Dungeons & Dragons Shifts to Franchise Model, Dan Ayoub Named as Head

Wizards of the Coast has shifted Dungeons & Dragons to a "franchise model," with former Senior VP of Digital Games Dan Ayoub named as the new VP of Franchise for the game. Ayoub made the announcement on LinkedIn late yesterday, announcing the shift in franchise. In Ayoub's words, the new model means that everything related to Dungeons & Dragons - books, video games, film, and TV - will now live under one roof. Ayoub stated that this model will allow for a "strong, coordinated, and well-funded approach for the franchise.

Ayoub comes from the video game industry, having worked at Microsoft for 11 years prior to jumping over to Wizards of the Coast. He notably worked on the Halo video game franchise for years, working as a Studio Head and Executive Producer of 343 Industries. He also worked as an executive producer for Ubisoft and a Game Director for The Walt Disney Company.

When first announcing his move to Wizards of the Coast back in 2022, Ayoub stated that he was a fan of both D&D and Magic: The Gathering, having played both as a child.

 

[haffthemighty]

They treated D&D like a brand before, so any part of their company could grab the logo and run with it. Now they are switching it to a franchise model, putting Ayoub at the head of all that is D&D, as if D&D was, again, its own company. So, that means a more coherent approach going forward, as all that is D&D will come under the same vision. No more left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing stuff. It is, assuming Ayoub is good as the head, good, and, if he is bad, then it is a bad thing. The licensing out to third parties that everyone is talking about in these comments is old news. Yes, they are shopping for third parties to develop properties for them and then WotC takes a cut as opposed to creating things in house. In house is more reward but more risk, since they internalize all the cost. Licensing is basically all reward but lower payouts since they only take cuts off the top. But that has been known for like a year. The franchise approach is the new thing.

 

[Starmaster]

To me, it sounds like moving to a "full franchise" model means that nothing will be done in house other than coordinating the projects to make sure that the items produced by the franchisees are what Ayoub wants and are bringing in enough revenue.
Perhaps I'm being a bit pessimistic, but I see them eliminating the D&D design studio and all or nearly all the in-house designers. The new core books are out now, so these can serve as a framework for everything the franchisees produce, including future rulebooks. This move may have been in the planning stages for some time, which would explain why D&D's senior designers have been fleeing the company like rats jumping off a sinking ship. Think of how much money it would save to get rid of all you designers & artists and just let other companies do all the work for you. You get a big share of the profits for licensing out your brand, you have no development costs, and you take none of the risks of producing a product that doesn't sell.

 

[darjr]

As another example - the annual events like Tomb of Annihilation are 100% a byproduct of a franchise model. If you liked that era, this might be a signal that they want to go back to something like that.

If it brings back things like the Stream of Annihilation that would be cool.

The vibe was such that I did a Tour of Annihilation, ten days, ten games, ten game stores.

 

[Parmandur]

If it means the business folks pay less attention to the tabletop it could be a good thing.

I agree with the Hasbro execs that D&D is undermonetized...but the monetization should be in cool stuff like Owlbear stuffiness or Beholder Mr. Potatoeheads...the RPG can only make so much money as a TTRPG.

Based on what @mearls said above, this does sound like a return to the model WotC had in the mid-teens in some structural sense, so here's hoping.

 

[Reynard]

My early take on this is Hasbro wants a consistent brand image for all aspects of D&D going forward.

Which is an honestly weird take. Not everything needs to look, feel and taste (ew) like Baldur's Gate 3. You can't sell BG3 to middle school kids. Why would you want a singular brand image for something that literally has no limits aside from folks' imaginations?

 

[LordEntrails]

How much does a franchise cost? Can I put it next to a McDonalds?

 

[Stalker0]

Perhaps I'm being a bit pessimistic, but I see them eliminating the D&D design studio and all or nearly all the in-house designers. The new core books are out now, so these can serve as a framework for everything the franchisees produce, including future rulebooks.

It is an interesting question. With 5e supposed to be the "forever edition"....what does future dnd development look like? Perhaps they are taking a more out of house approach, maintaing the keys to the core pillar, but letting other houses develop and design for a time.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

My impression is the opposite - the lack of synergy there frustrates me, or at least leaves me scratching my head. They might change some costumes, change a team line-up for a bit, feature a villain in a storyline, miniseries, or crossover, but that's about it. Maybe that's what you mean.

That's what I mean. If, say, the Guardians of the Galaxy are disbanded before the new Guardians of the Galaxy movie comes out -- even if that was the payoff to a long, well-written storyline, they're for sure getting back together a month before the movie drops, with a line-up that mirrors what's on screen, so audience members can drive from the theater and immediately start buying stuff that looks like the movies.

We've seen this happen a ton of times in the MCU era especially.

Back in the day, DC Comics took great pains to make the Superman comics compatible with Superman the Movie, including changing what Superman and Lois looked like for several years, making them much more closely resemble Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder.

Contrast with DADHAT and the ability to buy nothing WotC published that explicitly tied into the movie beyond just saying D&D on the cover. No starter set, no Neverwinter sourcebook, not even having their heist themed adventure collection feature characters who looked an awful lot like the characters in DADHAT.

If the D&D TV shows actually happen, I'd expect a lot more synergy next time around.

It's just always surprised me that neither company has ever had a line of comics that's even vaguely in continuity with the films and tv.

But also, yes, it's weird that Marvel Comics doesn't have an ongoing MCU continuity comic series, just a variety of seeming low-effort one-shots.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Which is an honestly weird take. Not everything needs to look, feel and taste (ew) like Baldur's Gate 3. You can't sell BG3 to middle school kids. Why would you want a singular brand image for something that literally has no limits aside from folks' imaginations?

Consistent profit.

 

[AlViking]

How much does a franchise cost? Can I put it next to a McDonalds?

What I want to know is when we can finally have a D&D amusement park roller coaster.