Richard Dansky - Game Narrative Expert
In this episode, Tim sits down with Richard Dansky — game narrative expert, fiction writer, and tabletop role-playing game designer — for a wide-ranging conversation about building a creative career across multiple formats and revenue streams. Richard traces his path from tabletop games starting in the '90s through nearly three decades of video game work, including a long tenure as the central narrative resource for Ubisoft's Tom Clancy franchise, while continuing to write fiction, contribute to tabletop games, and co-author a graphic novel along the way. He talks candidly about the economics of that kind of career: how he thinks about rates across different formats, why he has always lived well below his means, and why he wishes more writers understood their own professional value. He also shares hard-won wisdom about navigating rejection and knowing when to walk away from a bad deal.
Richard's question for Tim: How do you think about melding various revenue streams, as these days every author's got to have a Patreon/Substack/YouTube channel/podcast/newsletter/online store/convention presence etc.
Key Takeaways:
- Richard describes his entry into both tabletop and video games as largely relationship-driven — a reminder that in creative industries, showing up, being reliable, and knowing the right people often matters as much as talent.
- He has maintained a remarkable ability to work across multiple formats simultaneously: video games by day, tabletop and fiction by night — treating each as a distinct creative sandbox with its own rules and rewards.
- Richard's fiction acceptance rate is around 3.7%, which he notes is listed as above average. It's a useful reminder that rejection is the norm in creative work, not a signal of failure.
- Richard describes the best financial habit of his career as consistently spending well below his means, and how knowing he can afford his lifestyle frees up mental and creative energy.
- He argues that writers and narrative designers are frequently underpaid because the value of their work is hard to quantify, and that the industry actively works to make creative professionals feel their contributions are worth less than they are.
