D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Errata Reporting

[Iku Rex]

The "deflect arrows" feat says (SRD): "Attempting to deflect a ranged weapon doesn't count as an action."

The word "attempting" doesn't make sense in 3.5 - you don't "attempt" to deflect the weapon any more. (That was 3.0 .)

 

[Iku Rex]

The haste spell says (SRD):When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding.

The last part of the sentence (... with any weapon he is holding") should be removed. It is ambiguous (any one weapon or all weapons?) and as far as I know you don't have to "hold a weapon" in order to get the extra attack.

 

[Iku Rex]

(Unclear rule.)
In the "equipment" chapter of the SRD, under the description of light and heavy shields, it says: "You can bash an opponent with a heavy [light] shield, using it as an off-hand weapon.

This is most likely misleading. You can use a shield as your primary weapon if you want to. (It's just not very common.) You can even use a shield two-handed. (All this is IMNSHO.)

 

[Iku Rex]

The monster entries (SRD) for the PH races (dwarf, elf, halfling, gnome, orc [half-orc]) list racial traits as (Ex) abilities. This is incorrect. Some of the racial traits are "natural" (no "tag"), "spell-like" (Sp), "supernatural (Su) or not a "special ability" at all.

If this is intentional, then the many monster entries that don't list racial traits as (Ex) should be corrected.

 

[Iku Rex]

(Odd wording)
The animal growth spell says: "This alteration changes each animal’s size category to the next largest, ..."

The "next largest"? The next largest size category is "Gargantuan". (Instead, the spell is supposed to increase your size one step.)

 

[Iku Rex]

A couple of comments:

1. Could someone with the printed rulebooks submit the errata I've posted in this thread with page numbers? (I only have the SRD to go by.)

2. Remember, the 3.0 PH got a second printing after a short time. Make sure you submit unclear rules as "errata" - maybe they'll be clarified in new printing.

 

[Tarril Wolfeye]

The weapon "sai" is listed as dealing bludgeoning damage (SRD). It should be piercing damage.

No, this is correct. The sai is a bludgeoning weapon.

 

[Savage Wombat]

To be more specific - the historical, real-world sai is a bludgeoning weapon. Like the jitte, it's designed for disarming swordsmen.

Now, a modern, Elektra-like sharpened sai would be a piercing weapon, and probably have the exact same statistics otherwise.

 

[Iku Rex]

To be more specific - the historical, real-world sai is a bludgeoning weapon. Like the jitte, it's designed for disarming swordsmen.

The historical, real-world sai was/is used both as a piercing and as a bludgeoning weapon.

http://www.uechi-ryu.com/oldsite/sai_article.htm
(RL examples of sai use)

In OA it is listed as a bludgeoning weapon.
In (the more recent) A&EG it is listed as a piercing weapon. (Which is why I assumed it was an outright error in the PH.)

I suppose it should be both piercing and bludgeoning - it would make it a slightly more useful weapon and fit the actual use of the sai nicely. But if I had to choose it would definitely be a piercing weapon, if nothing else because that's what players will expect when they pick the sai.

(This doesn't really belong here. Please start a new thread if you want to discuss it further.)

 

[Mike18xx]

Thanks.
Errata list Spell Turning entry updated:

282-283***: (1) Spell Turning inconsistently handles Inflict Serious Wounds examples. (2) Further inconsistency regarding applicability to area-effect spells, and Fear (a cone-shaped burst).