Impressive response time, as usual :)Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile
Printable View
Impressive response time, as usual :)Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile
The Warpriest in the Advanced Class Guide is missing the column in the class description that gives the Sacred Weapon Damage for Medium creatures. Further down it does have the Sacred Weapon damage for Small and Large creatures but the Medium weapon damage is absent.
Ultimate Equipment: Itching Powder.
The description seems prematurely cut off.
It was - good catch.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmos
I have fixed it. The fixed version should be in the TEST system by tomorrow and will be in the LIVE environment this Tuesday.
Is it me or am I running into more of these than usual? Has anyone actually made it this far into these adventures in FG?
Space/Reach is mis-entered on the animated objects in Bestiary 1.
All size categories have 5ft/5ft listed.
Shining Child in Return of the Runelords book 4 has the same entry for full attack and standard attack actions.
Their touch attacks also don't seem to be targeting touch AC.
PFRPG Bestiary 1: Orc—missing the (orc) subtype.
Note: I have submitted an errata request to Paizo for them to issue an errata for this in the actual book as well.
The Rise of the Runelords issue has been fixed and checked in. I would have responded to this earlier but I didn't see it. When I glanced the post, I saw Bestiary 1 and didn't think it pertained to me. Thankfully, James, the production coordinator, saw it and passed it to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmos
To answer your first question about frequency, I think the issue is that people who played these prior either didn't notice the issues or they just fixed them locally and didn't report it. If you think about it, by the time someone sees the issue, it is often too late. They need to deal with it then for their game so they likely just fix it once it gets to the combat tracker. Then, when the game is complete for the evening, they never have to worry about it again. Some people may intend on circling back to report but forget. We all have lives, we all get busy. I wouldn't blame anyone for not reporting. Some people are just more likely to be like yourself and find issues when you see it. Some don't see it until later.
Anyway, thanks for reporting.
I can say that I encountered the same issue in the Rise of the Runelords AP. Space and reach were wrong (really misformatted rather than wrong) on lots of thing, in addition to CMB. I suspect this was a cut and paste issue. A flaw in an original source which was duplicated through multiple copying of said source. As I always noticed it during a session, I invariably forgot to keep track of where the errors were, fixed it on the fly, and promptly forgot to post error reports here.Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile
Not sure if this is relevant or not...the post you are answering referenced Return of the Runelords and your response referenced Rise of the Runelords. Could be the first post meant Rise or you meant Return. Either way as it stands now there is a discrepancy between the issue raised and the reply given.Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile
Well, just for that I fixed both :p
Mummy's mask: I think all the NPCs that have a combo of manufactured and natural weapons have their full attacks wrong. The natural attacks should count as secondary with a lower (-5) attack bonus as far as I know.
I will look into that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Half-plate has no max dex listed but it should be 0
Core Rulebook
This might be a ruleset issue since it also doesn't show zero when I type it in (zero seems to be the same as nothing rather than a specific value).
Seems like it also doesn't apply the skill checks when max stat bonus to armor class is zero.
EDIT: I have released v1.3.2 of Total Encumbrance to support max dex of 0 :)
that is indeed a bug but not with the item sheet itself, the way how the armor is coded is okay so far, the bug is that the armor toggle in the inventory for the penalties doesn't get toggled though the values there are the correct ones for the half-plate :) when you toggle that then you should see that the zero there is doing the correct thing :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bmos
(In sense of coding: It could be that the toggle gets ignored because the 0 in the item sheet is "too neutral", that would be indeed a relation with the item sheet :) )
This is a bug in the ruleset that the Max Stat is a number field; and the default value of zero is treated as off. It's also in many, many modules that way. I'll have to add to our list to look at in the future.
Regards,
JPG
It was the same in PFRPG2 - 0 was being treated as no dex cap. I had to do a work around cludge to set "armor" that had no dex maximum (a "-" in the stats) as +999 just to make it work. The ideal approach would be to change it to a string. But, as you say, there's many, many modules out there that have this as a number to a string.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moon Wizard
Is there some way to have the Powers option added in the PF ruleset. I don't know why this was omitted (or not added later), but we're playing in a Mythic campaign and had to kind of kludge it together. Especially since almost none of the abilities gained in the Mythic Adventures campaign are coded. (Things like Amazing Initiative does not add to your initiative). Adding Powers means you could update Mythic Adventures to have a Powers section for all of the items that use surge points.
Not sure if I understand, why not using spell classes for that? Everyone uses the spell classes for everything; do not get hang up by the name "spell", actually they're action classes :) when you click on the book icon at the upper left of the spell class then you can change its type, the third one would implement usage points for actions (like KI points or whatever), that may be your surge point? (I do not know surge points)Quote:
Originally Posted by theadept024
Actually, I am using spell classes for that now. It's just a little kludgey to use. Powers makes more sense and could work better. This would be better if the designers of the Mythic Adventures did their job properly. *sad trombone*Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelrugem
Hm, I do not know Mythic stuff and therefore I do not know what you refer to sadly :D In my opinion the spell classes have everything what one normally needs :) As far as I know the power group in 5e is just a trimmed down version of the spell class (mainly, maybe with some additional option about how their usage counter works), so, normally the power class is more like an aesthetical thing :)Quote:
Originally Posted by theadept024
Mummy's Mask part 5 (minor issue): The gear of Isatemkhebet is just plain text, not itemized for easy dragging to the party sheet or a PC.
Thanks for reporting this. I will get it fixed.
Madman
I have a player who is currently playing a level 2 half-elf cleric. Medium encumbered AND wearing "chainmail" which slows.He is being hit by both encumbrance and armor penalties bringing him down to 10 speed from 30. By the book:
"If your character is wearing armor, use the worse figure (from armor or from load) for each category. Do not stack the penalties."
I know I can simply Ctrl+mousewheel up to change his speed but I figured this is something that should be noted.
We have just started creating characters with the PF2 Core book
The Human Champion said that the Weapon proficiencies were not added automatically. The Gnomish Bard said that the Armor proficiency was not added either.
When Chainmail is added, it has the noisy quality, but did not seem to affect stealth rolls.
Is there any way to have the backpack resolve Bulk properly?
You are in the PF1 forum :)Quote:
Originally Posted by theadept024
Do you use any extension? Didn't test it at the moment but encumbrance does normally not automate anything in the sheet :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRoBro
More Hook Mountain Massacre Errata:
-----------------------
From the Reference Manual, if one navigates to A.03 Appendix: Bestiary, you'll find that the links for the two tables, Sandpoint Hinterland Encounters and Varisian Lowland Encounters both link to the same table, Varisian Lowland Encounters.
If, instead, one clicks on Tables (in the Library window) to bring up the Tables window, you will find that the four Encounters tables there each link to their correct table.
-----------------------
The image of Rukus Graul (labeled that way in the book) is referenced as, Image: Ogrekin, so if you're trying to show your players an image of Rukus Graul, and search on his name, you won't find it.
-----------------------
From the Library view, in Images & Maps, three generic battle maps are listed:
SmiteWorks BattleMap - Cave
SmiteWorks BattleMap - Outdoor
SmiteWorks BattleMap - Outdoor-2
The Outdoor-2 map just brings up a blank New Drawing.
Also, from the Reference Manual, on the Appendix: Bestiary page, Maps are mentioned, but only two are listed:
SmiteWorks BattleMap - Cave
SmiteWorks BattleMap - Outdoor-2
with Outdoor-2 suffering from the same problem mentioned above.
-----------------------
That's all for now.
Thank you,
- s.west
Hi swest,
Thanks for the report - I'll look into them.
The part about the image of Rukus Graul, however, is intentional. The image of Rukus, while it is labeled as such in Rise of the Runelords, is actually the stock image for all Ogrekin (which was introduced in Bestiary 2). So, since there are other ogrekin in the module, I left it generic so a GM can show the image to the players to show what ogrekin look like, not just Rukus.
For future reference, if a picture is associated with a monster/npc that has a stat block that creature's picture can be found by opening up the NPC record and clicking on the "other" tab. Within that, if there is an image associated with the monster/NPC, it will have a link. This works even for creatures whose NPCs are added to the combat tracker.
EDIT:
The issue with the Outdoor-2 map bringing up a new drawing doesn't seem to be happening for me. Have you tried updating? Perhaps create a test campaign file and try to see if there is an issue with your campaign file or not.
As for the fact that there are only 2 maps listed in the reference manual for use in random encounters, that is by design. It is not intended to use specific maps, such as the Graul Farmstead, for random encounters. There are two version of the same map (Outdoor and Outdoor-2). Only one of them is listed because there is no difference in the maps. The only reason 2 were created was due to organization and architectural reasons back when this was developed.
I can verify the issue with the bad table link and will fix that immediately, though it won't be in the live system until July 21st.
The problem with the Sandpoint Hinterlands Encounters table link has been fixed. You should see the corrected version in the TEST environment tomorrow and on the LIVE system on July 21st when the system changes get deployed.
So I discovered a very small problem tonight. It was discovered while troubleshooting another effect that wasn't working correctly. It is a very edge case and it appears that critical hit confirmation rolls are not applying ATK bonus effects in all cases.
Here is what I found.
If I make an attack roll without any effects, critical hit confirmation rolls never error. The proper bonus is applied to the initial roll to hit and the confirmation roll.
If I make an attack roll with a flat ATK bonus effect, say (Test; ATK: 2), the bonus always applies to the initial roll to hit and and the roll to confirm.
However when using "IFT: ALIGN (alignment)" with an ATK roll bonus or penalty, it applies it to all normal attacks and it applies to the initial roll to hit on a critical threat. However on the roll to confirm critical hits it doesn't apply the bonus on the roll. I will point out, I do include a proper alignment in the condition statement.
I've tried it with multiple different alignments for the ALIGN conditional operator and it always happens. I've not tried it with other types of conditional operators to the IFT condition, but based on it not working correctly for ALIGN, I would assume it doesn't work for any of them. I'm attaching a screen shot of a Sahuagin which has attacked one of the PCs in my campaign. The PC's alignment is set properly, his is LN, and the IFT statement is looking for lawful alignment. As you can see the initial roll that threatens does apply the bonus but the confirmation roll doesn't. Also ignore the fact that I have invalid stats for the trident. I'm only using these values to illustrate a point and make it easier to get a critical hit event to trigger.
Attachment 37674
If you want I can post a screenshot of it working when I use just a flat bonus to ATK as an effect, but I don't feel that it would contribute much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile
D'Oh! I knew that... but didn't have the wits about me to look there. Thanks for the reminder.Quote:
that creature's picture can be found by opening up the NPC record and clicking on the "other" tab.
Yup, I went to a test campaign that I use for this sort of purpose and you are correct, it doesn't happen there. I wonder what's wrong in my current campaign? How might I suss out the cause?Quote:
The issue with the Outdoor-2 map bringing up a new drawing doesn't seem to be happening for me.
But, hey... how about that Bad Link? (1 out of 3 ain't bad... I guess :-)
Thanks, and
Cheers!
- s.west
I had the "FG Battle Maps" module (which also contains that map) open in the campaign that exhibits the problem, and it contains that same map. I thought that might be what was going on, but alas, even after closing that module the Outdoor-2 map still exhibits the same symptom.Quote:
Originally Posted by swest
Still looking...
- s.west
p.s. Perhaps I shouldn't be adding these investigatory posts here? Does doing so add undesirable clutter to this thread (from the point of view of the folks that are looking in here to find new problem reports to work on)?
p.p.s. I'll solve the clutter question by just editing this post... @sciencephile, FYI, I closed all of the modules (except RotRL Chapter 3), and the problem with that map/link still exists. However, since this isn't an actual problem for me (I'm already using the other link to that same map), I'm not going to put any more time into figuring out what is going on. Needless to say, if you have other ideas about the cause, and you would like for me to explore, I will be happy to do so. Thanks, again.
I would have just privately messaged you but I think others can benefit ...
I have found that there can sometimes be issues with the module's temporary xml file that is contained in the campaign. That file allows for you to change things about the module for the campaign while leaving the original module content untouched.
Attachment 37678
If you go to your Fantasy Grounds working folder and find the campaign folder, open it up. Then open the "moduledb" folder. I would delete the xml file in there for RotRL Chapter 3, copy it somewhere first if you have changes you made to the module you wish to save. That might help you.
I have honestly have seen cases where I have changed the code of a module and those changes *never* see the light of day until I delete the module in the campaign's moduledb folder. Sometimes Fantasy Grounds gets stuck and doesn't see the changes due to the content within the moduledb folder overriding those changes. If not for me using this trick, I would have pulled out all my hair long ago trying to troubleshoot errors that seemed to happen for no reason.
You can try that. Feel free to privately message me if you wish to take the troubleshooting offline. I will help as much as I can.
-Danny
ah, I probably should have posted this here
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...ng-crit-damage
The spells in the Return of the Runelords APs have the classes abbreviated like "Clr" and "Wiz" rather than spelled out; this means that those spells aren't shown along with the other rulebooks when using the "Source" search feature.
Many class + level combinations are also listed twice, both uppercase and lowercase. I haven't been able to confirm why this is yet, although it seems like the module DBs contain these terms in lowercase and while they should be title case and FG is trying to consolidate by putting them in uppercase (but leaving the lowercase entries as well).
In Rise of the Runelords, Chapter 5, Sins of the Saviors, the grid on "Map - Shimmering Veils of Pride" is slightly the wrong scale and positioning. I managed to adjust it to fit well in my version, but thought you might like to correct it at the source.
Hi Bmos,Quote:
Originally Posted by bmos
What you are seeing is essentially the difference between using the premium pathfinder core rulebook and the SRD. If you open up the SRD library, you will see that they all use the abbreviated spell convention too. The only reason the spells are in the modules is due to the fact that some NPC records have spells that link to other spells (like the way Monster Summoning II would have a link to Monster Summoning I). They are not meant to be used by the players or GM as a spell book but only there to make sure spell links in NPC spells don't break.
You will want to disregard these in general and use whatever normal source you use for spells (such as the premium pathfinder core rulebook).
Just to conclude, since the SRD still does it the same way, I don't think this can be solved on the module level. This is more of an across the board thing, since the SRD modle is the originating source of the abbreviated spell classes.
If you think there is a case where an actual new spell, etc. is listed as abbreviated (not just a reference spell link), please let me know with specific examples. Granted, I didn't spend more than a few minutes looking but all I saw that had the issue you mentioned was the spells that were there for linking purposes. Thanks.
Gotcha. That definitely clarifies it, thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile
Any comment on the uppercase/lowercase duplication?
I can't replicate the uppercase situation. The closest I can get to replicating it is to have one in lowercase and another in title case.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmos
As far as comment, I'm guessing that this may be fixed at a ruleset level in the future (making case not matter so much). The reason I say this is because I tried to replicate the situation in FGU. In FGU, the duplication does not show up if the only difference is case.
Awesome! 3.3.11 is looking to have a bunch of nice quality-of-life type improvements like this. Thanks for checking into that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sciencephile