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.

 

[LordEntrails]

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

Just as soon as you buy a franchise and build one. I'll come buy a ticket or three.

 

[Reynard]

Consistent profit.

Only if you decide to serve just one market. I think it is a big mistake to think of "D&D fans" as a single, homogenous market.

 

[Amphytrion]

I think that, in some ways, it’s shocking this hasn’t been the case recently.

BG3 came out to resounding popularity, yet there wasn’t an obvious tie-in product for it. Under a better coordinated brand, the new FR setting books would have come out in 2023, alongside perhaps a themed Starter Set.

I’m sure some at Hasbro think it was a golden opportunity, now largely wasted. It may have been a better investment than the new Core Books in hindsight.

The first 5 or so years of 5th edition had excellent brand synergy across tabletop, boardgames, videogames, streams, etc. I am not sure why that was abandoned, and a return to that would probably be healthy for the brand and attract new players.

 

[Koloth]

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 not equal to sameness. Think how the Coca Cola Corp has many different products that they market to many different customer bases. But most of that marketing is coordinated out of Coke HQ. I think that is what this move by Hasbro is about. They want to avoid the possibility of the 'movie' group making a deal for a D&D movie and the 'computer game' group finding out about it in the trade rags when it is halfway through production.

 

[Argyle King]

Do you think there will ever come a time when Hasbro decides to license D&D out to other rpg companies?

I could see a future in which various settings are paired with other game systems.

Perhaps not the best analogy, but it would be like how Sega transitioned from having their own game consoles to licensing out their characters and IP to other console companies.

 

[timbannock]

I think that, in some ways, it’s shocking this hasn’t been the case recently.

BG3 came out to resounding popularity, yet there wasn’t an obvious tie-in product for it. Under a better coordinated brand, the new FR setting books would have come out in 2023, alongside perhaps a themed Starter Set.

I’m sure some at Hasbro think it was a golden opportunity, now largely wasted. It may have been a better investment than the new Core Books in hindsight.

The first 5 or so years of 5th edition had excellent brand synergy across tabletop, boardgames, videogames, streams, etc. I am not sure why that was abandoned, and a return to that would probably be healthy for the brand and attract new players.

Probably hurt by poor long-tail success. I'm sure I'll miss some exception, but of the ones I remember:

• D&D Stranger Things Starter Set was neat, but the adventure had no replayability, and beyond that adventure, nothing offered wasn't already in the Starter Set or Essentials Kit or the later Starter Set.
• Acquisitions Incorporated was a short adventure (again with little or no replayability), and its biggest and best mechanics were entirely focused on Backgrounds and Downtime, two things that just don't get a huge lift compared to classes, gear, monsters, and adventures.
• Dragonlance was tied to a novel series that started with an announcement and was immediately followed by lawsuits, then had the double-whammy of a big adventure and an even bigger integrated board game that was $80...and was almost immediately dumped into bargain bins at $10. (I really think DL was WOTC answering the fan feedback of "why didn't Spelljammer have ship combat?!" but they mucked it all up so it was an incredibly expensive "well, that's what we get for giving the fans what they ask for" moment.)

BG3 basically snuck up on them (which is hilarious in its own right). It vaguely seems like Descent Into Avernus was about the best they could pull together for a tie-in there. And Rime had the snowy prison featured in DD:HAT, and of course that movie wasn't an MCU-level success story which led to the sale of E-One.

I don't think they can really do anything right, TBH. But aside from my opinion, that track record bounces between low effort and it shows and maximum effort and it still failed.

 

[dbolack]

Do you think there will ever come a time when Hasbro decides to license D&D out to other rpg companies?

They have done it with "lesser" properties. I can see no reason to preclude them from considering licensing out one of the settings, though I sincerely doubt there would be enough money in it for them to look at it seriously.

 

[Argyle King]

They have done it with "lesser" properties. I can see no reason to preclude them from considering licensing out one of the settings, though I sincerely doubt there would be enough money in it for them to look at it seriously.

I don't expect it, but I could see it as a way to profit from "problematic" material and more adult-oriented stories from older settings that don't jive with 5E's current business model.

A Daggerheart Dragonlance and/or Goodman Games Dark Sun could do well.

Maybe even break it down further than that by allowing other companies to put a Beholder in a bestiary for a small fee.

 

[AlViking]

I think that, in some ways, it’s shocking this hasn’t been the case recently.

BG3 came out to resounding popularity, yet there wasn’t an obvious tie-in product for it. Under a better coordinated brand, the new FR setting books would have come out in 2023, alongside perhaps a themed Starter Set.

I’m sure some at Hasbro think it was a golden opportunity, now largely wasted. It may have been a better investment than the new Core Books in hindsight.

The first 5 or so years of 5th edition had excellent brand synergy across tabletop, boardgames, videogames, streams, etc. I am not sure why that was abandoned, and a return to that would probably be healthy for the brand and attract new players.

Part of it is that hindsight is 20/20, I don't think anyone knew that BG3 would be as big of a hit as it was. There likely should have been something and hopefully this new office is more than just corporate speak.

 

[Umbran]

Do you think there will ever come a time when Hasbro decides to license D&D out to other rpg companies?

Well, "D&D" in this context is not a single thing. It is a brand under the umbrella of which many things could be made. One would not expect them to license the entire brand out in one go...