6
\$\begingroup\$

There are a few rules discrepancies I am trying to work out as a GM and wished to refer to paizo's philosophy before making some rulings. I know that DnD 3.5 had such an outline but was wondering if such was out there for pathfinder 1e. Links would be appreciated.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to the site! Take the tour. This question raises a complicated issue that's been indirectly discussed here, here, and here, but, it seems, never asked head on. In other words, thank you for an interesting question and for your participation. \$\endgroup\$ Nov 6, 2020 at 14:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Also, for those unfamiliar with Pathfinder's antecedent's way of dealing with errata, see this question: Where are the rules about what sources are primary? \$\endgroup\$ Nov 6, 2020 at 14:25
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Did you have a specific example for one of the discrepancies you were looking to resolve? \$\endgroup\$ Nov 6, 2020 at 14:43
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It may help address this question to indicate what exact rulebook or rulebooks you have questions about (Core Rulebook?) and what printing your copies of those books are from. The printing information would be at the bottom of the credits page. I think there have been at least six printings of the Core Rulebook, if not more. \$\endgroup\$
    – ruffdove
    Nov 6, 2020 at 15:30

1 Answer 1

6
\$\begingroup\$

There is not

Paizo has never articulated this the way Wizards of the Coast did. For one, they’re opposed to the very concept of hard-and-fast rules about the rules—that is, to their mind, for the GM to decide. They do not put much of any value on the concept of being clear about what “the official rules” are. Moreover, they are extremely reluctant to ever recognize or acknowledge that there are any discrepancies, mistakes, or contradictions—they very much like to pretend that everything was always saying the same thing all along, and at worst was “ambiguous.” So they won’t often say “that was a mistake, use this instead,” they’ll say something like “oh, I see how you could read it that way [realistically the only way it could possibly be read], but what it really means it this [something the original wording could not have ever meant].” And then they’ll just tell you that there’s no need to prioritize them, because they actually say the same thing.

Of course, as much reluctance as they may have, sometimes they do have to bite the bullet and admit to straight-up mistakes. But they don’t do so often, and outside of the few times where they do so, they don’t like to acknowledge that they have done so. So there still isn’t any official prioritization.

The closest we have really is the general sense that the last word on a subject is (probably?) the one Paizo considers “official.” But they can be wildly inconsistent about that. Sometimes they’ll point to random developer forum posts as “the answer.” And yet for some reason won’t add it to the FAQ, which supposedly “should be” how such forum posts “become” official. Other times they’ll dismiss such forum posts. Sometimes they even dismiss FAQ entries. There’s little, if any, rhyme or reason to it that I can tell.

So ultimately, you have to just... not try to worry too much about what Paizo thinks. There’s a decent chance that whatever they think wouldn’t actually be the best answer for your game anyway. So just work it out with your GM, and make the best game you can.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .