|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi,
while I really love the Starfinder setting and the books I have to say that I'm really disappointed by the amount of content/page count of the books.
Let us compare it to similar PF1 books:
Advance Players Guide (336 pages) vs Character Operation (160 pages)
Ultimate Equipment (320 pages) vs Armory (164 pages)
Gamemastery Guide (320 pages) vs Galaxy Exploration (160 pages)
Inner Sea Guide (320 pages) vs Pact Worlds (216 pages)
Bestiary (320 pages) vs Alien Archive (164 pages)
Ultimate books (~250 pages) vs Starship Manual (160 pages)
I have to say this really disappoints me, especially if you keep in mind that the price is similiar (+5$ for the PF books, same prive for pdf versions).
Also if you read the SF books, you can definetly "feel" that there could be more in them...
I never really thought on it until you pointed it out... However in SF defense, Their weapons in the armory does have more variety then the Ult Equipment. Also Ult Equipment was mostly a reprint of already published stuff rather then 320 pages of new content. I would say less then half of it was something that hadn't been printed in another book.
But yeah, comparing the rough prices with page count I can see your point
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is an an understandable disappointment, and one I have as well. I'd really like the books to be comparable in size to the pathfinder stuff.
That said, while Paizo does push Starfinder with sincerity, it isn't the main project and iirc it has smaller teams working on it meaning that if they want to keep up with a certain schedule of creation then they end up with smaller books.
In addition, while it can be odd for the products to be identical in price. The prices given for the products are still far cheaper than what most other rpg companies sell the products of that size for. We're still getting a giant bargain compared to the industry standard because paizo can afford to sell things that cheaply.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like how punchy the APs feel and I don't mind them being shorter. It lets me add starship combats, or other encounters.
Starfinder is the first RPG that I follow actively, I've quit playing videogames and I just prep or play regularly instead. It's the first time I've ever been able to play weekly because of the online options. To me, they should be doubling down on the "tired parent" market who would otherwise play console games after 9pm on weekdays for two or three hours.
But I completely agree that the class options and weapons are somehow lacklustre. I love Starfinder in spite of this, but I wonder how much longer my group and I will keep loving it without relief.
For me, it's partially due to the approach to releasing class/weapon content in APs. This is fine for pen and paper players, but most people (I assume, especially in the last year) are using online third-party options like Roll20 and Hero Lab - and they aren't up to date with Paizo's latest. Hero Lab Online for example still doesn't have a lot of the subclasses or weapons that are in the APs that I'm running/playing (Threefold and Fly Free).
I'd love to see the market data on this, but it really seems that Starfinder is squeezing both ends of a bell-curve instead of focusing on what is a bit more universal. My players want Magus-like class options such as Spell Sergeant. My operative is tired of making sniper trick attacks. They want options for what they already have, they don't care about mechs (yet).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s about demand. There isn’t the same demand for Starfinder content that there is for Pathfinder content. Starfinder books are even more niche than Pathfinder books.
That means more sales of PF books and therefore more resources devoted to write the next one.
The pricing of PDFs vs Print is a more complicated issue. I think the PDF cost is a matter of policy - keeping the rulebooks cheap, to enable easy buy-in. For printed books, one of the most significant cost determinants is the size of the print run. That in itself justifies the price difference, I suspect.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi,
while I really love the Starfinder setting and the books I have to say that I'm really disappointed by the amount of content/page count of the books.Let us compare it to similar PF1 books:
Advance Players Guide (336 pages) vs Character Operation (160 pages)
Ultimate Equipment (320 pages) vs Armory (164 pages)
Gamemastery Guide (320 pages) vs Galaxy Exploration (160 pages)
Inner Sea Guide (320 pages) vs Pact Worlds (216 pages)
Bestiary (320 pages) vs Alien Archive (164 pages)
Ultimate books (~250 pages) vs Starship Manual (160 pages)I have to say this really disappoints me, especially if you keep in mind that the price is similiar (+5$ for the PF books, same prive for pdf versions).
Also if you read the SF books, you can definetly "feel" that there could be more in them...
Not to pick nits or anything, but you forgot to include Near Space, which belongs with Pact Worlds in comparison to the Inner Sea World Guide, so you actually have a total of 320 pages for ISWG and 376 total for PW and NS.
Personally, Starfinder is hands down my favorite RPG.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
oh no! there's not as much page bloat! the horror!
nah, look again. there's more gear in Armory than you would use in 10 campaigns. there's more options in Galaxy Exploration than any table is ever going to get to. more hooks in Pact Worlds than a lifetime of Starfinding could grab onto.
been a subscriber to the game books from the start, and been playing [and now GMing] almost that whole time in one way or another. lack of content is not an issue for Starfinder and never was after that brief period between the publication of the core rulebook and Alien Archive 1.
For me, it's partially due to the approach to releasing class/weapon content in APs. This is fine for pen and paper players, but most people (I assume, especially in the last year) are using online third-party options like Roll20 and Hero Lab
For roll20 you don't need an option to exist in roll 20 for it to work or be selected. Most starfinder society groups use the simple sheet, which couldn't even use compendiums until recently.
For roll20 a class option either changes your action economy, in which case you just announce what you're doing and why its wierd, adds a bonus to a roll, in which case you just add a bonus to a roll, or does something weird, in which case you can just write out as a macro "Leafytree uses Autumn's whirlwind, leaves blow in the area creating 20% concealment in a 15 foot radius"
|
|
For me, it's partially due to the approach to releasing class/weapon content in APs. This is fine for pen and paper players, but most people (I assume, especially in the last year) are using online third-party options like Roll20 and Hero LabFor roll20 you don't need an option to exist in roll 20 for it to work or be selected. Most starfinder society groups use the simple sheet, which couldn't even use compendiums until recently.
For roll20 a class option either changes your action economy, in which case you just announce what you're doing and why its wierd, adds a bonus to a roll, in which case you just add a bonus to a roll, or does something weird, in which case you can just write out as a macro "Leafytree uses Autumn's whirlwind, leaves blow in the area creating 20% concealment in a 15 foot radius"
yup. the basic roll20 sheet is essentially the same as a paper sheet you fill in with a pencil, except it has a hyperlink allowing you to roll the dice with a click, and it can tell everyone what the effect is rather than compelling you to say it out loud.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thought I'd count the number of people it took to make PF2E Advance players guide vs Starfinder Character operation manual
PF2E / Starfinder
Authors 3 / 1
Additional writing 32 / 20
Design lead 1 / 2
Designers 3 / 3
Editing leads 2 / 0
Editors 7 / 9
Cover Art 1 / 1
Interior art 24 / 21
Art direction and graphic design 4 / 1
Creative Director 1 / 1
Director of game design 1 / 1
Project manager 1 / 1
Publisher 1 / 1
TOTAL 80 / 62
|
|
I'm happy with the size and content of the Starfinder books. I think a fantasy setting like pathfinder comes with more expectations, there's tons of real history, mythology, other books to draw from that people expect. The speed of travel available to the PC and the scale of the playable world plays into it too I think. Inner Sea Guide covers a small part of one planet, The pact Worlds covers the sun, 10 planets, and 2 stations. To cover all of those in the same detail of the Inner Sea Guide would fill multiple bookcases.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder books were very short on details when they were initially published. The hardcovers you associate with volumes of content were omnibuses of original content + what had come before in the softcovers and AP's.
Example: Gods & Magic from Pathfinder 2e is a combination of Dragon Empires, Inner Sea Faiths, and Inner Sea Gods, all three of which were culled from various in-depth articles written as backmatter in prior Pathfinder AP's. The original campaign setting write-up from 2008, which was a compilation of the original 20 deities, the Inner Sea geography and ethnography, and other important details was only 256 pages -- and they had a head start there since that stuff was all things Erik Mona had been GM'ing for years.
Like it or not, creating a world is a process. That's why I buy Starfinder products zealously -- because I want them to create more later building off what they've created. It's an investment.*
*I've also played most of the AP's through, but didn't usually get to them until 1-2 years after they were published.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say this really disappoints me, especially if you keep in mind that the price is similiar (+5$ for the PF books, same prive for pdf versions).
Other than the CRBs, Starfindr books are $39.99 and Pathfinder 2E are $49.99 that's a $10 difference, not $5 The PDFs are only $5 difference.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know why content automatically is considered bloat?
Smaller books have less need of padding to fill up the page quota.
Less 'last minute' hires to crank up content on a ridiculous short notice to complete them last pages.
Less stuff to review and proof-read.
And so on
You realize books get their content planned at the start normally right?
Yeah, fly with that
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know that Tech Revolution is better than Armory. Fills some holes, certainly, but Armory was massively needed.
I would say tech revolution is the better book overall, but armory would be the... probably third most recommended book to someone starting the hobby if they weren't comfortable with just using archives of nethys to grab equipment.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like armory better because it connected the crunch and flavor. Tech revolution has a lot of flavorful vendors, but they really don't matter much once your shopping trip is over. On the other hand, if you buy a zeizer brand high capacity magazine, you're reminded of drow spray and pray tactics every time you use the weapon, or the lawfulness of abadarcorps every time machine gun fires around a friend or law enforcement officer.
A book about, say, the Azlanti Star Empire? Should primarily be about *the Azlanti Star Empire*, not giant lists of random gear that have only the faintest connection with the locations and society and themes of said Empire
Well, they do like to sell to people looking for crunch too. And this CAN be done well. Aeon stones for example is obvious, but so is armor with slots for the stones, devices that help you fight enn masse, darkness defying items (because your empires primary species is nightblind) etc
Yeah, but that planning can very well include stuff like "Ten pages of random new equipment here". You can plan for a book to contain bloat.
But as far as we are aware, they have never set out to do that.
'Bloat', in my eyes, is when the content in a book is too stretched. Things like lists of spells or items that do not meaningfully tie to the primary purpose of the book, but are just there to pad out pages. A book about, say, the Azlanti Star Empire? Should primarily be about *the Azlanti Star Empire*, not giant lists of random gear that have only the faintest connection with the locations and society and themes of said Empire. If a weapon or spell is included, it should be because its inclusion says something about the ASE, or its rivals/enemies, and serves to better portray them in play.
Or basically, gear lists are pretty much the least interesting thing you can put in a sourcebook. The more a book consists of just gear lists, the less interesting and useful it is. Hence why Tech Revolution is a much better supp than Armory, it gives its lists of equipment some solid grounding in purpose and drama ( and also divides them up so each topic doesn't overstay its welcome ).
None of that has anything to do with page count though. If there were 10 more pages to theoretical Azlanti book's length then previous books had, there is no reason to assume they'd suddenly ditch the design philosophy of the book.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting to see what people define as "content bloat".
For me it's mostly useless/extremly situational stuff which is only designed for one specific scene/case and which no player would ever use.
The x-trillion feats from all the PF Companion books are a good example for this.
Interesting to see what people define as "content bloat".
For me it's mostly useless/extremly situational stuff which is only designed for one specific scene/case and which no player would ever use.The x-trillion feats from all the PF Companion books are a good example for this.
The mountains of teamwork feats?
Almost all magic items are gimmicky and useful only in this ONE CLUTCH SITUATION. I gave someone a potion of gaseous form at like level 2 or 3, promptly forgot about it, and he used it six months later to slip out of a bad situation and we still talk about it to this day.
If we judged content based solely on utility, we'd have about 30 weapons, and 15 armorsets and maybe 2 pages of magic items that all gave +1/+2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Almost all magic items are gimmicky and useful only in this ONE CLUTCH SITUATION. I gave someone a potion of gaseous form at like level 2 or 3, promptly forgot about it, and he used it six months later to slip out of a bad situation and we still talk about it to this day.
If we judged content based solely on utility, we'd have about 30 weapons, and 15 armorsets and maybe 2 pages of magic items that all gave +1/+2.
Starfinder and tech items are LOT better about this than pathfinder was. The items are cheap enough that you can fill up a bag of holding with everything and then pull itout when it's useful. Utility items like that were so expensive in pathfinder they either sat there collecting dust in a shop or were sold to a shop asap.
|
|
Almost all magic items are gimmicky and useful only in this ONE CLUTCH SITUATION. I gave someone a potion of gaseous form at like level 2 or 3, promptly forgot about it, and he used it six months later to slip out of a bad situation and we still talk about it to this day.
If we judged content based solely on utility, we'd have about 30 weapons, and 15 armorsets and maybe 2 pages of magic items that all gave +1/+2.
I totally get your point and I agree that items are not "content bloat" even if they are very specific.
For me bloat is more about alternate class abilities or feats (thinks which you have to put a permanent investment in and which you can't change anymore).Simply take a look at the PF1E feat list, there are so many feats which do the same (or similar stuff). These could be merge (like done with the skill synergy feat) or could be easily dropped (because they are so edge cased or have so many prequisits that no one uses them).
Didn't Paizo mention that they aimed for smaller books for Starfinder on purpose?
They have less product lines and their intent was to cram a lot of extra splat stuff into backmatter but that was also true of early Pathfinder stuff so I don't know if it qualifies as a design choice or just "hey, we don't know anything about this universe yet, give us 7 years and we'll start releasing expanded omnibuses of new content + old backmatter".
I maintain that the reason they're smaller is because they're a smaller team but still have to keep up the rate of releasing books.
I maintain that the reason they're smaller is because they're a smaller team but still have to keep up the rate of releasing books.
I think it's also because they cannot match the same scope as Pathfinder.
Covering a PF region is far easier than a SF planet :P
I think it's also because they cannot match the same scope as Pathfinder.
Covering a PF region is far easier than a SF planet :P
I don't quite understand how that would lead to smaller books, can you expand on this?
I don't quite understand how that would lead to smaller books, can you expand on this?I think it's also because they cannot match the same scope as Pathfinder.
Covering a PF region is far easier than a SF planet :P
In Starfinder, you're likely to visit specific spots on a planet, thus smaller books.
I would love more coverage of those specific spots, though. (Hello, Qabarat. Hello, vertical map of Absalom Station.)
Well, I guess Starfinder Infinite could go into painful details about certains planets/cities.
Gotta say I'm astonished we don't have an Absalom Station AP yet.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I guess Starfinder Infinite could go into painful details about certains planets/cities.
Gotta say I'm astonished we don't have an Absalom Station AP yet.
I think part of that is because most of the other APs travel to and from Absalom Station to do stuff, plus a lot of SFS modules take place there. Dead Suns begins with Incident on Absalom Station, and when I was playing in it we returned there frequently to report in to the Starfinders and to resupply. It's assumed to be where the PCs for Against the Aeon Throne were hired, and they journey back there after the events of the first book to prepare before going off on the rest of the AP. The last book of The Threefold Conspiracy mostly takes place there too. The second book of The Destruction Ark is set on Absalom Station, when your PCs endeavor to save it. And finally, Fly Free or Die has multiple sequences and encounters on Absalom Station and your characters are assumed to stop there between cargo runs and adventures.
Perhaps they feel setting an entire AP on the Station alone would be redundant at this point, especially as with The Armada keeping the peace in its immediate vicinity of space there isn't really a way to insert the mandatory starship combat encounters.
Really weird that in a game where you have billions of stars to explore they don’t have you spend an entire campaign on one space station. Really feels like missed opportunity to squander 99.999% of their setting development as some sort of postmodern statement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really weird that in a game where you have billions of stars to explore they don’t have you spend an entire campaign on one space station. Really feels like missed opportunity to squander 99.999% of their setting development as some sort of postmodern statement.
It is a missed opportunity IMO because I personally find that unless a campaign takes place in a relatively consistent location, it's harder to care about the story because the lack of consistent characters & constant need to move onto a new location you now need to learn about and care about.
IMO, if it's an ongoing story it's better to have consistent play-space, and that the ever-shifting location works better for episodic stories than APs.
It's also not like every AP is set on different planets every book. We have things like the Sun AP, Horizons of the Vast, and most Pathfinder APs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If an AP only on Absalom Station is good, surely one that takes place solely in one building, or even room, is even better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo's already published an AP that focuses squarely on a single world, the sun. Thinking that they'd be "squandering" their setting to publish an AP focused on Absalom Station is a weird hill to die on.
Paizo's already published an AP that focuses squarely on a single world, the sun. Thinking that they'd be "squandering" their setting to publish an AP focused on Absalom Station is a weird hill to die on.
Dawn of Flame is coincidentally my least favorite AP precisely because it feels like 4 inter-connected dungeons rather than one continuous adventure in an open world. There's no traveling via starship at all except for setpieces after the first AP.
back to the original topic of the thread, i was just shocked by how much great stuff was in galactic magic.
Mechanically a lot of good stuff. A lot of the backmatter was just incomplete or frustratingly vague. It may just be that I've been eating & breathing Paizo material for the past 5 years but my brain just sorta feels like -- I already know how Iomedae, Pharasma, etc. think. I've had to think as these characters for 5 years already.
