Should the rulebook have a chapter about changes from 1st Edition?

[RunnerAndJumper]

Hello everyone,

it just occurred to me, that people who come from 1st edition might spend quite a bit of time looking for stuff that was essential to 1st edition but does not exist anymore. Some examples include:

- spell failure

- two weapon fighting (does not really exist as a general rule anymore, rather as specific feat)

- two-handed fighting (just in the sense, that this now only adds your strength bonus, not 1.5 times your bonus)

- multiclassing (in the classical sense)

And similar stuff. This might just be 2-4 pages, but help players transition to the new edition quicker without reading the new rulebook back to back or looking for rules that are not there anymore. Like me, looking for arcane spell failure for an hour O:-)

What do you think?

[Paul Watson]

No. It would be pointless in the rulebook as, hopefully, a lot of people who never picked up 1E will be buying it and you don't want to confuse them, or think they need to spend more money., Plus its X pages that could be used for new content.

As they did with the change from 3.5 to Pathfinder, a conversion guide may be a good idea, but in the book itself would be a bad idea.

[LukeM]

Agree with above poster.
Would use pages that would be better served with content applicable to new and old players.

[Tarik Blackhands]

I'm honestly confused what the section would even contain. Either it's going to be entirely unhelpful "Action economy totally different, see proper section" or you end up literally reprinting the various sections of the rulebook which is a colossal waste of space. I agree with the other people up thread on this, this is something that shouldn't be bothered with. It's a new edition, it's generally speaking good protocol to actually read the bloody rulebook rather than shrugging and going "well surely it's the same as 1e..."

[Laithoron]

No, not in the book as we're not going to need it years down the road, and that page space could be better used elsewhere.

However, a PDF detailing just this would be a nice idea, and mention of it in the book's Forward would take no more than about 1-inch of column space.

For example: "Returning Players: For an overview of what's new since 1st edition, please check paizo.com/2ndedition. There you'll find a list of changes, as well as a conversion guide for existing games and legacy material."

[Jeff Deaner]

An explanation of why these changes were necessary would go a long way. I would suggest in the foreword.

[RunnerAndJumper]

Laithoron wrote:

No, not in the book as we're not going to need it years down the road, and that page space could be better used elsewhere.

However, a PDF detailing just this would be a nice idea, and mention of it in the book's Forward would take no more than about 1-inch of column space.

For example: "Returning Players: For an overview of what's new since 1st edition, please check paizo.com/2ndedition. There you'll find a list of changes, as well as a conversion guide for existing games and legacy material."

True, a separate PDF is much better idea... This could also be expanded on further with new content being released.

[GeneticDrift]

Everything is changing. How can you list that? This rule book is the list of changes. It's either here or not. Not to mention additions from future books might invalidate your list of changes.

[CrystalSeas]

A resounding "No" from me.

I would hate to pick up a book that expected me to have mastered another game before I could understand the game it was explaining.

That information will be obsolete within a year or so. I'm pretty sure Paizo expects the Core Rulebook to be a viable product much longer than that.