D&D General No, Hasbro Is Not Selling D&D

I wasn't going to comment on this rumour in article form--despite a 20-page-and-counting thread about it--but it seems some clarification is needed as it's all over social media and the usual click-bait YouTube channels.

First off, Dungeons & Dragons is not being sold. That's the short version.

WotC, including D&D, is Hasbro's most profitable division and, as many put it, it's 'golden goose'. Despite an article on Pandaily being entitled "Hasbro Seeks to Sell IP “DND” and Has Had Preliminary Contact with Tencent"--and much of which is a close copy of a recent YouTube video rumour--buried halfway down the article is the important paragraph:

A Tencent IEG (Interactive Entertainment Group) insider revealed that Tencent, represented by its overseas business department IEG Global, is in negotiations with the aim of acquiring a series of rights including the adaptation rights for electronic games such as DND.

That means they wish to license the D&D IP to make video games. WotC licenses the D&D IP all the time--that's why you see all those D&D lunchboxes and plushies and t-shirts and miniatures and foam dragon heads and, indeed, movies and video games. Licensing an IP is not buying an IP. Modiphius is licensing the Star Trek IP for their TTRPG; Modiphius hasn't bought Star Trek. I published the Judge Dredd TTRPG for a couple of years, but I didn't own the Judge Dredd IP.

Tencent, incidentally, owns 30% of Larian Studios, who made the recent Baldur's Gate 3 video game--under license, of course (Larian didn't buy D&D either). Tencent is a massive Chinese company known for venture capital, social media, mobile games, internet services, and more, and is one of the world's largest companies. Tencent Games is a division of the company. It has stakes in a lot of companies.

So what does WotC have to say? "We are not looking to sell our D&D IP". The following statement was sent to outlets who reached out for clarification:

We regularly talk to Tencent and enjoy multiple partnerships with them across a number of our IPs. We don't make a habit of commenting on internet rumors, but to be clear: we are not looking to sell our D&D IP. We will keep talking to partners about how we bring the best digital experiences to our fans. We won't comment any further on speculation or rumors about potential M&A or licensing deals."

So, to be clear, Hasbro is not selling D&D to a Chinese company. They are in--as always--talks to license their IP to various companies for various purposes, including electronic games, movies, and lunchboxes.

 

[Abstruse]

We had a "Hasbro is looking to sell WotC!!" in 2020, and I'm quite certain there were another one around 2017. It's a recurring click-bait by now.

And I don't think I've heard of Hasbro selling an IP ever — if it's not profitable for now they'll shut it down and let it rest for ten to fifteen years before dusting it of for something new. The only way you'd get a new D&D home is by someone buying Hasbro — and from where I am we really don't need bigger conglomerates — or it going bankrupt and have to sell things off.

Hasbro tends to be an IP black hole. They very rarely let an IP go once they have hold of it. Even if it's an IP they don't care about and have zero plans to ever use again, they'll hold onto it and refuse to sell just to keep anyone else from having the rights.

One example is the character Rom the Space Knight in Marvel Comics which started off as a licensed tie-in to a Hasbro toy line (technically it was Parker Bros but Hasbro bought Parker Bros). Hasbro owns the rights to the character, but Marvel had a habit up until the late 80s to integrate their licensed characters into their stories. So there's a lot of comics that have Rom in them including stuff like Guardians of the Galaxy, Secret Wars, a few issues of Uncanny X-Men, and other comics that Marvel would really really like to reprint. But couldn't because Hasbro held the rights and didn't want to sell them. It took until less than a year ago for Marvel to finally get a license out of Hasbro to reprint the comics again.

But if you look through a lot of Hasbro's history, you'll see a ton of acquisitions where Hasbro buys up a company, strips out all the IP rights to games, toys, characters, etc., then either dissolves the company if there's nothing else of value (no need for Hasbro to keep Parker Bros active when Hasbro already makes toys and games) or sells whatever's left (like EntertainmentOne was stripped of a lot of assets and rights - particularly the children's show Peppa Pig - and was then broken into chunks and sold off because Hasbro didn't want the rap label Death Row Records). They will also just camp on stuff, like if you're a child of the 90s you'll remember the knock-off Transformers brand Go-Bots and likely haven't heard anything of them in decades...because Hasbro bought them and just sidelined them in favor of Transsformers (it's way more complicated than that but you get the idea).

If I had to speculate what Hasbro would do if they felt the D&D IP wasn't worth investing in anymore, it would be they would license it out but keep ownership and let a third party company start making "official" D&D (the way they decided to license TTRPGs and board games to Renegade Games for big IPs like Power Rangers, GI Joe, Transformers, and My Little Pony despite doing TTRPGs and board games in-house). They may continue publishing in-house as well, sticking the brand into a sort of "maintenance mode" where new material is printed but on a very reduced schedule like 1-2 releases per year designed by third-party publishers. You know, kind of like what happened when Hasbro executives were disappointed with 4e's sales not meeting expectations and so cut way back on the release schedule for 5e, licensing out the first adventures to Green Ronin and Kobold Press, and only started ramping up after the current boom in D&D started.

And even if they wanted to sell D&D, they sure wouldn't do it this year. Hasbro invested a lot of money into upcoming releases for 5ee in the 50th anniversary, the largest of which is probably the development of their new VTT. Hasbro's going to want to at the very least collect the profits off of all of those before they dump the IP. Which they wouldn't because see above.

 

[Queer Venger]

it seems to be the every growing era of click-bait schadenfreude BS on YouTube. I chuckle (and remove) these videos constantly because it's pretty clear what they are aiming at.

Thanks for clarifying..

 

[Remathilis]

At this point I just follow Pointy hat. When something pops up that isn't Dungeoncrafting or Treantmonk, I just click "don't recommend this channel"

I have stopped paying attention to almost all geek media content creators for the same reason. I rarely click on Doctor Who, Star Wars, or Marvel stuff that isn't from the mother ship and only watch let's play MTG.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The Rom comics were so good. Marvel Comics does Invasion of the Body Snatchers better than their conventional Skrull storylines (which tied into Rom as well) ever did.

 

[Minigiant]

The reason it's as bad as it is now though is because we've had multiple WotC incidents which were real, so I hope you're not suggesting the YouTubers are really "to blame" for that.

That's why this didn't happen with D&D content on YouTube earlier. The essential inducements from YouTube/Google are the same now as they were, say, three years go. You want clicks. You want eyes on your video. You want people seeing your Patreon or Kofi links or the like. Going negative and jumping on every rumour has always been a way to get some clicks, but generally when a product/IP is avoiding controversy, it's not that successful, and indeed, if people keep manufacturing fake negative stories, those get fewer and fewer clicks over time, and so people become less likely to promote.

.

Nah

Every popular game is full of clickbaiting videos

 

[Ruin Explorer]

If I had to speculate what Hasbro would do if they felt the D&D IP wasn't worth investing in anymore, it would be they would license it out but keep ownership and let a third party company start making "official" D&D (the way they decided to license TTRPGs and board games to Renegade Games for big IPs like Power Rangers, GI Joe, Transformers, and My Little Pony despite doing TTRPGs and board games in-house).

Yeah I think that's actually more likely than an outright sale in many ways, and further, you can bet that they'd probably move the licence around every few years, so X company would suddenly lose the D&D licence, and Y company would get it. And because they're Hasbro, they'd be making astonishingly bad choices of who to give it to. I won't name names to avoid starting stuff but they'd manage to avoid both really experienced D&D-oriented designers, as well any designers who do things that are clever or innovative, and somehow keep giving the licence to real mediocrities with limited design talent.

 

[MichaelSomething]

This is why I stick to Enworld for my TTRPG news! It's the best, most reliable place you can turn to for TTRPG content!

 

[Deset Gled]

We had a "Hasbro is looking to sell WotC!!" in 2020, and I'm quite certain there were another one around 2017. It's a recurring click-bait by now.

This is re-posting from myself in another thread, but rumors of Hasbro selling D&D seem to come out pretty regularly on a two year cycle.

2024: https://www.enworld.org/threads/hasbro-selling-d-d-ip.702355/

2022: https://www.enworld.org/threads/hasbro-rejects-plan-to-spin-off-wizards-of-the-coast.687212/

2020: https://www.enworld.org/threads/icv2-has-a-theory-that-wotc-will-be-sold.676728/

2018: https://www.enworld.org/threads/rum...-to-sell-wizards-of-the-coast-in-2021.612020/

 

[timbannock]

Nah

Every popular game is full of clickbaiting videos

Exactly.

You have to remember that every single one of these people either is or is trying to make a living off of their videos (or other social content, which can include articles and blogs, but who goes to those anymore?), and therefore they have to get more clicks. It's that simple. If they want to feed their families, this is the way to do it, because social media has made it so.

And a blanket "tough!" is especially harsh for many (most?) of them, because they make other content that's great: tips, tricks, crafting ideas, actual plays, game analysis, reviews. They want that stuff to be the money-makers and the stuff they are known for, but less people consume that content, so...

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

And a blanket "tough!" is especially harsh for many (most?) of them, because they make other content that's great: tips, tricks, crafting ideas, actual plays, game analysis, reviews. They want that stuff to be the money-makers and the stuff they are known for, but less people consume that content, so...

That argument endorses everyone behaving in the worst possible way, at all times, because that's what has the most financial benefit to them. And we can certainly find a lot of examples of people behaving like that in the world, but I don't know that I want to absolve them all of their behavior, just because some of that money turns into food for their kids.

All of these people have other options, including deciding that it's OK if their YouTube income is $X, rather than $X.5 or whatever it ends up being by piling on the clickbait.

I do a lot of career days, and one of the things I tell the older kids -- who invariably ask about money -- is that adulthood is dictated in large part by whether they'd do anything for money (in which case, go work for the local sewer system, who pay great money and are always hiring, and you can probably get away with not finishing high school, to say nothing of college) or whether they have some lines they don't want to cross.

No one is going to starve to death if they don't put out misleading videos on YouTube. It's a choice, one that says some important things about what kind of person they are, no matter what else they do with their platform.