Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Pathfinder Unchained (OGL)

I do wonder why you are so sure of that, and why it cannot be both.

Exactly. They'd be crazy to not use what they learn in a future edition.

Wait waht? In the previews the language made it sound like they would be doing more classes than just the 4 mentioned. This new language implies it's only these four.

Why the heck would they revamp Barb before Phy-Tor.

I am sure that the other things being done in that book will affect all other classes to varying degrees. All we really know is that they are targeting four classes for a total redesign. What else they are doing, who knows?

Put 2-3 versions of Gestalt in this and I will be a very happy man.

Add me to the list of people who are looking forward to this.

But really, if anyone needs a revamp, it's the poor Fighter.

Dot for interest.

Players will love the book's new resource pool for martial characters, allowing for exciting new tactical options,

I'm guessing this is gonna be the fighter 'fix', if they can be picked up or improved with combat feats.

Oh my... Will I finally be allowed to like the rogue and love the monk...

I've been hoping for some time that Paizo would eventually put out a book exactly like this (particularly with regards to taking a second stab at certain classes which cause headaches and/or have balance issues). It seems like weird timing to start in on it right after the Advanced Class Guide though. If it were me, I'd let those classes shake out in the wild for a bit, see how relative balance goes with them mixing in with the general public, then do this sort of thing once there's a clear consensus.

Oh my... Will I finally be allowed to like the rogue and love the monk...

Only in a strictly platonic sense.

I sense a strong disturbance in the force for barbarians. Any love they get is likely to be of the "bad touch" kind.

Players will love the book's new resource pool for martial characters

i think fighters will get love, just not a rewrite.

Chaotic Fighter wrote:

Oh my... Will I finally be allowed to like the rogue and love the monk...

Only in a strictly platonic sense.

I sense a strong disturbance in the force for barbarians. Any love they get is likely to be of the "bad touch" kind.

It sounds like these new classes wont be MRP BS, so at least the Summoner and Barb have an insurance policy in case of emergency Paizo fail.

I wish Book of Nine Swords had been a paid beta, it was not similar to 4E. You can argue its maneuver system was put into 4E, but only if you squint and really work it backwards. It if anything felt more like 3.5 trying to do wuxia or something similar.

Well, in fact it was a paid alpha. They just decided, tragically, not to go with that system.

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I do wonder why you are so sure of that, and why it cannot be both.

Exactly. They'd be crazy to not use what they learn in a future edition.

Maybe in the future, when and if Paizo pursues a 2nd edition of the Pathfinder RPG they'll look back on this and many other books for inspiration, but what you're seeing isn't a part of a "beta" for the future.

I'd like to think they'd look back on their whole catalog of work for any potential future version. I'm mostly attempting to stave off doomsaying that this is a precursor to an imminent PF2E.

I also imagine Jason and the rest of the design team will probably have a lot more to say about this with regards to the future in the coming months.

Here's a question. Will the new rogue and Barbarian get new Iconics?

Maybe in the future, when and if Paizo pursues a 2nd edition of the Pathfinder RPG they'll look back on this and many other books for inspiration, but what you're seeing isn't a part of a "beta" for the future.

Do you have any empirical evidence of that, or is this a case of "I know because I know"? ^^

Gotta admit, this sounds better than the trickle of posts that came though during Paizocon. I am cautiously optimistic, and plan on keeping my subscription for this atm.

Hope there is a playtest!

I am looking forward to this book, though I am kind of surprised that the barbarian is one of the classes getting an alternate version.

Then again, there are only a few specific rage powers that made people decide that barbarians are good. Maybe this will be a revamp that will work well on its own without superstition and pounce.

Hey there folks,

Couple of points to clean up the discussion and squash some speculation...

1. This book is not a second edition of Pathfinder. Nor is it intended to be a "rules light" or "essentials" version of Pathfinder.

2. This book is designed to let the design team play with the rules in a way that we have not been able to before, revisiting some old designs and tinkering with parts of the game that are otherwise considered "sacred" parts of the system.

3. There will not be a play test for this book. We have been getting years of play test feedback on many of the rules we will be examining in this book. Think of it more as an additional design step as opposed to a "start from scratch" design process.

4. There will not be new iconics for the classes. We will get some new art for them, but we will not be inventing new iconics.

5. There is a veritable mountain of other exciting things in this book that are just too "green" for me to talk about at this time. Expect to hear a lot more in the coming months.

Glad to see folks are excited about this book. We are certainly very excited to bring it to you!

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

I've always enjoyed the current version of the Monk and Rogue, so I'm pretty ambivalent on that front, but that item generator is exactly what I needed to hear to get excited about this product.

I would like to preface this with the statement that I very much love Pathfinder and respect the folks at Paizo completely, however I have stopped purchasing non-pdf Paizo products almost entirely.

It all started when the beginner box came out and I canceled my subscription not because of any doubt that it would be a wonderful product, but because I felt no need for any kind of intro set.

I never renewed simply because with the exception of the mythic rules my intrest was never peaked again...

APG: Yes!
UM: Yes!
UC: Yes!

Bestiaries/NPC codices are so-so for me as I do a lot of encounter design, AP's are a no-no as I make all of my own worlds, and Golarion specific books such as the inner sea stuff leave me unenthused.

All of this has nothing to do with the product quality, which is undeniably high, but simply is due to the fact that I do not desire any of it for my table.

But, Pathfinder Unchained, well it left me with this feeling...

I honestly can say I have not been this excited for an RPG release since the first time I got my hands on a copy of Vampire as it came out when I was 12.

Paizo, thank you. I will buy this and so I suspect will many others. However, beware your constant efforts have set a high bar of expectations for the quality of what I am sure many will hope will be groundbreaking material contained in this book.

Good Luck!

P.S.: Yes, I too vote for rewritten fighter.

Hey there folks,

Couple of points to clean up the discussion and squash some speculation...

1. This book is not a second edition of Pathfinder. Nor is it intended to be a "rules light" or "essentials" version of Pathfinder.

2. This book is designed to let the design team play with the rules in a way that we have not been able to before, revisiting some old designs and tinkering with parts of the game that are otherwise considered "sacred" parts of the system.

3. There will not be a play test for this book. We have been getting years of play test feedback on many of the rules we will be examining in this book. Think of it more as an additional design step as opposed to a "start from scratch" design process.

4. There will not be new iconics for the classes. We will get some new art for them, but we will not be inventing new iconics.

5. There is a veritable mountain of other exciting things in this book that are just too "green" for me to talk about at this time. Expect to hear a lot more in the coming months.

Glad to see folks are excited about this book. We are certainly very excited to bring it to you!

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Is their a possibility of other classes being looked at in this book? I ask because the Fighter is in a dire state like the Rogue and Monk, yet the Barbarian was the one announced.

I'm really looking forward to seeing what is done with rogues, monks, and summoners. Barbarians will be interesting too, I'm hoping for a simpler less round to round resource management stat changing version.

Put me down for a Fighter revamp also.

Ssalarn wrote:

Was at the banquet when they announced this, got the impression that this is going to be kind of like a "Pathfinder Essentials"; JB indicated that they were going to make the Barbarian easier to run at the table, present a nerfed and better balanced version of the Summoner, a full BAB monk, and hinted at "improving" the Rogue. Should be interesting.

Cool. What news had they on the Shaman and the Skald?

Virtually none. Jason did acknowledge that both classes existed, but made little reference to the mechanics and didn't really show any clips that displayed Shaman or Skald goodies (though he did have a solid and glorious 3 minutes where a double-page spread of Arcanist archetypes just kind of hung out on the screen).

I'm been very much looking forward to this. I'd love for some of the clunky 3.5e mechanics to get cleaned up. I do hope that crafting and skills get an overhaul as well.

Thanks for clarifying things up, Jason!

I'm not excited about the monster book, but I think this one will be right up my alley! :)

How is this going to work with Paizo's other products, especially the APs? While some of this books material might be nice, some of it interest me, and I'll definitely be be looking through it and buying it unless it sounds more like a dud closer to the time it comes out, I also might find it irritating if I have to use multiple versions of a single class just to run an adventure or need this book to run the AP or other stuff.

Paizo has a tendency to make unusual things "optional", except if you want to use the setting or some of the adventures then they are not very optional at all without a lot of work on the part of the GM to write them out.

I'm hoping a fix for the broken Gunslinger class makes it into the book. Spells were mentioned coming out in the Advanced Class Guide, to temper them. So there is hope yet there.

How is this going to work with Paizo's other products, especially the APs? While some of this books material might be nice, some of it interest me, and I'll definitely be be looking through it and buying it unless it sounds more like a dud closer to the time it comes out, I also might find it irritating if I have to use multiple versions of a single class just to run an adventure or need this book to run the AP or other stuff.

Paizo has a tendency to make unusual things "optional", except if you want to use the setting or some of the adventures then they are not very optional at all without a lot of work on the part of the GM to write them out.

Very few APs ever venture out of Core in terms of NPCs, so I don't see the problem.

3. There will not be a play test for this book. We have been getting years of play test feedback on many of the rules we will be examining in this book.

So you are saying that all the play test for UM, UC, APG, ARG, ACG, etc. etc. have just been play test within the bigger play test. Dreams within a dream, oh you clever boy you.

I'm really excited about this release!

There's been a vocal set on the boards saying that "Pathfinder RPG keeps all the problems of D&D 3.5" -- an exaggeration, yes, but still one that speaks to the fact that Pathfinder has kept features of 3rd Edition that have been seen as sources as problems for years. I myself would like to see if there are ways to simplify Pathfinder in higher-level play, or to make magic items more unique and special by not factoring them in the mathematical assumptions of the game.

At the time of the initial Pathfinder RPG release, backwards-compatibility was a necessity. Paizo needed to capture all the people who were still playing D&D 3rd Edition. Now that Paizo has established itself and is now the market leader, the design team has the freedom to introduce some options that revise the core game.

There's nothing inherently wrong with making changes to a game system -- it's how a company handles it. (First, these are not outright changes -- they're options. But of course the design team will look at the response to such changes for when the time for a new edition should come.) The question is the timing and manner of change. Either a company makes a revision for its own sake to make all the current books obsolete and make more money, or it is a response to longstanding issues that are common complaints in the community. And as someone who has frequented these boards for 2 years, I see the same issues coming up over and over again.

And this release seems to be coming at the right time for me. This is a chance to widely-acknowledged problems within the Pathfinder RPG system, while not making obsolete the investment players have already made in other books.

I also might find it irritating if I have to use multiple versions of a single class just to run an adventure or need this book to run the AP or other stuff.

I don't see that being a big problem -- how is that much different from having two characters of different classes in the same campaign?

What I would be more worried about, is changes to core parts of the game that affect adventuring and game balance. A GM would need to review the changes and weigh their impacts. I would think we'll see simplified rules for light, for certain skills, rules that address the "binary saves" phenomenon that also require the GM tweak the monsters the PCs face, limiting the number of buffs players can make and how to rebalance encounters in response, etc. (At least, these are the kinds of things I'm hoping for!)

I see this as a toolkit for people who want to tinker with the game, akin to the Dungeon Master's Guide that is planned for D&D 5th Edition.

How often has Paizo APs actually used non-core material?

How often has Paizo APs actually used non-core material?

Quite often. I think that every AP installment uses at least several monsters from beyond the first bestiary and an NPC or two with non-core classes. Standard policy is that anything that is avaialable in the official SRD is just referenced, while non-SRD material gets reprinted in full.

Insain Dragoon wrote:

How often has Paizo APs actually used non-core material?

Quite often. I think that every AP installment uses at least several monsters from beyond the first bestiary and an NPC or two with non-core classes. Standard policy is that anything that is avaialable in the official SRD is just referenced, while non-SRD material gets reprinted in full.

In that case I don't see how these alt classes will be problematic for APs if they're included.

I do believe with all certainty that the fighter should receive some love, as do many out there.
With that said, this is not just an options book as per advertised, it is a reset of the rules that are in place at this time in which many think of as problematic. These rules should not be thought of as optional like many to date. No, these rules are a fix for what democracy has clearly stated as a flawed rule set in the areas in which are being re-developed. In my mind this is a book in which the foundation of the game is gauged, and therefore a mandatory guide line for the future of our game in which we have come to respect and rely.

How often has Paizo APs actually used non-core material?

Such as the downtime rules and army combat in WotR?

(Not counting Mythic: that is a focus point for the AP)

interesting... all the classes mocked most of all by the boards are being redone in this book.

As if Paizo listens to everyone and not just those who toe the company line. :)

Yah, we use non-core material all the time in our modules and Adventure Paths. It's more or less an absolute requirement, in fact... we're currently working on AP #17 after all, and keeping things fresh and interesting after so many campaigns demands using more than just what's in the Core Rulebook.

Just how the elements of Pathfinder Unchained get picked up and used in our adventures, though... that's something we're still figuring out. We'll see!

4. There will not be new iconics for the classes. We will get some new art for them, but we will not be inventing new iconics.

WHEW!

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

4. There will not be new iconics for the classes. We will get some new art for them, but we will not be inventing new iconics.

WHEW!

Merisiel: UNCHAINED

Hey Jason,
can we expect to see those alternative stealth rules that showed a while back in the blog in this bad boy?

I am very interested in this book. I know the Design Team will do great things in this new release.

I would love to see a revamp of the Fighter and Sorcerer.

1)while I have no problem with the Fighter as is(except for the low skill points but that is every class with 2+int) I would still like to see what they would do with it.

2)While the Sorcerer is my favorite class I would love to see a version that focuses more on the bloodlines and has better skill points and class skill selection. I would mind less spellcasting in exchange for supernatural and spell like abilities. Maybe even a blasting ability akin to the 3.0/3.5 warlock class.

Gorbacz wrote:

Well, that won't stop people, in particular the ones with a long-standing axe to grind with Paizo, to run around the Internet screaming "paid beta of PF 2.0 out next year - WotC did that to you with Bo9s and now Paizo is doing it again".

Uhm, I'd be delighted if it were that. Either way, I'll definitely be picking it up.

I can think of many people I know that would firebomb Paizo HQ if 2Ed were announced ;)

Personally I like the way this sounds. This is more preferrable to a completely different edition. That said, while I know JJ has an axe to grind with the Summoner, I really REALLY hope they keep the current "Build-An-Ediolon" aspect and balance it up a bit. I would hate to just have a boring outsider companion and honestly, I would stick with the older summoner than the new one.

Actually I would prefer if they make a summoner that's more like the Master Summoner.

These classes are "unchained" so I want to see new and innovative takes on the concepts that are actually unchained from 3.5 and 3.P

Rogue without Sneak attack
Barb without Rage
Monk without Flurry and abilities with contradictory playstyles
Summoner that specializes in summoning magic and augmenting summons