2024 D&D Core Rulebooks Off to "Strongest-Ever" Start for D&D Books

Dungeons & Dragons got a rare shoutout during Hasbro's 3rd quarter earnings report, with Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks stating that the 2024 Core Rulebooks were off to a record start. Today, Hasbro released its third quarter 2025 earnings report, with Wizards of the Coast propping up the overall revenue for the company. Wizards of the Coast is up 33% YTD, with Magic: The Gathering having a 40% jump compared to last year. However, Cocks also called out Dungeons & Dragons in his comments, speaking to both the Core Rulebooks and D&D Beyond's Maps VTT.

Cocks' full comments (which are admittedly very brief) can be found below:

The refreshed 2024 editions of D&D’s Monster Manual, Players Handbook, and DM Guide are off to the strongest-ever start for D&D books. D&DBEYOND’S new, accessible virtual tabletop has driven weekly traffic up nearly 50% since its September launch.

Hasbro is having a good year, with total revenue up 7% compared to last year. Wizards is expected to be up 36-38% for 2025, largely due to the performance of Magic: The Gathering.

 

[bedir than]

Here I see a question about D&D, and rather than saying "D&D24 is doing great, sales are up X%", Fred pivots to "digital is looking great". For those familiar with corp speak, is that a red flag?

They also said the 2024 rules release is doing great. It wasn't contained to digital.

 

[Staffan]

What is your idea here? In academia, the advice was that if you asked about Prof X, and someone said "Prof X is great. Given you're interested in that field, Prof Y is doing some really cool things..." they meant "Prof X is bad and you should avoid them".

Professor X is well known to be a jerk.

 

[The Firebird]

They also said the 2024 rules release is doing great. It wasn't contained to digital.

Right...but "strongest ever start for Dungeons and Dragons books" is not a high bar, nor very precise. (Is every book individually doing better than any book has ever done?). And why not something more quantitative, as for Magic? "Magic revenue increased 55% to $459 million".

Perhaps too small to matter? I'm not that familiar with this world, don't have a stake other than curiosity.

 

[bedir than]

Right...but "strongest ever start for Dungeons and Dragons books" is not a high bar, nor very precise. (Is every book individually doing better than any book has ever done?). And why not something more quantitative, as for Magic? "Magic revenue increased 55% to $459 million".

Perhaps too small to matter? I'm not that familiar with this world, don't have a stake other than curiosity.

It's too small to matter. Larger brands like Monopoly didn't get dollar amounts. Nor did Transformers, GI Joe or Pepa Pig.
D&D can do very well and be of no interest to investors.

Apple doesn't give numbers for Apple TV for similar reasons -- it's a part of their identity but not a big number.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What is your idea here? In academia, the advice was that if you asked about Prof X, and someone said "Prof X is great. Given you're interested in that field, Prof Y is doing some really cool things..." they meant "Prof X is bad and you should avoid them".

There's a lot of evidence that Professor X views people, especially students, as disposable. He's lowkey a major villain.

 

[Reynard]

Do we have any idea how good the penetration is? As in, how many 2014 players have adopted 2024?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

My notes, for my store, have the PHB outselling the other two core books (which are roughly equivalent) by between double and two-and-a-half, for the last four revisions. (I no longer have files from before that). This is for lifetime sales.

Near release, they are closer to equivalent than they are long term. (Early adopters are more likely to buy all 3). PHB still "wins", though. Currently 2024 PHB is "only" at about 1.5x the other 2.

 

[Scribe]

There's a lot of evidence that Professor X views people, especially students, as disposable. He's lowkey a major villain.

Ack, my youthful innocence!

 

[Zardnaar]

Do we have any idea how good the penetration is? As in, how many 2014 players have adopted 2024?

Nope.

ENworlds around half it seems going by the what are you playing thread.

Elsewhere 1/3rd to a half going by similar informal polls.

Fairly consistent with every other cycle change. Takes 2-3 years to hoover up everyone who will switch.

Going with this threads figures 1st year of 5.5 equals a good year of 5.0 sales probably 2018 or 19 would have to dig for that.

 

[TrainedMunkee]

What is your idea here? In academia, the advice was that if you asked about Prof X, and someone said "Prof X is great. Given you're interested in that field, Prof Y is doing some really cool things..." they meant "Prof X is bad and you should avoid them".

(If they liked Prof X, they would say "Prof X is great and you should work with them").

Here I see a question about D&D, and rather than saying "D&D24 is doing great, sales are up X%", Fred pivots to "digital is looking great". For those familiar with corp speak, is that a red flag?

They always have to present in a good light, if they like their job. It's what they didn't say that matters.

They made a weak comparisons to 2014 sales. I don't have exact numbers, but they should be selling many, many more copies of the 2024 book than the 2014 book, in the comparison of launches. There is no realistic comparison between the customer base of D&D in 2014 and the customer base of D&D in 2024. This means they didn't have any good numbers to present.

I am not saying that D&D 2024 is bad. It isn't. From a fan viewpoint. From a corp viewpoint, they are cutting and cutting to save money. From a corp viewpoint they should have launched a new edition. As a fan of the game, I am glad they didn't.

D&D has never been the bread winner and should never be from a fan viewpoint. Corps tend to kill creativity.