Will Starfinder be good?

Will the gods have updated costumes? I want to see Space Iomedae and her Space Trumpets and Space Crusaders

Speaking as a PF player and DM, no. It will be shit. They've said all the space-tech-stuff will still slot in with the existing magic systems and call me old-fashioned but I like my crossovers to be short and sweet, not continual. Also, the setting sounds kinda dumb. You lost a whole planet? Good fucking job.

Also, now I have to deal with powergaming munchkins who will shriek, "But it's first party content! I should be allowed to take this trait that gives me a free shit-tier laser gun! The fact we're playing low-fantasy in feudal Japan doesn't mean you should ban legitimate mechanical options!"

No.

No, but not for the reasons you think it won't.

No because the real life political insertion in the adventure paths and other books with be ridiculous and blatant since they don't even need to sugarcoat it with fantasy anymore.

How badly disguised is the political insertion in PF ?

>"But it's first party content! I should be allowed to take this trait that gives me a free shit-tier laser gun! The fact we're playing low-fantasy in feudal Japan doesn't mean you should ban legitimate mechanical options!"

Followed later by the munchkin whining because nobody is selling ammo. Or that it's unrealistic that the laser is useless against mooks in non-magical armor of a few levels up.

Doesn't matter Aethera is better.

What would make you think a 20 year old RPG system known for being terrible at emulating fantasy skirmish combat would be even remotely playable in a science fiction game?

Hey, their adventure paths for 3.5 are adequate.

>it's going to be Shit in space

>No

>Not a chance.

>Probably no chance.

>No.

>No, but not for the reasons you think it won't.

Well it looks like I don't really to say anything
But I will
It gonna be shit, covered up so you can't see or smell the shit until you play it several times.

I am excited for the Starfinder Pawns. But that will be for a stars without numbers game...

Never heard of it. You're probably right.

Not that quality matters. There are a horde of people who refuse to play anything but 3.PF because they don't want to learn a new system. They will probably play Starfinder because it's a system they already know.

They haven't advertised compatibility, but conversion potential. Kind of like how it's not that hard to convert old D&D stuff to 5e, so there's still a decent hope that their system is going to be a more solid one, and they'll just have conversion guides for making old stuff fit in.

I think maybe. I will give it a shot, and you people should as well.

If it's being made by the same grossly incompetent devs behind Pathfinder then no.

Wot is it?

Is there anything other than traveler that has a functional built-in mercantile system?

My time is limited, so is my money. I didn't like Pathfinder. Everything I've heard says that this will be Pathfinder in space.

Why should I give Paizo a second chance ?

>low-fantasy in feudal Japan

If you're doing this in Pathfinder you're already retarded.

With that art? No.

The 3.5 OGL debacle should have proved that, outside of a few very specific successes, the d20 framework does not work well outside its comfort zone (without getting into the argument of how well it works within its comfort zone.)

The fact they seem intent on using that same structure puts them on course for disaster. They might create something miraculous, but I very much doubt it.

Because it costs you almost nothing?

Seriously, Paizo will release this a couple of months from now whether or not you want it and odds are 100 to 1 you will at least look into it's quality, if only so you can shitpost about it on 4chins.

>Costs you nothing

Not everyone pirates their books

They advertised that Pathfinder was compatible with 3.5 and they were talking out of their asses.

No and I'll pirate it just to shitpost about how awful it is.

Neither do I.
paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/
Paizo will probably release the rules for free.

You can also just walk into a store and look through it for a bit. Or read online reviews like 90% of this thread probably will.

No. But it will be what Pathfinder players deserve.

I assuming it will just be Pathfinder, but in a Sci-Fi setting and maybe they will use it as a reason to use a lot of their unchained rule changes as part of a core ruleset.

I am not really interested it in, but it might be nice to have a sci-fi game where everyone at my table is already (presumably) familiar with the rules.

The biggest question is why would anyone play this when there's so many other space opera games that have done the exact same things but better.

Trying to get an apathetic group to read a new rulebook is hard.

Also, change is scary.

...no they weren't? Anything from 3.5 can be converted into Pathfinder in like 10 minutes tops, and vice-versa. The greater bulk of that is just updating spell lists and figuring out CMD stuff.

I think it'll be interesting. A new Space Opera setting is exactly what we need right now, and Pathfinder has enough exposure that Starfinder might actually last awhile.

Because it isn't space opera, for one thing. It's high magic in space, which is quite different.

Spelljammers and Star Frontiers are not the same genre at all, and that's what you're trying to compare.

Two words: Spelljammer rocked.

Spelljammer is a setting, not a game system. Also, it was a setting for 2e, a game system that was remarkably good at modeling fantasy skirmish combat.

Either way, there's still probably an RPG that does it better.

There's probably an RPG that does it different. *better* is subjective.

And it's not like Spelljammer or Star Frontiers are all that supported anymore, and Paizo lacks the license to either of them anyway.

Name one that has support? There are at least three, and none of them show up on Veeky Forums because: no support.

Starfinder and 3.x will always be the best RPG system for every thing. every other book is a source book when you have a 3.x with pathfinder and starfinder extra skills. thou the coming from varg vikens myfarog is good too basically you just replace post apocalyptic with every one staying inside on "devices" fact is the worlds going to get overtaken by fucking machines not sexy hookers. VR and moments of the GM where you take the goggles off and a entire world is infront of you is other good tricks. but seriously wait for Starfinder it will have all the structure and updates of pathfinder with the skills you need. first book from them I'm going to get to go along with all my 3.0 and 3.5 stuff. seriously every thing before 3.0 is "old dnd' and didn't work outside of fantasy lit. before then you had to use traveler and cyberpunk. but now you can use all that great content with a better system with starfinder its a huge deal and most people your age will know 3.x/pf 4.0 was a test and 5e is good but it brings back too much ADnD shit to make it feel possible to be high combat at all the miniature rules for 3.0 in dragon magazine are still the best for combat. sure if you want to take it off grid you could consider using 40k or inquisitor rules or even killteam or a mix there of. but at the end of the day the future brings one thing.. one person being able to dominate more people at once so if your doing a cyberpunk RPG each character really should be controlling 3+ minis each just link them in some interesting way like 3whores or 1cop 2 sidekicks ones a cyberdog or 3bandits etc with a leader that has the other 2 on chems and in vr etc. drones etc the whole thing bout the future is more connection and that just exadurates the party dynamic so really a cyberpunk RPG should be made up of multiple partys interacting in a landscape. id go as far to say the best set up would be 2x 40k games with a GM on each and maybe a overarching gm so maybe 2gms a boss 4pcs

l8 b8 m8 i r8 it 8/888

I'm looking forward to a different system I don't like to beat it's sales.

>I'm looking forward to a different system
Fucking really user? There's a bazillion other RPG systems out there right now

What is d20 even good for? The only advantage I can think of is easy math and having a large enough variance for a bit more character customization via modifiers. But the latter backfires because someone with a +5 mod still loses to someone with +0 frequently enough even though the +5 is supposed to be above peak human strength on average.

The d20 is good for systems where a lack of consistency and extremes of success and failure are appropriate to the tone and theme of the game, pretty much.

It's designed to be Pathfinder compatible so if one hates the system they'll have problems with Aethera.

I hate when people post this because there are so many instances of PF devs(like pic related) being retards but they decide to post a joke that one of them made.

The d20 system in aggregate is meant to handle Iron Age skirmish combat in which characters rapidly outstrip normal people in survivability and power. It is a flat curve system meant to handle wide disparities in skill and talent, and to give characters lower in one or the other to still potentially punch above weight.

Sooner or later, this gets fucked up, but that's because a surprising amount of tabletop designers can't do math.

Time has a cost. I could be reading something will much more likely be actually good...

It might be a fun read, at the very least, as long as Paizo doesn't get too far up it's own butt at their 'deep and relevant' political bullshit. Distant Worlds was my favorite Golarion book so I'd be willing to read that as a full setting.

You would have to be a pretty shitty GM to be unable to run a low-fantasy game in PF.

Then why are you even in this thread?

Nobody is saying you couldn't do it.

They're telling you it's a fucking shitty choice of system for it.

Betteridge's Law of Headlines applies here.

Bulmahn wasn't joking when he posted that.

He started joking after people viewed him as a joke.

Yeah I'm not excited for this per se, but I am keen for some of the pathfinder die hards I know to maybe broaden their horizons a little.

Isn't this pretty reasonable?

>you will at least look into it's quality, if only so you can shitpost about it on 4chins.

Shit lads, he's on to us.

Well...

It'll be a good laugh I suppose.

In addition to what everyone else has said it's a visual cue. It's the largest of the dice in a standard set, so it visually stands out when the entire dice pool is rolled. Additionally its variance is too high to use for mechanics like damage, and you might as well use the entire set if you have one.

This discussion is exactly why I prefer low powered campaigns and less convoluted systems.

No, SKR was trying to bend his argument around a double standard. When he was called on it he denied he'd done any such thing and shut the conversation down as soon as a weak excuse presented itself, also giving himself the last word.

Only if it overhauled the system completely. Pathfinder at its core is fundamentally broken and what surrounds it is rotting cancerous bloat that's never cleaned off or polished; when it starts looking too ugly they just slap another coat of bloat on top of it.

Starfinder would need to "reinvent the wheel", but given two things, that won't happen:
1. Pathfinder's central fanbase is composed of people who LIKE the bloat and rot and ENJOY its broken features. Changing these would drive them away, as they often state.
2. Starfinder is advertised to be 100% COMPATIBLE with Pathfinder. This means that, while Starfinder may add new content or even lots of new content, it was always be interchangeable with Pathfinder at a fundamental level.

If you love Pathfinder, you'll love Starfinder. If you hate Pathfinder, you'll hate Starfinder. They are the exact same game with different coats of paint for different times. The most immediate comparison would be Warhammer Fantasy vs. Warhammer 40,000, in terms of the idea: Fantasy is for medieval battles, 40k is for futuristic/modern warfare battles. Many elements, from the Imperium/Empire, Orcs/Orks, Elves/Eldar, Chaos/Chaos are the exact same, but refitted to serve in a different era. This will be true of Pathfinder and Starfinder.

Though, for the record, Warhammer and Pathfinder aren't remotely comparable in quality. I wasn't inferring that.

If you're going to run a low-fantasy feudal Japan game, why not use L5R instead? I mean, you could run that game using PF but it'd ultimately be a waste of time since the system is mean to be used in high gonzo fantasy.

So what are some decent Sci-fi RPGs?

Any that emulate the Mass Effect feel?

Savage Worlds has a pretty good sci-fi supplement.

Traveller is of course the classic sci-fi RPG.

The 40k RPGs are good if you like or can tolerate 40k.

My time is limited. The only way I'll have the time to play Starfinder is if I stop playing a game I actually like.

Plus the things that really turn me off Pathfinder aren't the complaints you often see here. I'm more annoyed with things that I personally dislike, things that I can see why other people might like them. For example, I find 3.PF classes too restrictive, which leads to me playing a lot of classless systems.

Personal preference for Alternity. Klunky, but it's got that old school TSR modularity so you can do any sort of sci-fi with it.

I don't think it will matter if it is good or not, I think it will sell like hotcakes, because all the Pathfinder zombies will buy it just because.

I'd be thrilled if it WERE good, but I am not holding my breath.

It's gotten worse over the years. The best adventures and setting material are the older ones.

There used to be lg paladins of Asmodeus in cheliax, and erastil (cg nature god) used to advocate for traditional family roles. They've since declared that advocating traditional value roles is incompatible with being good, and so have removed it. Meanwhile, slavery is only an act of law, neither good nor evil, and iomedae, God of paladins, is still lg despite torturing her allies/agents in the midst of a war against a demon incursion if they fail trivia or give philosophical answers differing from her own regarding the nature of redemption, or object to her assaulting their allies.

There is also a prominent character who iirc traded the good of the land, for a sex change.

Their work has gotten increasingly preachy and obnoxious.

The answer is 6. That's the latest you can claim the game is designed to
model humans within real world limits.

>3PF classes too restrictive
I hate Pathfinder but I've never heard this one before. Not a jab here, I'm genuinely curious why you think this.

I like Pathfinder for other reasons, but I can really see the argument for classless being better.

I really wish I could like m&m's gameplay, it's chargen is fantastic.

D20 worked great for star wars. See saga edition. Not perfect, but great.

So, it can be done.

It's not out yet either, all the is is a preview.

Though the does seem to be a lot of sci-fantasy Pathfinder coming out these days.

Ntgb, I think he's saying he doesn't like prescripts character advancement paths, even if there's a fair number of alterations you can make to it.

There's something to be said for systems where you can build exactly the character you want to build.

It will be good.

I don't think it will be as popular a release as Pathfinder was. Pathfinder didn't just get really popular because it was 3.5 with blackjack and hookers, it also came out when players were really dissatisfied with 4th edition. There's not really a 4th edition bogeyman to help drive people to Starfinder this time around.

Everything that I've seen about Aethera just feels more sincere than Starfinder.

And yet it is the worst iteration of the Star Wars RPG. Both WEG d6 and FFG's Snowflake Dice versions are better than d20.

I'd like to agree with you, but it's still going to succeed because of Pathfinder's enormous market share. Go into any nerd shop and you're almost certainly to find 5e and PF. Any bets that Starfinder is going to be put right next to PF and for a lot of people new to TRPGs and don't know what to look for online those may as well be the only games in the world and Starfinder is going to likely be their only choice for a space game.

It may not be as successful, but the company is so dominant in meatspace that it's still guaranteed to succeed.

>want to play a cool space minotaur
>not allowed, you must pick from human, human in plant suit, human+ and robot

I was sad.

You should play Hellas and play a cool Robo-Centaur in SPAAAAAACE!!!!!

Started off Pathfinder playing some module I forget the name of. It involved crusades against demons and mythic tiers. Polished off the first two modules before forgetting it. So far it's filled with SJW fantasy characters like a fucking gay cleric and some he/she/it that got a magical sex change.

And how the fuck are traditional family values roles not good?

What makes you feel the classes are toob restrictive?

PF got popular primarily because of butthurt. It's still going on while 4e has since been shelved, which is a shame because 4e is genuinely a fun system abs genuinely the better system.

>you might as well use the entire set if you have one.
>d12s never get used for anything

BUT DUDE THE RULES YOU KNOW AND LOVE
SUNK COST FALLACY LMAO

But still quite good.

And I'd take saga I've WEG.

That's the one where Iomedae (the god leading the crusade) tortures the party of the fail at trivia or don't share her particular morals. It's one of the worst adventures they released.

And they decided traditional family roles are objective capital E Evil and oppressive to women and gays. I shit you not.

>Butthurt
Over 4e not being mechanically d&d enough for some people? Or the default lore changes that some d&d players considered too much to accept? Or over the PR nightmare caused themselves by discarding their large forgotten realms fans for 7 years? Or perhaps attacking their fans publicly? Or maybe robbing customers of access to their legally purchased PDFs shortly after 4e came out?

4e was a combination of very drastic mechanical and settings changes, along with a series of fucking self sabotaging business and PR decisions.

They alienated, discarded, and incited boycotts from many former happy customers.

As for Pathfinder? That's their fault too. They pulled Paizo's main revenue stream or from under them (dragon) and the original gsl was so terrible no business would touch it. So Paizo was forced to compete with WotC to stay in business, as were any other customers who were helping pro up WOTC during the 3e days.

Give me another game (other than 3.5) that does tactical reality warping high magic combat like level 10-16 tier 1-3 Pathfinder, has at least as flexible classes, a has half a dozen decent published campaigns, and at least one decent monster manual.

The closest I can think of is *maybe* HERO, which is on my to-play list as a potential Pathfinder alternative, but which I've yet to try.

GURPS actually. The best part is that the many many options aren't redundant bullshit like Pathfinder's.