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

 

[Remathilis]

I think they both deserve a pass honestly.

I feel the same. I feel WotC has been fairly honest about its intentions regarding OneD&D (less so about the OGL). They announced their intentions to do a new version of the core rulebooks two years before they are coming out. We all knew things were going to change. They said the scope of changes would be less than a full edition's worth. So far, they aren't as big as 3e, 4e, or 5e was. They said it would be backwards compatible. It mostly is. They have been playtesting and giving us dev updates regularly. While individual changes have surprised me, I'm not shocked or upset at them for communication as far as the actual game goes.

Likewise, think Paizo is being about as honest. The changes are bigger than simple errata; they are removing or changing content to de-OGLify it, and are announcing their intentions with a pretty long window. If I find any fault, it's that I don't particularly like going from two books to four to get the whole experience.

But that's what I mean enjoy about rpg players having a very skewed definition of edition. Under normal circumstances, neither of these changes alone should be wildly controversial. Your old 5e and PF2e books aren't going to be invalidated. But because the changes from 3e to 5e (and PF 1e to 2e) were so radical, it creates the impression that any attempt to update the game is forcing players to start over from scratch.

 

[payn]

I feel the same. I feel WotC has been fairly honest about its intentions regarding OneD&D (less so about the OGL). They announced their intentions to do a new version of the core rulebooks two years before they are coming out. We all knew things were going to change. They said the scope of changes would be less than a full edition's worth. So far, they aren't as big as 3e, 4e, or 5e was. They said it would be backwards compatible. It mostly is. They have been playtesting and giving us dev updates regularly. While individual changes have surprised me, I'm not shocked or upset at them for communication as far as the actual game goes.

Right. 5E is 10 years old at this point and I don't mind a refresh and a few changes. Nothing so far screams brand new edition to me even if some things will be different between 2014 and 2024. (OGL I believe had a lot more to do with digital and future products than physical publishing, but it was still an epic fail on WOTC part.)

Likewise, think Paizo is being about as honest. The changes are bigger than simple errata; they are removing or changing content to de-OGLify it, and are announcing their intentions with a pretty long window. If I find any fault, it's that I don't particularly like going from two books to four to get the whole experience.

Now this one is a bit surprising since PF2 is only a few years out the gate. However, I do think OGL business has forced Paizo's hand. I think it would be a much bigger deal if not for Archives of Nethys and affordable PDF options. So, yeah its not great, but its not something to grab a pitch fork over. I think its cynical to think Paizo hid the news to eat up some book sales just to screw people. I also think the idea Paizo has some responsibility to trumpet the news the second they think about such things is a bit entitled.

But that's what I mean enjoy about rpg players having a very skewed definition of edition. Under normal circumstances, neither of these changes alone should be wildly controversial. Your old 5e and PF2e books aren't going to be invalidated. But because the changes from 3e to 5e (and PF 1e to 2e) were so radical, it creates the impression that any attempt to update the game is forcing players to start over from scratch.

I think the future is digital. TTRPGs will get updates like MMOs and CRPGs. The rules will slowly adjust, adapt, and change as required. It will be simple to account for these things in digital spaces such as websites, databases, and VTTs. Ten or twenty years from now the game will look very different, but it wont be noticed because it will be incremental like a boiling a frog from scratch instead of tossing it into a fiery edition churn cauldron.

 

[SteveC]

I have to agree with Payn here as much as I have some issues with what's happening here: the future is digital. For games like Pathfinder or D&D or really anything with crunch that expands over time. My copy of Blades in the Dark is only going to change with a major update, and really doesn't need incremental changes to the playbooks for instance.
I am playing in a 5E game and I haven't cracked a book once. Similarly my PF2 characters were built entirely online. BUT ... I know that the digital future is upsetting to players who are still all about the books. At the same time, I don't even know how I'd make a character and just know how many books have feats or spells or magic items in them that my character could take. I don't know if there will ever be a meeting of the minds between paper book / online players as we continue.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Not quite. PI is the things you are not allowed to use under the OGL. This is about Wizards' OGC, which they can use under the OGL but not otherwise. The point is that the OGC is in peripheral stuff like certain monsters and spells, and not in the core mechanics.

(IANAL, TINLA.)

Fair, got the term wrong, but I'm happy the sentiment is accurate.

 

[Velderan]

I have to agree with Payn here as much as I have some issues with what's happening here: the future is digital. For games like Pathfinder or D&D or really anything with crunch that expands over time. My copy of Blades in the Dark is only going to change with a major update, and really doesn't need incremental changes to the playbooks for instance.
I am playing in a 5E game and I haven't cracked a book once. Similarly my PF2 characters were built entirely online. BUT ... I know that the digital future is upsetting to players who are still all about the books. At the same time, I don't even know how I'd make a character and just know how many books have feats or spells or magic items in them that my character could take. I don't know if there will ever be a meeting of the minds between paper book / online players as we continue.

Just going to repeat something I've said in other threads: I buy books because I prefer them for an initial reading. On game nights, I solely used D&D Beyond for 5e and Archives of Nethys and Foundry for PF2e currently because it's sooooo much easier to quickly search for the rule I want to reference. That's probably the biggest reason this whole thing isn't a big deal to me, because the info will ultimately end up where I will use it anyhow.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

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.)

It's D&D Essentials 4th Edition remaster all over again.

 

[BigZebra]

I'm with Rushbolt on this one. I clearly remember the statement being made about PF2e being designed in such a way the ogl could be stripped. It was very apparent they saw a spike in sales, they even bragged about it. This "revision" feels very underhanded. Especially when you just onboarded a lot of new players. I'm reading this whole thread and can't help but compare and contrast it with how the 5e anniversary is going. There's a lot of raised pitch forks about it being a new edition and how "drastically" its being changed. It's a stark difference in how Paizo seems to be getting a pass here. I know how this would go if WotC did the same thing. The whole world would be on fire.

This is exactly how I remember their statement as well. “Oh PF2 doesn’t need the OGL we can just pull it out so buy our books”. And then after a sales spike they suddenly put out a 2.5. This. Is. So. Bad. Behaviors. If WotC did this Reddit would explode.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I simply believe that Paizo did not release the information about their update of their rules in a timely manner. The community should hold them accountable for this. That's it. Am I asking too much? I'm not releasing any new rulebooks so I don't think it applies to me.

Again, do you have any actual proof that they knew they were going to do this at the time? You keep dismissing the idea that the OGL situation ended up speeding this up, but you really don't have any proof of that. If you have some, I'd love to see it. I'm open to being convinced.

I suppose my confusion here is that you're acting like this is some sort of betrayal, but they've been doing this sort of thing for a while. New printings of the PF2 Core Rulebook have had updated errata, with one class getting particular work. If you want to complain that they are making rulebooks "useless" by changing them, you're a little late for that debate. My rulebook does not have the most up-to-date errata for the Alchemist, so did they screw me, too?

That last point is, I think, the biggest thing here: they've been doing updates, which is something that Wizards hasn't done. I think you can argue either strategy being better, but at the end it's something they've been doing for a while. Wanting to further remove the OGL stuff along with basically reedit the books into a smoother format (something which has been a rather widely-made critique of the original set) and I just don't see how this is "screwing" anyone. This is just comes off as taking a window they've been given to push through a bunch of QoL changes as well as insulate them further from Wizards.

This is exactly how I remember their statement as well. “Oh PF2 doesn’t need the OGL we can just pull it out so buy our books”. And then after a sales spike they suddenly put out a 2.5. This. Is. So. Bad. Behaviors. If WotC did this Reddit would explode.

Did they say that? As I remember it, their statement was basically "We feel confident that we could take this to a court of law". However, there's no reason not to future-proof against a company that has tried to screw you over. Give them no angle of attack. But this is the statement I'm looking at, maybe you are talking about a different one?

paizo.com - Community / Paizo Blog

 

[Rushbolt]

Did they say that? As I remember it, their statement was basically "We feel confident that we could take this to a court of law". However, there's no reason not to future-proof against a company that has tried to screw you over. Give them no angle of attack. But this is the statement I'm looking at, maybe you are talking about a different one?

paizo.com - Community / Paizo Blog

"Of course, Paizo plans to continue publishing Pathfinder and Starfinder, even as we move away from the Open Gaming License. Since months’ worth of products are still at the printer, you’ll see the familiar OGL 1.0(a) in the back of our products for a while yet. While the Open RPG Creative License is being finalized, we’ll be printing Pathfinder and Starfinder products without any license, and we’ll add the finished license to those products when the new license is complete."

There it is. Black and white.

Paizo Announces System-Neutral Open RPG License​

January 12 Paizo Blog

Did a little research for you BigZebra.

 

[Justice and Rule]

"Of course, Paizo plans to continue publishing Pathfinder and Starfinder, even as we move away from the Open Gaming License. Since months’ worth of products are still at the printer, you’ll see the familiar OGL 1.0(a) in the back of our products for a while yet. While the Open RPG Creative License is being finalized, we’ll be printing Pathfinder and Starfinder products without any license, and we’ll add the finished license to those products when the new license is complete."

There it is. Black and white.

Paizo Announces System-Neutral Open RPG License​

January 12 Paizo Blog

That really doesn't disprove my point. That just shows that they always intended to get away from OGL as soon as possible. Where does any of that preclude not releasing new Core Books? Where is the lie there? This is starting to get inane.