Starfinder: Is it going to fail, split Paizo in half, or succeed?

[Lord Fyre]

Though keep in mind that Starfinder brings something to the table that none of those games do.

The Adventure Path.

A hard fact about gaming is that most gamers have other commitments on their time. Many of us don't have the ability to create an entire campaign from scratch.

[Malwing]

Nyan Cat wrote:

Begun, the Paizo Edition Wars haz?

If Starfinder rules work better for Pathfinder than Pathfinder rules then it just might.

Won't exactly affect anything but the boards will get weird for a while. And I'm certain at least that will happen because there are some relatively big changes that have been insinuated.

[Torbyne]

Lord Fyre wrote:

Though keep in mind that Starfinder brings something to the table that none of those games do.

The Adventure Path.

A hard fact about gaming is that most gamers have other commitments on their time. Many of us don't have the ability to create an entire campaign from scratch.

i would like a robust world creation system, this sounds like a great setting for a sandbox campaign. warp into sytem, GM pulls out one of a few pre-gen'd sheets and discovers that the party has warped into hostile space of an advanced species. warp out fast and mark that one down as a revisit later. recharge and warp again, this time find a high magic agricultural world, make first conact, help out the locals and win priceless art objects of an unknown culture that earns fame and respect back on Absalom. It wouldnt require too much work from the GM and could actually be a lot of fun for "galaxy building"

[cycnet]

Mmmmm I am currently on the fence about Starfinder.

I buy lots of RPG books, many simply to read and get ideas from. So it's possible that I do that here, but I am not huge on the idea of scifi RPGs honestly.

As of right now though I don't feel like buying any more paizo books... got so disappointed by the last couple I bought that I just don't feel like putting the money down... putting tengus on the back cover of the last race book then not having anything new for them was just awful... made me really mad.

So I have been focusing on buying the back catalogues of some 3rd party publishers lately instead of paizo core books.

Regardless...

I currently have enough material to play tabletop games for the rest of my life without adding anything so saturation is a major factor here... a factor that I don't see starfinder addressing.

Who knows though, there is a chance I grab the core book just out of curiosity.

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

I'm expecting this to be essentially Dragonstar with the following changes..

Minus ruling dragons and dragonstar setting.

Pathfinder compatible as opposed to 3.0 compatible

Inclusion of base Pathfinder engine to make the game standalone.

[MMCJawa]

If you are hoping this to fix whatever problems you have in Pathfinder itself, how happy you are going to be will probably be dependent upon what you identify as problems. It sounds like magic will be less important in the game, so caster-martial discrepancies should be less bad. They are working with entirely new classes, so class imbalance issues won't be a factor due to not having stuff grandfathered in. I'd also expect crafting to less important, what with mass production probably being a thing.

If you have deeper issues in the design, than no you probably won't be happy. Or if you decide to adapt non-Starfinder classes into the game which are not balanced with the existing game (I am already expecting some ANGRY threads when people try to do the latter).

Personally, I plan on picking up Starfinder, but probably wouldn't if it wasn't sort of compatible with Pathfinder. I would guess I am not alone in that consideration.

[Vic Wertz]

memorax wrote:

That being said I'm not sure it will be as successful as PF was imo.

The good news is that Pathfinder is not the stick by which Starfinder will be measured. As I said upthread:

I wrote:

...another key to all of this is that we're not expecting Starfinder to be as big as Pathfinder. It's got a much smaller team producing a much smaller number of products, and that... means that we don't need to achieve a Pathfinder-like level of success for the line to be worthwhile.

Nobody is expecting to sell as many copies of the Starfinder RPG core rulebook as the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook. Frankly, if it sells more copies than, say, Bestiary 5, we'll be pretty happy.

[Vic Wertz]

Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

Vic Wertz wrote:

Jason Nelson wrote:

They've talked to a number of 3PP folks about the possibilities ahead, but there is as yet no confirmation that I have seen about what shape or form a SFRD and/or compatibility license may take and how it will interact with the PRD and PF comp license.

I'll just say that, as one of the primary voices in this discussion, I'm very satisfied with what we have done in this respect with Pathfinder, and currently expect that this particular apple isn't likely to fall far from the tree.

As a followup: Has there been any decision on whether the Starfinder and Pathfinder compatibility licenses will be mutually exclusive? Can a single product contain rules/conversions for both systems?

While very little has been firmly decided, I'll note that the Pathfinder Compatibility License doesn't prevent you from using it on products that are also compatible with systems other than the Pathfinder RPG. I don't see any reason why we'd want to change that with the Starfinder license.

[Jaçinto]

You would think crafting to be more of a thing, or rather an actual thing at all. The crafting rules in Pathfinder (At least mundane) are total trash. After all, there is a good reason to have mechanical engineers in a space station.

If this is just a Pathfinder reskin, there is no reason whatsoever to get it. Just use the pathfinder book and just say it is in space. It becomes just a setting, not a new game. For this to stand out, it needs to actually be different, thematically and mechanically. It needs to have changes and new things entirely that make it different from Pathfinder. Just a reskin is annoying and a waste of money. I will need to check this out when it comes out, without buying it of course. I need to see if it is its own game, or just pathfinder wearing glasses and a moustache and saying it is different.

I love science fantasy games, as well as medieval high fantasy but they need to have real differences. I really want Starfinder to succeed, but it needs to earn it. Don't phone it in and have people throw money at it just because of the brand name like so many bad Michael Bay movies. Show some pride in the work and make it stand out. Not necessarily better than Pathfinder, but actually different and still good.

Also, seriously, they need to organize the rules a lot better than pathfinder does. An example that jumps to mind is in skulls and shackles which has the weather rules in book 3, yet they should be in book 1 or every book as they are always relevant. There are also many times in the core book and other "Core books" where I have to hop through the entire book just to get info on one rule, because the details are scattered all over the place. Plus the odd time there are contradictions. It gets to the point where people may actually want a rules compendium book just to have them all organized properly, but really they should just be organized in the first place.

Oh and of course, please make the Flavour and Mechanics actually fit together properly. There is no reason to have the story/flavour/fluff descriptions at all if the mechanics don't do what the description says it does. I love the descriptions of things, but I hate when they don't fit the mechanics at all and even contradict.

I am also going to be right angry if they include poisons at all (which they absolutely should since you can get someone to, maybe, drink reactor runoff) and the DCs are so bad that you can pretty much drink a cup of cyanide without problems by level 7 or 8 or whatever.

I know this was long winded but I get somewhat passionate about design problems. I am an analytical person and I can not help but find the problems in what I see. It is the reason why I quit 4th Edition RPGA after just 3 sessions. I can't turn this off.

Oh and if Starfinder has Duct Tape in it, I am going to have a good time. I'm Canadian and I watched a LOT of The Red Green Show throughout my life and still watch reruns of it. You can solve any problem with enough duct tape.

[GreyWolfLord]

Red Green was Fun show. I bet Harold was a Roleplayer. If so, I wonder if he ever tried to get everyone in the basement to try this crazy D&D thing!?

(Maybe it was an episode, but if so, I missed it). They poked fun at everything, including themselves more often then not. I think in the final episode, Harold gets married and his gift, an enormously huge roll of duct tape...

[Theliah Strongarm]

Torbyne wrote:

Lord Fyre wrote:

Though keep in mind that Starfinder brings something to the table that none of those games do.

The Adventure Path.

A hard fact about gaming is that most gamers have other commitments on their time. Many of us don't have the ability to create an entire campaign from scratch.

i would like a robust world creation system, this sounds like a great setting for a sandbox campaign. warp into sytem, GM pulls out one of a few pre-gen'd sheets and discovers that the party has warped into hostile space of an advanced species. warp out fast and mark that one down as a revisit later. recharge and warp again, this time find a high magic agricultural world, make first conact, help out the locals and win priceless art objects of an unknown culture that earns fame and respect back on Absalom. It wouldnt require too much work from the GM and could actually be a lot of fun for "galaxy building"

I'm thinking: "Galaxy Maker"

[Theliah Strongarm]

Nyan Cat wrote:

Begun, the Paizo Edition Wars haz?

Our pockets will BURN

[Jaçinto]

About what Vic Wertz said on nobody expecting it to sell that well. That honestly scares me. It makes it sound like they don't have much faith in the product or they are not really giving it their all. I know that probably isn't true but it really is scary to see a creator saying things like that. Again, I may be overly analytical. I can't help but analyze every little thing, especially from someone working on the project. Saying it will not be measured by Pathfinder as a standard raises more concerns like, are you saying you don't consider it as good? Are you just saying it is different? Confidence in a product, at least in what a person involved with the creation says on it is the general average and sometimes ignored, but when someone says something that can be considered disparaging, or even make the game sound kinda "meh" or the devs make it sound like almost a throw away side project, well it is scary. How can I have much confidence in it when it sounds like a person involved in the creation of it doesn't consider it as worthy of their main game's sales level.

Once again, overly analytical sure, plus I may have taken marketing classes a bit too seriously back in school.

[Skeld]

Jaçinto wrote:

About what Vic Wertz said on nobody expecting it to sell that well. That honestly scares me. It makes it sound like they don't have much faith in the product or they are not really giving it their all. I know that probably isn't true but it really is scary to see a creator saying things like that. Again, I may be overly analytical. I can't help but analyze every little thing, especially from someone working on the project. Saying it will not be measured by Pathfinder as a standard raises more concerns like, are you saying you don't consider it as good? Are you just saying it is different? Confidence in a product, at least in what a person involved with the creation says on it is the general average and sometimes ignored, but when someone says something that can be considered disparaging, or even make the game sound kinda "meh" or the devs make it sound like almost a throw away side project, well it is scary. How can I have much confidence in it when it sounds like a person involved in the creation of it doesn't consider it as worthy of their main game's sales level.

Once again, overly analytical sure, plus I may have taken marketing classes a bit too seriously back in school.

You're reading way too much into what Vic said. He didn't say that they expect to bomb or do poorly; he said it doesn't need to be as successful as Pathfinder to be considered a success. Vastly different, those two ideas.

Nyan Cat wrote:

Begun, the Paizo Edition Wars haz?

The Paizo Edition Wars started about 35 seconds after PFRPG was released.

-Skeld

[Jaçinto]

Skeld, like I said I am overly analytical. I can't turn off the "Look for the negative" in anything. I likely am reading way too much into it.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

How is this suppose to split the warehouse staff and customer service? Will Cosmo have to make a clone of himself without his trademark 'stache?

[Nutcase Entertainment]

Jaçinto wrote:

Skeld, like I said I am overly analytical. I can't turn off the "Look for the negative" in anything. I likely am reading way too much into it.

Vic's choice of words doesn't help there.

[Lord Fyre]

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

How is this suppose to split the warehouse staff and customer service? Will Cosmo have to make a clone of himself without his trademark 'stache?

Actually, there should be enough pieces of him all over the place to make a spare Cosmo at this point.

[Vic Wertz]

I'm just saying that it doesn't need to be our bestselling product to be considered successful. It *does*, of course, need to be a great product, and I have no doubt it will be.

[Jaçinto]

Vic, thanks for the clarification but if this feels like a Pathfinder reskin, there will be some sour tastes. I really want this to stand out as its own game and do well. As said previously, if they carry over bad skill systems (Like craft rules and the 2+int skill classes), trap feats, feat tax, and other issues like that then this is not going to do well. For a bunch of folks I know, including a store a frequent, they see this as a last chance to see if they can break away from 3.5 and really make their own game based on the years of forum feedback. Keep the good and throw out all the bad stuff. If this comes out good and not just a copy-paste in the system, I will buy it and recommend it.

[thejeff]

Jaçinto wrote:

Vic, thanks for the clarification but if this feels like a Pathfinder reskin, there will be some sour tastes. I really want this to stand out as its own game and do well. As said previously, if they carry over bad skill systems (Like craft rules and the 2+int skill classes), trap feats, feat tax, and other issues like that then this is not going to do well. For a bunch of folks I know, including a store a frequent, they see this as a last chance to see if they can break away from 3.5 and really make their own game based on the years of forum feedback. Keep the good and throw out all the bad stuff. If this comes out good and not just a copy-paste in the system, I will buy it and recommend it.

And if it's too far from Pathfinder, there will also be some sour tastes. Some people actually like PF (and its 3.5 roots) and don't want a major break away. Nor do all complaints about the system match yours.

Pathfinder, whatever its flaws, made Paizo a major player. It's not the huge drag on their business you seem to think.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

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.

[Bluenose]

D&D and it's derivatives has always outsold other RPGs. But I'd bet in the second tier of games there's probably not much difference between the best selling fantasy and SF systems.

[Chris Lambertz]

Removed a series of posts that are getting too close for comfort to edition warring rhetoric. Folks, we really don't need that here.

[rknop]

I see Starfinder as a specific sort of thing, along the lines of "The Strange", rather than a generic Sci Fi RPG. To be clear, I'm not saying that Starfinder is the same genre as or the same sort of game as "The Strange". However, The Strange is not just a game system, but a game world, and the nature of the system and rules that come with it are tied to the world. Likewise for Starfinder. Another example would be Eclipse Phase.

Pathfinder is a generic fantasy RPG. Sure, it comes with its own assumptions about the nature of the world, and you could find vastly different systems (Harn, Ars Magica, fanatsy-style GURPS, etc.) that will play very differently. But, still, people can and do use the Pathfinder rules set for lots of different fantasy worlds, and within the culture of gaming it can easily be a generic sort of game system.

A generic SF system, on the other hand, wouldn't necessarily have magic; indeed, a generic sci fi system could get by without any magic at all. Traveller (the system) was generic sci fi, as is GURPS Space, and some others. But Starfinder is a particular kind of SF -- science fantasy. Unless the book coming out is going to be quite different from what my understanding is based on what I've heard, it won't naturally support harder, more magic-free sci fi. It may well with some small modifications, but it's really more of a science fantasy system. And, given that the setting and system will be integrated in the core book together, it's really something of a standalone game.

I don't doubt that there will be 3pp that take the Starfinder core and set it in other worlds. There may even be some that strip the magic and give a more generic science fiction setting. But the core Starfinder we're going to see isn't really SF. It will stand or fall based on the appeal of the specific subgenre and setting.

Given that both The Strange and Eclipse Phase seem to be doing pretty well, specific subgenres of science fiction with their own rules set and setting are something there's a market for out there. The fact that Starfinder will have an additional pull on the mass of Pathfinder (and even D&D) players out there that those two games don't, I think it has a great chance of doing well.

We shall see. I'm looking forward to it.

[M the Magnificent]

I wonder if they are planning anything like PFS for Starfinder?

[David knott 242]

M the Magnificent wrote:

I wonder if they are planning anything like PFS for Starfinder?

Not immediately -- but they do realize that it could be a good idea eventually.

[thejeff]

rknop wrote:

I see Starfinder as a specific sort of thing, along the lines of "The Strange", rather than a generic Sci Fi RPG. To be clear, I'm not saying that Starfinder is the same genre as or the same sort of game as "The Strange". However, The Strange is not just a game system, but a game world, and the nature of the system and rules that come with it are tied to the world. Likewise for Starfinder. Another example would be Eclipse Phase.

Pathfinder is a generic fantasy RPG. Sure, it comes with its own assumptions about the nature of the world, and you could find vastly different systems (Harn, Ars Magica, fanatsy-style GURPS, etc.) that will play very differently. But, still, people can and do use the Pathfinder rules set for lots of different fantasy worlds, and within the culture of gaming it can easily be a generic sort of game system.

A generic SF system, on the other hand, wouldn't necessarily have magic; indeed, a generic sci fi system could get by without any magic at all. Traveller (the system) was generic sci fi, as is GURPS Space, and some others. But Starfinder is a particular kind of SF -- science fantasy. Unless the book coming out is going to be quite different from what my understanding is based on what I've heard, it won't naturally support harder, more magic-free sci fi. It may well with some small modifications, but it's really more of a science fantasy system. And, given that the setting and system will be integrated in the core book together, it's really something of a standalone game.

I don't doubt that there will be 3pp that take the Starfinder core and set it in other worlds. There may even be some that strip the magic and give a more generic science fiction setting. But the core Starfinder we're going to see isn't really SF. It will stand or fall based on the appeal of the specific subgenre and setting.

Given that both The Strange and Eclipse Phase seem to be doing pretty well, specific subgenres of science fiction with their own rules set and setting are...

I suspect this as well. A particular take on science fiction crossed with high powered fantasy, that really won't work well without as a straight sf system. Anymore than PF works as non-magic pseudo historical fantasy or even low magic fantasy.

High powered heroic science fantasy. It's definitely going to be its own thing and I really wish we had a better idea what they're looking towards. I've commented on the Appendix N thread about really wanting to know what the developers were using as inspiration.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

rknop wrote:

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.

[Jaçinto]

thejeff, find me someone that likes trap feats and feat tax. I have not met a single person that enjoys that part of the game. That is easily something that can go away and hopefully never come back.

Starfinder, please be a good game.

[thejeff]

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

rknop wrote:

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.

Not quite what he was saying, I think. I suspect it'll actually be about as generic as Pathfinder is.

Which isn't really very generic. It'll just be more obvious in Starfinder, since our expectations of science fiction settings haven't been shaped by a few generations of D&D.
Pathfinder is actually pretty lousy at playing anything outside of its own high powered epic fantasy genre without at least cutting out pretty huge chunks of the system and modifying quite a few others. Playing in a setting anything like most non-D&D derived fantasy works just doesn't work well. From Tolkien, to Conan, to SoI&F fantasy comes with radically different assumptions than Pathfinder.

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). Even among science fantasy works, it's really hard for me to come up with anything to set my expectations for SF. If you think it will be a new standard in a Generic Science Fantasy RPG, can you name 4 or 5 SF fictional works you think it'll be similar to?

[thejeff]

Jaçinto wrote:

thejeff, find me someone that likes trap feats and feat tax. I have not met a single person that enjoys that part of the game. That is easily something that can go away and hopefully never come back.

Starfinder, please be a good game.

Nobody likes trap feats, though some defend feat taxes as necessary. People just argue over which are trap feats or whether there really any.

Sure, I hope they'll try to avoid trap feats. I'm sure they'll have some that turnout to be thought of that way. Quite probably the same with feat taxes. I doubt they'll change the system so drastically that such things can't happen.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

thejeff wrote:

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.

thejeff wrote:

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.

[thejeff]

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

thejeff wrote:

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.

thejeff wrote:

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.

Yeah, Star wars is probably the closest I can think of.

Maybe Darkover? Though that's mostly a clash between high-tech and the local fantasy psionic culture, not the two working together.

Pern? Except that's really either just fantasy or science fiction + teleporting dragons, depending on which book you pick.

There's a lot of older fantasy that uses old lost or alien tech as the basis for its "magic", but that's really not the same either.

[captain yesterday]

Rifts?

[Duiker]

captain yesterday wrote:

Rifts?

I think the source of magic vs technology in Rifts is better explained out of game by LSD usage of writers than any internal logic.

[Dale McCoy Jr]

captain yesterday wrote:

Rifts?

*blink, blink* ... *blink blink* *deleted word* I haven't touched anything from Palladium since Robotech in the late 80's. But I think you just hit on the best source. Time to dive headlong into the ultimate edition.

[thejeff]

Though from my dim memories of Rifts, it pretty much lacks the whole space element, right?

You could also point at Shadowrun, if we're looking at gameworlds. Though cyberpunk is a specific SF genre that I doubt Starfinder is aiming for.

[DM Wellard]

Personally I think it has all the potential to be Paizo's Alternity...which if you don't remember it was the final nail in TSR's coffin.

[Jaçinto]

I heard Alternity was good, but nobody played it. I never even heard about it until Spoony mentioned it. Honestly, I hope this is the start of Pathfinder branching out into settings, like Dragonlance and Dark Sun and Spelljammer. All the same game, with some possible crossover, but separate worlds for people to make games and rules for, while keeping to a core engine. Of course, Starfinder is set in a distant possible future, not the guaranteed future. Man I am going to have a lot of questions about resource acquisition when everyone lives on a space station. Rationing must be intense. Also it is governed by an A.I that everyone sees as a god and... Okay if I see colour coded ranks on uniforms, I am going to be both happy and worried at the same time. I wonder if Friend Computer will consider this fun or a commie mutant traitor plot to undermine friend computer. I swear in character creation, I am going to at least be wearing a blue jumpsuit.

I really need to memorize when to use a colon mark.

[DM Wellard]

Remember to take your mandated happiness pill and keep your laser handy