SRD Errata

[EnnPeeCee]

Somewhat random question: is everything on the d20 SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/) correct? I'm guessing the official errata for the books has been incorporated into it. Are there any known typos or errors?

[KillianHawkeye]

Well I know some of the 3.0 content (Deities & Demigods and Epic Level Handbook stuff) is still in it's original form.

[holywhippet]

I'm pretty sure the errata is already applied. Checking the errata for the PHB on the wizards site it appears the changes have been applied.

That being said, there is some stuff that is questionable - like any amount of fire immunity/resistance providing 100% immunity to lava and magma. It's never been changed via errata but some consider it to be dubious.

[Chess435]

I'm pretty sure the errata is already applied. Checking the errata for the PHB on the wizards site it appears the changes have been applied.

That being said, there is some stuff that is questionable - like any amount of fire immunity/resistance providing 100% immunity to lava and magma. It's never been changed via errata but some consider it to be dubious.

Wait, so Fire Resistance 1 = lava immunity? :smallannoyed:

[MeeposFire]

Whether or not it is up to date on errata it is not fully up to date on everything anyway. Some things that were "updated" on later printings, such as what happens at epic levels with the divine power spell, are not shown in the SRD for various reasons (such as the problem that some changes were not made in areas open to the public).

[dextercorvia]

Somewhat random question: is everything on the d20 SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/) correct? I'm guessing the official errata for the books has been incorporated into it. Are there any known typos or errors?

It's close, but not perfect. Someone in an Iron Chef match noticed that the Krenshar is actually a playable race, despite what it says on d20srd.org.

[EnnPeeCee]

Alright, so no extreme errors so far. I'm mainly looking at the entries for classes/feats/spells/etc that relate to player characters.

Edit: I did find, while not an error technically, a bit of incorrect information:

"Trapfinding

Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Search skill to locate traps when the task has a Difficulty Class higher than 20.
Finding a nonmagical trap has a DC of at least 20, or higher if it is well hidden. Finding a magic trap has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.
Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Disable Device skill to disarm magic traps. A magic trap generally has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.
A rogue who beats a trap’s DC by 10 or more with a Disable Device check can study a trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it (with her party) without disarming it."

[Thrice Dead Cat]

The 3.5 stuff should be up to date, but the 3.0 OGL stuff probably isn't either because the errata wasn't applied of the 3.5 update wasn't applied because said update may not have been OGL content.

[holywhippet]

Wait, so Fire Resistance 1 = lava immunity? :smallannoyed:

Yep.


An immunity or resistance to fire serves as an immunity to lava or magma.

It's been like that since 3.0 - either the developers never noticed, never had it pointed out or for some reason decided not to change it. Which means you can stand in a campfire with fire resistance 1 and get badly burnt, but then stand in what is literally molten rock and not be harmed.

[Thurbane]

I can't cite specific examples, but I have seen people point out a few inconsistencies in the monster stats (i.e. attack bonuses that don't match up with BAB and STR scores etc.). I'm not sure if these errors are copied verbatim from the Monster Moanual, though.

Another common one seems to be that most monsters with only one attack for get 1.5 x STR bonus to damage, but there are some that do not - despite the fact the monster description section very clearly states that any creature with only one sole natural attack should get the 1.5 bonus.

[Draz74]

I can't cite specific examples, but I have seen people point out a few inconsistencies in the monster stats (i.e. attack bonuses that don't match up with BAB and STR scores etc.). I'm not sure if these errors are copied verbatim from the Monster Moanual, though.

Another common one seems to be that most monsters with only one attack for get 1.5 x STR bonus to damage, but there are some that do not - despite the fact the monster description section very clearly states that any creature with only one sole natural attack should get the 1.5 bonus.

Yeah, minor errors in monster stat blocks are the only errors I've ever heard of. I have a vague memory that there was some problem with the Pegasus.

[CTrees]

It's been like that since 3.0 - either the developers never noticed, never had it pointed out or for some reason decided not to change it. Which means you can stand in a campfire with fire resistance 1 and get badly burnt, but then stand in what is literally molten rock and not be harmed.

What's especially amusing to me (and sad confirmation of many people's beliefs), Pathfinder changed the wording, but STILL somehow managed to leave it as Fire Res 1=lava immunity. At least they fixed the 'wizards dropping the moon on enemies' problem...

[Ernir]

d20srd.com has significantly fewer errors than the official SRD (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35), in my experience.

Really, it's very good. Jans Carton deserves all our thanks.

"Trapfinding

Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Search skill to locate traps when the task has a Difficulty Class higher than 20.
Finding a nonmagical trap has a DC of at least 20, or higher if it is well hidden. Finding a magic trap has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.
Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Disable Device skill to disarm magic traps. A magic trap generally has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.
A rogue who beats a trap’s DC by 10 or more with a Disable Device check can study a trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it (with her party) without disarming it."

I'm AFB, but don't all (?) the classes that grant Trapfinding reference the Rogue class? If that is the case, it might be a bit contrived, but not inaccurate.

[Amnestic]

I'm AFB, but don't all (?) the classes that grant Trapfinding reference the Rogue class? If that is the case, it might be a bit contrived, but not inaccurate.

Factotum does reference the Rogue, but Beguilers do not.

[JaronK]

Somewhat random question: is everything on the d20 SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/) correct? I'm guessing the official errata for the books has been incorporated into it. Are there any known typos or errors?

One error I know of is that it says Sp abilities take the same time as the spell they duplicate. This is wrong, as the Monster Manual (primary source on Sp abilities) and Rules Compendium disagree. In fact, Sp abilities always take a standard action unless otherwise noted, or if the spell is shorter than one standard action to cast then and only then do they use the spell duration.

JaronK

[Veyr]

I did find, while not an error technically, a bit of incorrect information:

"Trapfinding

Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Search skill to locate traps when the task has a Difficulty Class higher than 20.
Finding a nonmagical trap has a DC of at least 20, or higher if it is well hidden. Finding a magic trap has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.
Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Disable Device skill to disarm magic traps. A magic trap generally has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.
A rogue who beats a trap’s DC by 10 or more with a Disable Device check can study a trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it (with her party) without disarming it."
That is what the OGL says, though, and no Errata changed it: it's purely an issue of Specific Trumps General. When a newer class has Trapfinding, it is the primary source on that class. If that class's description says it can find traps with a DC or 20 or higher, or disarm magic traps, that specific rule trumps the general rule that only Rogues can do that.

But since no such classes exist in the SRD, no Errata was ever really necessary. As such, Wizards never applied one. And because of that, the SRD doesn't mention other such classes. And since d20srd.org is providing the SRD, it keeps that wording. It's not really wrong, and I'm not sure they'd be allowed to change it in any case.