Secrets of Magic Errata

[Ravingdork]

Insofar as I'm aware, a thread for collecting potential SoM errata hasn't been started yet, so let's get that ball rolling, shall we?

Page 38: As written Arcade Cascade's requirements cannot be continously met. Since it has the Stance trait, this means that it shuts off the moment you take almost any action. As such, it is nonfunctional as written, even though the rest of the text makes it clear that, that was not intent. [Source]

Page 52: Due to the restrictions on a summoner's sigil, it appears as though it may be impossible for summoner characters to use Deception to Create a Disguise, Stealth to Hide or Sneak, or benefit from spells such as invisibility. No class feature has ever limited so many basic concepts and strategies in such a manner, or affected the rest of the adventuring party so (for example, if the party is Avoiding Notice, but the summoner and their eidolon's glowing sigil keeps giving them away, that's a strategy the party can't rely on so long as they are in the party.) [Source]

Page XX: The Climbing Evolution appears to be missing. Currently, eidolons have no means of obtaining an innate Climb speed.

Page 250: It appears that the editors forgot to remove Anthony Barnett's editorial comment from the PDF file.

[Ezekieru]

Page 180: Blade of Four Energies lacks the Spell Attack modifier and Spell DC for their spells for the base weapon, and lacks the Spell Attack modifier for the Greater version (since Acid Arrow is a spell attack).

[Ravingdork]

Page XX: It does not appear to be explicitly stated anywhere what happens to the eidolon when they reach 0 hit points, or are killed outright. Do they simply unmanifest and can be called back later? Do they need to be resurrected? Can they ever even enter a dying state?

[Vlorax]

Ravingdork wrote:

Page XX: It does not appear to be explicitly stated anywhere what happens to the eidolon when they reach 0 hit points, or are killed outright. Do they simply unmanifest and can be called back later? Do they need to be resurrected? Can they ever even enter a dying state?

Pg 52. You drop to 0 hp ediolon dissapears, and you share hp, so when it hits 0 they disappear.

[Ravingdork]

Vlorax wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Page XX: It does not appear to be explicitly stated anywhere what happens to the eidolon when they reach 0 hit points, or are killed outright. Do they simply unmanifest and can be called back later? Do they need to be resurrected? Can they ever even enter a dying state?

Pg 52. You drop to 0 hp ediolon dissapears, and you share hp, so when it hits 0 they disappear.

Yeah, I figured it out shortly after my post editing capabilities timed out. Not a fan of how it's buried in an activity description and not put in a more general rules location (like where the eidolon's proficiencies and stats are spelled out).

[Zaister]

Ravingdork wrote:

Yeah, I figured it out shortly after my post editing capabilities timed out. Not a fan of how it's buried in an activity description and not put in a more general rules location (like where the eidolon's proficiencies and stats are spelled out).

There's a full paragraph on p. 53 about this as part of the eidolon class feature.

[Ravingdork]

Page 67: There is a typo in the second to last sentence of the Meld Into Eidolon feat.

Your can’t be separately targeted while you are melded into it.

"Your" should be "You" at the start of the sentence.

[Ravingdork]

Zaister wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Yeah, I figured it out shortly after my post editing capabilities timed out. Not a fan of how it's buried in an activity description and not put in a more general rules location (like where the eidolon's proficiencies and stats are spelled out).

There's a full paragraph on p. 53 about this as part of the eidolon class feature.

That paragraph talks about how to manage hit points in different circumstances, but doesn't actually say what happens to the eidolon when they reach 0. Insofar as I'm aware, the answer to that exists exclusively in the Manifest Eidolon activity description on the previous page.

[Gisher]

Ravingdork wrote:

Page 67: There is a typo in the second to last sentence of the Meld Into Eidolon feat.

Your can’t be separately targeted while you are melded into it.

"Your" should be "You" at the start of the sentence.

"Your Eidolon" instead of "Your" is another possibility.

[NotDavis]

Unsure if it is worthy of errata, but the Occult Librarian background gives Academia Lore and not Library Lore. I don’t think there’s that much difference between the two, but it seemed kind of funny to me that the first background with “Librarian” in the name doesn’t get Library Lore.

[Ravingdork]

NotDavis wrote:

Unsure if it is worthy of errata, but the Occult Librarian background gives Academia Lore and not Library Lore. I don’t think there’s that much difference between the two, but it seemed kind of funny to me that the first background with “Librarian” in the name doesn’t get Library Lore.

As someone who has made multiple attempts at becoming a professional librarian, I kind of like that. Libraries are about knowledge (Academia) and how to organize it properly. Academia Lore fits that perfectly, and has been established previously elsewhere in the game. If Library Lore did exist, I feel it would either step on the toes of Academia Lore too much, or be borderline useless.

"Why yes, I can name every library in the Inner Sea. Would you like to hear about the different organizational systems they use too?" XD

[NotDavis]

Ravingdork wrote:

NotDavis wrote:

Unsure if it is worthy of errata, but the Occult Librarian background gives Academia Lore and not Library Lore. I don’t think there’s that much difference between the two, but it seemed kind of funny to me that the first background with “Librarian” in the name doesn’t get Library Lore.

As someone who has made multiple attempts at becoming a professional librarian, I kind of like that. Libraries are about knowledge (Academia) and how to organize it properly. Academia Lore fits that perfectly, and has been established previously elsewhere in the game. If Library Lore did exist, I feel it would either step on the toes of Academia Lore too much, or be borderline useless.

"Why yes, I can name every library in the Inner Sea. Would you like to hear about the different organizational systems they use too?" XD

Library Lore actually does exist. It’s one of the common lore subcategories listed in the Core Rulebook. The Spell Seeker (Pathfinder Society Guide) and Bibliophile (Abomination Vaults Player’s Guide) both give it. The PFS organized play campaign also gives Library Lore as a bonus lore for the Scrolls and Generalist trainings. It also appears a couple times in the Gamemastery guide: the Librarian stat block has both Library Lore and Academia Lore with separate bonuses, and the research subsystem suggests using Library or Academic lore for some challenges, with the same DC listed for both in the example.

It’s obviously a minor detail, but it’s one of those things that just feels weird.

[CaffeinatedNinja]

I am unclear if it is intentional or not, but arcane cascade does not boost ranged damage. So not much reason for starlit span to use one of the main class features.

[The Raven Black]

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

I am unclear if it is intentional or not, but arcane cascade does not boost ranged damage. So not much reason for starlit span to use one of the main class features.

I believe there is a feat for Starlit span that relies on being in the stance.

[Gortle]

Ravingdork wrote:

Vlorax wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Page XX: It does not appear to be explicitly stated anywhere what happens to the eidolon when they reach 0 hit points, or are killed outright. Do they simply unmanifest and can be called back later? Do they need to be resurrected? Can they ever even enter a dying state?

Pg 52. You drop to 0 hp ediolon dissapears, and you share hp, so when it hits 0 they disappear.

Yeah, I figured it out shortly after my post editing capabilities timed out. Not a fan of how it's buried in an activity description and not put in a more general rules location (like where the eidolon's proficiencies and stats are spelled out).

Good to know they haven't changed the way they layout their rules (?!?)

[Invictus Fatum]

Page 68 Reinforce Eidolon's description is says "You buffer your eidolon" rather than say "You buff your eidolon"

Though that's more of a typo than in need for an erreta I suppose.

[Perpdepog]

Invictus Fatum wrote:

Page 68 Reinforce Eidolon's description is says "You buffer your eidolon" rather than say "You buff your eidolon"

Though that's more of a typo than in need for an erreta I suppose.

Buffer wrote:

1: any of various devices or pieces of material for reducing shock or damage due to contact

2: a means or device used as a cushion against the shock of fluctuations in business or financial activity
3: something that serves as a protective barrier.

[Invictus Fatum]

Perpdepog wrote:

Invictus Fatum wrote:

Page 68 Reinforce Eidolon's description is says "You buffer your eidolon" rather than say "You buff your eidolon"

Though that's more of a typo than in need for an erreta I suppose.

Buffer wrote:

1: any of various devices or pieces of material for reducing shock or damage due to contact

2: a means or device used as a cushion against the shock of fluctuations in business or financial activity
3: something that serves as a protective barrier.

Touche. I suppose I didn't take that meaning into consideration since the term "buff" is used constantly used in this game. Point withdrawn.

[Gaulin]

Not sure if this would be considered errata but it's something I would love to have clarified. The plant eidolon ability field of roots, I can't tell if being on the ground is a requirement or flavor. It says it affects enemies within reach - I would assume it's not limited to enemies on the ground. Could an eidolon use this ability without contact to he ground, like in the air or underwater?

[egindar]

This is hearsay on my part, as I don't have the book, but the bounded casting multiclass archetypes have an irregularity in their slot progression, going from two 3rd-level slots and one 2nd-level slot to one 5th-level slot and two 4th-level slots. It seems like it's missing a bump from one 3rd-level slot and one 2nd-level slot to one 4th-level slot and one 3rd-level slot somewhere.

[Exocist]

The Fear cathartic magic has a broken interaction with the Fearful Feast focus spell.

Using a kobold that has Dragon’s Presence, and three party members with fearful feast, if you run into a monster with frightful presence (or any kind of frighten infliction that doesn’t also cause fleeing on a CF) you can easily end up giving -10 or more status penalty to saves against your spells (and +10 or more to your spell attacks).

Admittedly this does come at the cost of taking a bunch of mental damage from the CFs on Fearful Feast, and that you’ll still be at -10+ to your AC, saves and so on, but still -10+ to saves against your spells seems excessive.

[Rysky]

The Designers are already aware of it (mostly due to Fearful Feast breaking a lot of design guidelines outside of this interaction).

[Vlorax]

Exocist wrote:

The Fear cathartic magic has a broken interaction with the Fearful Feast focus spell.

Using a kobold that has Dragon’s Presence, and three party members with fearful feast, if you run into a monster with frightful presence (or any kind of frighten infliction that doesn’t also cause fleeing on a CF) you can easily end up giving -10 or more status penalty to saves against your spells (and +10 or more to your spell attacks).

Admittedly this does come at the cost of taking a bunch of mental damage from the CFs on Fearful Feast, and that you’ll still be at -10+ to your AC, saves and so on, but still -10+ to saves against your spells seems excessive.

While fearful feast could use some fixing i'm not sure this edge case will occur often.

3 other party members have uncommon spell from AP -> the fear caster getting feared -> their allies using focus points to do 18d4 dmg to their ally, to hopefully increase the ally's Frightened level.

Unless the fear caster has some kind of super spell there's few reasons to do it, and if he does that would be a crazy situation and might be kinda epic.

[Verzen]

Vlorax wrote:

Exocist wrote:

The Fear cathartic magic has a broken interaction with the Fearful Feast focus spell.

Using a kobold that has Dragon’s Presence, and three party members with fearful feast, if you run into a monster with frightful presence (or any kind of frighten infliction that doesn’t also cause fleeing on a CF) you can easily end up giving -10 or more status penalty to saves against your spells (and +10 or more to your spell attacks).

Admittedly this does come at the cost of taking a bunch of mental damage from the CFs on Fearful Feast, and that you’ll still be at -10+ to your AC, saves and so on, but still -10+ to saves against your spells seems excessive.

While fearful feast could use some fixing i'm not sure this edge case will occur often.

3 other party members have uncommon spell from AP -> the fear caster getting feared -> their allies using focus points to do 18d4 dmg to their ally, to hopefully increase the ally's Frightened level.

Unless the fear caster has some kind of super spell there's few reasons to do it, and if he does that would be a crazy situation and might be kinda epic.

36d4.

Each crit failure doubles the dmg

6d4=12d4*3=36d4

[Zaister]

Ravingdork wrote:

Zaister wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Yeah, I figured it out shortly after my post editing capabilities timed out. Not a fan of how it's buried in an activity description and not put in a more general rules location (like where the eidolon's proficiencies and stats are spelled out).

There's a full paragraph on p. 53 about this as part of the eidolon class feature.

That paragraph talks about how to manage hit points in different circumstances, but doesn't actually say what happens to the eidolon when they reach 0. Insofar as I'm aware, the answer to that exists exclusively in the Manifest Eidolon activity description on the previous page.

The rules do not need to say what happens when the eidolon reaches 0 hit points because that never happens. The eidolon doesn't actually have any hit points of their own. They do not “reach 0”. The summoner does, and if the summoner becomes unconscious because they're at 0 hp, the eidolon unmanifests. It is pretty obvious.

[Shisumo]

Page 39 Inexorable Iron hybrid study is unclear as to what weapons are allowed for its use. The first paragraph specifically mentions greataxe, greatsword, and polearm, but the second paragraph and the thunderous strike conflux spell only require a melee weapon wielded in two hands. Is the list in the first paragraph intended to be exhaustive, or no?

[Amaya/Polaris]

It's not a list, it's just the first-sentence-flavor-text.

[Shisumo]

Alfa/Polaris wrote:

It's not a list, it's just the first-sentence-flavor-text.

That's my take as well, but I know that I have seen at least one poster on the forums claim that those are the only weapons II can be used with.

[Amaya/Polaris]

I'm not sure how they could errata misread flavor text besides just excising it, though. Like, it's mentioned later in the feat itself what it applies to, and pretty much the entire game uses the first sentence for flavor text...in general, half the stuff mentioned in this thread thus far strikes me as either not an error or not really actionable.

[CaffeinatedNinja]

The Endless Grimoire offers an item bonus to learn a spell. But virtually every pc from a class that learns a spell probably has an item with an item skill bonus for their main skill already. Not sure if that was meant to be a circumstance bonus or not.

[Verzen]

Shisumo wrote:

Page 39 Inexorable Iron hybrid study is unclear as to what weapons are allowed for its use. The first paragraph specifically mentions greataxe, greatsword, and polearm, but the second paragraph and the thunderous strike conflux spell only require a melee weapon wielded in two hands. Is the list in the first paragraph intended to be exhaustive, or no?

Yes. Those are the only weapons. But you can't spellstrike with any of them either, because under spellstrike it specifically mentions PUNCHING or SWORD THRUSTING. No slashing. No axes. No polearms. No staffs. None of that can spellstrike so sayeth the flavor text.

[Guntermench]

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

The Endless Grimoire offers an item bonus to learn a spell. But virtually every pc from a class that learns a spell probably has an item with an item skill bonus for their main skill already. Not sure if that was meant to be a circumstance bonus or not.

If that's an item, I'd assume item bonus is correct.

[Shisumo]

Pg 58 Eidolons don't seem to list their starting Perception proficiency. It's clearly meant to be Trained, but there's no actual statement to that effect in the text.

Pg 213 The Terrain Shield feat looks to be missing an action symbol (probably a Reaction).

[Ravingdork]

Page varies The term "magus’s" is used repeatedly throughout. Possessive nouns ending in an s should end in an apostrophe, not an apostrophe and an "s." As written it is grammatically incorrect.

Shamus' sword was deadly sharp.

Not

Shamus's sword was deadly sharp.

[Pirate Rob]

Ravingdork wrote:

Page varies The term "magus’s" is used repeatedly throughout. Possessive nouns ending in an s should end in an apostrophe, not an apostrophe and an "s." As written it is grammatically incorrect.

Shamus' sword was deadly sharp.

Not

Shamus's sword was deadly sharp.

Hard disagree.

[Earthfall]

Ravingdork wrote:

Page varies The term "magus’s" is used repeatedly throughout. Possessive nouns ending in an s should end in an apostrophe, not an apostrophe and an "s." As written it is grammatically incorrect.

Only if the noun is plural. As "magus" is singular, the form "magus's" is correct.

[Ravingdork]

Earthfall wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Page varies The term "magus’s" is used repeatedly throughout. Possessive nouns ending in an s should end in an apostrophe, not an apostrophe and an "s." As written it is grammatically incorrect.

Only if the noun is plural. As "magus" is singular, the form "magus's" is correct.

You are correct that you also omit the second S when dealing with plurals.

However magus plural would be "magi," or "magi's" in the case of the possessive.

I was always taught that if a word naturally ended with an S, you don't add a second S after the apostrophe. Nothing in my nearly 40 years of life as an editor and writer has ever contradicted that before you fine folks today.

[Squiggit]

CMOS says either version is correct.

[Ravingdork]

Pages 69-70 Ostentatious Arrival blows up the summoner every time it is used since it appears as though eidolons can only be manifested next to their summoners. Surely that's unintended.

[nick1wasd]

Ravingdork wrote:

Earthfall wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Page varies The term "magus’s" is used repeatedly throughout. Possessive nouns ending in an s should end in an apostrophe, not an apostrophe and an "s." As written it is grammatically incorrect.

Only if the noun is plural. As "magus" is singular, the form "magus's" is correct.

You are correct that you also omit the second S when dealing with plurals.

However magus plural would be "magi," or "magi's" in the case of the possessive.

I was always taught that if a word naturally ended with an S, you don't add a second S after the apostrophe. Nothing in my nearly 40 years of life as an editor and writer has ever contradicted that before you fine folks today.

And if you need to pluralize AND possessive something that ends with S, you add " es' " to it, like the MtG card Heroes' Bane (even though hero doesn't end with S. Princesses' is another usage, but one that is much less interesting example). And yeah, the plural of Magus is Magi, Thus Spoke 1E books across the board, and many pieces of lore that feature the term "magus/mage/magi"

[cheezeofjustice]

Magus do not have a Class DC and Arcane Fists lacks any text to let them use their spell DC for class DC like the Warpriest has.

This is an issue because the crit specialization effect the feat grants you is a Class DC effect.

I am under the assumption that RAW you can't use Class DC effects without a Class DC, and even if you can for magus it would be forever untrained without a dedication or a nice GM.

If this is that case, RAW the feat is doing absolutely nothing for that pictured sample magus that's clearly a clawed catfolk.

[Invictus Fatum]

Ravingdork wrote:

Pages 69-70 Ostentatious Arrival blows up the summoner every time it is used since it appears as though eidolons can only be manifested next to their summoners. Surely that's unintended.

This is especially bad considering in a fight it would be a common place to just wake up from a dying condition, use your 3 actions to summon your Eidolon for protection, only to blow up the Summoner and put him in dying again. Which, of course, would de-manifest the Eidolon immediately.

[Shisumo]

Invictus Fatum wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Pages 69-70 Ostentatious Arrival blows up the summoner every time it is used since it appears as though eidolons can only be manifested next to their summoners. Surely that's unintended.

This is especially bad considering in a fight it would be a common place to just wake up from a dying condition, use your 3 actions to summon your Eidolon for protection, only to blow up the Summoner and put him in dying again. Which, of course, would de-manifest the Eidolon immediately.

Um, Ostentatious Arrival is entirely optional. I'm pretty sure this scenario isn't going to happen.

[Squiggit]

Yeah, Ostentatious Arrival is a free action to turn on, so you'll never accidentally do it.

It is a little odd that that part of the feat hurts you if you ever use it, but I'm not sure it's broken per se.

[Verzen]

I remember Mark saying there were 9 first level feats for summoner. I count 8. Did "climb evolution" accidentally get removed?

[Goodham]

Squiggit wrote:

Yeah, Ostentatious Arrival is a free action to turn on, so you'll never accidentally do it.

It is a little odd that that part of the feat hurts you if you ever use it, but I'm not sure it's broken per se.

What makes it even stranger is that the playtest version of the feat didn't deal damage to the summoner.

[Invictus Fatum]

Goodham wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Yeah, Ostentatious Arrival is a free action to turn on, so you'll never accidentally do it.

It is a little odd that that part of the feat hurts you if you ever use it, but I'm not sure it's broken per se.

What makes it even stranger is that the playtest version of the feat didn't deal damage to the summoner.

Huh, you're right. I just checked my playtest doc. and it says "This deals 1d4 fire damage per spell level (or 1d4 damage per 2 levels you have when Manifesting your Eidolon) to all creatures except you within a 10-foot emanation around the eidolon or summoned creature."

This version almost has to be an oversite as it only makes sense not to blow yourself up everytime you want to use a 6th level feat for your Eidolon.

[Orwi11]

I am not absolutely certain that this is an error, but it appears that the magus does not have any way to start with a level 1 class feat. Most classes either get to take one at level one, or receive one in connection selecting a subclass (e.g., druid order, arcane thesis). Unless I am missing something, the only way a magus gets a level 1 feat would be to select one at a later even level.

Maybe its intended, but I have doubts.

[Sagiam]

Orwi11 wrote:

I am not absolutely certain that this is an error, but it appears that the magus does not have any way to start with a level 1 class feat. Most classes either get to take one at level one, or receive one in connection selecting a subclass (e.g., druid order, arcane thesis). Unless I am missing something, the only way a magus gets a level 1 feat would be to select one at a later even level.

Maybe its intended, but I have doubts.

Aside from playing a human (Natural Ambition) of course.

But I think it's intended. There are other classes that don't start with a 1st-level feat naturally. Witch and Oracle spring to mind.

[Squiggit]

It was also specifically talked about during pre-release teasers that the Magus didn't get a level 1 feat (but got a ton of other stuff).