Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder To Get New Core Rulebooks Soon

It's not just D&D that's getting a 'revised' set of core books--Pathfinder is also getting 'remastered' books! The core rulebooks are being replaced by a new set of books, with new names, but like D&D it is being reiterated that this is not a new edition--"With the exception of a few minor variations in terminology and a slightly different mix of monsters, spells, and magic items, the rules remain largely unchanged."

The existing Pathfinder Core Rulebook, Gamemastery Guide, Bestiary, and Advanced Player’s Guide are being replaced with Pathfinder Player Core, Pathfinder GM Core, Pathfinder Monster Core, and Pathfinder Player Core 2.

These books appear to focus on re-organization and consolidation of existing material rather than substantive changes. They also represent Paizo's move away from the Open Gaming License and towards the new Open RPG Creative (ORC) license. Paizo says "This transition will result in a few minor modifications to the Pathfinder Second Edition system, notably the removal of alignment and a small number of nostalgic creatures, spells, and magic items exclusive to the OGL. These elements remain a part of the corpus of Pathfinder Second Edition rules for those who still want them, and are fully compatible with the new remastered rules, but will not appear in future Pathfinder releases."

Pathfinder 2E - Paizo Reveals Wayne Reynolds' Pathfinder Remastered Cover Sketches

While the final colour pieces won't arrive for a few weeks, Paizo's Erik Mona revealed the cover sketches of the upcoming Pathfinder Remastered core rulebooks while at the GAMA industry trade show yesterday. In an unsual move, you will actually be able to buy special 'sketch' editions of the...

www.enworld.org

 

[Velderan]

They really did seem to imply the system as it stood was only using OGL as a formality for sharing content, and that a future version of the CRB would just swap the OGL page for ORC with the remainder of the book being the same. There was no implication that "in the future, we will make sure our books are 100% divorced from OGL-derrived content."

If I can put on a tinfoil hat for a minute. Pathfinder 1e was a D&D clone that sold itself as being more D&D than D&D was at the time. They hewed very close to the D&D tropes because that was profitable for them. When they came to making PF2e, that wasn't as viable a strategy since D&D had returned to form. So they wanted it to be more their own thing rather than a clone. But they wanted it to feel like a continuation of PF1e and Golarion as well, and that meant keeping some of the bigger tropes to keep it somewhat familiar. Now, four years later they have shown their system is successful, and the OGL is a perfect opportunity to purge the last remnants of D&D out of the system. I have few doubts that they considered removing alignment or ability scores earlier but kept them to create continuity with PF1e and any refugees from D&D. Now, such legacy elements are more of a hindrance and this is their attempt to remove them and further distinguish their game from WotC's.

I am more curious about what legacy monsters and spells get axed or changed. We know about magic missile getting a name change and dragons getting an overhaul, but I wonder about other monsters like owlbear or the selection of giants. Couple that with the problematic ones, I can see a not small part of the bestiary getting changed in some way. That in turn will end up retconning Golarion as it has been known. (For example, many planar monsters, or drow).

But ultimately, it will probably be good for Paizo to tear the scab off and make Pathfinder as distinct as possible by ditching legacy elements. And I can understand people who will be upset by that. I mean, people were upset when WotC changes lore in settings or monsters, I imagine Paizo will be similar.

During a livestream after the Remaster announcement, lead designer Logan Bonner said they strongly considered dropping ability scores because they didn't serve a purpose but they figured it might be too drastic of a change for 1e players making the switch so they left it in to help the game feel more familiar. I think alignment was also considered but I can't remember for sure.

 

[Velderan]

A non-conspiracy concern of mine regards the player options in books like Guns and Gears & Dark Archive. Paizo said they're not planning to update these books (only the other four). Gunslinger, Thaumaturge, Inventor, etc, are all found in OGL books. Will Paizo let these go out of print, since they're concerned about getting sued by WotC? (And if you're that concerned, certainly you're worried about PDF sales too - those could also threaten your business.)
Maybe all of these will get upgraded later and just haven't been announced yet? Perhaps these will go in a later Player Core 3?
And then the crunch in their Lost Omens line such as Mwangi Expanse - still has the OGL in that too. Are you going to stop printing lore books too? Pathfinder comic books that have the OGL in the back? What about the CRPGs like Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous?
Either WotC gives you a pass for using the OGL or they don't.

I'm not sure what their plans will be given the level of effort it might take to go back and remaster everything with OGL in it, but I'd guess they mostly want to get the core of the game under ORC with no OGL and have unreleased books be safe. Existing material is probably less of an existential threat because if WotC wanted to push the issue in court, Paizo at least has material to keep selling while the legal process plays out.

 

[Rushbolt]

If you are going to modify you posts that deeply, you might as well just make a new one.



So first off, I don't know where you discussed this, but it wasn't here because your posting history consists of:

• 1 Post in a 1D&D thread.
• Being angry at Paizo in this thread.
• Posting a thread about how we shouldn't be angry at Wizards (and also why aren't we angry at Paizo?!)

I assume this was a random conversation on another board. If it were here, I suspect people might have been less skeptical of it. But it also misses that (and I can't stress this enough) Paizo has been printing different versions of the Core Rulebook for a while now. They haven't been like Wizards, where they have sold the same book with little changes, they've been making rather notable balance changes to the Alchemist for a while. Again, I have a different version of the CRB compared to someone who bought it today. I don't feel screwed by that.

Further, this statement doesn't say anything about the Core Rulebook being printed in the same format forever. When you lie by omission, you have to at least hint at something. There's not even the whiff of a hint here. There's nothing that indirectly mentions the 2019 Core Rulebook being the inviolable form of the core rules at all. It just says they are going to continue printing material. This isn't a lie by omission, it's a completely unrelated statement.

My post about whether Paizo should release new books was actually on the Paizo forums, not EN World. The title of the post is "Pathfinder Next Edition Thoughts." Several posters responded they did not want new books.

I was critical of Wizards when they attempted to deauthorize the OGL, but my post in the D&D thread is about streamers basically looking to create a scandal and grow their channels by scouring every single thing Wizards does to see if they can spin it into something dastardly. In that post, I concede the OGL scandal and the use of the Pinkertons by Wizards were both unacceptable.

I took some liberties in assuming that Paizo hid their decision to print a Remastered edition later this year on purpose to sell out their old inventory. I can't prove this statement and inform anyone reading that the only statements I know of made by Paizo are from Erik Mona on Roll for Combat where he stated they had been working on Pathfinder Remastered for a few months. He does not give a specific definition of the timeframe and instead leaves it very vague. Each reader can draw their own conclusion as to what a few months means. If anyone has a more exact date when the Remaster project was given the green light, I would greatly appreciate it.

I concede the January 12 statement is not a lie by omission if you will concede that nearly all the people who read that statement did not think Paizo was referring to a Remastered edition because most of them would not have considered 4 years a long enough time. I also concede people may have thought that the Core Rulebook may have some slight changes since this is normal.

Further confusion can be found earlier in the January 12 statement when Paizo states:

"By the time we went to work on Pathfinder Second Edition, Wizards of the Coast’s Open Game Content was significantly less important to us, and so our designers and developers wrote the new edition without using Wizards’ copyrighted expressions of any game mechanics. While we still published it under the OGL, the reason was no longer to allow Paizo to use Wizards’ expressions, but to allow other companies to use our expressions."

This also infers that 2E product does not use Open Game Content when it does. I concede it does not express specifically that Paizo did not use Open Game Content, but it does strongly infer it.

I'm not angry at Paizo. I am disappointed that this statement, which was probably on of the most read statements by Paizo during the OGL scandal, ended up being a very unclear statement that could have been misinterpreted. Thousands of people interpreted the statement as Paizo assuring them the current 2E books as of January 12 would not need any significant change to be reprinted and might only include errata updates. Those people then assumed that at least if the Core Rulebooks and other products were reprinted later in the year there would not be a significant difference.

I did buy both the Pathfinder Beginner Box and several of the rulebook pdfs, and I assumed those items would be reprinted for several years going forward with minor alterations to include some errata at most.

 

[Nylanfs]

This also lets third party get in on the new PF2.1 worry free asap.

I had my mind changed earlier. This is more like PF2.2, 2.1 would be a re-print with errata collected.

 

[Velderan]

If you are going to modify you posts that deeply, you might as well just make a new one.



So first off, I don't know where you discussed this, but it wasn't here because your posting history consists of:

• 1 Post in a 1D&D thread.
• Being angry at Paizo in this thread.
• Posting a thread about how we shouldn't be angry at Wizards (and also why aren't we angry at Paizo?!)

I assume this was a random conversation on another board. If it were here, I suspect people might have been less skeptical of it. But it also misses that (and I can't stress this enough) Paizo has been printing different versions of the Core Rulebook for a while now. They haven't been like Wizards, where they have sold the same book with little changes, they've been making rather notable balance changes to the Alchemist for a while. Again, I have a different version of the CRB compared to someone who bought it today. I don't feel screwed by that.

Further, this statement doesn't say anything about the Core Rulebook being printed in the same format forever. When you lie by omission, you have to at least hint at something. There's not even the whiff of a hint here. There's nothing that indirectly mentions the 2019 Core Rulebook being the inviolable form of the core rules at all. It just says they are going to continue printing material. This isn't a lie by omission, it's a completely unrelated statement.

It's funny because looking at their posting history, they're upset about something that literally doesn't impact them because in the other thread that got locked they said they don't play PF. Same with @BigZebra above.

As someone that since I started playing PF2e in February has purchased a lot of material both physical and digital, am I happy they're redoing 4 of the books I've purchased? No, why would I be? Am I outraged and demanding Paizo explain themselves? No, because Erik Mona already did and either that's good enough or it's not and nothing ever will be good enough especially if you're a non-PF player getting worked up about it. Personally I'll judge them based on how they handle the transition now that we know it's coming and most importantly why.

 

[Aldarc]

I concede the January 12 statement is not a lie by omission if you will concede that nearly all the people who read that statement did not think Paizo was referring to a Remastered edition because most of them would not have considered 4 years a long enough time. I also concede people may have thought that the Core Rulebook may have some slight changes since this is normal.

This is way too of an extreme position for any reasonable person to agree to. I believe that you are projecting here and trying to speak for others. I don't think any of us have any actual idea how "nearly all the people" read that statement nor are any of us responsible for how you chose to read Paizo's statement.

 

[Rushbolt]

This is way too of an extreme position for any reasonable person to agree to. I believe that you are projecting here and trying to speak for others. I don't think any of us have any actual idea how "nearly all the people" read that statement nor are any of us responsible for how you chose to read Paizo's statement.

So you believe people inferred that the reprints would be a Remastered edition that had not been announced yet? Did you even think that or did you not notice the announcement at that time? I think you may be confused about who has the extreme position.

 

[Aldarc]

So you believe people inferred that the reprints would be a Remastered edition that had not been announced yet? Did you even think that or did you not notice the announcement at that time? I think you may be confused about who has the extreme position.

I'll be honest here. I would be far more receptive to anything you had to say if you weren't so eager on badgering people who may disagree with you. I don't think that you're interested in any answers others than the ones you're fishing for. You're clearly out for blood, and I want no part of it. Check back with me when you cool down a few notches.

 

[Remathilis]

During a livestream after the Remaster announcement, lead designer Logan Bonner said they strongly considered dropping ability scores because they didn't serve a purpose but they figured it might be too drastic of a change for 1e players making the switch so they left it in to help the game feel more familiar. I think alignment was also considered but I can't remember for sure.

Further proof of my conspiracy.

I really haven't played PF since 1e, so I have no dog in this fight. But I can say I think they are using the OGL as an excuse to further push Pathfinder away from its D&D clone status. The fact that Logan admitted they wanted to go farther but didn't to keep a feeling of continuity with 1e (and to a lesser degree D&D) but now feel comfortable with wanting that familiarity gone (and feeling their audience will better accept it now) shows that I don't think all these changes are about removing actionable OGL concerns as much as putting as much daylight between them and D&D as possible while still having common ancestry.

(For example, magic missile is in the 5.1 SRD which is CC. They could add a CC addendum and keep the name, but I think they WANT to remove it to make it feel far more distinct to Pathfinder. Using the OGC is a convenient excuse to do it.)

I still wish Paizo the best in this endeavor. I hope it can really lean into its own by removing the vestigial D&Disms in the system. It will strengthen the IP to be something other than a D&D clone. I just believe this is being done more to distance themselves from any WotC "stink" rather than because of any legal issues with the OGL.

 

[Rushbolt]

I'll be honest here. I would be far more receptive to anything you had to say if you weren't so eager on badgering people who may disagree with you. I don't think that you're interested in any answers others than the ones you're fishing for. You're clearly out for blood, and I want no part of it. Check back with me when you cool down a few notches.

I will be as transparent as possible here and I will not use any inductive reasoning. I bought some Pathfinder 2E items but have not played them yet because I am finishing a campaign in D&D. I thought what Wizards did with the OGL was despicable and I hope the Pinkerton agents get the book thrown at them. I thought the January 12th statement from Paizo did not mean they were releasing a new edition. I hope no one read the January 12 statement and purchased their books expecting they would not be updated for several years feels slighted by the decision to Remaster the product later this year. It would be nice if Paizo reached out to the new players to make sure they are still happy with the products purchased earlier this year but they have no obligation to do so. Thank you for reminding me about the proper etiquette for a discussion.

I did play Pathfinder 1e and 2e both at Gencon and I understand why people love the game. A large amount of hard work goes into it. I have not currently played this year.

I will not discuss any Pathfinder products going forward as my viewpoint is far too skewed by not being a regular Pathfinder player and assuredly biased by being primarily a D&D player. I will not post any controversial remarks about Pathfinder and will leave the regular players of the game to determine whether any communication from Paizo could have been improved.