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

 

[Lojaan]

That would be

Ok. You know what I honestly want to see with this? (No joking or faux outrage this time.)
I want a legitimate "beginner AP." Show new GMs how to run a campaign and teach players the ropes.
Time to stop being so gatekeeping with your adventures. Want to show you're welcoming to new gamers? Do that with your flagship product line.

That would be GREAT.

(And a note for everyone else - stop telling people to "just buy the beginner box". I don't want to have to buy a second product to teach me how to use the core rules)

 

[Thomas Shey]

I think that is antithetical to the design goal of the system.

At the very least you'd need to design a caster who lacked the versatility and crowd-control functions of current casters before it'd be reasonable.

 

[Thomas Shey]

For the same reason I hate D&D Cleric "heal bots", I hate all Pathfinder 2 spellcasters.

The "support role" sucks.

Characterizing all PF2e spellcasters as only "support" is hyperbole at best, misrepresentation at worst.

 

[Yaarel]

Characterizing all PF2e spellcasters as only "support" is hyperbole at best, misrepresentation at worst.

It relates to the capacity to be an active combatant in a combat game.

This means exactly: high damage versus a single target.

 

[Weiley31]

Ah, you want to be a ganzi kobold. Simple enough.

Oooh that works!

 

[agrayday]

More books for sale from Paizo? you dont say.

Curious how much shelf space would you need for all the PF1 and PF2 Books? I know with my PF1 hardbacks, I have two rows in a Kallax shelf (4x4) not counting the beginner box sets, pawns, maps, tiles, and the PF2 "beta" books that came out. The PF1 section at the used bookstore is much larger than the D&D section (all Editions).

 

[ScYork]

So the new remastered books seem to have new cover art work, anyone heard if the interior of the books will have new art work?

 

[Feeroper]

My problem is with the lack of transparency and the misleading statements made by this company during January. There was no indication during the sales spike that the rulebooks being purchased were, let's be honest here, being replaced. Using an old rulebook and needing to reference the errata or bringing up AoN when you play is not the way most of those purchasers envisioned their future with PF2E. It's even more sickening this statement acknowledges the profits from those sales were at least part of the impetus behind making them outdated so quickly. Paizo needs to offer an official apology, preferably on an industry-leading platform such as EN World, to the RPG community for the withholding of information they used to take advantage of buyers.

I agree fully with this - Paizo likes to put on the "we're like you!" customer service face, but they are obviously a business too, and not too dissimilar to WotC. I really like PF (both 1e and 2e) but this was a pretty tone deaf play. I get the divesting from OGL stuff, but the presentation uses very tricky wording - I think the fact that they will not update old 2e Core Rulebook PDFs says a lot - a true customer service route would be to give current (digital) customers a free PDF of the Player Core and GM Core, since it is apparently just reshuffled presentation and "minor" adjustments, or alternatively, continue to update relevant rules in the old core rulebook PDF since it "isn't obselete" - what happens in a year or two after the release of the new Core books and there is even more errata? Those old core rulebooks will seem much further outdated by then if they will no longer update the PDFs (as they do with all of their digital products in their supported lifetime). I don't think AoN is a viable excuse for everyone. It is clear this is a stealth and low key shifting of the edition, just removing alignment alone is a pretty big change that I think is hard for them to talk around (which is evident in their descriptions of the solution for it). In my personal opinion, this is an ill-timed PR blunder given the recent renewed interest in Pathfinder. I get it though, at the end of the day they are a business and this is an opportunity to not only get away from the OGL, but to move some more units with more player interest. I wish they would just be more transparent about it, no need for the façade (imo) - I think the cryptic answer about Starfinder ("not yet") shows that they are indeed rather shrewd with their business.

Don't get me wrong, I do like Paizo and believe they have a very passionate staff their that does care about their game and the hobby, but we have to also remember they are a business - they aren't our personal friends doing us a favor, its a business decision. There is nothing wrong with that, I just prefer more transparency in the communication.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It relates to the capacity to be an active combatant in a combat game.

This means exactly: high damage versus a single target.

Given that a number of spellcasting types are capable of boosting themselves up with their magic to the point where they're perfectly capable of taking on the same sort of opponents a fighting type can do one-on-one--I've seen it done--it appears your position is that they need to be able to do so not only as, but more reliably than most fighting types can, and possibly be able to take on opponents even most fighting types would have trouble handling without help.

So, still not even vaguely buying it. Among other things "being an active combatant" being equated to "can take on opponents by themselves" is a remarkably silly equivelency. The only thing PF2e spellcasters are intrinsically worse at is holding their own against up-rev opponents, and if they're going to be as good as a fighting specialist at that, what are they getting all the other things they're good at for? Because spellcasters are just Supposed To Win?

 

[Thomas Shey]

[Accidental duplicate I just now noticed.]