• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

PF2 The Golarion Role Playing Game

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
Reading through the Core Rulebook and Bestiary one thing that really struck me is that Pathfinder 2 is intimately tied to Golarion in a way that the first edition was not. These are not just Dwarves, Elves, Halflings, Goblins and Gnomes. They are the Pathfinder versions of them which in this edition emphatically means the Golarion versions. From small things like a Dwarf's Clan Dagger to big things like Gnomes that came from the First World and must contend with the bleaching the unique struggles and cultures of these races are directly embedded into the fabric of the game. You can also see this in the Bestiary entrees for Orcs, Hobgoblins, and Kobolds. It's also particularly prominent in classes like the Barbarian, Bard, Champion, Cleric, and Sorcerer. These classes are embedded into Golarion with features that tie them directly into the world.

I think this can be seen with even more strength when you take a look at the supplement lineup for the next year. The Lost Omens line absolutely dominates the schedule. We will be seeing detailed write ups of the various cultures for the core ancestries, write ups for meta regions and organizations, full page spreads for many of the gods with curses and blessing they can provide, and archetypes that are directly embedded in the setting. We are even going to get an entire supplement devoted to the city of Absolom and a lore heavy adventure that takes place around the city.

I am personally a big fan of this embrace of Golarion. What are your thoughts?
 

Parmandur

Legend
Generic RPGs not tied to a setting are not in style. 5E has the Great Wheel cosmic setting, Call of Cthulu has the Weird 20's, Traveller has the Third Imperium, Vampire has the World of Darkness, Runequest has Glorantha, Pathfinder has Golaron, and Starfinder has Golarion...in....spaaaaaace!

I think it ended up being the de facto case for PF1, and PF2 is made stronger by embracing that.
 

ccs

39th lv DM
I'm good with it.
Nothing they write will prevent me from running my version of their world or stealing stuff for my 5e group.
 

Staffan

Adventurer
Generic RPGs not tied to a setting are not in style. 5E has the Great Wheel cosmic setting, Call of Cthulu has the Weird 20's, Traveller has the Third Imperium, Vampire has the World of Darkness, Runequest has Glorantha, Pathfinder has Golaron, and Starfinder has Golarion...in....spaaaaaace!
Point of order: Starfinder specifically does not have Golarion in space. It has the rest of the solar system in question, but Golarion itself is gone.
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
That reminds me - second season should not be too far off.

The best thing about that show was how hard it trolled all the Dr Smith haters

/a Parker Posey fan
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
They're clearly trying to move away from D&D IP. Thus the baked-in Golarion, the monster name changes in the Bestiary, etc. Not so much that they're not still using the OGL though. But it's definitely a branding move.

Age of Lost Omens is a MUCH better setting name than "Golarion". Fantasy words never make great setting names. It's "Game of Thrones" not "Westeros" for a reason.
 

Kaodi

Adventurer
There are a couple of different naming conventions, but I would definitely say that most of the successful settings do fall under the rubric of having been named for a concept, not a world.

Dark Sun, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Birthright, and Al-Qadim all fit this mold.
Planescape and Spelljammer are similar, but they are also meta-settings so it is not quite the same.
Blackmoor, Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Nentir Vale, Kara-Tur, and Maztica, are all named for geography within larger worlds.
Eberron and Mystara are the main examples of the planet as setting naming convention, and maybe Ravnica? Eberron has done okay for itself with that name, and it may not have had much of a choice in the matter since "Dragonshard" and "Dragonmark" would tread on the toes of "Dragonlance" . But where does Eberron fall in the popularity rankings compared to Dark Sun and Ravenloft? And does anyone even play Mystara any more?
 
There are a couple of different naming conventions, but I would definitely say that most of the successful settings do fall under the rubric of having been named for a concept, not a world.

Dark Sun, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Birthright, and Al-Qadim all fit this mold.
Planescape and Spelljammer are similar, but they are also meta-settings so it is not quite the same.
Blackmoor, Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Nentir Vale, Kara-Tur, and Maztica, are all named for geography within larger worlds.
Eberron and Mystara are the main examples of the planet as setting naming convention, and maybe Ravnica? Eberron has done okay for itself with that name, and it may not have had much of a choice in the matter since "Dragonshard" and "Dragonmark" would tread on the toes of "Dragonlance" . But where does Eberron fall in the popularity rankings compared to Dark Sun and Ravenloft? And does anyone even play Mystara any more?
WotC did some research into which of their published settings were most popular. Eberron was in the top tier in terms of popularity and, so far, is the only D&D setting getting a an old school 5E campaign setting guide. The other top tier settings were: Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Dark Sun and Ravenloft.

I'd say Eberron is very popular.
 

Aldarc

Adventurer
They're clearly trying to move away from D&D IP. Thus the baked-in Golarion, the monster name changes in the Bestiary, etc. Not so much that they're not still using the OGL though. But it's definitely a branding move.
Not just the names, but also the art direction. If you were searching for goblins, you can readily recognize Paizo's goblins. It's pretty clear that their new versions of monster art in PF2 (e.g., hobgoblins, kobolds, etc.) was inspired by their success with goblins in PF1. It helps reinforce their own flavor, brand, and IP.

Fantasy words never make great setting names. It's "Game of Thrones" not "Westeros" for a reason.
It's actually "A Song of Ice and Fire." :confused:
 

kenada

Explorer
Reading through the Core Rulebook and Bestiary one thing that really struck me is that Pathfinder 2 is intimately tied to Golarion in a way that the first edition was not. These are not just Dwarves, Elves, Halflings, Goblins and Gnomes. They are the Pathfinder versions of them which in this edition emphatically means the Golarion versions. From small things like a Dwarf's Clan Dagger to big things like Gnomes that came from the First World and must contend with the bleaching the unique struggles and cultures of these races are directly embedded into the fabric of the game. You can also see this in the Bestiary entrees for Orcs, Hobgoblins, and Kobolds. It's also particularly prominent in classes like the Barbarian, Bard, Champion, Cleric, and Sorcerer. These classes are embedded into Golarion with features that tie them directly into the world.

I think this can be seen with even more strength when you take a look at the supplement lineup for the next year. The Lost Omens line absolutely dominates the schedule. We will be seeing detailed write ups of the various cultures for the core ancestries, write ups for meta regions and organizations, full page spreads for many of the gods with curses and blessing they can provide, and archetypes that are directly embedded in the setting. We are even going to get an entire supplement devoted to the city of Absolom and a lore heavy adventure that takes place around the city.

I am personally a big fan of this embrace of Golarion. What are your thoughts?
Everything outside of the core rulebook line was already set in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting (now Lost Omens), so it’s not really a big change. Even the core rulebooks were Golarion-flavored; they just didn’t use the names.

From a homebrew perspective, it’s not too difficult to file off names and use the core material in another setting. There are Golarion-specific concepts, but Paizo seems to be saving the deep integration (e.g., Golarion-specific archetypes) for the Lost Omens line. Once you do need to make changes, the way customization works makes it easy to modify existing or add new options. The only real challenge might be adapting a setting with a different set of deities, since you need to come up with anathema and spell lists, but there is ample material for inspiration.
 

Kaodi

Adventurer
Depending on the setting you probably do not even "need" anathema. The spell lists are the only strictly necessary part.
 

Greg K

Adventurer
I am personally a big fan of this embrace of Golarion. What are your thoughts?
My friends and I didn't like Paizo's PF1 goblins or their take on the majority of the PF classes including the changes to the 3e classes (with the exception of two or three specific class features). As a result we passed on that edition. Therefore, based on what you have written, we will, almost assuredly not be give PF2 a look. However, I do wish Paizo the best of luck with PF2.
 

Green Onceler

Villager
Age of Lost Omens is a MUCH better setting name than "Golarion".
I thought the 1e setting would have been the Inner Sea? I never saw Golarion mentioned in the title of a supplement CF the main campaign setting books, Inner Sea World Guide and Inner Sea Gods.

I assumed they did this to more explicitly open up other areas in their campaign setting, which seems like a good move.
 

kenada

Explorer
I’d always assumed it was called the “Pathfinder Campaign Setting” since that’s what the subscription was called, which is admittedly not a particularly evocative name.
 

pcrotteau

Explorer
I could never take the horsehating doghating pyromaniac football headed freaks seriously.
I don't think they were meant to be taken seriously, especially after the release of "We Be Goblins"

This "reboot" of the ancestry tones this down, trying to make them an integral part of the existing societies. It will be a challenge for veterans of the old culture to change how they view/play goblins. The New adventure "We Be Heroes" goes some distance to fixing that.
 
I like that Golarion is infused into the Pathfinder 2nd Edition rulebooks.

Although I have been using PF1 as the core rules for my homebrew since shortly after PF was released, I haven't been playing in Golarion. Now, from the little bit of it that I've seen in the PF2 Core Rulebook and Bestiary, I'm excited to learn about Golarion and eventually use it as my default setting.
 

Advertisement

Top