TR Member Perks!

Paizo has announced a new campaign mode for its Pathfinder Society Organized Play global roleplaying game campaign, which boasts 75,000 current players worldwide. The new Core Campaign will use the basic game found in the Pathfinder RPG: Core Rulebook and aims to to offer a simpler entry-point for new players by using a more streamlined gaming approach and limited scenario replay.

The Core Campaign will offer a more limited feature set than the standard Campaign and is structured to help familiarize newer players with the Pathfinder RPG system. Core Campaign players will only be allowed to use the core rulebookCharacter Traits Web Enhancement, and Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play. Players will unlock treasures and rewards as they play and will have the option of transitioning their Core campaign character into the full Pathfinder Organized Play campaign at any time.

Both the Core and standard campaigns will use the same scenarios, modules, and other sanctioned adventure resources although characters are only allowed to be used in one campaign or the other, not both. Additionally, while characters from the Core campaign can move to the standard campaign, standard campaign characters are not allowed to be moved to or used with the Core campaign.

Players will be allowed to gain credit twice for each Organized Play scenario that they complete, once for the Core campaign and once for the standard campaign. Additionally, players will be able to gain credit for GM’ing each scenario once each per campaign.

The standard Pathfinder Society Organized Play campaign, which is now in its seventh year, will continue in its current form along side the new Core campaign.


More information on the Pathfinder Society can be found here.

What do you think of this announcement? Do you think this will attract new players to the game? Are you a new player interested in joining the Pathfinder Society Organized Play program? Let us know in the comments below.

Travis Williams

Tabletop Editor

Maestro of cardboard and plastic.

  • Nick

    This sounds pretty sweet. I’ve been thinking about seeing if some friends wanted to start playing pathfinder again and since they aren’t super heavy RPG nerds (yet) this would be a great way to reintroduce the game style.

  • Typical

    Hmm, that’s interesting, but why wouldn’t they just do a beginner’s box set and expand that if they want a ‘lite’ version I wonder? This seems more of a way to stem the power creep that’s flooding in with all the new classes that make the core classes underpowered, as has happened in pretty much every (D&D, and now pathfinder) edition since 2nd. Maybe they want to actually make a campaign world where the rogue isn’t overshadowed by 15 other class choices?

  • Kalezian

    I kind of take offense to the thought that rogues are underpowered compared to other classes.

    You would be surprised at just how effective a rogue is when they set their own traps. If the rogue isn’t trying to move to get a flank or hit his sneak attacks, be aware of where you walk, caltrops are a hell of an item.

  • Typical

    You can check out the Paizo forums, there is literally months of reading about the argument, but the general consensus seems to be that a trapper ranger is a better choice, and unless you house rule flanking to be a condition, the rogue is too weak and hits too poorly to even make her sneak attack damage worth it.

    It’s one of those topics that is usually looked at as Oh hell, not this again when someone brings up playing a rogue, what’s better than a rogue, what rogue build have you enjoyed playing etc.

    when pathfinder came out, I was like “Wow! they made core classes look good again!”, but then they crapped it up with all the additions.

  • Nick

    I agree, the only time Sneak attack became great was when you could couple it with some of the crazy alternate options from DnD3.5 FR stuff, or the Martial Combat. where you can basically get stealth as a free/swift action thereby allowing you to surprise an enemy nearly every time you attack. by the numbers the Scout was a better option in every way, simply because moving allowed you to gain the extra damage.

    I feel like Paizo needed to bring in alternate spellcasting classes a lot more heavily instead of just regurgitating the same old Vancian style spells per day stuff that was in DND3.5. I do like Pathfinder, I had just hoped it had done more.

    I also agree that the additional base classes don’t really add much, and it also seems like they slowly dropped any sense of prestige classes which is what made DnD3.5 really interesting. I can accept that they want to build in the class options to the base class though.

  • Typical

    I do like that pathfinder has so many archetypes, you can play as whatever fantasy setting character you want to rip off. But it’s just a pain when you have that min maxer friend who just abuses powers across all the books.

    Luckily, my group is all new players I DM for, and they don’t really study the books, so I’m telling them what they’re supposed to roll usually, so that crap is probably way off for me.

  • Nick

    unfortunately for some, I’m the min-maxer type of person. I find a lot of joy in looking through different source books and comparing stats and abilities to get a really focused character that fits a specific style. the character building and planning portion of the game is probably where I get 75% of the fun.

  • Typical

    Well, I played with a guy that had to be the best all the time, it just gets old, if you never fail, what’s the challenge? Rules lawyering and having a rogue output 50 hp on an attack at level 1 made me tired of his crap. A well designed character is one thing, I page of stats with no fluff is just boring for everyone else.

  • Nick

    Yah, I definitely agree that the situation you described is very annoying!