Should starfinder have been straight sf?

Dumarest · September 22, 2017, 03:58:47 PM

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;994949Starfinder should, obviously, be exactly what the people who made it wanted it to be.

That's a goal sometimes out of reach...

christopherkubasik · September 22, 2017, 04:19:32 PM

Quote from: Dumarest;994954That's a goal sometimes out of reach...

Their best shot at what they wanted it to be, then.

The key is, it's theirs to make; the target is theirs to choose.

Voros · September 22, 2017, 11:14:18 PM

Quote from: Dumarest;994877Exactly. Nothing about the plot elements has anything to do with the genre. Whenever anyone says "Star Wars is a samurai movie" or "Star Wars is a Western," I can only assume they haven't seen Star Wars and they read something online and are parroting it.

Also Hidden Fortress isn't a Samurai film, just sayin'

Dumarest · September 22, 2017, 11:18:19 PM

Quote from: Voros;995026Also Hidden Fortress isn't a Samurai film, just sayin'

Well, that is what I mean , a plot or set piece is not a genre. I could make a sci fi version of the plot from Seven Brides for Seven Brothers or The Music Man, but that doesn't make mine a musical.

christopherkubasik · September 22, 2017, 11:22:21 PM

Also: World War II and Star Wars.

Philotomy Jurament · September 23, 2017, 08:15:34 PM

Quote from: Schwartzwald;994434I wasn't interested in starfi der as I do. Not like d20 systems but looked in on the thread here about it. Before it degenerated into TSR fans taunting pathfinder fans with ''Ha! Ha! Your game's dying!'' and pathfinder fans refuting this I got the vibe starfinder is a bastardization game combining sf and fantasy elements like magic.

Do you think starfinder should have been straight up SF like traveller or do you prefer the sf\fantasy crossover genre?

I prefer straight sci-fi over sci-fi with elves and magic and such.

That said, I wouldn't have purchased Starfinder in either case (I dislike the system, and don't care for Paizo's approach to adventures and splat-books). I wouldn't go so far as to say that they "should" or "shouldn't" have taken the approach they did, though. It's not for me, but I'm sure there are gamers who appreciate what they're offering.

Biscuitician · September 24, 2017, 09:16:52 AM

Starfinder should have been whatever the devs wanted.

It should also have included a fucking bestiary.

Manic Modron · September 24, 2017, 01:23:48 PM

Yeah, I don't know why the bestiary didn't launch at the same time as the core book. They did the same thing with Pathfinder, I learned. CRB one month, bestiary two months later. I suppose they assume conversions from previous, mostly compatible games are a good bandage for that.

Caesar Slaad · September 25, 2017, 12:32:32 PM

I'm going to go with: No.

Though it would have potentially made it more of a selling point to me (the idea of the Golarion-verse fast-forwarded is one that is not inspiring me), I've gotta say that would have been the wrong move for the line. And it also wouldn't have made sense (the concept of starfinder seems to have grown out of SF stuff like Distant Worlds and Iron Gods that were in Pathfinder.)

In short, a publisher could have put out any of a variety of SF subgenre games. But this is the game that it made sense for Paizo to make, and the one for which its installed base would buy into.