Not an official place no but usually someone just starts a thread so might as well post it here.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks like Key Attribute boost on Player Core pg91 says it "boosts the modifier by 2" then refers to pg19 where it says boosts increase things by 1. pg91 seems to be a missed "change 2 to 1" when going from Scores to Modifiers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Player Core pg168 Rogue Resilience 9th - I dont believe the intent is to get Success = Crit Success when a save moves to Expert. That (in every other area) only happens when a save moves to Master.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
(in before somebody inevitably announces that books should never have errors or typos and that Paizo is obviously lazy for letting even one slip past--errors are inevitable even with the most professionally done large texts and if this book has double the usual number of errors, there is more than ample reason for there to be considering the speed it was put together in reaction to the OGL nonsense at the beginning of this year. Ordinarily we might expect to see this book not until sometime next year at typical release rates)
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Player Core, page 26 - "to HONE in on how they think." Should be HOME.
Home in means to locate and move toward something. Hone in means to focus on something. Hone seems more likely, though I can't be 100 percent sure without seeing the sentence in context.
|
Might as well start us off - enfeeble inexplicably has the Attack trait, despite having nothing to do with attacks. Likely someone forgot that it was no longer ray of enfeeblement and no longer has a spell attack roll.
I actually don't think this is a mistake.
It looks like an intentional step to decouple the Attack trait from being exclusively applied to spells which target AC.
The langauge in the new Knowledge is Power feat carves out a benefit granted to attacks which don't target AC.
It also means that it would benefit from things which improve attacks in someway.
Page 39 - Formatting Error - Domains table has several rows that extend all the way to the right, whereas others stop short.
Player Core, page 26 - "to HONE in on how they think." Should be HOME.Home in means to locate and move toward something. Hone in means to focus on something. Hone seems more likely, though I can't be 100 percent sure without seeing the sentence in context.In reference to edicts and anathema, the full sentence reads: "For most characters, these are entirely optional, though it’s best to consider taking some on as you create your character to hone in on how they think."
While "hone in" is often used in the way you describe, most grammarians consider this to be a mistake.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hone%20in#:~:text=%3A%20to%20mov e%20toward%20or%20focus,the%20common%20man%20Lisa%20Russell
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A reminder that the Paizo Developers have said that threads like these are a lot more useful to them when people post specific page numbers. Realize they probably worked on the book months ago at this point and don't always remember where everything is.
Page 65 - Multitalented - Makes a reference to Ability Modifiers, rather than Ability Attributes.
Page 301 - Minions - The sentence on actions makes no sense as written.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Page 301 - Minions - The sentence on actions makes no sense as written.
I think you are conflating "conditions" and "abilities" in your reading it as not making sense. There are many familiar abilities that grant the familiar a special reaction. The Haste/slow thing is more about the conditions.
Page 429 - Areas - More a matter of efficiency than an error. The key for area effects/creature size is in the middle of the page. There's a space in the bottom right. Had it been placed in the corner, there would have been room to show us what a 15-foot emanation is supposed to look like.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you are conflating "conditions" and "abilities" in your reading it as not making sense. There are many familiar abilities that grant the familiar a special reaction. The Haste/slow thing is more about the conditions.Page 301 - Minions - The sentence on actions makes no sense as written.
As written, it is incomplete or badly structured.
do what? It seems to change direction to a different topic mid-sentence leaving the first half without any conclusion or answers.
More properly written it might say something like:
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Page 65 - Multitalented - Makes a reference to Ability Modifiers, rather than Attribute Modifiers.
Applying my own errata to my post. :P
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Might as well start us off - enfeeble inexplicably has the Attack trait, despite having nothing to do with attacks. Likely someone forgot that it was no longer ray of enfeeblement and no longer has a spell attack roll.I actually don't think this is a mistake.
It looks like an intentional step to decouple the Attack trait from being exclusively applied to spells which target AC.
The langauge in the new Knowledge is Power feat carves out a benefit granted to attacks which don't target AC.
It also means that it would benefit from things which improve attacks in someway.
Luis confirmed on Discord that Enfeeble having the Attack trait is an error, and is marked for errata.
Sure seems like an error. We found a similar error for a different spell and I've already logged both errors for errata.
|
|
Might as well start us off - enfeeble inexplicably has the Attack trait, despite having nothing to do with attacks. Likely someone forgot that it was no longer ray of enfeeblement and no longer has a spell attack roll.I actually don't think this is a mistake.
It looks like an intentional step to decouple the Attack trait from being exclusively applied to spells which target AC.
The langauge in the new Knowledge is Power feat carves out a benefit granted to attacks which don't target AC.
It also means that it would benefit from things which improve attacks in someway.
Luis confirmed on Discord that Enfeeble having the Attack trait is an error, and is marked for errata.
Sure seems like an error. We found a similar error for a different spell and I've already logged both errors for errata.
Fair enough then. I saw both it and TKM at the same time and thought it was a new direction they were taking for some spells that would be popular with gish classes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Daze Cantrip says the following on every spell-list as a quick flavor text (Arcane 304, Divine 307, Occult 309)
Daze: Cloud a creature’s mind to make it off-guard or slow.
Yet the actual Daze Cantrip (Pg.322) is the same cantrip we got in the Original Player's Core just replacing Spell Attack modifier with a 1d6 mental with a weak Heightened (+2) which does nothing that the description mentions.
Also
Page 307 Divine Tradition Spell list, lists Grim Tendrils as Divine.
Grim Tendrils (Page 334) Lists Tradition as Arcane and Occult, not Arcane, Divine and Occult.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Page 138:
Shield Block
"You gain the Shield Block general feat (found on page 266)"
Should be "page 262".
Page 141:
Aggressive Block is listed as a Reaction. Probably should be a Free Action, just as it was before in CRB (4th printing).
The trigger is another reaction (Shield Block) and we can only use 1 reaction per turn.
Page 212 - Familiars - Possible Editing Error
I've gone and methodically searched for every instance of "Familiar" in Player Core and GM Core. The closest rule that I could find addressing something non-witch familiar death is the Special entry of the Pet feat (from which familiars are based): "You can gain a new pet by retraining this feat, releasing any previous pet you have."
Insofar as I can tell, it's either resurrection, or retraining for a week to release your dead familiar.
The Animal Companion rules have the line, "If your companion dies, you can spend a week of downtime to replace it at no cost. You can have only one animal companion at a time." The Familiar rules do not.
Acid Grasp (Pg.314) Mentions it gives a -10 speed status bonus when ti should say penalty.
Rogue class feature Rogue Resilience (168) probably should not allow them to get a critical success when they succeed on a fortitude saving through.
Didn’t they playtest a similar “expert proficiency, but success to critical success shift with the animist though? I don’t think there is a hard “not possible” line with saving throw boosters.
It's entirely possible that Paizo is already aware of this and decided it's not worth bothering with, but the plural of "anathema" should properly be "anathemata" or "anathemas".
Multiple subjects can be a singular anathema: for instance, you can say "his policies were anathema to the country’s rich elites" or "Two of Hamas’ formative allies are anathema to much of the Arab world" even though there are multiple subjects. [quotes from Helen Regan, CNN, 31 Aug. 2023 and Tracy Wilkinson, Los Angeles Times, 18 Oct. 2023]
Edited addendum: I'm not positive of this, but from what I read it seems "Nephilim" is a plural term, and the singular should be "Naphil".
Nephilim is the name for the entire race of giants/angels. In general, if you talk about an individual you'd say 'one of the Nephilim' as it doesn't have a singular term.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, your examples seem to be drawn from common usage, rather than what's generally considered to be grammatically correct.
Then you missed the point: a single anathema might have several parts which is different than having multiple individual anathema.
But your insistence on attempting to discredit every suggestion I provide serves nobody.
Just pointing out what I see as incorrect. Feel free to disagree because I'm going to do that when I see something wrong.
Oxford Languages Usage examples "the usual norms of decorum are an anathema to him": IE multiple norms
YourDictionary sentence examples "This was perhaps no more than the outcome of the fierce polemical spirit of the abbot of Clairvaux, which led him to include all his adversaries under a single anathema."
The 2 in the last post are merriam-webster sentence examples.
I'm trusting Oxford Language and merriam-webster over random internet dude.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think being prescriptive about language is not a productive use of errata.
Like Paizo employs editors. I'm sure they are able to make these calls about common use vs. latin grammar.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another reminder. The Devs have also said that in these kinds of threads all they care about is that somebody found the wording confusing enough to ask for errata. As far as they're concered other people posting about why X isn't really errata worthy just crowds the thread and makes the stuff they are actually interested in harder to find. They would much prefer it if such discussion was saved for a different thread entirely.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A fair point, given that I once again failed to mention the context of my comment. On page 26, there is a heading titled "Edicts and Anathema". Because of the conflicting quantification, this sounds very awkward, like "women and man" or "trucks and car". This is the reason I submitted my suggestion.Again, your examples seem to be drawn from common usage, rather than what's generally considered to be grammatically correct.Then you missed the point: a single anathema might have several parts which is different than having multiple individual anathema.
While my hindbrain also cringes at that seeming disparity in grammatical number, if we want to be strictly technical, the term "Anathema" in that example isn't the standard English word at all but rather a game-specific term referring to a particular rules element. So it would be up to the game designers who created and named those elements to decide what the singular and plural forms would be.
I don't have the new remaster books yet, but the in-game description of the anathema element was given on pg. 628 in the old CRB.
anathema When a character violates restrictions on their behavior imposed by the source of their power, they can lose related abilities. 86–87, 106, 118, 130
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can you please remove descriptions from the book that say "As Per X" or worse, "Look above this" which doesn't appear above but actually appears on a different page altogether and also never do it again.
Page: 256 + 257
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Page 215 (Spellcasting Archetypes):
Expert Spellcasting Feat: Typically taken at 12th level,
these feats make you an expert in spell attack rolls and DCs
of the appropriate magical tradition and grant you a 4th-
rank spell slot. If you have a spell repertoire, you can select
a second spell from your repertoire as a signature spell. At
14th level, they grant you a 5th-rank spell slot, and at 16th
level, they grant you a 6th-rank spell slot. Archetypes refer
to these benefits as the “expert spellcasting benefits.”
Master Spellcasting Feat: Usually found at 18th level,
these feats make you a master in spell attack rolls and DCs
of the appropriate magical tradition and grant you a 7th-
rank spell slot. If you have a spell repertoire, you can select
a third spell from your repertoire as a signature spell. At
20th level, they grant you an 8th-rank spell slot. Archetypes
refer to these benefits as the “master spellcasting benefits.”The bold sections should be removed, since proficiency in spell attacks / DCs is no longer linked to a specific tradition.
Wouldn't this still apply to someone who takes a spell casting archetype that doesn't start out as a spell caster?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A very minor typo on the Arcane spell list, it shows the Grease spell as being both shown as a 1st Rank and 3rd Rank spell but only in the short list, when go the detailed descriptions it is clearly shown as 1st Rank only.