is worth, I enjoyed the idea presented by the humanoid looking shadow and wanted to do more with it. So, "happy little accidents."

Zapp |
FWIW, I think the image is very cool and evocative, and that you made the right decision to keep it!
(Making up unique stats for it would of course have been ideal, but having a canon entry for "regular people-looking shadows" being a legit variant shadow is a cool outcome of the incident. It opens up the door for a future Shadow player character race ;-)