D&D Movie/TV Paramount+ Will Not Proceed with Dungeons & Dragons Live-Action TV Show

Deadline reports that the live-action Dungeons & Dragons television series will not continue at Paramount+. The show was originally announced in January 2023 as Paramount+ placed an eight episode straight-to-series order. Normally that’s the best you can hope for in terms of a guarantee of the show happening as the show would produce the entire first season instead of needing to make a pilot to be approved.

Two big corporate changes happened since then, however. First, Hasbro sold the show’s co-producer Entertainment One to Lionsgate in December 2023 and shifted the production to Hasbro Entertainment. Currently, Paramount is searching for a buyer for the company with the current front runner according to reports being Sony Pictures, who have partnered with private equity firms to place a rumored $26 billion offer for the studio.

Little was announced about the plot other than it would be character-focused and involve the Underdark. These tidbits plus the fact that the character of Xenk from the 2023 film Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves was originally intended to be Drizzt Do'Urden but changed during pre-production led to speculation that the series would be an adaptation of the Drizzt novels, particularly the origin story novel Homeland.

Creator Rawson Marshall Thurber (Red Notice, Easy A, Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story) and showrunner Drew Crevello (The Grudge 2, WeCrashed) are still attached to the project. Hasbro will repackage and update the pitch for the show and stop it around to other distributors.

 

[Parmandur]

I've been very unimpressed with WotC's demographic infographics ("infodemographics"? "Demoinfographics"?) for a while now. There's zero information given about how they reach the numbers that they do, and I know enough about statistics to know that they can be "massaged" in all kinds of ways, and even if they aren't there are still numerous issues that can skew data even when the people collecting/presenting it are well-meaning.

Combine that with how WotC has a vested interest in presenting information about themselves in the best possible light (which is only to be expected, and not something I hold against them in-and-of themselves), and it makes me leery of putting any stock whatsoever in charts like this.

They have a vested interest in knowing who buys and plays their products.

 

[Alzrius]

They have averted interest in knowing who buys and plays their products.

I agree that they've averted interest in that.

All joking aside, I agree that they have a vested interest in knowing who buys/uses their stuff. Hence my wondering how they go about obtaining that data, rather than just assuming that they're doing a good job of it and that what they make public accurately reflects what they've learned.

 

[Parmandur]

I agree that they've averted interest in that.

He who controls the past, controls the future.

But seriously, there is no reason to doubt that WotC is targeting 12-24 year olds primarily, they have been saying that since the 90's.

 

[Alzrius]

But seriously, there is no reason to doubt that WotC is targeting 12-24 year olds primarily, they have been saying that since the 90's.

I don't know about "targeting," but their statements about the demographics of the people playing/buying D&D don't go into the "how" of things. That's fine, that's their prerogative, but it's mine to be skeptical of any data that's so lacking in details.

 

[mamba]

Combine that with how WotC has a vested interest in presenting information about themselves in the best possible light (which is only to be expected, and not something I hold against them in-and-of themselves), and it makes me leery of putting any stock whatsoever in charts like this.

and what does put them in the best light? A large young audience? A well spread out customer base?

I assume they present the data they have here, not sure what spin would actually be useful in any way

 

[Alzrius]

and what does put them in the best light? A large young audience? A well spread out customer base?

I don't know, which is another reason why I wish we knew more about what information they collected and how they collected it.

I assume they present the data they have here, not sure what spin would actually be useful in any way

Take another look at the chart posted earlier in the thread. According to it, 100% of the people who play D&D (presumably 5E) are age 45 or younger. Literally no one age 46+ is playing D&D 5E, if you go by what's on that chart.

Does that help explain why I express skepticism?

 

[Parmandur]

I don't know, which is another reason why I wish we knew more about what information they collected and how they collected it.

Take another look at the chart posted earlier in the thread. According to it, 100% of the people who play D&D (presumably 5E) are age 45 or younger. Literally no one age 46+ is playing D&D 5E, if you go by what's on that chart.

Does that help explain why I express skepticism?

No, that was a typo that Greg Tito corrected: "40-45" should read "40+".

I see no particularly good reason to be skeptical.

 

[Alzrius]

No, that was a typo that Greg Tito corrected: "40-45" should read "40+".

I see no particularly good reason to be skeptical.

Skepticism should be, in my opinion, the default; it's where you go unless there's a good reason not to.

The issue of it being a typo is proof of that; errors can creep into the process, and so you shouldn't take what's presented at face value.

 

[Parmandur]

Skepticism should be, in my opinion, the default; it's where you go unless there's a good reason not to.

The issue of it being a typo is proof of that; errors can creep into the process, and so you shouldn't take what's presented at face value.

Hardly, it was a typo. So all gamers over 40 were 11% per their market research. I see no reason to not believe that to be true. 11% of 40 million is still a lot of people.

 

[Parmandur]

Skepticism should be, in my opinion, the default; it's where you go unless there's a good reason not to.

The issue of it being a typo is proof of that; errors can creep into the process, and so you shouldn't take what's presented at face value.

It is also worth noting that when Morrus shared the stats for visitors to ENWorld, his numbers actually skewed even younger than what WotC put in their infographic.