"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.

​

 

[Staffan]

WotC bought TSR in 1997 and was bought by Hasbro in 1999. D&D 3e was released in 2000. I'm not going to say that a lot of D&D design decisions weren't made during that two year time period before WotC was bought out, but it is important to realize that WotC was owned by Hasbro when D&D 3e was actually published.

That's the period during which most of 3e was made, when the groundwork for the OGL started, and when they abandoned the Comics Code-inspired "Code of Conduct" that said that the good guys must always win and authority figures must always be portrayed in a positive light. That last bit was particularly strongly shown in Cloak & Dagger, which actually let the bad guys take some good strides forward in FR and planted the seeds for Bane's return.

But the things I remember most about that time was the way Wizards was reaching out to fans. One of the first things they did after buying TSR was can the old online policy (which basically said "don't do anything online with D&D stuff") and replaced it with a much simpler and more generous one which basically said "as long as you're not reprinting our books, using our art, and/or making money from stuff, do whatever." Peter Adkison, "CEO and Janitor", made occasional posts about the acquisition and how things were going, followed by Ryan Dancey. They started making old books available online - some for free, and others as paid downloads.

Much of this went on for a while after they were bought by Hasbro, because Hasbro essentially said "You're clearly doing something right over there bringing in all that money, so we'll leave you to it." Most of that was from Magic and Pokémon, but that "shielded" D&D from corporate interference.

 

[MerricB]

You're right; it's not that they don't allow it, but rather that the default position is that you can't but you can seek exceptions.

Although I can make a case for Stan! being allowed to continue with his work outside Wizards, I don't really see how they could come to an accommodation with Monte about Numenera.

 

[Cybit]

I'm not sure what that means in actual terms of what he did and what others did without him. Do you have any sort of details?

You would probably have to ask Mearls or Cook themselves; I am not privy as to what he specifically worked on. I just remember the letter that Wizards wrote when Cook announced he was leaving; it was almost like they were in shock. I think they imagined Monte would be a big part of this new edition.

 

[Mark CMG]

You would probably have to ask Mearls or Cook themselves; I am not privy as to what he specifically worked on. I just remember the letter that Wizards wrote when Cook announced he was leaving; it was almost like they were in shock. I think they imagined Monte would be a big part of this new edition.

I'd imagine they hired him back precisely with that hope. I'm just thinking that his limited time there would have to limit his contribution as well. I mean, sure, everyone who worked on it will always say that others they worked with were big contributors but looking at things realistically that doesn't seem possible in retrospect. Not to mention what that would imply regarding everyone else's contribution to say that the guy who was there on contract for a very short time was so instrumental. Would seem a bit unfair to those who were there the whole time working so hard through all the changes and such.

 

[Cybit]

I'd imagine they hired him back precisely with that hope. I'm just thinking that his limited time there would have to limit his contribution as well. I mean, sure, everyone who worked on it will always say that others they worked with were big contributors but looking at things realistically that doesn't seem possible in retrospect. Not to mention what that would imply regarding everyone else's contribution to say that the guy who was there on contract for a very short time was so instrumental. Would seem a bit unfair to those who were there the whole time working so hard through all the changes and such.

Time spent != impact. It is more based on what part of the game you're working on, and when in its' development you stepped in. You could have someone who is only there for a few months, but comes up with the basic mechanics (like, for instance, everything is an ability check, and we have bounded accuracy) make a much bigger impact than someone who works on the nitty-gritty details for 18 months. I believe Cook's impact was at a much higher level "senior designer" point than most folks.

 

[Mark CMG]

I believe Cook's impact was at a much higher level "senior designer" point than most folks.

Just your gut feeling? Or do you know something specific? Like do you know that while Monte was there he said, "Hey, let's add in this Advantage / Disadvantage mechanic and streamline the math for combat and the like." I know Monte is a sharp guy but I think it detracts from everyone else to claim that he had much of an impact while he was there for a short time relative to the impact everyone else had over the long haul.

 

[Shasarak]

I remember that Monte was only there a few weeks before he invented Passive Perception.

 

[Iosue]

Just your gut feeling? Or do you know something specific? Like do you know that while Monte was there he said, "Hey, let's add in this Advantage / Disadvantage mechanic and streamline the math for combat and the like." I know Monte is a sharp guy but I think it detracts from everyone else to claim that he had much of an impact while he was there for a short time relative to the impact everyone else had over the long haul.

The original WotC page that had the information is now gone, so I only have this post of mine referencing the material, but it clearly shows that Cook was the Design Team Lead. That's why he was given the Legends & Lore articles to do. Mearls mentioned hiring him in the September 20th, 2011 L&L, but he was first mentioned in an earlier one from August. Cook left WotC in late April, 2012, so he was there for about 8 months. The first playtest packet came out a month after he left, with the game largely in the form we have it now, as far as the core chassis. A review of his L&L's indicates, to me anyway, that 5e's development proceeded along the lines he outlined in those articles, and as Design Team Lead, presumably had a hand in deciding.

Just to clarify (not to Mark CMG, but to the wider audience), the Design Team basically sets strategy -- they say, "We want the game to do this." The nitty-gritty mechanical expression of that is then created by the Development Team. So Monte's role in the 5e process was not to create mechanics or write rules necessarily, but to provide goals and objectives for the development team, and then evaluate the results.

 

[Mark CMG]

(snip)

(snip)

Thank you, both, so much! Excellent summary and just the info I was hoping someone might have access to sharing.

 

[delericho]

I remember that Monte was only there a few weeks before he invented Passive Perception.

??

Wasn't Passive Perception (and, indeed, Insight) in 4e?