WotC Hasbro Bets Big on D&D

During today's 'Hasbro Fireside Chat', Hasbro's Chris Cocks, chief executive officer, and Cynthia Williams, president of Wizards of the Coast and Digital Gaming mentioned D&D, and about betting big on its name. This was in addition to the Magic: The Gathering discussion they held on the same call.

The following are rough notes on what they said.

D&D Beyond

• Leaning heavily on D&D Beyond
• 13 million registered users
• Give them more ways to express their fandom
• Hired 350 people last year
• Low attrition

What’s next for D&D

• Never been more popular
• Brand under-monetized
• Excited about D&D Beyond possibilities
• Empower accessibility and development of the user base.
• Data driven insight
• Window into how players are playing
• Companion app on their phone
• Start future monetization starting with D&D Beyond
• DMs are 20% of the audience but lions share of purchases
• Digital game recurrent spending for post sale revenue.
• Speed of digital can expand, yearly book model to include current digital style models.
• Reach highly engaged multigenerational fans.
• Dungeons and Dragons has recognition, 10 out of 10
• Cultural phenomenon right now.
• DND strategy is a broad four quadrant strategy
• Like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or Marvel
• New books and accessories, licensed game stuff, and D&D Beyond
• Huge hopes for D&D

What is success for the D&D Movie

• First big light up oppourtunity for 4th quadrant
• Significant marketing
• They think it’ll have significant box office
• It has second most viewed trailer at Paramount, only eclipsed by Transformers
• Will be licensed video games, some on movies
• Then follow up other media, TV, other movies, etc.
• Bullish on D&D.

 

[tetrasodium]

But that's the issue "at least short term".

And you're right short term. Initially the artists etc. will playing catch-up with what's already in D&D.

But this is a company that wants to make money, and you can bet that, long before the artists are done catching up, WotC will have them creating new stuff specifically because it's awesome-looking and will sell, even though maybe it's not a good fit for existing D&D or whatever. As soon as WotC starts seeing what sells and what doesn't we can expect the resources to start getting refocused.

I mean, if they have like just simple tokens I can put a few letters/numbers on and maybe a colour (like I use on the tabletop, to hell with minis, they cost money and space), I won't be too worried, but there's little incentive for them to support that kind of thing well, to be honest.

The idea that any other VTTs will meaningfully be able to compete with the offering WotC are suggesting they'll have is laughable.

Sure, a locked-in, ageing user like yourself may well decide to stick with Foundry, but anyone less locked-in is likely to move, if WotC's VTT does what they're saying it will. They will have a de facto monopoly.

Of course that's a big if. But if they really have 350 people on it? They'll manage it by 2025 if not 2024.

Wrt artists & catchup.. By going 3d wotc's vtt already looks to be placing micro transaction over filling gm needs. I believe that I have tokens for all of the monsters at all crs from caeora plus the same for levelup"s monstrous menagerie token pack imported into the vtt I use. Paizo announced a couple of months ago that they are working with caeora to put out a mega pack of all their monster book monsters early (?) next year too. Then there are the literal gigs & gigs of mapping assets from my vtt of choice (arkenforge). Wotc's vtt could come out tonight & still be behind in art.

 

[overgeeked]

But I don't have to allow any of that in my game? And if I do, everyone at the table can use it -- you can't spend money to gain an advantage over me or the other players. So, no, it's not at all like video games.

Right. You don't. At your table in your house. But the players expect that you will allow everything. There are huge threads of arguments about that very topic. Whether the referee "gets to" or "is allowed to" or even "should" limit player options. Most referees say yes, the referee should have that authority. Most players vehemently disagree.

And once you're no longer talking about what happens offline at your home game but instead Hasbro's D&D VTT...will you have the same control then? We assume so. But we won't know until it lands.

There's also the question of AL and this VTT. And with paid DMs now being a thing, WotC would be dumb not to have some kind of DM and player matching service in there. And it's all but guaranteed they'd have specific rules for the whats and hows.

 

[Greg Benage]

Right. You don't. At your table in your house. But the players expect that you will allow everything.

I mean, my players don't, but even if they did and I allowed everything, they still can't buy an advantage over anyone. They just aren't the same, man.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I used D&D Beyond (DDB) by manually copying and pasting info into Word documents and into Foundry VTT, no license required to revoke. If DDB wants to hinder copy and paste on their site, they would be shooting themselves in the foot.

I do know for Foundry VTT there are (free, with additional features for modest Patreon support) add-on modules that allow you to pull your DDB purchases and materials into Foundry VTT, and they utilize the DDB API to do this. This is a possible avenue that DDB could put behind a paywall, but I think it would generate a lot of ill will in the community, as well as make digital partnerships more difficult going forward.

The only thing I've ever purchased on D&D Beyond (the monsters from Spelljammer) I copied to my homebrew docs offline immediately. I don't believe in renting gaming content.

 

[Alzrius]

He clearly believes that in person physical play is superior (I don't agree)

I don't know about superior, but I think that in-person play lacks disadvantages that VTTs necessarily possess, largely with regards to the technological factors inherent in using them. While virtual play is clearly a boon for people who can't otherwise meet in-person, the reliance in internet connectivity opens up several new areas where things can go wrong (I know several people in rural areas, for instance, whose internet connection becomes spotty if it rains; one guy has his connection lag severely if anyone else in his house runs the microwave), etc.

And that's before the point about "the medium becomes the message," which strikes me as a legitimate factor to be concerned about. VTTs aren't the same as video games, so I don't think they can necessarily be compared to something like Dragon Age or League of Legends, but there's something to be said for an immersive virtual environment (i.e. a more elaborate, graphically-intensive VTT) creating a sense of limitations because certain aspects of PC interaction with the game world are programmed to be supported and others aren't. That the type of play sets expectations is something which goes back much further than VTTs, where RPGs are concerned, but they have the potential to inadvertently create new barriers in that regard without meaning to.

There's also the issue of micro-transactions and shifted corporate focus as well. A greater pivot to digital assets likely (albeit not conclusively) means a reduced emphasis on game mechanics and lore/worldbuilding, which means less material for people who like that. That certainly constitutes a legitimate reason to be concerned with the direction which 1D&D is going, and I thought the video did a good job covering most of those points.

EDIT: Forgot to talk about the issue of third-party products potentially being harder to integrate into a VTT also.

 

[Umbran]

Do we have any evidence that they've learned their lesson from the MtG debacle?

Well, they turned down the publishing rate when they released 5e. So, it seems to me that the D&D side of the house has figured that one out some years ago.

 

[Alzrius]

Well, they turned down the publishing rate when they released 5e. So, it seems to me that the D&D side of the house has figured that one out some years ago.

Well sure, but hasn't the publishing rate of 5e products been on an uptick for the last few years?

 

[BovineofWar]

We already do. Splats with explicit power creep. This new subclass is OP compared to the subclasses in the last splat book, which are OP compared to the subclasses in the PHB. You pay to get better stuff. It's literally how RPGs are monetized.

Well, in D&D terms, we did. I'd argue 5e doesn't do that anymore. There's very few options books (Xanathar and Tasha); even adventures are infrequent annual hardcovers instead of monthlies.

Is that better? I don't know. Paizo fans have to be happy with the Pathfinder cadence. I sometimes miss the better world building and development. But it's also nice to go a few years without any 'must buy' titles?

 

[Micah Sweet]

DMSGuild would disagree with you.

Not really WotC though, short of a couple random products and older stuff.

 

[Scribe]

Do we have any evidence that they've learned their lesson from the MtG debacle?

Based on the comments I've seen, no, Hasbro/Wizards is not heeding anything the community is saying, and intends to plow on ahead.