"Tabletop D&D Has Lost Its Way" Says Pathfinder Video Game Exec

Feargus Urquhart, one of the execs from Obsidian Entertainment, which is behind an upcoming Pathfinder-themed video game, told Polygon why the company chose to go with Paizo rather than WotC for tabletop fantasy inspired games. "One of the reasons we actually went with Pathfinder was ... how do you say it? I'll just say it: We were having a hard time figuring out how to move forward with Dungeons and Dragons." The issue, he says, is that "D&D is a part of Wizards of the Coast and WotC is a part of Hasbro" and that he would "love to see D&D be bought by someone and become what it was before... Become TSR again."

Of course, TSR went bankrupt, so I'm not sure wishing that on somebody is a kindness.

Urquhart is a long-time D&D video game exec, having worked on games like Neverwinter Nights 2; he points out that "I'm probably one of the people who has one of the most electronic D&D games that they've worked on". Now, of course, his company has moved on to Paizo's Pathfinder.

The upcoming Obsidian video games will be based on the Pathfinder games - specifically a tablet game based on the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, due in the next few months. The studio is, of course, known to tabletop RPG fans for D&D games like Neverwinter Nights 2. Urquhart did hint at non-card-game based projects, saying that "We're thinking about how can we take traditional RPG stuff and put it on the tablet. No one has solved it really."

You can read the short interview here.

​

 

[Jester David]

And I didn't say that it did fully make up for their loss.

Also, while they don't mention it next quarter, they're not saying it's doing badly. Just that it's not a top earner or losing out.

Or, more likely, because it's revenues are constant.
Mentioning "D&D" and "MtG" in the same breath regarding earning potential is laughable, as Magic makes soooooo much more money. It's much more likely D&D was mentiomed because its revenue was X% higher than the previous quarters or the year or two. That should not be mistaken for Hasbro being happy with its profits or satisfied with the game.

D&D is the older daughter that just went off welfare and got a job waiting. Everyone is "proud" that she's turned things around, but she's still a long way from being her younger sister, Magic, that manages a chain of resteraunt and drives a BMW.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

Citing it because its revenues went up would be how it would work if Hasbro were a relatively small company. Instead, Hasbro is the closest thing to a cyberpunk-style megacorporation that exists. If they're losing profits in a noticeable amount; it's because the entire industry is losing profits in a noticeable amount. Keep in mind this is a corporation that can toss a couple hundred million at a movie flop and not even find the loss of money worth mentioning in their quarterly reports. And the number of product lines and brands they have is so huge that it's very likely even they don't have a complete list.

So, when they mention a product, it's because that product not only saw a rise in profits, but saw a rise in profits that affected their bottom line. They have product lines that rise in a large percentage of profit every quarter that they don't mention. So to mention DnD at all means that it's doing extremely well, to the point it has risen above the hundreds of other product lines competing for attention.

 

[Zardnaar]

Citing it because its revenues went up would be how it would work if Hasbro were a relatively small company. Instead, Hasbro is the closest thing to a cyberpunk-style megacorporation that exists. If they're losing profits in a noticeable amount; it's because the entire industry is losing profits in a noticeable amount. Keep in mind this is a corporation that can toss a couple hundred million at a movie flop and not even find the loss of money worth mentioning in their quarterly reports. And the number of product lines and brands they have is so huge that it's very likely even they don't have a complete list.

So, when they mention a product, it's because that product not only saw a rise in profits, but saw a rise in profits that affected their bottom line. They have product lines that rise in a large percentage of profit every quarter that they don't mention. So to mention DnD at all means that it's doing extremely well, to the point it has risen above the hundreds of other product lines competing for attention.

Maybe maybe not. even if they sold a million PHB (unlikely) I doubt they would get much more than 20 million dollars and probably more like 10 million. D&D gets mentioned probably because they made a few million off in in the WoTC division.

 

[Mistwell]

Maybe maybe not. even if they sold a million PHB (unlikely) I doubt they would get much more than 20 million dollars and probably more like 10 million. D&D gets mentioned probably because they made a few million off in in the WoTC division.

Here is one set of numbers confirmed by Hugh Howey: For a hardback that costs $27.99, the publisher/authors makes $9.87. So about 35%.

 

[mouselim]

I would partially agree. Not that D&D 5e isn't good but it lacked the feel of what D&D was during TSR reign at the helm. I guess TSR went down under isn't what Feargus is trying to comment but the hobbyist approach. Not sure how this can be applicable in today's context but it is the truth. Even where I am, most (if not all) of the FLGS are not what it was then back in those good old days.

 

[Jhaelen]

Behold the opinion of some random guy on the internet - yeah...

 

[pemerton]

I've just re-read the 2nd ed AD&D High Level Campaign handbook. It's really not very good. Is that the sort of 2nd ed material that people are nostalgic for?

 

[pemerton]

Here is one set of numbers confirmed by Hugh Howey: For a hardback that costs $27.99, the publisher/authors makes $9.87. So about 35%.

Well, that's more-or-less in line with the upper end of [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION]'s speculation: 35% of $50 is 17.5, so a million sold would be a bit less than $20 million.

As someone who follows the Amazon trends and other sales/industry data, do you think they have sold one million 5e book?

 

[Ravenheart87]

I've just re-read the 2nd ed AD&D High Level Campaign handbook. It's really not very good. Is that the sort of 2nd ed material that people are nostalgic for?

I think some people are nostalgic for the campaign settings of 2e, but forget about the poorly written splatbooks, crappy adventures, and of course Lorraine Williams. The last time TSR was hobbyist was maybe during the early 1e era, and even then they were quite unfriendly even with third party publishers they supported before (eg. Judges Guild) - see Gygax rambling about the importance of official products.

 

[Xavian Starsider]

Here's some numbers that may be more worth comparing.

The 5th Edition Player's Handbook is currently the 104th best selling book on Amazon. The Pathfinder Player's Handbook is currently 3,006th. Now granted the two books were released 5 years apart which is going to be a considerable factor. So let's try again with two books released more closely together. Please note, that I did not check these numbers prior to starting this post.

The D&D 5E Monster Manual was released 2 months before Pathfinder's Monster Codex and costs $10 more than Pathfinder's Monster Codex. With the more recent release and the lower price, Pathfinder should have the advantage here. after all, these are both hardcover monster splat books. Right?

5E Monster Manual: #236
Pathfinder Monster Codex: #72,236

I'm not making these numbers up.