"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.

​

 

[Xavian Starsider]

True, but that's a somewhat cheeky comparison as well - last I checked, D&D has never tried. (And, actually, I would be really interested to see what would happen if they did. )

Plus, D&D already has two active MMOs out there. It's great that Paizo raised 1+ mil for its MMO, but for a project the size and complexity of an MMO, that's probably just enough to get your foot in the door.

Double Fine raised nearly 3.5 million in a record breaking kickstarter for an adventure game (a genre that's almost gone the way of the dodo since the 1990s) and with no disrespect to their endeavor, I don't think the finished product begins to compare to the effort and development that went into making Cryptic's Neverwinter MMO. So I feel safe in saying that Neverwinter probably cost substantially more to develop into the game that it is. Or even the game that it launched as. Pathfinder's kickstarter will not put it on even footing.

 

[Neonchameleon]

True, but that's a somewhat cheeky comparison as well - last I checked, D&D has never tried. (And, actually, I would be really interested to see what would happen if they did. )

So would I. As far as I'm concerned (and I've spun this off to a new thread) the D&D team is leaving a lot of money on the table due to a limited marketing model.

Plus, D&D already has two active MMOs out there. It's great that Paizo raised 1+ mil for its MMO, but for a project the size and complexity of an MMO, that's probably just enough to get your foot in the door.

And initial indications from the MMO are not looking good.

 

[Umbran]

So basically its hard so why try?

It is not only hard, it is risky. It isn't like, with enough effort, it is sure to pay off for them.

So, it isn't about hard. It is about whether it is actually a good idea for them at all. Engaging with us could well be a mistake. I, at least, am not convinced that we (the community overall) are ready to uphold our end of it.

 

[Queer Venger]

from a marketing standpoint I dont know how wise it is to make a statement like that. Then again, while many of us feel nostalgia for the "good 'ol days" of TSR, this is the company that went bankrupt and resulted in many innovations in D&D (Pathfinder and 3e/3.5e). Hasbro may not be the most empathetic of companies, but its not going to go bankrupt from mismanagement.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Just because you don't like what a company is doing (or not doing)... doesn't ipso facto mean what they are doing (or not doing) is wrong.

I know it's hard to accept... but maybe, just maybe... what *you* want isn't in fact the best course of action for the company.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Just because you don't like what a company is doing (or not doing)... doesn't ipso facto mean what they are doing (or not doing) is wrong.

I know it's hard to accept... but maybe, just maybe... what *you* want isn't in fact the best course of action for the company.

This. Also, when people talk about TSR, it's important to remember that there were really two TSRs. Up to 1985, and post 1985. AKA, the Gygax TSR, and Lorraine TSR. When people talk about how TSR had management that ran the company into the ground, they are probably talking about Lorraine Williams TSR. When people talk about the "good ol days of D&D with TSR", they're probably talking about pre-Lorraine. Or at the very least, prior to the Blumes ing the company just before the take over.

That's important to realize, because TSR was around for a long time, and making a blanket general statement about it isn't really accurate to the context of whatever statement you're replying to.

 

[Dausuul]

So he thinks 5E D&D has "lost its way," because, um... reasons.

If he'd provided any explanation of what he meant by D&D losing its way, specific issues with the game or its management, that would be one thing. But he didn't. He just said, "5E bad, Pathfinder good." Maybe whoever wrote the article just left out all the relevant bits, but based on what we've got here, count me in the group that sees this as sour grapes because Obsidian didn't get a license.

 

[Agamon]

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?

That's kinda like telling people that like classic movies that you just watched Plan 9 from Outer Space and don't get it.

 

[DEFCON 1]

When people talk about the "good ol days of D&D with TSR", they're probably talking about pre-Lorraine. Or at the very least, prior to the Blumes ing the company just before the take over.

But you know what? Even *that* isn't necessarily true... because there was nothing at the time to compare TSR *to* to determine whether what they were doing was or was not actually right or smart. I mean heck... they were running two game lines simultaneously, their president was spending more time in Hollywood than actually working on the game, and a whole swathe of their published works were modules they scribbled up to use as convention games with little thought as to their balance or usefulness to long-term campaigning. So yeah... we could make a case that even the original TSR really sucked as a company too.

And that's the point. Over the entirety of the game's 40 years (and the companies that ran it), there's always been some parts that we could say were fantastically great, and some parts we could say were ridiculous and stupid. And every other spot in between. So what WotC is choosing to do right now is comparatively no better or no worse than any other time. We can find things that seem brilliant, and find things that seem moronic. But so be it. That's called "running a business".

 

[TwoSix]

Just because you don't like what a company is doing (or not doing)... doesn't ipso facto mean what they are doing (or not doing) is wrong.

I know it's hard to accept... but maybe, just maybe... what *you* want isn't in fact the best course of action for the company.

This is true, but so is the converse. Just because a company is embarking on what may be the most fiscally viable path doesn't mean I have to like it.

Now, I shouldn't argue my opinion as any sort of business plan, I agree. What I want the company to do might drive them bankrupt, for all I know. But I have no obligation to cut them any slack simply because of a business plan. The only rationale for that is if I tie the health of the product with the health of the company. While I don't think they're orthogonal to one another, I don't necessarily think there's a strong correlation.

Quite simply, I find the current release schedule to be BORING, and that's the worst sin for D&D's release schedule, for my interests. There's nothing to talk about other than "What's WOTC going to do next?" and "Gosh, 5e is a solid game, how about that bounded accuracy?" We were already looking forward to Sword and Fist and the FRCS at this point for 3e, and Martial Power and the 2 FR books for 4e, plus the knowledge that PHB2 was coming. This lull is driving me away from talking about D&D on message boards. I'm reading the Paizo.com message boards again, for God's sake!