Pathfinder Remaster Errata Submission

[Dancing Wind]

Ed Reppert wrote:

Another option is player (or gm, for npcs) choice, but that seems rather arbitrary.

That's pretty much how it works IRL, so I don't see why it wouldn't work in Pathfinder.

[Ed Reppert]

oh, it'll work. It just may not be the most satisfactory solution.

[Tunu40]

Were familiars supposed to lose access to use Trained Skill actions?

It was in the original Familiar page, but in the Remaster, it doesn’t exist in either the Pet feat or the Familiar page.

[Captain Morgan]

Tunu40 wrote:

Were familiars supposed to lose access to use Trained Skill actions?

It was in the original Familiar page, but in the Remaster, it doesn’t exist in either the Pet feat or the Familiar page.

Not sure, but even if nothing specifies that, a familiar doesn't have a proficiency so it would default to not being able to use actions requiring trained proficiency, right?

[darkowl9]

I think I've found an un-errata'd errata in the Player Core, on p. 411. Under "Instant Death" it states:

"There are ways in which you can die instantly, without reaching dying 0 first."

I think the intention was either "0 Hit Points" and / or "dying 4".

On the same page above, it's noted "You lose the dying condition if it ever reaches dying 0", so dying 0 as related to immediate death makes no sense. On the following p. 412, it expands on ways you can immediately die, mentioning both "0 Hit Points" and "dying 4".

That said, the paragraph on p. 411 is likely unnecessary, given the following examples of Death Effects (including immediate death) on p. 412.

[Kittyburger]

graystone wrote:

zmor wrote:

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.

"To hone in on how they think" is correct in this context. "Home" and "hone" are false friends.

[Unicore]

Forgive me if someone already caught this, but Grease is listed as a 3rd rank spell on the Arcane List on page 305 of the player Core.

[ElementalofCuteness]

The Light cantrip stats it can not be willing dismissed.

[ottdmk]

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

The Light cantrip stats it can not be willing dismissed.

The Light cantrip specifically states "You can Dismiss the spell." Where are you seeing otherwise?

[Captain Morgan]

ottdmk wrote:

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

The Light cantrip stats it can not be willing dismissed.

The Light cantrip specifically states "You can Dismiss the spell." Where are you seeing otherwise?

One imagines Archive of Nethys or some other source which wasn't remastered yet.

[dirkdragonslayer]

Squark wrote:

The Aiuvarin and Dromaar versatile heritages should have the requirement of non-elf and non-orc respectively*. A humanoid requirement like Beastkin has is more subjective, but might also be worth considering.

*To be clear, I mean that Elven Aiuvarin and Orcish Dromaar don't make sense. I absolutely want to see a sibling team of an Elven Dromaar and an Orc Aiuvarin.

"I'm half orc, and the other half is also orc."

Yeah, when I was messing around with pathbuilder it took me a moment to realize Dromaar isn't meant to be applied to Orcs.

[darkowl9]

GM Core, page 56 under Party Size. It says "The rules for building encounters (page 57)..."

However, page 57 is not related to this. Page 75 is related to encounter building.

[Mathmuse]

darkowl9 wrote:

GM Core, page 56 under Party Size. It says "The rules for building encounters (page 57)..."

However, page 57 is not related to this. Page 75 is related to encounter building.

Ironically, page 75 in the GM Core has a typographical error in the XP Budget table. The Character Adjustment of Low Threat budget is given as 20 when it ought to be 15.

[Dubious Scholar]

With general rules for Object Familiars in Divine Mysteries, I noticed that the Construct familiar ability in PC2 gives it immunity to healing, but doesn't actually say it can be repaired via Crafting or anything.

[WHARRGARBL]

I don't know if this is an error as much as it is an inconsistency across editions, but since there is 2e material that depicts reefclaws as fighting on land and that they do have a land speed, and given that they have the amphibious special quality in 1e, that perhaps they should have the amphibious trait.

[ElementalofCuteness]

We should really condense these to a single thread.