Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) is a massively popular tabletop role playing game. While the game has been around since the 1970s, it has recently exploded in popularity with podcasts, TV shows, video games, and movies making the game more mainstream. Each year, the intellectual property alone generates millions in revenue for parent company Hasbro (for the sake of ease, I will be referring to the corporation as D&D, even though Wizards of the Coast is the publisher and Hasbro is the parent. Thus, I will sometimes attribute decisions to D&D even if they were made by Hasbro).
Originally, D&D published physical rulebooks and sourcebooks to help guide players and establish the rules of the game. There were also modules players could buy: pre-made stories to ease new players into the system or challenge experienced players. Players often “homebrew” content as well: they create their own stories, magic items, and so on. Using a physical character sheet, players would track their character’s progress, abilities, inventory, spells, etc.
Some character classes can get very complicated to track by hand, in particular spellcasters (wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, bards, and clerics). Players need to roll die, add numbers, calculate probabilities on the fly, and determine results of actions. I like to call D&D “Homework: The Game” because of how complicated it can get. To help players manage increasingly complex characters, the online game streaming company Twitch created a website called D&D Beyond which automated a lot of the process. Players could simply buy the D&D rulebooks on the website, set up their characters, and the website would track and roll everything for them. In 2022, D&D acquired D&D Beyond as part of a quest to bring all content under one roof (theirs) and capitalize on the move to digital gaming that had accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns.
On paper, it looked like D&D was becoming a monopoly. By owning a popular IP, the firm could control large aspects of the tabletop gaming world. Most homebrew content creation under the company’s Open Game License allowed for players to use large swaths of D&D content for their own uses, and even limited commercial uses, without needing to pay royalties. This agreement had been around since 2000 and players treated it as a matter of course.
However, in August 2022, D&D announced they would be moving toward a new content agreement with players called One D&D. Players initially feared the new One D&D would limit their freedom to create without paying royalties to D&D. While initially denied by the company, as more details emerged, player fears were confirmed. The fanbase revolted by canceling subscriptions to D&D Beyond and searching out (or developing) new tabletop games. By January 2023, D&D backed off, even putting much content under an irrevocable Creative Commons license. D&D tried to flex their monopoly muscles and failed.
More recently, D&D tried to flex their monopoly muscles again. Following an announcement of a new edition of the rulebook, they announced on August 22, 2024 that anything tied to the previous rulebook would not function in D&D Beyond (or other digital content) unless players homebrewed the material or bought the new rulebook. In other words, D&D was attempting to take away content people had already bought and force them to buy new content. Again, the fanbase revolted. Not one week later, on August 26, D&D announced they “heard fan feedback loud and clear” and were canceling the planned change to D&D beyond. Players will be able to use content previously purchased on the digital platforms.
There’s an important lesson here, one that the late mentor and friend Steve Horwitz used to repeat all the time: “monopoly” does not equal “big.”
Companies may be big, and they may even own lots of IP and content, but they are not necessarily monopolies with the ability to set market prices. Any monopoly power they have will heavily depend on the availability of substitutes for their product. If there are many substitutes, the firm, regardless of their size, may act much like a competitive firm.
Mistaking size for monopoly power is an error that runs in multiple directions. Firms often overestimate their monopoly power and, as the case with D&D, are forced to back down. Likewise, antitrust regulators often overestimate the monopoly power of firms and end up turning efficient markets inefficient. Metrics like firm size, market share, profit, or profit margin do not accurately describe the monopoly power of a firm. Sometimes, we may not know how little (or much) monopoly power the company has until they do something boneheaded like D&D.
P.S. This is a picture of my D&D group. My character, Vargen, is second from the right.
READER COMMENTS
Dylan
Nov 27 2024 at 2:31pm
Great post, Jon. I like the distinction between monopoly and bigness. I had an experience with the power of monopoly pretty recently and what happens when a service that had no close substitutes suddenly does.
For years, my building had only option for internet, cable. We are the only building in the neighborhood that doesn’t have FIOS, and things like satellite and 5G are not viable options in an apartment with no access to the outdoors. Given the lack of alternatives, our internet was a lot more expensive than our neighbors. I was spending close to $100 a month for the lowest internet tier. A couple of months ago a new service by a startup ISP came into the building; $40 a month for much faster service. The cable company, which previously had no incentive to offer lower prices, suddenly offered deep discounts. I still went with the startup, but it was a nice reminder of how great it is to have viable alternatives.
Jon Murphy
Nov 28 2024 at 9:22am
Yeah, choice is awesome.
Craig
Nov 27 2024 at 3:31pm
Hasbro also makes Twister and I suppose perhaps I should complain about their monopoly power but in lieu of complaining to the FTC I think I’ll send a xmas card to the CEO with my kids on it thanking him for the fun game.
Peter
Nov 27 2024 at 7:00pm
Fair but it’s also about substitution affects, i.e. the RPG market itself is highly competitive. I’m not even sure if you just count the PnP game itself, not all the non-PnP IP, has the majority share of the RPG market; it’s been a long time since I’ve seen any GAMA numbers on it. A good counterexample to your Hasbro story where the company just ignores what the community wants but is still successful in spite of that, and is more of a true monopoly in it’s niche space, is Games Workshop.
As an aside, FASA and White Wolf, you are sorely missed and I’ll be forever sadden Palladium never could break into the CRPG market, I think they by far have one of the best settings that isn’t high fantasy in Rifts. Just giving them an honorable mention.
Jon Murphy
Nov 27 2024 at 8:53pm
Correct. Precisely my point.
Matthias
Nov 28 2024 at 1:58am
Yes, there’s lots and lots of other non-D&D role playing games.
Btw, that the people who own the intellectual property (copyright, trademarks) to D&D can enforce a monopoly over D&D is just intellectual property working as intended.
If someone doesn’t like it, they should complain about intellectual property rights. (I think trademarks are mostly fine. Copyright is too long, and patents, especially for software, are rather questionable.)
Jim
Dec 9 2024 at 10:33am
Small correction, Twitch did not make the app Dndbeyond. It was made by Curse which was acquired by Twitch.
Justin Burnside
Dec 9 2024 at 6:23pm
I don’t think you can call this a monopoly. While they own the IP that also happens to be the largest IP in the space, they were only flexing with D&D content (rules, in this case). The base showed that Hasbro/WotC does not, in fact, have a monopoly by people leaving the D&D Beyond platform in great numbers. Other popular games, such as Pathfinder and 5e variants, saw their base increase because of WotC’s mistakes.
Speaking of Pathfinder, that’s how that game came to be. For D&D 4th edition, they changed the licensing for that edition as well. Paizo was publishing magazines for 3.5 edition and, upset with the edition change and licensing change, went on to make their own game: Pathfinder, which outsold D&D until 5e was released. While Paizo definitely doesn’t have the market share that Hasbro does, they’re large enough to have a unionized workforce, two living games, and monthly releases for both games, showing that WotC doesn’t have a monopoly in this space.
You perfectly described what WotC was trying to do: bring all of the 3rd party resources and homebrew under one roof. If you wanted to play D&D 5e or 5.5e, you had to use Beyond and, eventually, their virtual table top which is as anti-TTRPG as you can get. Most games thrive because of 3rd party content and support. If Critical Role continued to stream Pathfinder 1st edition and not 5e because of licensing, 5e wouldn’t have been as popular as it is now.