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.

 

[mamba]

But the prompt is your own text.

So what, the prompt has nothing to do with the output, which is not your own text. As I said, you can argue that it would put your own spin on it, much like you said you can do on the output, but in either case you had little to do with the result, so I consider either approach to be AI generated.

Unless you started with a full text of yours and then use a RL editor or have an AI perform the same function I consider it AI generated.

 

[mamba]

It is more about text than video, and I think the idea is that there is a continuum. The endpoints are:

1) "Give me an adventure set in the forgotten realms"

2) Writing your own mod

yes, there is a continuum, but chances are you stay quite a bit away from the middle in most cases. Either the AI does most of the work & writing, or you do.

Somewhere in the middle is the prompting sequence:
-here is my original campaign setting
-here are the themes I'm trying to emphasize
-This is what the players have done so far
-they are interested in faction X. Suggest some ideas for adventures involving this faction.

Still fully on the AI side and not really all that far away from 1) unless you take the ideas (i.e. at most a paragraph rather than 80% of an adventure) and then create your own adventure based on one or more of the ideas

 

[DrJawaPhD]

I wish WOTC would be consistent, just two years ago they went with the "we are not going to allow any AI art ...."

As a company their "moral compass" is all over the map.

Their moral compass has never changed. It is unwavering, unflinching, always pointed directly towards the $

Also nothing in the snippet linked above is inconsistent with their previous claims of not allowing AI art. For example when he says "We believe the winners in AI will be companies that combine deep IP, creative talent and disciplined deployment.", the "disciplined deployment" corporate jargon phrase means to refrain from using AI in ways that will anger their customer base and put their precious $$ at risk. As long as they think enough people are against AI art that it would cost them more money in sales than they could save on paying artists, they won't do it. If (when?) we as a society get to the point where most people just give up caring/knowing about AI art versus actual art, then yeah at that point they'll use it along with everyone else in society.

 

[Morrus]

But the prompt is your own text.

When I give an art order to an artist and they create that illustration for me, I did not do the illustration. The artist did.

When you give an art order to AI and it outputs an image for you, you did not make that image, AI did.

Asking someone or something to do something is not the same as doing the thing. When I hire a plumber to fix my kitchen sink, the plumber fixed the sink, not me.

 

[TheSword]

So what, the prompt has nothing to do with the output, which is not your own text. As I said, you can argue that it would put your own spin on it, much like you said you can do on the output, but in either case you had little to do with the result, so I consider either approach to be AI generated.

Unless you started with a full text of yours and then use a RL editor or have an AI perform the same function I consider it AI generated.

In fairness, my original example was capturing word for word a play session then using the AI to edit it and pull out the salient details. That is a bit more than a prompt. It starts with a groups creative work.

 

[mamba]

In fairness, my original example was capturing word for word a play session then using the AI to edit it and pull out the salient details. That is a bit more than a prompt. It starts with a groups creative work.

and I called that a sensible use of AI and something that they should call created with the help of AI rather than calling it AI generated

As you asked then

Also should he declare it as written with AI even though the original creativity was his?

the answer still remains that it was written with AI, not purely AI generated, but written with its help. Would you claim that AI was not involved or that it did very little, akin to what a spellchecker does?

 

[TheSword]

and I called that a sensible use of AI and something that they should call created with the help of AI rather than calling it AI generated

As you asked then

the answer still remains that it was written with AI, not purely AI generated, but written with its help. Would you claim that AI was not involved or that it did very little, akin to what a spellchecker does?

Definitely involved. I guess my question was more about whether it’s created by or edited with.
Questioning whether it’s a fair and/or moral example. Not so much whether it should be disclosed but what it should be disclosed as.

To be clear. This isn’t personal to me. I have never ran an original adventure in my life! certainly not one that I would want to record or share with anyone else!