Pathfinder Second Edition Remaster Project!

The missing components was news to me, but makes sense as VSM is a specific D&D mechanical story of how to activate spells. But looking at a spell Logan showed in Paizo Live it was not clear to me how that spell activation method gets replaced with traits. Muzzling the wizard and binding the hands and stealing their components gets dropped from stories? Also loosing D&D spell schools is ingrained so sad to see those have to go.

Spell Rank is long overdue! But they still have the heighten (#) on the spells so that leaves UI confusion still is that # meaning PL or SR been better if they said # rank on the spell.

I like Off-Guard and Reactive Strike!

I may be misremembering but I thought at some point it was mentioned that how spells are cast from a narrative perspective doesn't really change much with the change to components, but also it's intended to give you more flexibility to describe how you personally cast spells in a way that I expect blends with the former class component guidelines such as how bards can play an instrument to cast or clerics can substitute their symbol for material components.

I may have read into the conversation more than was actually there but unfortunately I don't remember which stream it was mentioned in

The wizard in my game thought that the listing for material components might be missing (used to old school D&D) and so he made up his own.

Unseen Servant, for example is a small artists doll, one of the jointed ones to practice shapes with.

The wizard in my game thought that the listing for material components might be missing (used to old school D&D) and so he made up his own.

Unseen Servant, for example is a small artists doll, one of the jointed ones to practice shapes with.

Sure anyone can make up their own narrative, always enjoyed Liam's wizard on critical role because he dove into the narrative of D*D components. But I will be sad if my grappler cannot shut down the caster BBEG anymore if it is moved solely to RP without mechanics. PF2e already dropped specific material components so that is nothing new in the remaster.

Lurker in Insomnia wrote:

The wizard in my game thought that the listing for material components might be missing (used to old school D&D) and so he made up his own.

Unseen Servant, for example is a small artists doll, one of the jointed ones to practice shapes with.

Sure anyone can make up their own narrative, always enjoyed Liam's wizard on critical role because he dove into the narrative of D*D components. But I will be sad if my grappler cannot shut down the caster BBEG anymore if it is moved solely to RP without mechanics. PF2e already dropped specific material components so that is nothing new in the remaster.

We know spells will still have the concentrate/manipulate traits as appropriate, so grappling is confirmed to still be an impediment to most spells unless somehow the restrained condition no longer affects manipulate in the remaster

You can see a sample spell here. Note it still has the manipulate trait, as does most of the spells shown elsewhere.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/14nffa0/new_spell_confirmed_ in_paizo_stream/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=a ndroidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2

hmm but no auditory trait I think the OGL version of that was VS.

hmm but no auditory trait I think the OGL version of that was VS.

Correct, concentrate is replacing verbal but no one knows exactly what that means yet.

Reminder that auditory spells/effects depend on whether you need to hear them for them to take effect, not just the ability to speak or make sounds. Verbal components needed one but not the other, so it's unlikely spells would ever be given the auditory trait to denote a need to speak, rather than the more significant need to hear the caster.

My bet is that spells with the Concentrate have the things currently associated with Verbal unless specifically noted otherwise. And Silence still affects them as it currently does.

Simplest way is usually the right guess.

My bet is that spells with the Concentrate have the things currently associated with Verbal unless specifically noted otherwise. And Silence still affects them as it currently does.

Simplest way is usually the right guess.

Maybe, but they might also use this as an opportunity to further distinguish themselves from D&D rather than just rename things.

Reminder that auditory spells/effects depend on whether you need to hear them for them to take effect, not just the ability to speak or make sounds. Verbal components needed one but not the other, so it's unlikely spells would ever be given the auditory trait to denote a need to speak, rather than the more significant need to hear the caster.

This loses some important restrictions.

First, verbal components are specifically a need to speak load enough to be heard, which draws attention and doesn't work with stealth.

Second, silence kills the ability to cast spells with verbal components.

The metamagic to cast silently thus is specifically important to counter these two drawbacks. Additionally, these two drawbacks create interesting problems and situations.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Reminder that auditory spells/effects depend on whether you need to hear them for them to take effect, not just the ability to speak or make sounds. Verbal components needed one but not the other, so it's unlikely spells would ever be given the auditory trait to denote a need to speak, rather than the more significant need to hear the caster.

This loses some important restrictions.

First, verbal components are specifically a need to speak loud enough to be heard, which draws attention and doesn't work with stealth.

Second, silence kills the ability to cast spells with verbal components.

The metamagic to cast silently thus is specifically important to counter these two drawbacks. Additionally, these two drawbacks create interesting problems and situations.

I mean, you're right but that doesn't really have anything to do with my post. No matter how loudly you need to speak to supply the Concentration portion of a spellcast, most spell should still never have the Auditory trait because the spellcasting itself does not need to be heard by the target to function.

We know that there is no more 'material' component, yet spells still have narrative descriptions of material components when relevant. Perhaps instead classes will have "You must speak and gesture to cast spells" written into their spellcasting descriptions now (except for Psychics, obviously). We don't know how/whether the need to speak will carry forward, just that it isn't going to be using the Auditory trait.

So I don't know if info about this about has been said but with regards to spell schools being removed how will this effect Arcane Cascade for Magus

So I don't know if info about this about has been said but with regards to spell schools being removed how will this effect Arcane Cascade for Magus

Not only Arcane Cascade, additional spells from Fairy Eidolons and many other small mechanics scattered around different books that relies in schools.

There will be a lot of things that will need to receive erratas or conversion rules.

So I don't know if info about this about has been said but with regards to spell schools being removed how will this effect Arcane Cascade for Magus

It will need to exclusively use old spells that do have schools, or the GM will have to houserule in a school.

Your old stuff still works, it just may not work with new stuff going forward until (or if) there's a relevant remaster or errata. Secrets of Magic content have a lot of issues with new things going forward with no announced solution.

Pieces-Kai wrote:

So I don't know if info about this about has been said but with regards to spell schools being removed how will this effect Arcane Cascade for Magus

It will need to exclusively use old spells that do have schools, or the GM will have to houserule in a school.

Your old stuff still works, it just may not work with new stuff going forward until (or if) there's a relevant remaster or errata. Secrets of Magic content have a lot of issues with new things going forward with no announced solution.

At least for Cascade, Paizo are allegedly on record (I heard it was via a Discord post) that it'll get errata. Everything else is up in the air, including whole archetypes.

One of the great things about 2e is not having to pester the GM to rule a given interaction, which we have to remember ourselves to remain consistent. I don't want to be in a position, like in a certain other game that uses d20s, where that benefit is lost.

Sadly, concentrate is used in rage of the elements but just refers to Player Core in the glossary. So we won't have an answer on how it works right away and I guess should just use the original CRB version of the trait for now.

Sadly, concentrate is used in rage of the elements but just refers to Player Core in the glossary. So we won't have an answer on how it works right away and I guess should just use the original CRB version of the trait for now.

Don't despair. We are working in a free PDF to bridge the gap to the Player Core.

Captain Morgan wrote:

Sadly, concentrate is used in rage of the elements but just refers to Player Core in the glossary. So we won't have an answer on how it works right away and I guess should just use the original CRB version of the trait for now.

Don't despair. We are working in a free PDF to bridge the gap to the Player Core.

Nice! I also noticed Rage references what I assume are Player Core versions of spells, like Tangling Vine and Entangling Flora.

Folks, don't believe anything you read on Discord, and especially don't believe anything anyone told you that THEY read on Discord.

It is, if anything, the opposite of an official communication method. If it's not on a Paizo Blog post, announced during a pre-recorded Twitch livesteam, or published as FORMAL Errata on this website it is meaningless.

Folks, don't believe anything you read on Discord, [snip]

I would have gone with "everything" over "anything" there.

Wading through this, as someone who has the second edition books, I really can't see any reason to buy into the remaster. None of the changes are interesting enough to be worth the money - especially _not_ multiple Player core books that are essentially required because basic classes are split between these splat books. That's a WOTC level money grub.

As it stands, I can take the core rule book & basic bestiary & dice and play. More than good enough.

I understand the legal reasons for the changes and that some other changes are being hammered in using that excuse as well since you're going to version 2.5 (in all but name) anyway.

But without a single volume softback, I won't be buying in and will simply keep using 2.0 instead, perhaps house ruling anything actually interesting (traits if the system is actually usable for example). I probably better buy one or two backups of the older core rule book while I can before this replaces them on the shelves.

You do realize Paizo published more than one book with classes in it before the Remaster, right?

You do realize that the classes in the _core_ rulebook are being split into two books? That's what I object to. But that's ok. I own enough. They can chose to not need any more of my money.

You do realize they’re incorporating material from multiple hardcovers? Not just splitting The core Rulebook in two?

Original Core Rulebook had 12 classes.

Between Core 1 & 2 for the Remaster there’s 16.

As it stands, I can take the core rule book & basic bestiary & dice and play. More than good enough.

That's exactly what Paizo has been saying all along: the changes aren't significant enough to call it a new edition, and that all your previous rulebooks are still useable.

perhaps house ruling anything actually interesting (traits if the system is actually usable for example).

You and your players can always use Archives of Nethys to access the changed material. That's the whole point of Paizo supporting them.

Player Core 1 and 2 are the player portion of the CRB + APG, while GM core is GMG + the GM portion of the CRB. You're buying 3 books to get what was 3 books before. It is a slightly worse page to dollar ratio, but that's just adjusting for inflation.

Now, if you don't find the promised changes enticing enough to spend money on and don't mind missing risking cross compatibility issues with future content, you can just keep using your old material. That's a perfectly reasonable position. But I don't think painting this as a money grab is particularly fair.

I think it's reasonable to have a "wait and see" approach to see how much stuff is going to be changed in the remaster before you buy any books. Like if you bought a 1st printing CRB, there's been a lot of errata in the subsequent five (I think) printings, but that doesn't mean you needed to buy the book again- you can just look at Paizo dotcom or AoN to see the most current version of a rule. It's possible the remaster is just going to be like that; it's hard to say before anybody has seen the book.

That reminds me, for erratas and stuff, do those get applied to PDF versions that are bought? So if I buy a PDF, and then a few months later an errata is applied, can I redownload the PDF and it'll have the new errata?

That reminds me, for erratas and stuff, do those get applied to PDF versions that are bought? So if I buy a PDF, and then a few months later an errata is applied, can I redownload the PDF and it'll have the new errata?

In the past, Paizo has produced a new version of the PDF at the time a new print version is released. It's not based on release of errata per se, but on editing and re-laying out the print document.

There's been no announcement that this policy will change in the future. There was a previous announcement that release of errata was being separated from reprinting of books. So there may be official errata available that is not yet incorporated into the print version.

IIRC, the whole point was to uncouple the issuance of errata documents from the reprinting of physical books. I expect that the PDF changes are still going to be tied to the reprinting cycle, not the errata cycle since they require editing and layout work to bring them up to date.

Perhaps Aaron can ask some behind-the-scenes questions and provide better information.

I think it's reasonable to have a "wait and see" approach to see how much stuff is going to be changed in the remaster before you buy any books. Like if you bought a 1st printing CRB, there's been a lot of errata in the subsequent five (I think) printings, but that doesn't mean you needed to buy the book again- you can just look at Paizo dotcom or AoN to see the most current version of a rule. It's possible the remaster is just going to be like that; it's hard to say before anybody has seen the book.

Indeed. I'm actually exciting to buy the books for this reason. After five errata rounds I can't really trust my original printing CRB anymore and like having an excuse to replace it. I also have enough disposable income to afford it though, and can't fault anyone who can't justify the purchase.

You do realize that the classes in the _core_ rulebook are being split into two books? That's what I object to. But that's ok. I own enough. They can chose to not need any more of my money.

Split is perhaps a misnomer here.

You're right, in that the core rules will no longer be housed in a single document.

But it's also worth pointing out that, according to the product pages, Player Core and GM Core are both individually as large as the original CRB. So it doesn't appear we're being shortchanged on content here (obviously will have to wait and see to know for sure what that content looks like). It's not like they just split the rules into thirds and bumped them up to full price.

It also feels like a bit much to imply Paizo is trying to grift you when we already know that this stuff is going to end up on AON anyways.

Wading through this, as someone who has the second edition books, I really can't see any reason to buy into the remaster. None of the changes are interesting enough to be worth the money - especially _not_ multiple Player core books that are essentially required because basic classes are split between these splat books. That's a WOTC level money grub.

As it stands, I can take the core rule book & basic bestiary & dice and play. More than good enough.

I understand the legal reasons for the changes and that some other changes are being hammered in using that excuse as well since you're going to version 2.5 (in all but name) anyway.

But without a single volume softback, I won't be buying in and will simply keep using 2.0 instead, perhaps house ruling anything actually interesting (traits if the system is actually usable for example). I probably better buy one or two backups of the older core rule book while I can before this replaces them on the shelves.

Needlessly antagonistic and insulting to Paizo.

Reading rather than wading through is good practice before writing such an inflamatory post.

Oh! Something I just thought of and haven't seen mentioned (I haven't read the ENTIRE thread) -

With the change in alignment being used, any ideas on the change to the Harrowdeck? Whether it's just a simple renaming of those Alignments, or a bit more substantial? I'm assuming it will probably just be the renaming so folks can continue using their decks they've bought.
The thing is that I love cartomancy in fantasy fiction, and the Harrowdeck is not my favourite (personally) so I'd love to see a new version that's less structured that way. But I'll still be excited for however it ends up looking going forward!

Well, all existing harrow decks aren't going to be unprinted. If they print new ones that are ORC products, the change is probably just going to be that instead of having the Fiend be an LE card and the Big Sky be a CG card, we'll just have the cards associated with Hell and Elysium respectively.

Well, all existing harrow decks aren't going to be unprinted. If they print new ones that are ORC products, the change is probably just going to be that instead of having the Fiend be an LE card and the Big Sky be a CG card, we'll just have the cards associated with Hell and Elysium respectively.

Aye, that's my thinking. Pretty much just a "How are they going to do the alignments for new decks" which I'm totally fine with.

Don't despair. We are working in a free PDF to bridge the gap to the Player Core.

Might this free PDF have a copy of the remastered character sheet?

With the change in alignment being used, any ideas on the change to the Harrowdeck? Whether it's just a simple renaming of those Alignments, or a bit more substantial?

James Jacobs answered that earlier

kyamsil wrote:

Isn't the Harrow deck deeply tied to Alignment? How is it going to be affected by the PF2e remastered removing alignment?

It is, but it's not so much tied to the rules concept of alignment as it is the English language definition of those words.

Side note about my initial design for how the Harrow would be set up:

** spoiler omitted **...
That all said, the revised Harrow deck and its associated Adventure Path, Stolen Fate, are all 100% OGL adventures that do not use the the remastered rules, nor were they designed for it, since when all of this started happening earlier this year, all three of those adventures were either already at the printer or only a few weeks away from going to the printer, so none of those products are affected by the removal of alignment from the remastered rules.

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

Sadly, concentrate is used in rage of the elements but just refers to Player Core in the glossary.

We are working in a free PDF to bridge the gap to the Player Core.

Might this free PDF have a copy of the remastered character sheet?

...Guessing it's part of /corepreview pdf, separated from rage of elements pdf.

wlewisiii wrote:

You do realize that the classes in the _core_ rulebook are being split into two books? That's what I object to. But that's ok. I own enough. They can chose to not need any more of my money.

Split is perhaps a misnomer here.

You're right, in that the core rules will no longer be housed in a single document.

But it's also worth pointing out that, according to the product pages, Player Core and GM Core are both individually as large as the original CRB. So it doesn't appear we're being shortchanged on content here (obviously will have to wait and see to know for sure what that content looks like). It's not like they just split the rules into thirds and bumped them up to full price.

It also feels like a bit much to imply Paizo is trying to grift you when we already know that this stuff is going to end up on AON anyways.

[Emphasis in bold mine…]

I got so excited I just checked the product pages - Player is 464, and the GM is 336. So they are combined bigger than the PF1 CRB. Not individually

It is a good point made upthread that the info of the PF2 Core, GMG and APG will be in these two Core books. So rather than one book becoming two, it is more like three becoming two.

Not exactly, most of APG will be in Player Core 2.

(Also, "the original CRB" in the context of this thread refers to the PF2E one I'd assume. :b But I'm not comparing pagecounts myself, I just know it's slightly lower in total and the removals will likely be the less useful GMG variant rules and stuff.)

But it's also worth pointing out that, according to the product pages, Player Core and GM Core are both individually as large as the original CRB. So it doesn't appear we're being shortchanged on content here (obviously will have to wait and see to know for sure what that content looks like). It's not like they just split the rules into thirds and bumped them up to full price.

To elaborate on that, this was the page counts of the previous set of 4 books: 640 (Core Rulebook) + 360 (Bestiary) + 256 (Gamemastery Guide) + 272 (Advanced Players Guide) = 1528 pages total

Meanwhile, the page counts of the new books is: 464 (Player Core) + 376 (Monster Core) + 336 (GM Core) + 320 (Player Core 2) = 1496 pages total.

In other words, there's only a 32 page difference in size between the old set & the new across the same number of books. It's really not that significant of a difference (Around 2% shorter), especially after accounting for the fact these books is supposedly intended to be better organised than the old set. So yeah, more the content has been moved to be more evenly distributed than any kind of making you buy more books for the same amount of stuff.

While fans are discussing value page, don’t forget that some of the Lost Omens ancestries and heritages content will be incorporated into the Player Core and Player Core 2. The leshy, hobgoblin and lizardfolk come from the Lost Omens Character Guide. Many of the Advanced Player Guide ancestries were further developed in the Lost Omens Ancestry guide. So the Core books are going to be functional consolidations.

Also, inflation from 2019 to 2023 was over 16%. I don’t price Paizo products, but by my simple calculation a $60 rulebook “should” cost about $10 more now, from every publisher.

[Emphasis in bold mine…]

I got so excited I just checked the product pages - Player is 464, and the GM is 336. So they are combined bigger than the PF1 CRB. Not individually

It is a good point made upthread that the info of the PF2 Core, GMG and APG will be in these two Core books. So rather than one book becoming two, it is more like three becoming two.

Hm, it appears they updated the product pages since I made that post. The available formats section for both books listed page counts over 600 at the time.

Glad they fixed it at least.

The only thing that seems a bit of a problem to me is that while the sum total of the 3 books is roughly the same, previously you had a good start with only the one main book. The game was playable with that (and a bestiary for monsters, which is still needed with the new 3.)

Now I believe you'd need both Player One and the GM book, correct? Not a big deal for those who were going to buy both anyway, but a higher barrier to entry. At least for those who don't want to start with only Nethys or whatever.

Yeah, I still think the original 2E CRB has advantages.

Yeah, I still think the original 2E CRB has advantages.

Well, as someone who has been buying DnD and other RPG books for over forty years, the original, PF1 CRB fairly amazed me. It was a tome, complete and while it did need a little errata over a decade it was such a nice book. I really didn’t get that feel from the PF2 CRB, which while still a tome felt like a little stylistically sparse and was laid out quite confusingly, for all the vaunted attempts at clarity and editing. It was almost like an attempt had been made to make the rules be laid out in an order that “made more sense” but for me at least, it really didn’t.

Then again, I am the person who missed the fairly major rule that enemies use the same action economy as the PC’s…on page 9, and had to be told here on the forums. But that was more from not reading the book through from the beginning, and when I looked for it in the encounter area, combat, actions etc it was nowhere to be found. I couldn’t find it. I checked the Index, reread the chapters where I felt it might be found, plenty of times, and still couldn’t find it.

I guess I’d like the Remastered books to hew closer to dense but clearly laid out of the PF1 CRB rather than the sparse, bells and whistles yet somehow confusing PF2 CRB.

The only thing that seems a bit of a problem to me is that while the sum total of the 3 books is roughly the same, previously you had a good start with only the one main book. The game was playable with that (and a bestiary for monsters, which is still needed with the new 3.)

Now I believe you'd need both Player One and the GM book, correct? Not a big deal for those who were going to buy both anyway, but a higher barrier to entry. At least for those who don't want to start with only Nethys or whatever.

I think that's a case where Paizo tried it the other way, and feedback from new players strongly leaned this way. "One big book" works well if you already know what's relevant to you, but not so much for folks starting out.

Probably the GM Core is optional but recommended similar to what DMG is for 5e.

What we really know is that magical and alchemical items was move to GM Core but probably the most basic items like runes probably will stay in Players Core 1. With this is probably sufficient to play simple adventures and even if you try to play an AP you still can get the listed itens in AoN.

That said I still preferred that Paizo didn't move the itens chapter to GM Core just chapters 8 and 10 to GM Core. This would make the GM Core a GM exclusive book while keep Players Cores and books with classes expansion as players books.