Secrets of Magic Errata

[TheDoomBug]

Shadowcaster Archetype's Shadow Reservoir says, "Each time a creature fails its saving throw against a spell cast from your reservoir, you gain a small tattoo inked on your flesh out of pure shadowstuff." But it doesn't mention any duration or other limitations. Are these permanent marks? Can they be removed by Dispel Magic?

The Secrets of Shadows gives negative (or positive) resistance based on highest spellslot level, but no actual indication that even one shadowstuff tattoo is required.

Is there really no intended social ramifications for these marks?

[Laclale♪]

Blave wrote:

Runelord Archetype:

- Tattoo Artist as an archetype feat seems ... redundant? It's exactly the same as the regular skill feat, so you could just get that one instead. The only advantage from getting the archetype-version is the ability to pay off the Dedication a bit faster.

Tatoo is on another "Lost Omens" book.

[aobst128]

Page 106, "flammable fumes" doesn't list a save for either of it's damage sources.

[TheDoomBug]

Unlike Shadowdancer, Caster receives no form of Darkvision in any of its feats. It also cannot target itself to see through its own Darklight focus spell or be immune to that spell's damage, as it can only target allies.

[Staffan Johansson]

I'm not sure if this is technically errata or just bad design, but:

Haunting Hymn (page 109). is a cantrip that deals casting-stat points of sonic damage in a 15-ft cone, +1d6/2 spell levels, basic Fortitude save. If you critically fail the Fortitude save, you also become Deafened for one minute. This makes you immune to Auditory effects. Which Haunting Hymn is. I don't really know any other spells that make the target immune to it on a critical failure.

[Dubious Scholar]

Eidolons borrow the summoner's spell attack roll and DC, but not the value of the stat (which matters for cantrips).

This greatly impacts the value of getting a couple cantrips on them since there aren't many (any?) utility cantrips it's worth giving them then I feel, since very few stat lines have enough CHA to get damage early on with them (the big thing here is a lot of short-range cantrips that they could otherwise use safely, like Puff of Poison).

Edit: Please modify Meld into Eidolon to allow it to be used while the Eidolon is already out. As written you can't do that, and being able to Evolution Surge then Meld allows for utility for dealing with environmental obstacles.

[Old_Man_Robot]

Fused Polearm from the Runelord dedicated feels like it’s missing text to govern rune interactions like the Magus Fused Staff does.

For example. If I fused a polearm with the shifting rune on it with a staff, would I then be able to use shifting as normal? Since this interaction is explicitly called out in Fused Staff. In addition, some text on how different sets of potency runes interact would have been good, just like with Fused Staff.

[Karmagator]

Spellhearts, unlike staves, do not specify that higher types get everything the lower types get - i.e. the spells. But the trait states that is the intention in a roundabout way: "Crafting a spellheart requires the spells the spellheart can cast. For example, a major five-feather wreath requires air walk, gale blast, and wall of wind.".

I'm particularly interested whether or not you still egt the level 3 version of the spell the greater type gives you when you get the same spell in the 4th level version from the major type.

I've seen the question a couple of times, so a clarification would be appreciated.

[Karmagator]

It might also be worth clarifying that the Cast A Spell activation component of Activate an Item satisfies the "Cast A Spell" part of Spellstrike, since you are technically doing another activity.

[Dubious Scholar]

Oh joy, more summoner questions:

1) Miniaturize does not state it reduces your eidolon's reach while in use, unlike the Shrink spell. RAW, this appears to mean it's unchanged.
2) Hulking/Towering Form increase reach as expected, but nothing says it goes away if your eidolon shrinks.

RAW, this reads as being able to make a plant eidolon with 20' reach and tiny size.

[graystone]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

Oh joy, more summoner questions:

1) Miniaturize does not state it reduces your eidolon's reach while in use, unlike the Shrink spell. RAW, this appears to mean it's unchanged.
2) Hulking/Towering Form increase reach as expected, but nothing says it goes away if your eidolon shrinks.

RAW, this reads as being able to make a plant eidolon with 20' reach and tiny size.

I don't see why it needs a specific mention as 'Table 9-1: Size and Reach' shows that tiny normally has a 0' reach. This means a Tiny plant gets a 5' reach with Tendril Strike, at 7th their 0' reach moves up to 5' at tiny. IMO, it would have to specifically say in Shrink Down or Miniaturize that it retains reach instead of Hulking/Towering Form requiring some specifics that it retains reach even when it's not that size anymore. IMO, it's pretty clear the listed reach is JUST a reminder of 'Table 9-1: Size and Reach' and not an immutable alteration not linked to size: this is shown, IMO, by the reach and the size matching in the table for size upgrades.

The only thing mildly out of place is Miniaturize not listing reach when the size increase feats have a reminder of the reach change so it most likely should have it added for parity and clarity if nothing else.

[Dubious Scholar]

The problem is that the eidolon normally is small or medium baseline. The size rules do not say that size changes automatically change reach.

As I noted, the Shrink spell does explicitly change reach, so you get into debates of what is and isn't automatic there. It needs a clarification.

[graystone]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

The problem is that the eidolon normally is small or medium baseline. The size rules do not say that size changes automatically change reach.

It does give a default though as it lists the "typical reach" for that size: hence, an ability would have to note it differs from the norm.

Dubious Scholar wrote:

As I noted, the Shrink spell does explicitly change reach, so you get into debates of what is and isn't automatic there. It needs a clarification.

IMO, it's an instance of reminder text, not a specific change to the norm for tiny creatures. I do not think the spell needed it to have the target of the spell have a 0' reach as, again, that is what the "typical reach" for that size is.

Now as I said, if they are going to make reminder text it should be consistent: this is the only reason I think Miniaturize should note the reach.

[Kyrone]

Probably not intended but if a Druid have order explorer they get more than one focus spell with the Advanced Elemental Spell feat.

[CaffeinatedNinja]

A clarification on Arcane Cascade would be awesome too.

Right now there are a lot of arguments over whether it has to be the same turn as your cast a spell or spellstrike, or whether you can do it next turn if your last action was cast a spell or spellstrike.

(Also unclear if it is triggered by free actions/reactions or if using those since the last regular action prevents arcane cascade. That is kind of a long running issue as the word "action" refers to all three types of actions AND the three actions you get each turn.)

[Naarg]

Kyrone wrote:

Probably not intended but if a Druid have order explorer they get more than one focus spell with the Advanced Elemental Spell feat.

Advanced Elemental Spell needs to add a line that says either “choose one elemental order you belong to”, or “you make take this feat multiple times using a different elemental order each time”, or “you gain the spell for each elemental order you belong to”.

[HumbleGamer]

Summon Deific Herald

The Liberator effect ( Chaotic Good ) gives the ally freedom of movement for 3 rounds. Since it doesn't state the level of the spell, and given the fact that all other alignment give a level from 5 to 6, would be right to assume that, because of the limited use of freedom of movement ( compared to the other effects ), that we are goingto use the spell level to counteract/break free from movement imparing effects?.

[CraziFuzzy]

Inexorable Iron should be cleared up as to whether is requires just a Greatsword, Greataxe, or Pokearm, or if it will work with any melee weapon wielded in two hands.

[Guntermench]

Well, as it stands it just says a melee weapon in two hands. Two hand a dagger for some temp hp.

[beowulf99]

CraziFuzzy wrote:

Inexorable Iron should be cleared up as to whether is requires just a Greatsword, Greataxe, or Pokearm, or if it will work with any melee weapon wielded in two hands.

The "Hands" bit of the Weapons deals with that quite nicely really.

Hands wrote:

...some abilities require you to wield a weapon in two hands. You meet this requirement while holding the weapon in two hands, even if it doesn’t require two hands or have the two-hand trait.

So you could wield any weapon in two hands and qualify for Inexorable Iron abilities.

[Guntermench]

beowulf99 wrote:

CraziFuzzy wrote:

Inexorable Iron should be cleared up as to whether is requires just a Greatsword, Greataxe, or Pokearm, or if it will work with any melee weapon wielded in two hands.

The "Hands" bit of the Weapons deals with that quite nicely really.

Hands wrote:

...some abilities require you to wield a weapon in two hands. You meet this requirement while holding the weapon in two hands, even if it doesn’t require two hands or have the two-hand trait.

So you could wield any weapon in two hands and qualify for Inexorable Iron abilities.

I don't think you can wield gauntlets in two hands.

[beowulf99]

Guntermench wrote:

beowulf99 wrote:

CraziFuzzy wrote:

Inexorable Iron should be cleared up as to whether is requires just a Greatsword, Greataxe, or Pokearm, or if it will work with any melee weapon wielded in two hands.

The "Hands" bit of the Weapons deals with that quite nicely really.

Hands wrote:

...some abilities require you to wield a weapon in two hands. You meet this requirement while holding the weapon in two hands, even if it doesn’t require two hands or have the two-hand trait.

So you could wield any weapon in two hands and qualify for Inexorable Iron abilities.

I don't think you can wield gauntlets in two hands.

That is fair, I will amend by saying instead, "So you could wield most non-freehand weapons with hilts, shafts, handles or any other hand placement area in two hands and qualify for Inexorable Iron abilities whether that weapon has the two hand trait or requires two hands."

Although... Captain Kirk may disagree...

[CaffeinatedNinja]

Given the issues with arcane cascade and previous actions, and as it is rather clunky to use sometimes (does an AoO between rounds interrupt it, can you use it as the first action of a round if your last round ended with a spell) etc. it might be easier to change the requirement to “You cast a spell or used a spellstrike since the start of your last turn.”

[Castilliano]

Rereading Arcane Cascade, the language suggests there's one spell and the Stance rolls off of its energy without stopping (at least not unless you restart for a different energy type, change Stances, or the battle ends).

[Old_Man_Robot]

Castilliano wrote:

Rereading Arcane Cascade, the language suggests there's one spell and the Stance rolls off of its energy without stopping (at least not unless you restart for a different energy type, change Stances, or the battle ends).

That's clearly the intention of the ability. The text box on Page 38 of SoM literally says "You can usually stay in Arcane Cascade for a long time". Which does not make sense with a reading of an ability that would should shut off every turn.

[Djinn71]

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

Given the issues with arcane cascade and previous actions, and as it is rather clunky to use sometimes (does an AoO between rounds interrupt it, can you use it as the first action of a round if your last round ended with a spell) etc. it might be easier to change the requirement to “You cast a spell or used a spellstrike since the start of your last turn.”

If you run it RAW then simply entering the stance means that your last action was not to Cast a Spell or make a Spellstrike, it was Arcane Cascade, which means you instantly leave the stance. It is clearly not meant to be a stance and whoever wrote it simply forgot what the stance rule does.

[nephandys]

Djinn71 wrote:

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

Given the issues with arcane cascade and previous actions, and as it is rather clunky to use sometimes (does an AoO between rounds interrupt it, can you use it as the first action of a round if your last round ended with a spell) etc. it might be easier to change the requirement to “You cast a spell or used a spellstrike since the start of your last turn.”

If you run it RAW then simply entering the stance means that your last action was not to Cast a Spell or make a Spellstrike, it was Arcane Cascade, which means you instantly leave the stance. It is clearly not meant to be a stance and whoever wrote it simply forgot what the stance rule does.

We know from designer discussions that it was 100% intended to be a stance.

[Temperans]

I bet the reason it's weird is that they copied Bespell Weapon (free action that explicitly end at end of turn). But forgot to make the text fit the Stance rules.

Bespell weapon got around the requirement being "last action was to cast a spell" by explicitly saying it doesn't end until end of turn. But Arcane Cascade being a stance and lacking that language breaks when you no longer meet the requirement. Thus even using Arcane Cascade would break it immediately.

The way to fix the stance is to change 1 of two things: The requirement to stay in the stance being different; Or adding explicit wording as too how it behaves after the current requirement is no longer valid.

Until then it's a dead ability unless a GM allows it. Much like Mutagenist Alchemist where a dead path when it originally came out. Remember that whole problem?

[Invictus Fatum]

Extend Boost has a similar issue. It requires the next action to be boost or reinforce Eidolon. This means it cannot be used if you u are boost Eidolon as part of Act Together since the next action was actually Act Together.

[Ed Reppert]

Not going to speculate on how we got to this point, but...

Stance: A stance is a general combat strategy that you enter by using an action with the stance trait, and that you remain in for some time. A stance lasts until you get knocked out, until its requirements (if any) are violated, until the encounter ends, or until you enter a new stance, whichever comes first. After you use an action with the stance trait, you can’t use another one for 1 round. You can enter or be in a stance only in encounter mode.

The problem seems to be that as soon as you enter the stance, your last action was to enter the stance, not to cast a spell or make a spellstrike.

Arcane Cascade Requirements: You used your most recent action to Cast a Spell or make a Spellstrike.

I would word this "Your last action prior to entering Arcade Cascade Stance was to Cast a Spell or make a Spellstrike". I believe that would solve the problem. I would also not be surprised if the devs' reaction to this "problem" was "well obviously we didn't intend that!" :-)

[Stephan Taylor]

Can Magi not use a whip? If the concern is constantly fighting against creatures with an AoO, maybe it’s time to invest in whips

[Stephan Taylor]

Castilliano wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Cintra Bristol wrote:

I'm getting a chuckle from the spell, Summoner's Visage (page 135). As written, your eidolon changes appearance to look identical to you, but it can use no gear (other than any Eidolon-tagged gear it already had).

So it's completely naked and can't don any clothing, because it can't use gear without the eidolon trait.

While this would be appropriate for some gaming groups, I'm a bit concerned on how this could derail a game session...

Eidolons are actually only prohibited from using any magical gear. They can wear normal clothes just fine.

What?! You mean my Eidelon, Manhattan, has been lying to me this whole time?

Yep… Manhattan has been manipulating you to let their freak flag fly

[DomHeroEllis]

Blave wrote:

Runelord Archetype:

- Tattoo Artist as an archetype feat seems ... redundant? It's exactly the same as the regular skill feat, so you could just get that one instead. The only advantage from getting the archetype-version is the ability to pay off the Dedication a bit faster.

That seems fairly advantageous to me, same feat, same cost, helps you get to multiple archetypes quicker...

HumbleGamer wrote:

Summon Deific Herald

The Liberator effect ( Chaotic Good ) gives the ally freedom of movement for 3 rounds. Since it doesn't state the level of the spell, and given the fact that all other alignment give a level from 5 to 6, would be right to assume that, because of the limited use of freedom of movement ( compared to the other effects ), that we are goingto use the spell level to counteract/break free from movement imparing effects?.

I believe that the general rule is, if no level is listed use the base level of the spell...

[DomHeroEllis]

-Miniaturize feat for the Eidolon has the line "Prerequisites Shrink Down" - could this line be edited to say something like Prerequisites Shrink Down, or Small Eidolon for those of us who choose to start with a small Eidolon and want to go tiny.

[Squiggit]

Umbral Extraction:

This spell seems really hard to use on its own without spending feats to either hide your spellcasting or allow you to Steal in combat or some other combination of options.

I guess not technically errata since it's clear as written but it feels weird and I'm not sure if the spell is intended to have an exception to the normal Steal rules.

The "steal as part of casting the spell" component of the action seems basically impossible to use without the Conceal and Silent spell feats.

[Narxiso]

Arcane Fists:

This feat gives the critical specialization for the brawling group at level 5; however, the brawling critical specialization slows the attacked creature based on a fortitude save against the class DC. Magus doesn't have a class DC and is, therefore, untrained.

[beowulf99]

Narxiso wrote:

Arcane Fists:

This feat gives the critical specialization for the brawling group at level 5; however, the brawling critical specialization slows the attacked creature based on a fortitude save against the class DC. Magus doesn't have a class DC and is, therefore, untrained.

That is an interesting oversight. I imagine that the Magus' class dc would be equal in training to their spellcasting dc, but using your choice of dex or str for key ability.

But it isn't listed anywhere I could find. Good catch. That needs addressing I'd say.

Unless I'm mistaken and missed something somehow.

[Guntermench]

Bards and Clerics also get critical specialization at 11 (7 for warpriest), also without class DCs.

[Super Zero]

Warpriest can use their spell DC instead, though. And not all critical specialization effects call for saves. Most of them don't.

Arcane Fists gives you one specific effect, which does.

[Brysun]

Page 205+ Was Polar Ray intentionally left off the Elemental Spell List? If so, why?

[Dargath]

Brysun wrote:

Page 205+ Was Polar Ray intentionally left off the Elemental Spell List? If so, why?

Almost all Cold and Electric spells where, which is weird because I consider Lightning Bolt and Cone of Cold etc to be "elemental" but I guess Golarion or the lore or the game doesn't.

[Elicoor]

Dargath wrote:

Brysun wrote:

Page 205+ Was Polar Ray intentionally left off the Elemental Spell List? If so, why?

Almost all Cold and Electric spells where, which is weird because I consider Lightning Bolt and Cone of Cold etc to be "elemental" but I guess Golarion or the lore or the game doesn't.

It's basically true for all energy derivatives :

Electricity damage for Air
Cold damage for Water
Acid damage for Earth (acid however seems to have almost completely been unlinked from Earth)

However, a lot of element-based spells have unstable behaviour towards elements/energies :

- Elemental Zone (SoM) applies to Electricity and Cold
- Elemental Betrayal applies to Cold (APG) but not Electricity
- Elemental Confluence (Air option) (SoM) has the Air trait and deals Electricity damage without having the Lightning trait, while dealing no non-electricity damage
- Element Embodied (SoM) doesn't have any elemental trait by itself, only the resulting form ; the Air option deals Bludgeoning or Lightning damage ; the Water option doesn't deal any Cold damage.
- Elemental Absorption (Water option) (SoM) gives resistance to effects with the Cold trait, but the Air and Earth option do not apply to their derivative energy
- Elemental Tempest (CRB) talks about elements, but only applies to energy derivatives.

And at the same time, there is some illogical behaviour in the composition of the Elementalist spell list :

- You have Mantle of the Magma Heart, which is OK as a Fire spell... But at the same time you have Mantle of the Frozen Heart, which doesn't have any Elemental trait, as it's a purely Cold spell. (The word "Water" is not even present anywhere in the spell description)
- Why do Snowball, Frigid Flurry and Wall of Ice have the Water trait in addition to the Cold trait, where other Cold spells don't have it ? It seems somehow arbitrary, and not completely linked to damage types (Snowball deals only cold damage for example)

I'm mostly certain it's a way to avoid having a single class with all damage-dealing spells, but the spells themselves are lacking some internal coherency.

[LordPretzels]

The Familiar ability masters form, requires manual dexterity and speech and is listed as a granted ability for shadow familiars but speech is not granted. I'm guessing since its a granted ability shadow familiars get master's form whether they have speech or not. Is speech intended to be a granted ability for shadow familiars?

[graystone]

LordPretzels wrote:

The Familiar ability masters form, requires manual dexterity and speech and is listed as a granted ability for shadow familiars but speech is not granted. I'm guessing since its a granted ability shadow familiars get master's form whether they have speech or not. Is speech intended to be a granted ability for shadow familiars?

IMO, it's given to the familiar bypassing the prerequisite [you only need the prerequisites to pick one, not be granted one]. Seems like they are going for the 'shadow puppet' vibe here, so the lack of voice kind of fits.

[Xenocrat]

It’s the actual shadow of the caster, that’s why it has Master’s Form even if it can’t talk or hold things.

[CaffeinatedNinja]

Spellstrike is a bit odd when it comes to resistances, particularly once you get elemental runes. So if you have a flaming rune, and spellstrike with produce flame, technically it triggers the weakness twice, since there is no language about combining damage for the sake of resistances. Same with hitting resists, it is resisted twice?

[nephandys]

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

Spellstrike is a bit odd when it comes to resistances, particularly once you get elemental runes. So if you have a flaming rune, and spellstrike with produce flame, technically it triggers the weakness twice, since there is no language about combining damage for the sake of resistances. Same with hitting resists, it is resisted twice?

Pretty sure that's how weaknesses and resistances have always worked - multiple instances are impacted multiple times - so I don't think it would be any different here.

[Kalaam]

Dunno, since it's all in a single strike it'd make sense to me to combine the damage.

[Guntermench]

The only mention of combining weaknesses is picking the higher if there are multiple weaknesses that could be applied, like weakness to slashing 10 and cold iron 15 with a cold iron dagger you would use the cold iron 15.

Or for stuff like Double Strike I guess.

[Kalaam]

The only times it's mentionned to combine damage sources are usually when doing 2 attacks as 2 rolls (Flurry and Double Slice).

I guess a clarification would be needed, for now as GM fiat I'd say damages are combined for the purposes or resistance/weaknesses. Though maybe not on an AoE/Save Spellstrike...