1. I actually haven’t played it yet. So far I’ve just skimmed the book. I do still plan to try it.
2. I’m more of a casual gamer, so I’m more impressed by rule efficiency than tactical realism.
3. I’ve been spoiled by the simplicity of D&D 5e.
4. Pathfinder players will probably love it.
I’ve always wanted to try Spelljammer, but I don’t
like older RPGs so much. It took decades to streamline D&D’s rules
to create the elegant system we have today, and it's hard for me to go backwards. I keep wanting to try modern
sci-fi RPGs, but the few I’ve tried haven’t really done it for me. Starfinder
is Paizo’s newest attempt to create a sci-fi RPG, and I was really looking forward to it.
They obviously wanted to make it as cross-compatible with Pathfinder as possible, and those who are used to Pathfinder will be right at home. Unfortunately for my tastes, that's where things went wrong.
They obviously wanted to make it as cross-compatible with Pathfinder as possible, and those who are used to Pathfinder will be right at home. Unfortunately for my tastes, that's where things went wrong.
Where do I begin? Pathfinder was already pretty
complicated compared to D&D 5e. Being based on 3.5, the most
prolific version of D&D, it had to compile years of content and
errata into a coherent system. I’ve always respected Pathfinder
so doing it so thoroughly. But now that I play D&D 5e, I was glad to be
rid of things like flat-footed AC, diagonal squares taking more
movement, ability damage, negative levels, and so on. Now Starfinder comes
along and adds two kinds of AC, separate stamina and
hit points, resolve points, and so on.
This would all be okay if any of the new stuff
impressed me, but it doesn’t. I’m disappointed there aren’t more
races, and the ones it does have don't wow me. Sure, it has rules for using existing Pathfinder races, but I never really wanted to see any of those in space. The
classes are mildly interesting, but none of them really jumped out at
me. Usually when I read a new RPG book, my biggest problem is narrowing down all the cool new stuff I want to try, but for some reason none
of the Starfinder classes really sparked my imagination.
I do like that it has separate classes and themes. The themes remind me of the backgrounds in D&D 5e. But there's only ten of them in the PHB (including "Themeless"). And some of the ones they have are more specific than others. I can understand Mercenary or Spacefarer - those are fairly generic and are likely to describe a lot of adventurers. But "Icon" (i.e. celebrity) seems a bit specific when you only have ten themes. I much prefer 5e's spread of backgrounds.
Of course, by the time I get my next haircut they'll have released a dozen splatbooks full of new races, themes, and classes, and eventually I'll see something I want to play. And that's great and all, but I'm still not sure I like Pathfinder rules in space. Every three pages I'll run into a paragraph I have to read three times to really "get", because it's phrased like a calculus problem.
But that's my fault. I knew Starfinder was going to be kinda/sorta Pathfinder compatible, so I should have expected that from the beginning. And to be fair, I don't dislike Pathfinder. I've played it before and the rules don't feel nearly as complicated in context - they just don't read well. Again, 5e spoiled me.
From my point of view, it feels like a wasted opportunity. They had the chance to create an RPG from scratch, but instead they built on top of Pathfinder's tried-and-true rules. It was actually a very smart decision, and it will probably sell a lot more copies than the hypothetical RPG I would have preferred they made. In other words, Starfinder, "It's not you, it's me."
