What does Starfinder mean for Paizo and Pathfinder?


Paizo General Discussion

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

With a decent chunk of the current paizo staff being pulled to this game, how will effect the pathfinder line? Is paizo expanding their current number of employees? Bringing on more freelancers?

James with you being chief creative developer does this mean you won't have your hands in Golarion for awhile? Does it also mean we won't be seeing a new Salim novel anytime soon?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

James Jacobs remains the Creative Director for Pathfinder. James Sutter, previously Executive Editor, has ascended to the position of Creative Director for Starfinder. From what they said at the banquet, Paizo will have some people devoted to either project, and most will float between the two.

James S's reactions to prodding about a new Salim novel included "I'd really like to." and "I'm too busy at the moment." Included were humble chuckles about people wanting to read his next novel.

Starfinder will not be produced identically to PF. SF will be essentially only an AP line, at least for the foreseeable future, and all new information will be developed with each AP installment. PF will continue as normal, they mentioned no interruptions of service, and when asked for comment James Jacobs was wholly confident that SF and PF won't overshadow each other.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks Alayern, I edited my post completely because I went back and reread the blog again. When I submitted it I saw your answer and it summed up a lot of my questions.

So we won't be seeing book after book of Starfinder, that's kinda good because that means I won't have to dump too much into it to see what it's like.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you for this information. Will there be at least a CORE rulebook or is everything going to be produced in AP format?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

From the blog:

Quote:
The Starfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be releasing at Gen Con 2017, but that's not all—we're also going to be starting a monthly Starfinder Adventure Path in addition to our ongoing Pathfinder Adventure Paths. The Starfinder AP volumes will include both adventures and cool new rules and setting information to help expand your Starfinder game.


Hmm, including new rules in the AP books means that players have to buy the books to find out what the new rules are. That's going to need a certain amount of personal discipline to only read the rules section. Might be easier for PDF versions, because the rules could be put in a separate file.


Lisa Stevens said in another thread that she only signed off on this project when she was 100% sure it wouldn't affect Pathfinder. Full Steam ahead, it seems.

Silver Crusade

Hmmm, given Salim's condition, I wonder what are the chances of him having a Starfinder Tales?

Silver Crusade

When will previews begin?


Joana wrote:

From the blog:

Quote:
The Starfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be releasing at Gen Con 2017, but that's not all—we're also going to be starting a monthly Starfinder Adventure Path in addition to our ongoing Pathfinder Adventure Paths. The Starfinder AP volumes will include both adventures and cool new rules and setting information to help expand your Starfinder game.

Thank you. I'm not sure I like this. To get one yout need to buy the other.

Silver Crusade

?

That's kind of how the APs have always been, they include a bunch of additional information about the world.


That Lisa will go from sleeping on a pile of money to swimming in it Ala scrooge mcduck.

Scarab Sages Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:
When will previews begin?

While I'm not the person to either decide this or announce it if it was decided, I CAN repeat something James Sutter has mentioned a few times here at PaizoCon - it's VERY early days still for Starfinder. We wanted to let people know what we were working on as soon as it made sense (it's simply tiring to keep a big project secret, to be honest), but we have a lot of work to get done on this before there's much we're sure enough about to show you.

Metaphorically, this is the 8-second teaser. It'll be a while before we can get you a real trailer.

Liberty's Edge

We all of course understand that, but we also hope you guys can take our desperate excitement for any scrap of news as the compliment it is...


Gnick Gnak PaddyWack wrote:
Joana wrote:

From the blog:

Quote:
The Starfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be releasing at Gen Con 2017, but that's not all—we're also going to be starting a monthly Starfinder Adventure Path in addition to our ongoing Pathfinder Adventure Paths. The Starfinder AP volumes will include both adventures and cool new rules and setting information to help expand your Starfinder game.
Thank you. I'm not sure I like this. To get one yout need to buy the other.
Rysky wrote:

?

That's kind of how the APs have always been, they include a bunch of additional information about the world.

But in Pathfinder, if you want only the rules to use in your own setting with your own adventures (or convert adventures from another system), you can buy the RPG-line books without having to pay for a monthly AP issue you don't intend to use.

I think that's what he means.

EDIT: Of course, the core book itself will be separate, but to get any APG-style expansions to the rules, you'd presumably have to buy the AP issues they're included in. If the line is successful, of course, future hardcovers or Companion-type books might reprint the AP-specific rules, a la kingdom building or chase rules, but as it stands right now, that's not a totally safe assumption.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joana wrote:
Gnick Gnak PaddyWack wrote:
Joana wrote:

From the blog:

Quote:
The Starfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be releasing at Gen Con 2017, but that's not all—we're also going to be starting a monthly Starfinder Adventure Path in addition to our ongoing Pathfinder Adventure Paths. The Starfinder AP volumes will include both adventures and cool new rules and setting information to help expand your Starfinder game.
Thank you. I'm not sure I like this. To get one yout need to buy the other.
Rysky wrote:

?

That's kind of how the APs have always been, they include a bunch of additional information about the world.

But in Pathfinder, if you want only the rules to use in your own setting with your own adventures (or convert adventures from another system), you can buy the RPG-line books without having to pay for a monthly AP issue you don't intend to use.

I think that's what he means.

+1
EDIT: Of course, the core book itself will be separate, but to get any APG-style expansions to the rules, you'd presumably have to buy the AP issues they're included in. If the line is successful, of course, future hardcovers or Companion-type books might reprint the AP-specific rules, a la kingdom building or chase rules, but as it stands right now, that's not a totally safe assumption.

Liberty's Edge

That's assuming there will *be* APG-style expansions to the rules.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It's how Pathfinder started. Well, tehcnically it's got core rule which is more than Pathfinder got for four APs. Seemed to do ok that time. If interest and sales, and staff madness, warrant, I'm sure they'll expand the Starfinder line as they did Pathfinder: cautiously.
(For info: Pathfinder AP 1 was August 2007, Crown of the Kobold King (first module): June 2007, Guide to Korvosa (first Campaign Setting book): MAr 2008, Elves of Golarion (First Companion): Oct 2008) so for about a year, there was nothing but Adventure Paths for the line.)

You kids and your compartmentalised, discrete book lines. Spoiled, I tells ya, and get off my lawn!


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Paul Watson wrote:
(For info: Pathfinder AP 1 was August 2007, Crown of the Kobold King (first module): June 2007, Guide to Korvosa (first Campaign Setting book): MAr 2008, Elves of Golarion (First Companion): Oct 2008) so for about a year, there was nothing but Adventure Paths for the line.)

However, these were all third party products for D&D. The Pathfinder RPG was not in existence at that time.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Yes, but what I mean is Paizo tend to be cautious with new product lines. If the AP doesn't sell well, its less traumatic for the business, and the staff involved, to cancel it rather than cancelling it, Campaign Setting and Companion lines.


I think it should prove interesting.

How many times have we heard them blame the fall of TSR on splitting the lines of sale?

This is FAR more drastic than promoting a Tian Xia line or a Distant Worlds line. This has FAR more potential to split their fanbase than ANY of those.

I don't think it is a correct assumption to blame the fall of TSR on splitting it's sales lines, but I think that they way they marketed them (bad business practices) and incorporated R&D and spent money vs. sales in regards to that split in their lines had an effect that led to TSR's problems.

In that light, I'm not certain what's going to happen with PF and SF.

I know I'm considering whether I'll drop PF and go strictly SF at this point, when SF comes out.

PF is really full of bloat at this point, and their AP's ALWAYS want to use more than just the core. Sure, I can convert things easily enough, but it would be FAR nicer to simply just have one core book in regards to APs.

That means it could affect me in more than just the rules, it could also mean that I drop the PF AP and get the SF AP (I know, people say, why not get both...but in truth, the bloat and constant referencing to multiple books is a pain at times).

Trade in my PF sub for several SF subs?

I'm sure people will get both, and there's a LOT of time to consider at this point, but I'm looking at whether I'll get both (2x the money) or drop PF in favor of SF.

If there are a sizeable amount that are like me, I thnk that could have a major impact on PF.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
GreyWolfLord wrote:
Trade in my PF sub for several SF subs?

There are no several SF subs to trade in for. They've said they'll release a Core, then everything else will be in the Adventure Paths. So one subscription. Done.

Also, to address all those other words, I'm confident Lisa has more statistics and experience with this than we do. So... I'm going to go ahead to trust her.

Also also, personally I hate bare-bones games. What you refer to as bloat I refer to as "supported". We've tried a couple other systems (for instance Numenara and Eclipse Phase) and neither went anywhere because all there was to use was the basic rules and basic adventure. There was no published material beyond that, and none of us have the time or inclination to create a coherent adventure, and it's kind of lame when the single basic rulebook clearly has one, or possibly two "best" or "most fun" builds, so most characters end up the same. Pathfinder benefits from lots of fiddly bit subsystems, and lots of options to put in them. But to each their own. Which is my point here.


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Anguish wrote:
We've tried a couple other systems (for instance Numenara and Eclipse Phase) and neither went anywhere because all there was to use was the basic rules and basic adventure. There was no published material beyond that (...)

Really? I have about a dozen hard- and softcover books for Numenera and lots of more in the form of PDF "glimmers". In fact, a new hardcover book just came out this week, and more are announced to be released in a roughly quarterly schedule going right into summer next year.


Understand it was 2am my time and I'd just finished running a crash-prepared session, so I was brief. For me.

But really, we tried this when it (both) were first released. The point remains though, that what one person deems bloat, another deems options.


Options are nice. Too many rules to memorize or keep track of for a GM...not so nice.

Bloat may be options for some, but for me, I'd like it if they'd tailor things for core and actually use the others as OPTIONS rather than requirements in their APs.

That's the big difference between bloat and options for me. Options are just that, optional. Bloat is where those additional rules are written into APs rather than being optional additions to the AP.

Instead of having as an option to add, a GM has to replace and reconfigure instead if they don't want to use those books.

Which is why Starfinder is looking more interesting to me, at least at first. It's missing all those additional required books to run the AP, or to look up online in order to run it or which you have to change.

APs should be easy to run, and take less time than a homebrew. Instead one can find themselves looking through all the rule books to ensure they know all the rules prior to running the game.

Though the idea for core only PFS and core only games is good, much of the APs still reflect more items than just core (at least up to IG, haven't really glanced through the two latest ones in Cheliax).

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GreyWolfLord wrote:
How many times have we heard them blame the fall of TSR on splitting the lines of sale?

TSR split its fanbase by creating multiple competing products in the same genre. They were printing the Forgotten Realms side by side with Mystara and Greyhawk, all of which were targeted toward generally the same audience.

This would be more comparable to TSR's attempt at Alternity, which was about expanding their audience. In theory at least, Starfinder should be an opportunity to bring people who don't want D&D-style fantasy into the fold.

And, if it is a failure, I would imagine that Paizo probably will pull the plug on it rather than commit the other big TSR blunder of continuing to print products that they were taking a loss on.


Charlie Brooks wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:
How many times have we heard them blame the fall of TSR on splitting the lines of sale?

TSR split its fanbase by creating multiple competing products in the same genre. They were printing the Forgotten Realms side by side with Mystara and Greyhawk, all of which were targeted toward generally the same audience.

This would be more comparable to TSR's attempt at Alternity, which was about expanding their audience. In theory at least, Starfinder should be an opportunity to bring people who don't want D&D-style fantasy into the fold.

And, if it is a failure, I would imagine that Paizo probably will pull the plug on it rather than commit the other big TSR blunder of continuing to print products that they were taking a loss on.

If I recall, Alternity was a fail even by TSR standards...and as WotC so fondly told us, those standards weren't too high in regards to profits vs. losses (or even keeping track of profits vs. money spent already).

Not certain comparing it to Alternity is doing it any favors...comparing it to Spelljammer (which falls solidly into the competing lines of marketing and fans) would however.

OR, Buck Rogers vs. D&D would also be comparable (but probably not any more favorable to consider than Alternity).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
GreyWolfLord wrote:

Options are nice. Too many rules to memorize or keep track of for a GM...not so nice.

Bloat may be options for some, but for me, I'd like it if they'd tailor things for core and actually use the others as OPTIONS rather than requirements in their APs.

That's the big difference between bloat and options for me. Options are just that, optional. Bloat is where those additional rules are written into APs rather than being optional additions to the AP.

Instead of having as an option to add, a GM has to replace and reconfigure instead if they don't want to use those books.

Which is why Starfinder is looking more interesting to me, at least at first. It's missing all those additional required books to run the AP, or to look up online in order to run it or which you have to change.

APs should be easy to run, and take less time than a homebrew. Instead one can find themselves looking through all the rule books to ensure they know all the rules prior to running the game.

Though the idea for core only PFS and core only games is good, much of the APs still reflect more items than just core (at least up to IG, haven't really glanced through the two latest ones in Cheliax).

Again, I hear you, but arrive at a different destination. I find it annoying when rules exist but are never used. Personally, I want APs to use a wide variety of source books in order to present new challenges. Yes, it's my job to actually read statblocks and research unknown feats and abilities. And yes, I get it that APs are meant to be work-light for GMs. Still, it's not the same thing as work-free. And homebrew is lots of work. While you inherently will know whatever statblocks you create, creating them in the first place is a chore. As is coming up with a coherent and artistic plot.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

GreyWolfLord wrote:

If I recall, Alternity was a fail even by TSR standards...and as WotC so fondly told us, those standards weren't too high in regards to profits vs. losses (or even keeping track of profits vs. money spent already).

Not certain comparing it to Alternity is doing it any favors...comparing it to Spelljammer (which falls solidly into the competing lines of marketing and fans) would however.

OR, Buck Rogers vs. D&D would also be comparable (but probably not any more favorable to consider than Alternity).

That's a shame about Alternity - I didn't realize it was a bomb. Still, I think the point stands that Starfinder will hopefully be an expansion of Paizo's audience rather than a split.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Regarding Alternity:

TSR basically split the fanbase (again!) for the new system by publishing the Dark*Matter setting a year after the Star*Drive setting. Not to mention publishing a lot of books on extra/expanded rule systems and setting expansions in those two or three years; I doubt they had time to actually judge how well it was selling before most of it was released, considering the distribution channels being used at the time.

Which was a bit of a shame. It's actually a pretty decent system, although characters seem to need to be a bit too specialized, IMO. A slower roll-out period with stronger adventure support (let's face it, most of the adventures weren't that good) might have done better than flooding the market.


Starfinder is just clear proof of Paizo secretly being taken over by NASA astronauts.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Zaister wrote:
Anguish wrote:
We've tried a couple other systems (for instance Numenara and Eclipse Phase) and neither went anywhere because all there was to use was the basic rules and basic adventure. There was no published material beyond that (...)
Really? I have about a dozen hard- and softcover books for Numenera and lots of more in the form of PDF "glimmers". In fact, a new hardcover book just came out this week, and more are announced to be released in a roughly quarterly schedule going right into summer next year.

I'm also confused by this, Eclipse Phase also has several books(and they are under OGL too iirc) and they are still releasing new ones, which is impressive for system that everybody considers the worst part of that game.

Cypher system definitely isn't unsupported system .-. I mean, even Pathfinder didn't at release(probably, I wasn't customer back them) have multiple support books available for it, thats just common senes.(unless you count books released for D&D 3.5 <_<)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Davia D wrote:
Starfinder is just clear proof of Paizo secretly being taken over by NASA astronauts.

Disagree - clearly this is actually a Nemesis plot.

Grand Lodge

Gnick Gnak PaddyWack wrote:
Joana wrote:

From the blog:

Quote:
The Starfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be releasing at Gen Con 2017, but that's not all—we're also going to be starting a monthly Starfinder Adventure Path in addition to our ongoing Pathfinder Adventure Paths. The Starfinder AP volumes will include both adventures and cool new rules and setting information to help expand your Starfinder game.
Thank you. I'm not sure I like this. To get one yout need to buy the other.

I suspect the additional rules will largely be available through some sort of rules reference document at Paizo, and possibly some fan-run site for those that prefer a different format.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
TimD wrote:
Davia D wrote:
Starfinder is just clear proof of Paizo secretly being taken over by NASA astronauts.
Disagree - clearly this is actually a Nemesis plot.

No, it's obviously a Mender Silos counterplot.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Then again, Alternity was never designed to be a competing product with D&D2E. It was designed as a playtest for 3E. Similarly, I believe that the Star Wars Saga Edition game was designed as a playtest for 4E rules. As a result, I'm suspecting that Starfinder might end up being the precursor to a second edition of Pathfinder, but we're a few years away from that happening by my estimation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
TimD wrote:
Davia D wrote:
Starfinder is just clear proof of Paizo secretly being taken over by NASA astronauts.
Disagree - clearly this is actually a Nemesis plot.
No, it's obviously a Mender Silos counterplot.

Thanks for making me miss an entirely different game now. :(


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Darkbridger wrote:
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
TimD wrote:
Davia D wrote:
Starfinder is just clear proof of Paizo secretly being taken over by NASA astronauts.
Disagree - clearly this is actually a Nemesis plot.
No, it's obviously a Mender Silos counterplot.
Thanks for making me miss an entirely different game now. :(

Never forgive (NCSoft), never forget (CoX).

Creative Director, Starfinder Team

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alayern wrote:


James S's reactions to prodding about a new Salim novel included "I'd really like to." and "I'm too busy at the moment."

As folks have said, Starfinder shouldn't really affect Pathfinder. As for it affecting how soon we get another Salim novel... well, that's actually pretty fair, as my brain and writing time are both full to the brim with Starfinder at the moment, and likely to stay that way for quite some time. :)


Darkbridger wrote:
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
TimD wrote:
Davia D wrote:
Starfinder is just clear proof of Paizo secretly being taken over by NASA astronauts.
Disagree - clearly this is actually a Nemesis plot.
No, it's obviously a Mender Silos counterplot.
Thanks for making me miss an entirely different game now. :(

I miss being the Lincoln Memorial... :(


James Sutter wrote:
Alayern wrote:


James S's reactions to prodding about a new Salim novel included "I'd really like to." and "I'm too busy at the moment."
As folks have said, Starfinder shouldn't really affect Pathfinder. As for it affecting how soon we get another Salim novel... well, that's actually pretty fair, as my brain and writing time are both full to the brim with Starfinder at the moment, and likely to stay that way for quite some time. :)

Are you leaving some of the PF Tales stuff to someone else? Or will you still have stewardship of that line too?

Scarab Sages Developer, Starfinder Team

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Misroi wrote:
Similarly, I believe that the Star Wars Saga Edition game was designed as a playtest for 4E rules.

I am one of the designers of Star Wars Saga Edition.

This is not the case.


When was this Alternity? I played (well, I should say I purchased them) Gamma World and Star Frontiers 20 years ago, both of which went nowhere.

My buddy likes Buck Rogers over Risk, but in RPG's, I see no science fiction game catching on like swords and sorcery do.


Nice to see the new titles appearing for Owen and James. I am confuserd a little though - is Owen still wearing a PF development hat? Should it read

"Developer - PF, Developer - Starfinder Team"?

Liberty's Edge

Not a Fan of Sci-Fi Still wish them best of Luck to them.
Will stick with Pathfinder....Not a lot expendable cash so I ain't a "must have" customer.

At My age I could play every day for the next 20 years and never run out of stuff even if the stopped making Pathfinder yesterday.

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

Misroi wrote:
Then again, Alternity was never designed to be a competing product with D&D2E. It was designed as a playtest for 3E. Similarly, I believe that the Star Wars Saga Edition game was designed as a playtest for 4E rules. As a result, I'm suspecting that Starfinder might end up being the precursor to a second edition of Pathfinder, but we're a few years away from that happening by my estimation.

Without getting into the conspiracy theories about Starfinder, I do not believe that it was the case that Alternity was in any way a stalking horse for third edition D&D. That argument can certainly be made for Star Wars Saga (although see Owen's post, above), but from having worked at WotC during the end of Alternity and the beginning of third edition, I'm not aware of any connection between the two.

Silver Crusade

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
Misroi wrote:
Similarly, I believe that the Star Wars Saga Edition game was designed as a playtest for 4E rules.

I am one of the designers of Star Wars Saga Edition.

This is not the case.

Saga was the one with the long, instead of tall, books right?

Ooo, I had fun playing in those games, Thankies!

Scarab Sages Developer, Starfinder Team

ObsessiveCompulsiveWolf wrote:

Nice to see the new titles appearing for Owen and James. I am confuserd a little though - is Owen still wearing a PF development hat? Should it read

"Developer - PF, Developer - Starfinder Team"?

So, to be technical, I have never been a "Pathfinder Developer." I am a Paizo Developer.

The difference is largely invisible from the outside. MOST of the time, that has meant I worked on Pathfinder RPG products, for obvious reasons. The Player Companions most often, though certainly not exclusively.

But I have also, when appropriate and needful and so directed by the Editor-In-Chief, Project Manager, and/or Publisher, I have gone over plot lines for the Adventure Card Game, hosted the Superstar contest, spoken to licensors about tie-in games, and on on.

ALL of the Paizo Developers have done that kind of broader work, be it answering game questions about how a plot in fiction could handle an issue without the world our game described, going over tie-in materials when a specific expertise is required, giving seminars, designing workshops - whatever is needed.

I also happen to be on the Starfinder Team right now, and likely for quite some time.

But that is a specific, special role on top of being a Developer here rather than a new job description. And I'll continue to tackle different games, tie-ins, contests, and anything else my job calls for as it gets called for.

I obviously won't be doing as much Pathfinder RPG-specific stuff as we work on Starfinder, but I am still doing "development" as needed, and I strongly suspect I'll be working on Pathfinder RPG products in one capacity or another on and off even before Starfinder is released.

Scarab Sages Developer, Starfinder Team

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

Saga was the one with the long, instead of tall, books right?

Ooo, I had fun playing in those games, Thankies!

I mostly think of them as "more square," but yes.

And you're welcome! A lot of other great folks did a ton of awesome work on those books as well. :)

Silver Crusade

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Saga was the one with the long, instead of tall, books right?

Ooo, I had fun playing in those games, Thankies!

I think of them s mostly "more square," but yes.

And you're welcome! A lot of other great folks did a ton of awesome work on those books as well. :)

^w^

... I miss my Kushiban...

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / General Discussion / What does Starfinder mean for Paizo and Pathfinder? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.