What's the problem with that? Mars is further away than Earth and it's a desert too.

It just depends on what the planet is made of from when it was formed. Distance from the star has little to do with it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm sick of seeing all your signatures and not having one of my own

Keep one thing and only one thing in mind: Science FICTION. I understand what you mean, except I also like to argue. But really, Don't worry about the technicalities. I mean, the planets wouldn't be as close as they are. Same thing with atmosphere, it wouldn't happen 6 feet away from the surface. Lol, most people would be ducking for air!


____________
Guess what, this isn't my sig, I just wrote it here

---

It just depends on what the planet is made of from when it was formed. Distance from the star has little to do with it.

---

Distance actually does have something to do with it. If a planet is not in a stable orbit around a star in the "Goldilocks" zone, it would be difficult to develop a lush biosphere. Too close in, and all the water evaporates and one ends up with a desert world, like Venus. Too far out, the water is frozen and you get a desertlike planet if there is little water (like Mars) or you get an icy world where life *might* exist but only in an oceanic environment under the ice crust, assuming that it has an active, hot core (like Jupiter's moon Europa) to ensure a liquid ocean exists.

Different stars have different Goldilocks zones too. For a G2V spectral-class/luminosity yellow dwarf similar in mass to good ol' Sol, the Goldilocks zone is obviously at about 1 AU. For more massive, hotter-burning stars the Goldilocks zone would be further out, for dimmer, cooler stars the zone would be closer in, etc.