D&D General Hasbro CEO Says AI Integration Has Been "A Clear Success"

We've known for some time that Hasbro CEO--and former president of Wizards of the Coast--Chris Cocks is an avid AI supporter and enthusiast. He previously noted that of the 30-40 people he games with regularly, "there's not a single person who doesn't use AI somehow for either campaign development or character development or story ideas." In a 2025 interview he described himself as an "AI bull".

In Hasbro's latest earnings call, Cocks briefly addressed the use of AI within the company. While he mentions Hasbro, Wizards of the Coast and the digital studio teams, he doesn't specifically namecheck Dungeons & Dragons. However, he does tout Hasbro's AI integration as a "clear success", referring primarily to non-creative operations such as finances, supply chains, and general productivity enhancements, and emphasises that "people make the decisions and people own the creative outcomes". He also notes that individual teams choose whether or not to use AI.

So while it is clear that AI is deeply embedded in Hasbro's workflows, it is not clear to what extent that applies to Dungeons & Dragons. WotC has indicated multiple times that it will not use AI artwork, and its freelance contracts explicitly prohibit its use. The company also removed AI-generated artwork in 2023's Bigby's Presents: Glory of the Giants.

Before I close, I want to address AI, and how we're using it at Hasbro. We're taking a human-centric creator-led approach. AI is a tool that helps our teams move faster and focus on higher-value work, but people make the decisions and people own the creative outcomes. Teams also have choice in how they use it, including not to use it at all when it doesn't fit the work or the brand. We're beyond experimentation. We're deploying AI across financial planning, forecasting, order management, supply chain operations, training and everyday productivity. Under enterprise controls and clear guidelines around responsible use and IP protection. Anyone who knows me knows I'm an enthusiastic AI user and that mindset extends across the enterprise. We're partnering with best-in-class platforms, including Google Gemini, OpenAI and 11 labs to embed AI into workflows where it adds real value. The impact is tangible. Over the next year, we anticipate these workflows will free up more than 1 million hours of lower-value work, and we're reinvesting that capacity into innovation, creativity and serving fans. Our portfolio of IP and the creators and talent behind it are the foundation of this strategy. Great IP plus great storytelling is durable as technology evolves, and it positions us to benefit from disruption rather than being displaced by it.

In toys, AI-assisted design, paired with 3D printing has fundamentally improved our process. We've reduced time from concept to physical prototype by roughly 80%, enabling faster iteration and more experimentation with human judgment and human craft determining what ultimately gets selected and turned into a final product. We believe the winners in AI will be companies that combine deep IP, creative talent and disciplined deployment. That's exactly where Hasbro sits. As we enter 2026, we view playing to Win and more importantly, the execution behind it by our Hasbro, Wizards of the Coast and digital studio teams as a clear success.

- Chris Cocks, Hasbro CEO​

​

Wizards of the Coast's most recent statement on AI said "For 50 years, D&D has been built on the innovation, ingenuity, and hard work of talented people who sculpt a beautiful, creative game. That isn't changing. Our internal guidelines remain the same with regards to artificial intelligence tools: We require artists, writers, and creatives contributing to the D&D TTRPG to refrain from using AI generative tools to create final D&D products. We work with some of the most talented artists and creatives in the world, and we believe those people are what makes D&D great."

A small survey of about 500 users right here on EN World in April 2025 indicated that just over 60% of users would not buy D&D products made with AI.

 

[Umbran]

I have a friend who works in higher ed and also swears AI improves his workflow . . . but I suspect, as you discuss, that there are hidden costs he is not realizing.

Yeah - we often look at (and are sold) AI functionality in terms of time to task completion. We don't often then actually look at the overall workflow, or even more holistically, to see where costs will crop up.

Like, if you have an AI writing code, it may seem to be completed in record time. The costs may not be seen for months, until bugs or fragility of code impacts company costs.

We also have to be aware of looking at trees, rather than forests - taking anecdotes instead of data. Individuals may say, "Hey, this makes my job so much better," but as of last month, the studies I've been able to find still have only about 5% of enterprise-level generative AI implementations realizing returns on their investment in the tech.

 

[Scribe]

He seems to think it speaks with an authority over us. "It's obviously correct."

If he's not trolling, that's horrifying.

 

[Mistwell]

The assertion that everyone he knows uses AI in their campaigns seems laughable... looking at the two campaigns I am in quite a few people use AI for character art, but little else. I've used copilot to shorten a few long character backstories.

So...almost everyone you know uses AI to some extent in their campaigns too?

However, it has always been a struggle to get anyone to take notes. Two weeks ago, I decided to give one of the AI generated session summarizers a try (SessionKeeper). The results were... mixed. If all you need is a paragraph or so summary of what happened, it does a decent job--maybe a detail or two that are off. The more detailed description flat out hallucinates or misinterprets events, sometimes to hilarious results.

My DM, who created his own version of that (described in a thread elsewhere) uses it and it's AMAZINGLY good. Summaries, tracks limited resource expenditures, tracks treasure found, clues found, tracks rounds remaining on any spells or other durations carried over from prior session, tracks in-game date and time (as well as prior session actual date), gives player highlights from prior session, it's so useful. He's making it a service he offers, we're some of the test subjects.

But then it provides summaries tailored to each player, and my players tell me it makes some stuff up, mixes up who did what, and even judges them for their play styles and tactical choices! We've had a laugh about it and it's fairly useful (and I can see the potential), the amount of faith large companies are putting in this technology really seems overly optimistic.

We've used this summary software for over a year now and I'd never go back. It makes just playing and not worrying about notes and such so easy. It makes picking up the next session without trying to recall where we left off a breeze.

 

[chuckdee]

Like, if you have an AI writing code, it may seem to be completed in record time. The costs may not be seen for months, until bugs or fragility of code impacts company costs.

That's where the humans and the policy comes into play. You are 100% held accountable for any code that you introduce in my company - AI driven or not. And as such, expected to fully vet the code and the outcome as if it were your own. It helps in me not having to recall esoteric algorithms or go to stack overflow or search for it elsewhere and get a skileton in place. I do not use that as is in most cases. But when my work includes 5 different languages I can think of off the top of my head, it takes a lot of cognitive load involved in code-switching betwen them. (yes, using cultural terms in relation to actual code LOL)

 

[Scribe]

I do not use that as is in most cases. But when my work includes 5 different languages I can think of off the top of my head, it takes a lot of cognitive load involved in code-switching betwen them. (yes, using cultural terms in relation to actual code LOL)

This is where I've found value as well. I work in multiple languages, multiple platforms, and with multiple ERPs and their own dumb APIs.

On top of everything else, I am OK with not keeping that all in my mind.