Wizards of the Coast Head Explains Benefits to D&D Franchise Model

The head of Wizards of the Coast believes that moving to a franchise model will allow for more alignment between D&D multimedia and the core D&D tabletop game. Recently, Wizards of the Coast president John Hight spoke with GameIndustry.biz in a wide-ranging interview about the gaming company. Much of the interview was spent on Wizards' digital gaming ambitions, but Hight did speak about the realignment of the company to a franchise model.

Under the franchise model, all D&D-related operations now run through Dan Ayoub as opposed to having different arms for entertainment, video games, and tabletop. In the interview, Hight stated that the franchise model would allow for better coordination - specifically between different aspects of the franchise. One example was the D&D movie, which had relatively limited crossover with the D&D tabletop game. "We'd love to have had a D&D book or campaign a part and parcel with the movie," he says.

He also noted that Stranger Things - which is receiving a new tie-in project next month - could be integrated more with the game. "It'd be nice to have that all lined up, so when this thing rolls out, we've got a campaign for you to enjoy that's something you saw on the show, or the characters in the show."

Additionally, Hight noted that another side to the franchise model is to fully align the digital and physical sides of play, which he hopes will lead to in-person play. "Unfortunately, because of COVID, there's a whole generation of gamers that has spent a good deal of their time playing only online," he said. "And they're re-discovering the joy of being able to play together. What I want us to be able to do is have players move fairly seamlessly between in person play and online play."

Elsewhere in the interview, Hight hinted at a new D&D MMORPG, stating that he has encouraged development of a new MMO but stopped shy of saying a project was officially in the works.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As far as I can tell it is a feature of management change. The movie studio buying and selling is under 2 different CEOs as far as I remember. A new person comes in and reverses or partially reverses what the previous guy did, is pretty common. Especially if the company is under pressure from investors.
As for Sigil, I think, too much is being made of Sigil here. It is a functional piece of software. I look at it occasionally. One can build maps. I have not tried to host a party since the original release where it was unstable. So, I do not know if those issues have been addressed. What I do notice, is that someone is fixing the odd bug and someone is adding assets to the thing. Also, the suggestion page is being updated.
It is not quite dead. What has never been clear to me is, who is this for? I have looked at Sigil and Tailspire and both of them are a ton more work to use than any 2D VTT. They are also more work on the player side compared to a 2D VTT or an actual videogame like BG3 or Solasta.
I am not sure I would use it even for free, even for a boss fight as compared to a 2d VTT. Especially since it is not integrated into Beyond.
I am also not sure I have any blame on WoTC management regarding the cancelling of Sigil. I am pretty sure I would have cancelled Sigil. I am somewhat amazed it got as far as it did anyway.

Investors and corporate culture are a problem that can and often do affect customers in a negative way, huh?

 

[dave2008]

My problem with Hasbro is that they are notorious for scuttling thes plans about 1/2 way in. They wanted an in-house VTT then they cancel it. They bought a movie studio and sell it the same year that the DnD movie & the Transformers rise of beasts debuts. And sadly, I expect this guy to be fired at Christmas

I'm sure everyone who has actually worked in DnD in the last 3 years has put their all of their passion into the projects but the suits just worry about Return On Investment.

While I don't disagree with the general thrust of the argument, the VTT (Maps) is very popular and continues to be developed. Now maybe you are thinking about the 3D VTT (Sigil) which was stopped?

 

[AlViking]

Will the switch to Franchise model for D&D mean that Exodus is supported by D&D or will it remain its own business unit?

I would think that many could be considered part of those shared resources they mentioned in the article. Part of the issue development hits is balancing workload with headcount. So if they can have people that are needed more for specific stages and time it so that they can jump from one project to another.

Sounds great on paper and maybe they can get it to work. If they can, a lot of resources could be shared.

 

[EthanSental]

Agreed on the 3D vtt Sigil. They were way off in their demand of people wanting it, which currently is apparently low for a 3D vtt, to support the development…realized it late and pulled the plug instead of spending resources with low or no ROI.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

One thing to note is that WotC doesn't really run any of their own games at conventions. It's all contracted out.

At GenCon... D&D is run by Baldman Games. Great crew that has been running games at GenCon for a long time. Magic is run by Pastimes. I don't play MtG so can't speak to how great they may be. Like Baldman, they've running MtG events at GenCon for a long time.

So while WotC could run their own convention, I don't think they're really all that interested in doing it.

Everything you say is true, and actually contradicts none of what I said - yay!

Everything Baldman and Pastimes done is at a tactical "on the ground" level. And if I was WotC, I would continue to be clear to those partners that the value they are delivering to their respective imprints was huge, and thank you.

Whereas I'm more thinking about WotC having a brand festival, wherein many different folks do various things related to their brands - folks like Baldman, Pastimes, etc. In fact, they don't even have to do more than say "hey, Destination Concepts/Encore/ASM Global - put on something that advances our brand with our core market, as well as does outreach to these other 3 adjacent markets". They will make money. BUT - they have already proven they don't want to spend their marketing dollars in that specific way beyond the Baldman/Pastimes method of participating in other brand's events. Which is fine. Short-sighted or small-minded or quarterly-profit driven? In my opinion, yes. For a brand that depends so much on in-person interaction, one would think that would be one of their pillars to build their company on (again, that was Peter Adkison's vision). But the bean counters think "real-world is dead - long live the digital realm!".

Ah well, it is what it is.

 

[CleverNickName]

I think they're just acknowledging that in-person play is important and to counter the argument that I've seen made that they're pushing for more and more online play.

And I'm over here like

I'm greedy, I want more of both.

 

[Tanya Bowers-Dean]

I agree that there is something special about in-person gaming. However, I highly doubt that WoTC/Hasbro is truly focused on that.
A franchise model is fundamentally about control and monetization. That conflicts with the OGL’s openness and decentralization. The franchise model favors content from large corporations, not small, indie creators. While the SRD is in the public domain, I predict Hasbro will tighten its grasp on digital tools, VTT functionality, and certain multimedia tie-ins that fall outside the OGL and can be governed by separate licensing. That’s the wedge WotC/Hasbro is keeping open for greater corporate control.