Wizards of the Coast Hiring New Lead Designer and Head of Game Ecosystem for D&D

dnd-asterik-1234066 (1).jpeg

Wizards of the Coast seems to be hiring replacements for Chris Perkins and Jeremy Crawford. This week, Wizards of the Coast posted job listings for a new "Head of Game Ecosystem" for Dungeons & Dragons, as well as a new "Principal Game Designer" for the game. Both are high level positions focused on product execution for Dungeons & Dragons, with 8+ years of experience in game design preferred for both roles.

Wizards of the Coast recently lost the two arguable faces of Dungeons & Dragons - Jeremy Crawford and Chris Perkins. Both left the company after the launch of D&D's revised 5th Edition ruleset. In an interview I did with Jess Lanzillo about the departures, she indicated that others within the D&D design team would be taking on greater responsibilities moving forward.

The job description for the Principal Game Designer role is below:


The Principal Game Designer leads the execution of Dungeons & Dragons’ major product releases. These tentpole projects span analog and digital expressions and may include setting content, rules-adjacent systems, adventures, and platform-native features. This role architects and stewards the design vision of sophisticated product suites, working closely with design leads, editorial, rules leadership, and digital teams to ensure cohesion and quality across every player touchpoint.

What You'll Do:
  • Lead the game design execution of major multi-SKU product suites, collaborating with cross-functional partners to align scope, tone, and player value.
  • Structure content development plans, including product mapping, design outlines, and contributor briefs that account for both analog + digital formats.
  • Guide designers, freelancers, and partners in developing content that reflects D&D’s tone, design ethos, and evolving format needs.
  • Collaborate with rules design leadership to integrate new mechanics or modular systems under development into flagship products.
  • Act as the primary design voice for your product(s), providing vision, review, and iteration through every phase of development.
  • Partner with the Executive Producer and Head of Product to ensure your projects meet the quality bar and are delivered on time and within budget.

The Head of Game Ecosystem job description is below:


The Head of Game Ecosystem is a crucial leadership position responsible for driving the complete design and evolution of the Dungeons & Dragons game system. This role ensures consistency across all game releases, both physical and digital, preserving the integrity of the rules and mechanics while encouraging innovation.

What You'll Do:
  • Define and drive the long-term vision for D&D’s core rules and gameplay systems across all product formats.
  • Own the rules roadmap and ensure mechanical consistency and interoperability between releases.
  • Propose and lead ecosystem-forward product initiatives—system-focused releases that reinforce the health, extensibility, and accessibility of the D&D ruleset across play formats and player types.
  • Lead and mentor a team of game designers and developers to deliver high-quality content at scale.
  • Partner closely with product management, narrative, and digital teams to align game systems with franchise goals and player needs.
  • Develop frameworks and tools to support scalable content creation—internally and externally—without compromising quality.
  • Represent D&D’s systems vision internally and externally, acting as a voice of authority and alignment across all design efforts.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer


log in or register to remove this ad

IDK, I wouldn't put it past a job posting to consider -every- upcoming book to be "game design" even if it's a repolished setting book, or an adventure, or whatever they're likely to publish going forward.
I would have to agree. I would have this in the job description of this kind of role for every stage of the game's life cycle.
I mostly agree with you. The main objection I have is against the idea that 2024 is any kind of disappointment to WotC, and the overall concept of "6e is on the way!" - which is very popular here on the boards, so much so that it's gotten to the point that I scoff whenever I see it, and probably will until the day that it's an actual announcement!
I think I'm at the point where my position is that D&D'24 could well be a disappointment, and/or 6e could very well be on the way, but the evidence (or at the very least the weight of it) people (here and online in general) have been putting forward seems unconvincing at this point.

At some point they will announce, and the people who were calling it right before will say 'called it!,' and more power to them if that gives them a good feel*. I won't give it much heed unless it was specific to the time (rather than every moment until it eventually happens), and the reasoning put forth is compelling. *I don't honestly believe people are going around patting themselves on the back for such things. I mean more that minor visceral thing like some places where you call 'First!' for being the first commentator or other minor victories.

Salaries of 150-200k, roughly are listed, because that's required by law in Washington
I feel that that has more to do with Hasbro trying to get away with not paying as much as they may have done for the previous titles, but I suppose that the salaries mentioned are not particularly insignificant (at least not compared to the previous job offers), so who knows?
Putting that through a cost of living calculator, that salary in Seattle equals ~95-127k in the twin cities where I am. That's not-nothing, but hardly exceptional for being head of something and in such a prominent role. I know my being at the intersection of health, law, and data/IT skews my perspective on normal, but this seems -- well, not low, but also maybe not "not particularly insignificant" in a way that counteracts the notion of trying to get away with not paying as much either.
 


Putting that through a cost of living calculator, that salary in Seattle equals ~95-127k in the twin cities where I am. That's not-nothing, but hardly exceptional for being head of something and in such a prominent role. I know my being at the intersection of health, law, and data/IT skews my perspective on normal, but this seems -- well, not low, but also maybe not "not particularly insignificant" in a way that counteracts the notion of trying to get away with not paying as much either.
I agree that it's not particularly significant either, which is why I put it that way - it's kind of in the middle.

The last time they put up a job offering, I would have to have taken a large paycut if I'd wanted the job (and I OWN AN FLGS!) whereas this job offering I could live on.

I still couldn't take it. I'd need to move to Seattle, and the job has almost no job security (yes, even compared to owning an FLGS). I could never be truly serious when musing about the idea of this job (for myself). I mean, I'd love the idea of working on the game, but the reality is another matter. And of course, I know that they'd never hire me for it.
 



It failed the potato test.

Which meant that it would never have been successful.
They could have made it pass the potato test if they'd wanted too (I presume you mean "run on low-end machines").

Fortnite runs on absolute junk and mobile phones, and that's a UE5 game. And there are quite a few other UE5 games which will on a wide variety of machines, including low-end ones (admittedly there are also quite a number which run fairly badly even on mid-high end machines). But to make them do that, you have to:

A) Code the game accordingly and set it up right so it can have potato-tier graphics when it needs to.

B) Actually package it and release it for things that are mid-to-high range Windows PCs.

But... they didn't do either of those things. That's a choice, it's not an inevitability, so it's not a "would never have". They certainly didn't make it easy for themselves, though, that's for sure! And also, to be clear, developing an app like they wanted was likely going to cost tens of millions, and probably did, even getting to the point they did, and I suspect that's a larger development budget than D&D + Beyond combined had over the same period, which means in order to justify its existence, it was going to have to make a lot of money - and I and many others (possibly you?) pointed out that it was very unlikely it would be able to make that money.
 


There is nothing in the job posting that suggests 6E is in development. Nothing.

This looks like the backfill for Jeremy Crawford. Work with other senior to leaders to develop a product roadmap, decide which rules will be in new products, and develop the rules.

So, what does "rules" mean for 5E? For most books, it means one thing: subclasses. Think about everything published between the 2014 and 2024 Player's Handbook...what rules were in them?
  • Over 100 subclasses
  • 1 class
  • Lots of spells
  • Some traps
  • A few vehicles
Did I miss anything? Maybe. But that's about it.

We should assume there will be another revision to the 5E rules in 2034. I'm sure that's the plan at WotC.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top