Where did the Errata go?

[Hikuen]

I have a 1st copy of the CRB, and as such rely on the Errata's to inform me of rule updates and changes. I distinctly remember there being a massive change to the way certain item bonuses and status bonuses interact (specifically the Barbarian class feat Animal Skin got completely changed so that it not longer interacted with some new alchemist items). However, I just went to look for that exact rule change, and I can't find it in the Errata on the site anywhere?

Where did the rules changes go? Is there some other location to find them besides https://paizo.com/pathfinder/faq ?

[Asethe]

That is the only place to find it.

Are you sure it was Animal Skin that was errata'd? I recall the Deer Animal Instinct getting errata in base Barbarian but not Animal Skin by name. Might want to check the alchemist errata as well for their changes if that's the interaction you remember

[Hikuen]

After further research, thare are apparently dozens of changes that are NOT listed in the Errata... Why?

[aobst128]

Yeah, you may just need check AON occasionally for convenience. I'm not sure if there's a comprehensive list of the changes here.

[Aricks]

Given the structure of the AoN website, I honestly think the next logical step is to implement a git style interface for the rules. That way you can not only easily see the latest changes for the rules but you can see annotations on the changes and the history of the changes.

I think the days of the fixed published errata document/pdf aren't as useful as it was with the advancements in document versioning. Heck it gets better with a tracked repo. Imagine you go on the paizo website, put in your version of a rulebook, and it dynamically creates a pdf of the rules changes from the book you have using the current repo status.

Maybe they can have a call for volunteers to contribute to an open source project. Not the rules themselves but the structure of what holds them, assuming there isn't something out there that would so this already.

[breithauptclan]

Hikuen wrote:

After further research, thare are apparently dozens of changes that are NOT listed in the Errata... Why?

Are you looking for 1st edition errata? or PF2 errata?

[Hikuen]

breithauptclan wrote:

Hikuen wrote:

After further research, thare are apparently dozens of changes that are NOT listed in the Errata... Why?

Are you looking for 1st edition errata? or PF2 errata?

Pathfinder 2e errata. Seems that things like Animal Skin changing from a status bonus to an item bonus... or Quick Alchemy no longer needing a free hand... aren't listed in the official errata page, but are absolutely a change that has happened since the first printing through until now.

[graystone]

Hikuen wrote:

breithauptclan wrote:

Hikuen wrote:

After further research, thare are apparently dozens of changes that are NOT listed in the Errata... Why?

Are you looking for 1st edition errata? or PF2 errata?

Pathfinder 2e errata. Seems that things like Animal Skin changing from a status bonus to an item bonus... or Quick Alchemy no longer needing a free hand... aren't listed in the official errata page, but are absolutely a change that has happened since the first printing through until now.

There where a bunch of 'stealth' errata that just mysteriously changed but wasn't listed anywhere. As to why? Only the people that work here can tell you that: I sure don't know.

[Old_Man_Robot]

I’ve always felt the errata process for PF2 was pretty wonky. I know they made the decision to tie errata release until they re-print the books, but, imho, that was a mistake.

The archives serve as the prefect place for centralised errata, done more frequently, and more comprehensively. Obviously things go on the official site as well, but I just feel like there is room for more frequent, but smaller, errata with better documentation.

[Ravingdork]

No errata without documentation!

*Tosses shipment of Pathfinder tokens into the sea*

[Abraham Z.]

Hikuen wrote:

After further research, thare are apparently dozens of changes that are NOT listed in the Errata... Why?

I'd like to know more about this. Where have you found other changes that are not in the errata? Thanks.

[Angel Hunter D]

The errata policy and methodology is one of the most infuriating things about the company.

Stealth errata, errata/FAQs that don't fix things (how many times did it take for Battle Medicine to get clarified?), an abhorrence for defining parts of the system, and handling all of it like it's 2005 and only wanting to do it once it's printed and then never again until they're on a second printing run.

It's enough to drive a man mad.

[Temperans]

While on the subject of errata being weird with this edition, anyone know why the resources page was eliminated and made to redirect to the main page?

I understand not wanting to confuse people by having PF1 and PF2 resources in the same page. But that seems like a matter of making a section for each, not for removing the entire resources page outright.

[Ravingdork]

Yeah, where they have the 2E errata confused the heck out of me early on because it wasn't in the same place as 1E's errata, and I'm still seeing a lot of people who aren't even aware that it exists on account of it (this thread being only the latest example).

[Golurkcanfly]

2e's pace of errata is definitely an aggravation for some. It's just not profitable for them to make errata compared to making new content. That and non-clarification errata probably has some internal vetting process, so it's both slow and a hard sell from a business standpoint.

Also as a paper-first production philosophy (print and digital releases are simultaneous), it can be awkward to issue rapid errata and suddenly outdate the product you just made.

Though these are just inferences made from my own observations, and I have no insider perspective on their errata process.

I'd personally prefer a "digital first" method as a consumer (allows more rapid errata, quality control, and allows changes closer to release deadlines as "time to print" isn't a concern), but that's just not how Paizo runs things, likely for various reasons (people like physical books, staggered releases probably reduce physical copies sold, harder to sell subscriptions, etc.).

[Romão98]

Dude this sucks. My book lists animal skin completely different from AoN and this errata is not listed here on Paizo. Someone commented that there were changes regarding Stealth, but I couldn't identify it. That's Funny I just opened a thread one or two days ago to talk about Terrain Stalker vs. Feather Step which seems to me to be pretty inconsistent, but I may just have got it wrong. If there are new erratas somewhere i'd like to know.

[Gortle]

I have a whole thread on this and probably have only just scratched the surface.

I mean the errata make sense for Animal Skin. It does need to be expressed in terms of an item bonus as it is instead of armour. So should Scales of the Dragon BTW - but it hasn't been fixed yet.

Anyway I hate how Paizo are treating people who choose to support them by buying their products, but they don't even list the errata properly for them.

[graystone]

Romão98 wrote:

Dude this sucks. My book lists animal skin completely different from AoN and this errata is not listed here on Paizo. Someone commented that there were changes regarding Stealth, but I couldn't identify it.

If it was my post, I didn't mean there was an errata on Stealth but that several rules got altered without notice or warning and without being added to the FAQ's, IE done stealthily or "stealth" errata. It was the reason for the quotes around the word stealth to differentiate it from the game term Stealth. Sorry for the confusion. ;)

[Romão98]

graystone wrote:

If it was my post, I didn't mean there was an errata on Stealth but that several rules got altered without notice or warning and without being added to the FAQ's, IE done stealthily or "stealth" errata. It was the reason for the quotes around the word stealth to differentiate it from the game term Stealth. Sorry for the confusion. ;)

Got it, no problem! Even so I'm quite surprised by these changes, I was reading the thread Gortle just recommended and I wonder if there are any plans to clarify these things, as new books keep coming out, as well as new rules and mechanics, but there are still changes to the basics. It gets tiring to follow the game's progression in this way.

[VestOfHolding]

I created this doc a while back that's the result of doing a full diff on the two printings of the CRB. I'm not sure if AoN has all of these yet, as many are just flavor text changes that are lower priority.

[Ravingdork]

What the heck?

There's SO MUCH they're not telling us.

[graystone]

Ravingdork wrote:

What the heck?

There's SO MUCH they're not telling us.

Mulder: I'm not going to give up. I can't give up. Not as long as the truth is out there. *key up X-Files Theme Song, Materia Primoris*

[Temperans]

It's still incredible how the Alchemist was practically rewritten via erratas alone. Truly incredible.

[OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0]

Hang on - there is no definitive list on Paizo's site of all the errata that has been made by Paizo...who made the CRB?!? How do the *developers* and *designers* stay across all of it?

I would like a document I can download and stick in my CRB...

[Franz Lunzer]

OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:

I would like a document I can download ...

The PDF of the Core Rulebook is usually updated, when new printings are made, to incorporate Errata. With PF2 though, Paizo also does errata in between new printings, so it's not always up to date.

Last update to the Core Rulebook was November 2020...

I too miss the downloadable Errata documents of first edition (labled "3rd printing to 5th printing" or somesuch)

[VestOfHolding]

As far as I'm aware, there has not been new errata since the 2nd printing of the CRB, so you're good there.

But also yes, I would like to not make the document that I did again.