Remaster playtests?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion


Apologies if this has been asked but is there any plan for the four remastered classes to be playtested before publication? Or even other remastered rules in general?


11 people marked this as a favorite.

Nope - again, this is more like an errata pass than a new edition.


14 people marked this as a favorite.

You can think of all the threads and posts folks have been throwing around over the past four years as the playtest.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Perpdepog wrote:
You can think of all the threads and posts folks have been throwing around over the past four years as the playtest.

Came here to say that too. These classes have been playtested for the last couple or three years now.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I posted this thread here asking what kind of engagement we could expect. You can skip the bickering in the middle and just look at the second last post that says effectively:

"Paizo will have more information when the time is right—I suspect the next big batch of info will be at Paizocon. In the meantime, please be patient."

So the answer is still neither yes or no but James earlier statement in the thread implies a no (but later says its for others to answer/wait for the Paizocon announcements).

Either way books coming out in November like Player Core 1 are likely already finished and not open for changes. But Player Core 2 isn't in the same state so there is an opportunity there for additional community engagement. It may or may not come out as a play test though and its probably better to assume you get no say/input and be pleasantly surprised if we do get more community engagement that is bidirectional.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Red Griffyn wrote:

I posted this thread here asking what kind of engagement we could expect. You can skip the bickering in the middle and just look at the second last post that says effectively:

"Paizo will have more information when the time is right—I suspect the next big batch of info will be at Paizocon. In the meantime, please be patient."

So the answer is still neither yes or no but James earlier statement in the thread implies a no (but later says its for others to answer/wait for the Paizocon announcements).

Either way books coming out in November like Player Core 1 are likely already finished and not open for changes. But Player Core 2 isn't in the same state so there is an opportunity there for additional community engagement. It may or may not come out as a play test though and its probably better to assume you get no say/input and be pleasantly surprised if we do get more community engagement that is bidirectional.

Huh. Hadn't really thought about it, but there would be just enough time to run a playest within the normal 10 month window (most playtests begin 10 or 11 months ahead of the scheduled publication date) if it was put up right after Paizocon.

I don't think anything along those lines is happenign either, but I'll admit it WOULD be kind of cool to see Witch 2.0 and Alchemists 5.7 in even a draft form, and let them use the same opportunity to sort of preview at least a little of what remaster looks like.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

20 people marked this as a favorite.

That comment was taken a little out of context and/or wasn't clear enough, so let me be clear about it here.

There won't be a playtest for the remastered rules.

We'll have more information about the remastered rules at Paizocon, but there will not be a playtest involved with the remastered rules, just to be clear. This is NOT a new edition, but more akin to an errata, and as such we already know the changes that need to be made. No playtest is required, since the feedback we've heard over the past several years does that job.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:

That comment was taken a little out of context and/or wasn't clear enough, so let me be clear about it here.

There won't be a playtest for the remastered rules.

We'll have more information about the remastered rules at Paizocon, but there will not be a playtest involved with the remastered rules, just to be clear. This is NOT a new edition, but more akin to an errata, and as such we already know the changes that need to be made. No playtest is required, since the feedback we've heard over the past several years does that job.

Like I said (in an edit, so you may not have seen it), I didn't actually think anything of the sort would be happening. The 10-11 month lead time is just the first thing I mention when I'm making a guess that there won't be a playtest incoming, so that this could actually fit caught me off guard.

But no, y'all have so much on your plates I would have been shocked by a playtest announcement, whatever the timing. I'm honestly a little impressed by how much you are getting out as much as you are as quickly as you are.


I figure the Remaster will be predicated on feedback about classes they have gotten over the last 4 years. It's not like "rogues and wizards getting nonstandard weapon proficiencies interacts awkwardly with the rest of the rules" hasn't been a thing that crops up over and over again. Likewise "taking a feat to refocus better makes sense, but it sure isn't as cool as [other feat]" is a thing we see with every class with focus spells. The "Swashbucklers struggle a lot when getting panache is very difficult" thing is likewise well documented.

So I would consider the remaster already thoroughly playtested.

Dark Archive

James Jacobs wrote:

That comment was taken a little out of context and/or wasn't clear enough, so let me be clear about it here.

There won't be a playtest for the remastered rules.

We'll have more information about the remastered rules at Paizocon, but there will not be a playtest involved with the remastered rules, just to be clear. This is NOT a new edition, but more akin to an errata, and as such we already know the changes that need to be made. No playtest is required, since the feedback we've heard over the past several years does that job.

Sorry, if you feel I took you out of context, but that other thread did ask for that more clear/explicit answer you gave in this thread and instead ended off with the quote I provided above. Pretty sure I treated your statements pretty fairly there and pointed to the suspected result (that you just confirmed) despite you saying to wait until Paizocon. So not sure you need to frame what I said the way you did.

Anyways OP. There is your more clear answer. No play-test. Hopefully they make the changes the community has been asking for for years (especially for classes like the Alchemist that have gotten many errata passes and book releases like Treasure Vault but are still missing the mark).


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Just as an aside: Playtests are very expensive. A lot of man hours go into setting them up, running them, and evaluating the feedback. That's precious time that could be spent on other books that are already significantly disrupted by the sudden need for the revision. Not only that, playtester fatigue is something that needs to be managed, so it's smart to only playtest what needs to be tested or you run the risk of burning out your pool of playtesters.


Thanks for the response. Man I hope you guys get Alchemist squared away once and for all lol.

And I'll throw in I'd also really like the Witch to be primal and occult only but be able to dip into divine and arcane spells though their patron!

The Champion Reaction should be tied to their chosen Anathema as their subclass package.

Oracle, no notes.

Backseat designer... OUT!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Red Griffyn wrote:
Sorry, if you feel I took you out of context, but that other thread did ask for that more clear/explicit answer you gave in this thread and instead ended off with the quote I provided above. Pretty sure I treated your statements pretty fairly there and pointed to the suspected result (that you just confirmed) despite you saying to wait until Paizocon. So not sure you need to frame what I said the way you did.

You did put the quote out of context. For you didn't provide the entire quote JJ provided.

"I can't. I'm not actually on the team doing the actual work on this project, so those aren't my questions to answer (although as folks have mentioned upthread, there are ansowers for some of thies out there already). Paizo will have more information when the time is right—I suspect the next big batch of info will be at Paizocon. In the meantime, please be patient."

He gave a clear answer, in so far as the fact he is NOT on the team actually working on the Remaster, and thus he could not give you a clear/explicit answer, despite your two pages of demanding someone from the Design Team, and then later JJ, to do so. Thus, he asked you to be patient and wait for more details to be revealed by the actual Design Team, likely at PaizoCon (which, they DID announce a 2 hour panel on the first day just for the talk about the Remaster).

And to be clear, you didn't ask for "an explicit/clear answer" for if there'd be a playtest. You asked 4 very specific questions, argued with people on how necessary those questions needed to be answered, and then asked JJ to answer those four exact questions. Those being:

"1.) What books/content are set in stone? What elements, classes, etc. aren't?

2.) Will the community be engaged in a formal way to either playtest or to provide survey feedback on changes?

3.) Are the new threads/forum discussions about what should be changed being culled by Paizo Game Designers for these changes or is it only legacy Forums/Threads that may have driven any changes?

4.) If there are surveys or playtests will we get a post-engagement breakdown on the results and lessons learned?"

That's waaaay more questions than JJ was likely comfortable answering without consulting with the Design Team, who again, are the actual ones working on the Remaster Project.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

I would like it if we could stop being accusatory towards the dev who is under absolutely no obligation to be here trying to explain stuff at all. It seems a lot like James spoke carefully because he didn't want to be taken out of context or overstep his jurisdiction.


this is really the 5th printing with some truly horrible name change

not much to playtest

Paizo Employee Community and Social Media Specialist

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Cleaned up the spam and other off topic posts. Thanks for the flags yall.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Remaster playtests? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.