Official Pathfinder Modules Bug Report Thread

[Moon Wizard]

Originally hardness was not implemented; then per user request, we added the DR and resistances as an implementation of hardness, since it works in 95+% of the scenarios.

In this case, according to the information I can find. The rules seem to say that vulnerability is applied before resistance or hardness as a general principle.
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questi...sistance-stack

The quote by the developer for that particular encounter suggests that the fire vulnerability should bypass the hardness; but that's not how the rules work in general. Unfortunately, there's no way in FG to automatically parse that information in a way to make a specific exception in this case, since the automation is written to work on the general case.

Regards,
JPG

[madman]

Thanks Moon

[DeadlySecret]

I would recommend removing the code all together from enemies with hardness and let us do it manually, or leave a note with the enemy that can't be missed for the GM to remove RESIST: 5 fire from the code when applied to the combat tracker.

Reference Material:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/damaging-objects/

Vulnerability to Certain Attacks
Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object’s hardness.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_..._on_creatures/

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rbw0?H...Half-Dead-City

[Moon Wizard]

It's something that will need to be looked at for a future patch. It's the first instance I've seen where hardness and vulnerability have occurred on the same NPC.

Regards,
JPG

[Blackfoot]

Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object’s hardness.

MAY seems to be the important part of that there.. making it a GM call which.. honestly.. I'd prefer hardness to work in the majority of cases than to have to ignore it for an individual 'optional' one.

[DeadlySecret]

It was brought to my attention that the False Sarcophagus is also in this situation.
1.A.15. False Burial Chamber - weak to cold but has hardness

[DeadlySecret]

Today we didn't get too much done but I did find 2 more errors.
1.A.09. Chamber of Reflection; there is a space in the word reflection, 2nd paragraph
1.A.15. False Burial Chamber; there is a space in the word Reflex, under trap description 2nd paragraph.

Also not sure if this was mentioned in other reports, but the parcel A.15. False Burial Chamber shows both 50 gp + the item valued at 50 gp. As far as I can tell there shouldn't be 50 gp.
and parcel A.08. Trophy Room Khopesh & Spear should say MWK in the item title, though it does how it in the items notes but the gold value is not correct to reflect they are mwk

Thank you have a great weekend.

[madman]

Thanks for reporting these I will fix them. I went back through all six modules a fixed a bunch of things. also I put together a Desktop decal extension. should be available soon..

Madman..

[rickyhunt]

Something that I am still seeing for Mummy's Mask in parcels that have multiples of the same item is that when I drag the full parcel over to the party inventory, it only sends 1 of each item. I made a test parcel with 5 items and it worked fine. I thought it might have just been a corrupted parcel or 2, but all of them seem to be behaving that way, at least in book 1.

[madman]

It's been reported and fixed...
Madman