|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Check it out.
Thank you Loranthorn. I really appreciate it.
Boomerang Nebula wrote:
science fantasy is one of the most popular genres out there,
That truly isn't much of an indicator. Star Wars RPG is the only science fiction RPG that held its own in the top 5 RPGs. Traveller was popular back in the day, but it never held a candle to DnD. Mongoose has had the Traveller license since '08 and it may have made the top 5 once, maybe. The Warhammer 40k RPGs have been there for a while, but they're gone now.
Mind you, Paizo knows all this and, from the way Vic was talking, budgeted for it. And IMO that is the real trick to making RPGs profitable: budgeting right. So I am confident that Paizo will make the game profitable. They're smart cookies
Umbral Reaver wrote:
Introduce a race of aliens whose alignment chart includes 'Blue' and 'Orange'. The normal concepts of alignment just don't work with their mindset.
We at LPJ Design are definitely going to support Starfinder.
The only thing really keeping us from saying we will definitely be supporting Starfinder at this point is the fact we haven't seen the license yet.
Mind you, its Paizo; I'm sure the license will be somewhere near identical to the Pathfinder license.
However, I said nearly those exact words earlier this year with the new edition of Traveller and ... well ... when we saw the license and had time to digest it, we were not thrilled. We considered walking away for a time. Ultimately we stuck with it, even if we are not happy. But I am looking before I leap this time.
In the whole HISTORY of SF games, the only thing that comes CLOSE to a series of good interlinked adventures on which to build a lengthy SF campaign was a 3rd party product for Traveller, FASA's Sky Raiders campaign. (Legend of the Sky Raiders, Trail of the Sky Raiders and Fate of the Sky Raiders by the Keith brothers).
That will change soon for Traveller. Mind you, it will still be 3rd party support, but it will be a proper AP.
GM Rednal wrote:
*Rubs chin* Um... on the cover? I know the phrase "Adventure Path" itself is in use by third-party publishers (the Legendary Planet Adventure Path from Legendary Games, the Northlands Saga Adventure Path from Frog God Games, etc. - they are referred to as such in the books themselves, and the people at both companies are industry pros who know exactly what they're doing), but I'm not sure about actually using those specific words on the cover. Let's hope Liz Courts sees this soon - she usually has the answers for stuff like this. XD
Heck, I'm using the term for an adventure path we have coming up for Traveller. It doesn't have to be in relation to Pathfinder only.
I'd assume the playtest is a test to see how popular starfinder is and if there is enough interest for them to consider a society structure.
Otherwise, it is just a demo.
@Athos710 #Starfinder will not be a hard science fiction with lots of realistic FTL science. Softer with some things that break "rules".
@Athos710 #Starfinder set in Golarion world and it's setting, but should be adaptable to other SciFi settings ....
@Athos710 #Starfinder ... Not going to include every TARDIS, Bird of Prey, or Star Destroyer in the setting
@Athos710 #Starfinder starship will include ship to ship combat, more of a mini game and optional. Will have tactical rules, but not CRUNCH.
@Athos710 #Starfinder goal is to have play test/demo of Starfinder, pregen PFS scenario at #GenCon2017 No word on SF Org Play at this time
@Athos710 #Starfinder "Distant Worlds is the jumping off point for the future worlds. If you liked it, hope you'll like SF."
@Athos710 #Starfinder "Tech Guide is inspiration for much, but major underlying math has changed (damage was an example ?!??!)"
@Athos710 #Starfinder "What ShadowRun was to CyberPunk, I want Starfinder to be to SciFantasy"
@Athos710 #Starfinder "The ships your PCs fly around in will be upgradable, and like an extra character shared by the party"
@Athos710 #Starfinder "A new core of 20 gods that have new additions from time advancement and galaxy exploration"
@Athos710 #Starfinder "Multiverse-wide memory modification, called The Gap. No information of that undetermined time (poss 1000+ years)"
@Athos710 #Starfinder on Ratfolk "Every group has that one player who wants to be a Jawa, or Rocket Raccoon. Some races are goofy fun!"
I'd like to thank @Athos710 for these.
"More Star Wars than Star Trek, with a little bit of Firefly mixed into it"
@Athos710 classes in #Starfinder - Soldier, Operative (Specialist and skill monkey), Envoy (Party utility, leadership) and ...
@Athos710 #Starfinder Mechanic (fixer skills, plus Robot companion or brain implant), Mystic (spellcaster that channels cosmic forces), ...
@Athos710 #Starfinder Technomancer (tech + magic = awesome), and Solarion (mystical order focused on cosmic balance, Jedi-ish)
@Athos710 #Starfinder 7 Core races (including Human), plus updated Pathfinder races. Androids, Ratfolk, plus brand new and revamped races.
@Athos710 #Starfinder "I want a Cantina alien vibe in both the monsters and playable races"
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
This is a real shame, as your Pathfinder products are consistently some of the best 3PPs released. :(
Thank you. I really appreciate it. The good side of this is that you know we love every single one of our Pathfinder releases we do. When we release a Pathfinder product, you know it is because we love the idea so much, we have to do it and do it well.
Steve Geddes wrote:
(60% all up I believe, but I haven't actually used it, so I could well be misremembering that).
Its 50%. 25% goes to DriveThru, WotC gets 25% and the publisher gets 50%.
The nice thing about it is:
The downsides are:
That last point is the most important to me. If Paizo did that with Pathfinder and I had to use it (the way it is for Traveller), I'd immediately stop publishing for Pathfinder. I haven't made a profit off any of Pathfinder products for quite some time. Where I make my money is converting it to another system. If they set it up like Wizards did for 5e where there's an OGL option and an inworld option for a smaller percentage, I don't believe I'd use it. I'd have to see a much larger amount of sales for that to happen.
most people are going to not fit exactly into any alignment category.
Agreed. And I much prefer alignment to be removed entirely. However, I've made my peace with alignment for those that do like it and want it to stick around (whether out of short hand description or because of tradition or whatever). Having said that, I just don't care for it as a mechanic. Sword that does fire damage, hurts goblinoids, takes off someone's head, can attack ghosts, all good. Sword that hurts bad people, ehhh, I'm less cool with. Why should it hurt someone that cheats on their taxes the same way as someone that is a genocidal maniac? I just can't see that. For me, that just means, I don't play classes with alignment as a significant part of what defines the class (aka paladins).
But now we're talking SF, a genre with much less good and evil stories. If anything they have more Law vs Chaos stories in them, but even then they are not a whole lot of those. Firefly, a show cited as a major influence for Starfinder, is frequently described as Law vs Chaos (Independents being chaos, Alliance being law). However, I prefer to think of it as Neutral vs Chaos or possibly even Chaos vs Chaos. The Alliance allows the border worlds to be the way they are. If they were a lawful society, they would first send in the troops to impose martial law and build up an infrastructure similar to the core worlds. Maybe it is a question of resources or priorities, but their grip is too loose for me to see it as iron strong Lawful. Infact their clear priority to retrieve River to the ruination of all else tells me they are Chaotic. Again, perhaps, they first tried all other (aka more lawful) options before sending in an Agent (i.e. bounty hunter, relying on warrants, etc.) but their willingness to go all the way to Agent-dom to get the job done, tells me they are comfortable working with both lawful and chaotic sides, which is pretty much the definition of neutral.
In either case, SF stories about one's outlook on life giving them powers beyond that of a mortal man are not exactly common. Dune could be an exception to this. Paul Atreides did not have powers that Muad'Dib did possess. Was it his outlook on life that changed, possibly. I think it has more to do with eating a steady diet of worm poop and constant practice. A monk, sure. And a Pathfinder monk must be lawful. I disagree with that, but I do see the logic since constant practice and regimented order are not common marks among chaos. But again, this is where I agree that an alignment chart does poorly in describing people. I person can have a regular regiment of going to the gym, going 10 rounds with a punching bag, and then spending the rest of his day extorting people for money.
Like I said, I'd prefer no alignment, but I am cool with alignment being kept as long as there is no mechanical benefit or penalty to it.
To me it looks like he is holding onto the force lightning generated by Dooku and then sending it elsewhere for the first time. The second blast of force lightning, Yoda just absorbs it, demonstrating his power that no one else has. Yoda is clearly showing off just how much more powerful than he is than everyone else by taking control and sending it back to its owner, with no implements, something no one else is capable of.
Jon Brazer Enterprises released Book of Beasts: Monsters of the Forbidden Woods. It features 18 new and converted monsters to fifth edition, ranging from CR's 1/4 to 7. Now only monsters, we give you enough details about them to build memorable encounters around these creatures, details like the names that local people that do not know what thesse creatures are call them, items in their lair, and in game quotes from NPCs about these monsters. These are fun monsters that your players will remember.
I'm with others in this thread: I'm cool with alignment sticking around as a way of quickly describing a character, but I would very much like to see all mechanical elements related to it are removed.
While fantasy is flooded with good vs evil stories, there is far less of them for in science fiction. The biggest sf franchise to have good vs evil is Star Wars, and even then, I can think of only one force power not used by anyone on the good side: force lightning. Beyond that there was no other mechanical benefit to any alignment. Mind you, the last Star Wars RPG I played was WEG d6.
Professor Rastaban wrote:
I'm sending my players on an interdimensional dungeon crawl, and the next "level" is on the aforementioned "Plane Where Lost Things Go". But what lurks between the mountains of keys and stray socks?
Also, I'd say dinosaurs. Don't have them face dragons, but dinosaurs.
Today only, JBE is running a $2 Sale on all of our items currently on sale that normally sell for more than $4. That is a minimum of 50% off the regular price and as much as 80% off. That’s right, you can get our PDFs that are normally $10 for the rock bottom price of $2. This mean for Pathfinder you can grab for $2:
Its that time of year again! The Christmas in July Sale at DriveThruRPG/RPGNow will be starting on 21st of June (tomorrow!!!) and running through the 29th. JBE will have quite a bit on sale for Pathfinder this year. If you wanted anything of ours, this is the best time to pick it up. Here are a few of the highlights:
Add everything you want to your Wishlist at DriveThruRPG/RPGNow today so you don’t miss a deal.
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
I don't see any reason why all PCs can't be hobgoblins. But then again, I never see a reason why that can't be the case. Humans, elves, and dwarves are overrated.
Coffee Demon wrote:
Your reviews would be much more helpful to me if you gave more (any?) products something other than a 5/5.
I would hazard a guess that the only reviews of his that you are reading are those by exceptional publishers, and even then only their best work. EZGs reviews are tough. After reading the same book, I tend to feel that he gives them a lower rating than they deserve. When he gives something 5 stars, they earn it.
Distant Scholar wrote:
Yea, 2011 was our best year. Hard to believe it was 5 years ago. I do find it funny how we're just off the top 10.
I suspect it'll actually be about as generic as Pathfinder is.
It won't. Paizo has already said that the setting will be apart of the core book.
Starfinder will be even more extreme - first of all the vast majority of SF isn't science fantasy (or at least isn't the kind of science fantasy with actual spellcasters and gods and things).
I've actually been looking for science fantasy fiction since the game's announcement and all I am coming up with are the most obvious sources that are still pretty far from what the game is aiming for: Star Wars (best source thus far), Dresden Files (modern), Dune (well, its Dune). I'm going to try Princess of Mars next, but still, it is hardly what they are aiming for.
So yea, I'm hoping that it'll inspire some authors to write their own science fantasy fiction, making it the standard.
I see Starfinder as a specific sort of thing, along the lines of "Th8e Strange", rather than a generic Sci Fi RPG.
I am more hoping that Starfinder will be the new standard in a Generic Science Fantasy RPG. I mean, sure it will have the starfinder setting inside, but I'm hoping it will be (mostly) contained to a single chapter and easily ignorable if I want to play my own homebrew setting.
Fantasy RPGs always outsell SF RPGs. I mean the numbers have never been close. D20 modern was never close to D&D in terms of sales. Paizo knows all this and from Vic's words, it sounds like they budgeted and have their expectations set accordingly.
So comparing Pathfinder and Starfinder sales wise is not the best measure of the game's success.
I was thinking of this problem over the weekend and here's my conclusion:
Regular combat is fun because you have alot of options. Classes give you lots of options in personal combat. Sure they give you a few tricks out of combat, but mostly they player have lots of options. Fighters choose feats to tailor their unique attack style to how they want to play their character. Rogue players have to figure out how to set up their sneak attack. Various classes have some resource to manage (various pools of points, abilities that work x/day). Spellcasters have to figure out which spells they prepared that day work best on the monster at hand. And at the end of the combat, players get to feel that their choice of tactics, the way they maneuvered through combat, their choice of spells paid off.
Ship combat (and mass combat as well) is not fun because all those options are gone. I know mass combat better than ship combat, but from what I've seen, they are similar in this respect. In mass combat, all those spells you prepared, all those class options and feats you earned, all those tactics you honed are simply gone. You have one options: have your mass combat unit attack/fire your ship's gun and do damage to the enemies hp. That's it. There is no rewarded feeling of "something I earned or choice I made really helped." A mass combat unit of fighters feels identical to a mass combat unit of rangers.
For Ship Combat to be fun, it has to integrate with class abilities and have LOTS of options in it. In regular combat, a rogue has to set up a flank with a teammate. But in ship combat, the ship moves, and not necessarily where the rogue wants it to go. This means the rogue already has less options. In order for ship combat to be an integral part of Starfinder, class options/feats/etc have to present a reason why character X should be at the plasma guns while character Y should be arming the torpedoes. Does one class provide a bonus to energy weapons (i.e. a tech class) while another allows you to grant a bonus to physical weapons (i.e. a magic class). Can the pilot do something other than steer the ship to where the other characters on the guns want it to go? Like can the pilot try scrambling their sensors to give their enemy a blanket penalty to hitting them or adjust the shields to give the ship resistance to certain kinds of damage. Is there a reason why a low-BAB spellcaster be on a gun over the fighter that doesn't involve a spell?
This is what I think ship combat needs to be a serious part of the game.
I would like class skills to change, but I would like all races to receive a minimum of 2 skills they can choose as class skills and 2 skill points/level (while humans get more). This way if you are playing a game where everyone is in a figher (ala star wars), you don't have to choose your class based on which has the pilot skill as a class skill. You can just use one of your racial skills and call it a day.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Whatever JBE releases under the Starfinder license, I hope it is a great success.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
I am hoping that the core rules encourages more 3PPs to jump in with their own worlds, races, and histories/lore
Judging from Vic's words here, I am quite sure they will. I have full faith in Paizo.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
I personally very much against "good vs evil" and do hope that alignment does not have a mechanical component in the game, even if it is kept for a shorthand to describe a character.
As I have said before, these posts are for some theoretical future home game. It might get published; it might not. I am not committing myself, since I have over committed myself in the past and I am trying not to do that in the future. Also, I don't have a final clear vision as to where I want to go at this time. The basic Empire/Rebellion model is my starting point, but I want it more complex than that. The Rebellion side is obviously sympathetic to all gamers and and is a logical starting point for any game. Having said that, I want the Empire to not be clear cut evil. Take the Evil League of Evil as an example. That name is a very rough sketch of what I want. I mean, sure there is going to be warlord tyrant that hires space orcs to savage anyone that stands in their way. There is also going to be a more reasonable warlord that will take care of the people in his/her domain. There are going to be corporations that outright deals in slaves or simply treats their employees like slaves. There will also be corporations that believe their empowered people work harder and produce better results, resulting in higher profits. All the other sides are going to be the same way.
I am also deviating from the Empire/Rebellion model in ways I haven't discussed yet openly, and frankly I am not sure exactly what form they are going to take yet. Posting these is helping me work through my various ideas to form something cohesive. I do know I am borrowing from RuneQuest and 13th Age some and am incorporating the idea of factions/icons. I think they work well and help invest players without having to have them become masters of the setting before their first game. Doing this lets a player make a meanful contribution to the game with little information. For example, a rebellion space pilot can have a contact inside the Evil League of Evil on the sheet and use it to get a safe harbor to stop over and refuel before striking the cybernetic undead. Something like that.
*Puts point in quibblemuch's score*
Simple straight forward question: Why are elves not a core race, from the races we know about thus far? They are already a space-faring race in pathfinder and they are one of the more popular races in the game, so why not?
Also, I'd say that the designers wanted to do something new.
Do you have a theory why elves or any of the other core races are not core here (serious or silly)?
I would say it would take it's cues from runelord. Each adventure would center around a different classic monster (goblinoids, constructs, void creatures that don't breathe, etc), showing how each is different in space with an overarching plot of someone/something wanting to take over and/or destroy everything. probably a corporation.
More than anything else, it will be a tour of the solar system.