Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks Talks AI Usage in D&D [UPDATED!]

Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks is convinced that the Dungeons & Dragons franchise will support some kind of AI usage in the future. Speaking today at a Goldman Sachs event, Cocks spoke about how AI products could soon support Dungeons & Dragons and other Hasbro brands. Asked about whether AI has the potential to "bend the cost curve" in terms of entertainment development or digital gaming, and how it's being used in the toy and content industries, Cocks said the following:

"Inside of development, we've already been using AI. It's mostly machine-learning-based AI or proprietary AI as opposed to a ChatGPT approach. We will deploy it significantly and liberally internally as both a knowledge worker aid and as a development aid. I'm probably more excited though about the playful elements of AI. If you look at a typical D&D player....I play with probably 30 or 40 people regularly. There's not a single person who doesn't use AI somehow for either campaign development or character development or story ideas. That's a clear signal that we need to be embracing it. We need to do it carefully, we need to do it responsibly, we need to make sure we pay creators for their work, and we need to make sure we're clear when something is AI-generated. But the themes around using AI to enable user-generated content, using AI to streamline new player introduction, using AI for emergent storytelling, I think you're going to see that not just our hardcore brands like D&D but also multiple of our brands."

Wizards of the Coast representatives has repeatedly said that Dungeons & Dragons is a game made by people for people, as multiple AI controversies has surrounded the brand and its parent company. Wizards updated its freelance contracts to explicitly prohibit use of AI and has pulled down AI-generated artwork that was submitted for Bigby's Presents: Glory of the Giants in 2023 after they learned it was made using AI tools.

A FAQ related to AI specifically notes that "Hasbro has a vast portfolio of 1900+ brands of which Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons are two – two very important, cherished brands. Each brand is going to approach its products differently. What is in the best interest of Trivial Pursuit is likely quite different than that of Magic: The Gathering or Dungeons & Dragons." This statement acknowledges that Hasbro may use AI for other brands, while also stating that Wizards is trying to keep AI-generated artwork away from the game. However, while Wizards seems to want to keep AI away from D&D and Magic, their parent company's CEO seems to think that AI and D&D aren't naturally opposed.

---

UPDATE -- Greg Tito, who was WotC's communications director until recently, commented on BlueSky: "I'm deeply mistrustful of AI and don't want people using it anywhere near my D&D campaigns."

 

[Clint_L]

I spent a chunk of time this summer having the commercial version of ChatGPT (much more powerful) run a short campaign (levels 3-5) for a solo adventure that eventually grew into a party of four.

It was a pretty interesting experience. I would describe it as collaborative; I gave it general instructions as to setting and the very broad adventure ideas, but then it came up with the details, right down to a room by room description of a dungeon, and running combat.

What was really cool was that it would spin adventures out of my actions. So if it described a shady-looking character in a tavern and my character spoke to them, they would typically drop hints about some sort of intrigue, lost temple, or whatever, and I could opt to follow up, or not. It felt very sand box-y.

The generative AI was very good at doing character interactions as I roleplayed the PCs and it did all the NPCs. It was also very good at coming up with vivid descriptions. It was better at math than previous iterations, but still fudged all the time, rather than really generating random numbers. It was forgetful, so in that dungeon it would sometimes give wrong directions and contradict earlier descriptions. Despite me repeatedly asking it to make the encounters more challenging, it had trouble doing so.

Also, it could add art to illustrate what the characters were seeing, which was super cool!

It was a fun experience, and with me taking an active role (often by actively rolling dice) I had a new D&D-related experience that was fun and memorable. But it was by no means independently DMing. I was leading it, so even though I didn't know where the adventure was headed, my active engagement was needed to keep it going off the rails. Nor do I think the current iteration of ChatGPT is capable of being an independent DM, due to the way it is designed.

However, I do think it would be possible to make it much better without too much work. Taking that basic model of ChatGPT and adding a better math function, maps, and adventure guidelines could allow it to be much more independent and approximate a human DM far more effectively. It does not seem like a big step, is what I'm saying. I can see why WotC and others are pursuing it.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

Some DMs may find it easier to create atmospheric descriptions in writing than freestyling or trying to remember all the salient details that they need to share.

It's a muscle. Exercise.

 

[darjr]

I think the big impetus for AI for folks at the c-level is investor money.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The obvious solution is for Cocks to play D&D with Enworlders. Once he played with the best of the best, he'll know what D&D really is about.

Are we going to do a GoFundMe for the support services the DM will need afterwards?

 

[Azzy]

It's a muscle. Exercise.

Really? That's what you want to go with instead of just being understanding that different people have different skill sets and that that's okay.

 

[Oofta]

I spent a chunk of time this summer having the commercial version of ChatGPT (much more powerful) run a short campaign (levels 3-5) for a solo adventure that eventually grew into a party of four.

It was a pretty interesting experience. I would describe it as collaborative; I gave it general instructions as to setting and the very broad adventure ideas, but then it came up with the details, right down to a room by room description of a dungeon, and running combat.

What was really cool was that it would spin adventures out of my actions. So if it described a shady-looking character in a tavern and my character spoke to them, they would typically drop hints about some sort of intrigue, lost temple, or whatever, and I could opt to follow up, or not. It felt very sand box-y.

The generative AI was very good at doing character interactions as I roleplayed the PCs and it did all the NPCs. It was also very good at coming up with vivid descriptions. It was better at math than previous iterations, but still fudged all the time, rather than really generating random numbers. It was forgetful, so in that dungeon it would sometimes give wrong directions and contradict earlier descriptions. Despite me repeatedly asking it to make the encounters more challenging, it had trouble doing so.

Also, it could add art to illustrate what the characters were seeing, which was super cool!

It was a fun experience, and with me taking an active role (often by actively rolling dice) I had a new D&D-related experience that was fun and memorable. But it was by no means independently DMing. I was leading it, so even though I didn't know where the adventure was headed, my active engagement was needed to keep it going off the rails. Nor do I think the current iteration of ChatGPT is capable of being an independent DM, due to the way it is designed.

However, I do think it would be possible to make it much better without too much work. Taking that basic model of ChatGPT and adding a better math function, maps, and adventure guidelines could allow it to be much more independent and approximate a human DM far more effectively. It does not seem like a big step, is what I'm saying. I can see why WotC and others are pursuing it.

So two basic thoughts on this. First, it does seem like they could just link into subroutines specifically designed for the math and a few other bits.

But ... D&D just isn't all that big and customized AI would be expensive, even if you can include other TTRPGs. It's one thing for video games to consider AI NPCs that you can have actual conversations with (and obviously there are other issues) when a big video game can gross hundreds of millions, another when you're looking at the TTRPG assistant market. Is the ROI really there?

 

[I'm A Banana]

So, I could totally see Sigil using something like Dungeon Alchemist to help users build 3d environments quickly. Would this be a problem?

Depends on your end goal and a few decisions along the way.

Say I'm a DM using Sigil and I want a 3d dungeon for my next dungeon crawl on Sigil. What are my potential options?

1. Invest my time. Build it myself. Best possible results! But, maybe I don't have the time.
2. Invest my money. Pay someone to build it for me. Could have OK results! But, is there a marketplace for that? Can I buy other peoples' maps on Sigil and use them in my games? Can I import files for a 3d dungeon from somewhere else (like maybe DMs guild)?
3. Pay WotC to have AI do it. The results are not great, honestly, but better than nothing and quicker and I don't have to worry about the faff with #2 (presumably...).

If I am WotC and I am building this thing out, I get to choose what I want to support.

User-Created Dungeons.
I could support #1. It's a pretty basic functionality and it's the kind of thing my users expect. I don't have to support #1, though. Giving a good user experience for a 3d dungeon builder is a lot of work, after all. Time and effort and development budget. I could just say, "use it with the dungeons WE provide" and then pay some people to whip up these dungeons.

....and then if I use AI instead, I can save on paying people to whip up these dungeons. Maybe pay some junior person to edit them for coherency, but I'm going to treat this like a volume business where a bit of slap-dash doesn't matter and nobody is really holding me to a high standard of quality.

OR, I could pay someone who is good at making 3d dungeons to make those dungeons, but that's gonna be more time and more effort and more money, probably...

Is this good? Is this bad? Is this a problem? Well, AI use here does put multiple people out of a job (WotC doesn't need to pay people to make dungeon-building a friendly experience, and doesn't need to pay people to make quality dungeons, either, and it's going to be a lot cheaper to make an intern edit for coherency than it will be to have someone make custom content). It's content-milling. Quantity over quality.

But, maybe my users won't give a toot and I can make bank off of content-milled dungeons and so my investors are happy and if they're all happy, then I in the C-suite am happy, and the only people I've made UNhappy are people who don't write me checks. Maybe this is much cheaper, and will give a better experience to a broader base, than developing a program that can help random people build 3d dungeons in Sigil itself. Certainly at least a competitive case can be made.

A Dungeon Marketplace
If I want to support option #2, I don't need to build a user-friendly map-builder, either, I just need to build an ecommerce shop and an import functionality, and THAT is a much smaller lift. Not nothing - I need some dev to make sure my tabletop can import some file formats that folks are currently using or could currently use (build your dungeon in Blender or Unreal and import into Sigil!), maybe wade into some copyright waters (what happens when someone just...imports a BG3 map...), probably develop a way for people to create storefronts and process credit card transactions, but nothing too beyond the pale. This is just setting up an internet platform. I could be the YouTube of 3d dungeons, with everyone making their own (wherever they do that) and uploading them to my platform and me taking a little cut of every purchase. I can even have my own storefront and do things like release map packs with big adventures to double-dip on some purchases.

The storefront, of course, could contain artists who make dungeons on spec. You submit a brief, they come back with a quote on how long it will take them to make your 3d dungeon and how much it will cost, and then you pay and get your dungeon.

People will OF COURSE use AI to make these dungeons, but I've kind of sidestepped that issue. Maybe get a tag and a policy of "clearly tag your AI creations as AI created" for the store fronts.

To me personally, this sounds like potentially the best idea for WotC. Always better to be a marketplace than to be a producer. The problems this creates are...solvable.

What's the downside, then? Ah, right, I'm a CEO, and my investors are all frothing at the mouth over AI. This solution doesn't leverage AI. I mean, not directly - certain sellers in the marketplace might use it and certain buyers would be fine with it. But I don't get to tell the rich people who write my checks that I did good and used their pet tech trick. This doesn't save me headcount. It doesn't inflate my headcount by a lot, but we'll need managers and moderators and we'll have to do some development of the platform.

I'm not "bending the cost curve" at all, here. Just providing a useful platform for a reasonable fee. And if I am a CEO, that's not what I actually want to do at all.

Click Button, Make Dungeon
Okay, so if I want to make my investors happy, I am pushing AI. And folks are already out there using random generators and even some AI to make dungeons, so here's what I do: I make an AI platform for dungeon generation.

Let's say a subscription comes with a certain amount of..."ASTRAL DIAMONDS" that can be used to get an AI result. People can also buy these ASTRAL DIAMONDS a la carte, I suppose, but the better deal will always be the subscription, because subscriptions are what we want to drive people to. The users will go to the map screen and click a button and maybe write a paragraph and then -1 ASTRAL DIAMOND and get an AI-generated map meeting their brief.

AI doesn't really do this with 3d software today (as far as I know, anyway), but it's not a HUGE leap, and talking about AI keeps the investor checks coming my way. I've gotta pay some AI developers, some basic map editors, but once the work's done, it's done! It can't be that much more complicated than all those free programs out there generating 2d dungeons, right? ......Right?! Of course not.

Is this a problem? Well, not for the investors. And the users might be happy to get a few free maps each month with their Epic-Tier subscription or whatever. This might eat up some money as we're developing it, but that's why we have investors, after all, and the long-term ROI is potentially banger, if all my users are as hype about AI as my investors are (hint: they are not). It is a problem in that it cuts out potential paid 3d dungeon-makers who are human beings, but they won't miss what they never had, right?

So what do I do?
Depends upon what problem you actually want to solve. What's gonna make the most money? Well, they've all got potential. I probably make the least money on free user-created dungeons, but even that is something I can monetize with tokens and templates and assets. I can probably make decent money with a marketplace, but it is some work to set up and doesn't rely on the investor buzzword at the moment. My users might also create trash. I love the idea of increasing the value of a subscription, so the AI generation is appealing. That would kind of depend on how big the upfront cost of getting that AI model built would be. (Lucky for me some of my biggest investor also have invested in AI by pure coincident I am sure and they have contacts that can help connect me!)

And how big a problem is any of these in terms of overall adoption of AI and of making human beings obsolete? There's a continuum. In any case where AI is an option to employ instead of a human, the human's labor is devalued, but making that AI be an option in the first place is a potentially significant investment. If you can afford to ignore your investors' hype, you can still find places where you could use AI effectively to shave off some development costs.

And maybe at the end of the day a lot of users are fine with that, in the same way that a lot of people are fine with processed meat in their hamburgers and conspiracy theories from government officials and going into severe debt when you get sick. A lot of people are fine with all sorts of things that aren't good things, just because it doesn't bother them enough. Convenience is more king than reason.

There was a philosopher named Paul Virilio who said "When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck; when you invent the plane you also invent the plane crash; and when you invent electricity, you invent electrocution..." Novel technologies contain dangers inherent in their use.

If WotC is using AI, then they shouldn't be ignorant of the dangers inherent in the use of AI, in the interests of appeasing their investors.

 

[SteveC]

Really? That's what you want to go with instead of just being understanding that different people have different skill sets and that that's okay.

I think this is an important point. I want people to play games and have fun. If they need help or if the best way they can run a game is to use this kind of assistance, who am I to say boo about it?

Back in the 3x days, I played with a DM who used the resources at the time to generate the game world. There were a ton of books with pages after pages of examples of everything you might need to create and run a game. And my friend used this to run the game. It may not have been a tightly interwoven plot but we had pizza, Mountain Dew, and other snacks while hanging out in his basement. Man I miss that time! I went and got responsible and now don't have time for anything more than an online game.

If there are people out there who run a game and can spend time with friends with online help, yay them!

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I think the big impetus for AI for folks at the c-level is investor money.

I think we are at or close to peak AI hype, Whether the technology lives up to it is another matter but I also think that there is currently a lot of money at stake and share prices at stake. Money costs are rising (and possible future tariff wars is likely to drive up inflation) and a lot of venture capitalists want to off load investments and prove that there is some (any ) utility in AI as it currently exists.
So, yeah! I think Cocks and the like are under pressure to invest in AI and there also the possibility that it may deliver on some of the hype. So, he cannot completely ignore it either.
Some area of AI application will (I think) prove to be very useful but I am not sure that that AI tech is the same as being pushed by the VC crowd.

Some slightly relevant links in spoiler

Spoiler: Attached Media

Most relevant


Less relevant but very funny.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

So two basic thoughts on this. First, it does seem like they could just link into subroutines specifically designed for the math and a few other bits.

But ... D&D just isn't all that big and customized AI would be expensive, even if you can include other TTRPGs. It's one thing for video games to consider AI NPCs that you can have actual conversations with (and obviously there are other issues) when a big video game can gross hundreds of millions, another when you're looking at the TTRPG assistant market. Is the ROI really there?

Probably be better to let MS or someone else do the legwork and licence out the tech then.