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]

This looks more like a reorg of existing stuff and errata and an effort to expunge the OGL.

I know Paizo stated previously they felt enough changes had been made in 2e to not need the OGL, but maybe a thorough review came up with some areas that may be questionable and this remastered version was at their legal team's suggestion to better transition to ORC.

 

[SteveC]

Except that some GMs don't use the Gamemasters Guide, but will have to purchase it now to get magic items.
Except that some tables don't use the APG classes (which are more complex than those in the Core Rules), but now will have to purchase it to get access to the other classes.

Do you remember the last time a game did this by having Players Handbook 1 & 2 to get the core classes? And split the DMG into 1 & 2? Yeah, that was 4E D&D. It didn't work then.

Also, this turnaround from PF2 to PF2.5 is the quickest edition change since 3.0 to 3.5.

Not to mention everyone who's going to be asking "which version do I need? If I bought the Core Rulebook, do I need to get Game Master Core 2?" (This is the Old School Essentials conundrum.)

You make some good points that I don't know if we have answers to yet. I don't know if magic items will be gamemaster content for instance (in the 4E days, it was not). My take on it is that this is really a move to excise content that's keeping them from removing the OGL license, along with a cleanup. And yes, I do remember the 4E days with having to wait for the PHB 2 to even get the druid, but I don't think this is the same situation. All of the content will be online (and that's where I use it from to run my game, I haven't cracked open my Players Guide but once or twice).

I see how you definitely could interpret it as you're saying, Paizo just has some good will with me that I'm going to wait on. I do think having updated books for new players and GMs is going to be a good thing, so going forward that all works. At this point I don't get the same feel for this that I do with what's happening with D&D where I've said I think WotC will be making changes to the system in order to drive adoption of the new. But I have been known to be wrong before so who knows?

The impression that I get is that there will be no reason for me to buy new books to keep playing and running. I am sure there will be a bundle or other such thing that I could get the new books in PDF. I don't get the impression that this is "Pathfinder 2 unchained" but again, who knows?

 

[payn]

Probably also a way to sell more books.
Previously, you could run the game with two books (CRB and Bestiary). Now it's spread out over ... 4?

One site?

 

[Aldarc]

Do you remember the last time a game did this by having Players Handbook 1 & 2 to get the core classes? And split the DMG into 1 & 2? Yeah, that was 4E D&D. It didn't work then.

I remember liking 4e a lot and not minding this in the slightest, but I understand that you want to turn 4e into a Bogeyman.

 

[delericho]

This looks more like a reorg of existing stuff and errata and an effort to expunge the OGL.

That last is probably the major reason this is being done, and being done now. In addition to people playing the game, the various rulebooks are the references for Paizo's various creators, and it will be much easier to instruct them to "use these new versions of the books" than to say "use the older books, but don't use X, Y, or Z".

It's also true that printing new books will allow them to make 100% certain that they're in the clear, just in case something like the OGL incident crops up again.

 

[SteveC]

I just wanted to point out that I've already seen discussion of some class updates, so it seems like there will be actual changes, so file this under "SteveC was wrong". That doesn't really discourage me, but I get how people who just bought new rulebooks will likely not be happy. Hopefully changes will be super minor and we'll move on. Still not planning on new physical books at this point.

 

[Alzrius]

I know Paizo stated previously they felt enough changes had been made in 2e to not need the OGL, but maybe a thorough review came up with some areas that may be questionable and this remastered version was at their legal team's suggestion to better transition to ORC.

I'm aware that Paizo has maintained that Pathfinder 2E (and Starfinder, for that matter) are different enough from D&D 3.X that they only need to make minimal changes to remove the games from the OGL entirely. However, I honestly have a hard time seeing the changes necessary as being as minor as they're positing. Even leaving aside that most monster names, for instance, are already from popular mythology or other non-copyrightable sources, there's a significant amount of overlap between the 3.5 and PF2 versions of a lot of creatures.

For instance, look at the 3.5 babau and the PF2 babau:

• Both are tagged as being demons.
• Both deal 2d6 sneak attack damage.
• Both have an acid coating that potentially damages creatures, and/or weapons, that hit them.
• Both have telepathy out to 100 feet, darkvision, and see invisibility.
• Both are tagged as being an appropriate encounter for 6th-level characters.

That's really just the tip of the iceberg; there's a lot to be said for the arrangement of the PF2 babau's stat block looking a lot like the stat block arrangement of the 3.5 babau, etc.

Now, maybe that's one of the creatures they're dumping, but examples like that strike me as being all over the place. I worry that in trying to say that PF2 and Starfinder are "different enough" from 3.5 that they only need to make modest changes to pull those games out of the OGL altogether will result in Paizo leaving themselves in a very actionable position (though that's only if WotC decides to subsequently sue them for copyright infringement, which is a different consideration altogether).

 

[Velderan]

I'm aware that Paizo has maintained that Pathfinder 2E (and Starfinder, for that matter) are different enough from D&D 3.X that they only need to make minimal changes to remove the games from the OGL entirely. However, I honestly have a hard time seeing the changes necessary as being as minor as they're positing. Even leaving aside that most monster names, for instance, are already from popular mythology or other non-copyrightable sources, there's a significant amount of overlap between the 3.5 and PF2 versions of a lot of creatures.

For instance, look at the 3.5 babau and the PF2 babau:

• Both are tagged as being demons.
• Both deal 2d6 sneak attack damage.
• Both have an acid coating that potentially damages creatures, and/or weapons, that hit them.
• Both have telepathy out to 100 feet, darkvision, and see invisibility.
• Both are tagged as being an appropriate encounter for 6th-level characters.

That's really just the tip of the iceberg; there's a lot to be said for the arrangement of the PF2 babau's stat block looking a lot like the stat block arrangement of the 3.5 babau, etc.

Now, maybe that's one of the creatures they're dumping, but examples like that strike me as being all over the place. I worry that in trying to say that PF2 and Starfinder are "different enough" from 3.5 that they only need to make modest changes to pull those games out of the OGL altogether will result in Paizo leaving themselves in a very actionable position (though that's only if WotC decides to subsequently sue them for copyright infringement, which is a different consideration altogether).

That makes sense and I guess it just comes down to legally how different is different enough? I have no idea, but I'd guess at least some of this comes from Paizo being uncomfortable with some things in 2e being too close for their comfort.

 

[Velderan]

Roll for Combat is live right now with Erik Mona discussing this:


I probably won't have time to listen to this until tomorrow, interested to hear what they have to say.

 

[Elodan]

Interesting that according to the product descriptions alchemist, barbarian, champion, monk, and sorcerer are in Player Core 2. Witch “promoted” to Player Core 1.

Wonder how they decided to allocate the classes between the books.

(Also leshy ancestry in PC 1)