Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2E Errata 2E

Pathfinder 2nd Edition has received its 2nd printing, and with it comes its 2nd set of errata.

Here's five of the changes straight from the horse's (err, goblin's) mouth!

• All classes increase their unarmed attack proficiency along with their weapons.
• Alchemists gain a scaling item DC without taking a feat and can make more of their field specialty items at 1st level, instead of 5th. They all gain medium armor proficiency in addition to unarmored and light armor.
• We simplified how you carry items into held, worn, and stowed items, making it easier to determine where you can find each of your items without needing to go nitty gritty and buy every bandolier, pouch, and pocket to contain them.
• We lowered the Bulk of several items and separated out the alchemist’s kit, which is for travel, from the alchemist’s lab, which is very heavy. These changes make it easier to carry your important tools on the go.
• We clarified Sustained spells to make it clear whether you could Sustain them multiple times in the same turn and get a benefit.

 

[Decoby j.]

Pathfinder 2E Errata: "Redirect to Pathfinder 1E"

No.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Is it just me, or is that a LOT of errata for one book? I'm talking about Part 1 mostly, but Part 2 has some pretty big changes as well.

Its not exactly a small book. And of course once you start doing errata on spells there's always a potential lot there, especially if errata includes "with a year of broad usage, we've rethought this" (which appears to be what's happened with the encumbrance and stowage based changes.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Pathfinder 2E Errata: "Redirect to Pathfinder 1E"

You can always count on someone to come along and launch a snarky little edition war dig. Its like clockwork.

 

[Philip Benz]

FWIW there has been a further clarification to the recent errata, settling any lingering ambiguity about battle medicine, other uses of tool sets, the definition of attacks and attack rolls, and a couple other things.

paizo.com - Community / Paizo Blog

 

[Retreater]

Just when I was almost getting to a partial level of competency with the rules.
Is anyone else at the point where they just can't handle new rules?

 

[Philip Benz]

The thing with battle medicine was a much-needed clarification. Some folks wanted to roll with no-hands, no-tools non-magical healing with a single action, but now we know you need worn tools and one free hand. A very reasonable call.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The thing with battle medicine was a much-needed clarification. Some folks wanted to roll with no-hands, no-tools non-magical healing with a single action, but now we know you need worn tools and one free hand. A very reasonable call.

Yeah, there were multiple multi-page threads on the topic on the Paizo forum. There were people who wanted every interpretation imaginable, and would argue extensively for their position.

 

[kenada]

FWIW there has been a further clarification to the recent errata, settling any lingering ambiguity about battle medicine, other uses of tool sets, the definition of attacks and attack rolls, and a couple other things.

paizo.com - Community / Paizo Blog

I wasn’t thrilled with the change at first because it felt like a regression from the modular design of PF2, so I appreciate the clarification of attack rolls. It’s just another kind of check, and sometimes the rules care which particular type of check you are making.

 

[kenada]

Just when I was almost getting to a partial level of competency with the rules.
Is anyone else at the point where they just can't handle new rules?

I was close. Like I said in my previous post, I was leery of losing some of the modular (trait-based) approach that makes PF2 manageable for me. I’m not interested in parsing semantics over whether something is an attack roll or an action with the attack trait. The clarification was just enough to fit it into a conceptual framework.

Otherwise, I was starting to feel the pull of OSE again. That conversation never goes well with my group because they like character customization (even if they’re neither builders nor optimizers).

 

[Retreater]

Otherwise, I was starting to feel the pull of OSE again. That conversation never goes well with my group because they like character customization (even if they’re neither builders nor optimizers).

Yeah. My games have all gone to different OSR systems (one being OSE) over the past three weeks - with the exception of my PF2 game switching to 5e. I just can't handle the rigors of something like PF2 anymore, and honestly 5e is a little fiddly for me at this stage.