Well, the article is based on a linkedin post, and that post defines it as: "So, what happened today? We shifted our structure internally and D&D moved to a full franchise model, meaning everything: books, video games, film, and TV – everything touching the franchise lives under one roof. The impact here cannot be overstated; this is massive for D&D and will allow a strong, coordinated, and well-funded approach for the franchise, and most importantly, for us, the fans."
Though I agree that does leave open lots of room for interpretation. As the article notes, there's a lot of video games in development, but all of them are by 3rd party companies. So maybe it means the person on the WotC side that handles the licensing is now a direct report to the new head of the franchise (Dan Ayoub)? And whoever is taking over for Perkins and Crawford also reports to him, etc?
I'm thinking it's more the franchise like Marvel is a franchise that has comics, the MCU, video games, merchandising, other stuff, that kind of thing. It will probably let them coordinate a marketing strategy a bit better. (Like how did they not release an adapted BG3 hardcover adventure? I guess no one predicted it to be as big as it was, but still.) And maybe it will let them coordinate with MtG better. Like how we know we're getting a new MtG setting, and maybe they try and time it with the release of the new cards.
Well, the article is based on a linkedin post, and that post defines it as: "So, what happened today? We shifted our structure internally and D&D moved to a full franchise model, meaning everything: books, video games, film, and TV – everything touching the franchise lives under one roof. The impact here cannot be overstated; this is massive for D&D and will allow a strong, coordinated, and well-funded approach for the franchise, and most importantly, for us, the fans."
Though I agree that does leave open lots of room for interpretation. As the article notes, there's a lot of video games in development, but all of them are by 3rd party companies. So maybe it means the person on the WotC side that handles the licensing is now a direct report to the new head of the franchise (Dan Ayoub)? And whoever is taking over for Perkins and Crawford also reports to him, etc?
I'm thinking it's more the franchise like Marvel is a franchise that has comics, the MCU, video games, merchandising, other stuff, that kind of thing. It will probably let them coordinate a marketing strategy a bit better. (Like how did they not release an adapted BG3 hardcover adventure? I guess no one predicted it to be as big as it was, but still.) And maybe it will let them coordinate with MtG better. Like how we know we're getting a new MtG setting, and maybe they try and time it with the release of the new cards.
The 1st question that pops up: What happens to 3rd party indies that produce content for D&D? Maybe wotc makes an announcement. Maybe wotc does not.
Well, the article is based on a linkedin post, and that post defines it as: "So, what happened today? We shifted our structure internally and D&D moved to a full franchise model, meaning everything: books, video games, film, and TV – everything touching the franchise lives under one roof. The impact here cannot be overstated; this is massive for D&D and will allow a strong, coordinated, and well-funded approach for the franchise, and most importantly, for us, the fans."
Though I agree that does leave open lots of room for interpretation. As the article notes, there's a lot of video games in development, but all of them are by 3rd party companies. So maybe it means the person on the WotC side that handles the licensing is now a direct report to the new head of the franchise (Dan Ayoub)? And whoever is taking over for Perkins and Crawford also reports to him, etc?
I'm thinking it's more the franchise like Marvel is a franchise that has comics, the MCU, video games, merchandising, other stuff, that kind of thing. It will probably let them coordinate a marketing strategy a bit better. (Like how did they not release an adapted BG3 hardcover adventure? I guess no one predicted it to be as big as it was, but still.) And maybe it will let them coordinate with MtG better. Like how we know we're getting a new MtG setting, and maybe they try and time it with the release of the new cards.
The 1st question that pops up: What happens to 3rd party indies that produce content for D&D? Maybe wotc makes an announcement. Maybe wotc does not.
I don't know that anything can happen with them. The SRD is in creative commons. It can't ever be taken out. What announcement would or could WotC make?
This is not exactly unexpected or abnormal. Hasbro's poor organizational structure has been evident for quite some time - they grew fairly big and diversified into a number of different spheres, then when their major purchaser (Toys R Us) collapsed and supply chain issues during COVID hit, their overextension became a liability. Their recent trend has been to prune brands that are not performing and try and consolidate brands into a single place, so they do not have multiple competing executive officers each with their own slice of the same pie. For example, Hasbro sold off its entertainment production after the D&D movie came out and made comments at the time that it made more sense to keep IP within the wheelhouse of those who actually manage IP and license out their branding than to run a whole production company (that assumes the most risk if a venture fails).
This seems like the natural move as D&D continues to expand with a TV show in the works, multiple games in the works, and new novels getting published. Bring the control over all those different products under one roof to streamline the process, concentrate the funding in a singular department instead of spreading it across other gaming and licensing departments, and better ensure the left hand knows what the right might be doing when producing these products.
Perhaps more importantly, it is pretty clear a lot of those who actually work for D&D, including in executive positions at D&D, are long-time players who love the product. Giving them greater control over the D&D IP seems like a major win to me - I would much rather have D&D fans be negotiating and overseeing licensing deals than some person in a larger books/games/visual media department whose understanding of D&D is limited to the memos on their desk.
I saw an entire YouTube video earlier that thought it was somehow turning D&D into something akin to McDonalds franchises and I’m still not entirely sure how they thought that would even work
Personally I can’t see a down side to having everything under one umbrella. It’ll stop it from feeling quite so disjointed and we might actually see D&D capitalising on the success of one thing by releasing tie ins in exactly the way we didn’t get with Baulders Gate 3
I saw an entire YouTube video earlier that thought it was somehow turning D&D into something akin to McDonalds franchises and I’m still not entirely sure how they thought that would even work
I really wish that such a poor attempt to understand what is happening wasn’t both predictable and inevitable, but here we are.
Considering Nintendo's current fiasco and the petition in the EU, I wouldn't be surprised to see some drastic changes to they way things are done in the TTRPG sector of gaming soon. One of the few benefits of a global economy.
I wouldn’t take a victory lap on that front yet; a petition just gets legislators to look at something. It doesn’t make them care. Particularly because unless a clear majority gets behind it, blocs are gonna start horse trading over it for their own interests.
I want to not worry, but this is Hasbro-WoTC, i am very ill at ease hearing this given their recent history. I just hope my fears turn out to be unfounded.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
This is not exactly unexpected or abnormal. Hasbro's poor organizational structure has been evident for quite some time - they grew fairly big and diversified into a number of different spheres, then when their major purchaser (Toys R Us) collapsed and supply chain issues during COVID hit, their overextension became a liability. Their recent trend has been to prune brands that are not performing and try and consolidate brands into a single place, so they do not have multiple competing executive officers each with their own slice of the same pie. For example, Hasbro sold off its entertainment production after the D&D movie came out and made comments at the time that it made more sense to keep IP within the wheelhouse of those who actually manage IP and license out their branding than to run a whole production company (that assumes the most risk if a venture fails).
This seems like the natural move as D&D continues to expand with a TV show in the works, multiple games in the works, and new novels getting published. Bring the control over all those different products under one roof to streamline the process, concentrate the funding in a singular department instead of spreading it across other gaming and licensing departments, and better ensure the left hand knows what the right might be doing when producing these products.
Perhaps more importantly, it is pretty clear a lot of those who actually work for D&D, including in executive positions at D&D, are long-time players who love the product. Giving them greater control over the D&D IP seems like a major win to me - I would much rather have D&D fans be negotiating and overseeing licensing deals than some person in a larger books/games/visual media department whose understanding of D&D is limited to the memos on their desk.
I read this guy's CV: microsoft, ubisoft, EA, disney, VP of digital games for wotc. All corporate names that are beloved by video gamers....not.
Colour me skeptical that this fellow is a fan of the tabletop game, no matter if he says he plays with the same crew that started with Basic Set, per his LinkedIn. If that is true, he will immediately embark on re-selling/re=packaging the classic editions of the game. I am running two tables at a convention in October. Of the 34 tables that are signed up so far, ZERO are running 5e. I am running AD&D 1e, and Shadowdark. My SD table is already full, at 6, and the 1e is at 4 of 6, so far. BECMI is running at about 3 of the tables, at least. There is more demand for the classic editions than many think, and if this new leader is actually a BECMI guy like he says he is, he will pounce on that wasted opportunity.
This is not exactly unexpected or abnormal. Hasbro's poor organizational structure has been evident for quite some time - they grew fairly big and diversified into a number of different spheres, then when their major purchaser (Toys R Us) collapsed and supply chain issues during COVID hit, their overextension became a liability. Their recent trend has been to prune brands that are not performing and try and consolidate brands into a single place, so they do not have multiple competing executive officers each with their own slice of the same pie. For example, Hasbro sold off its entertainment production after the D&D movie came out and made comments at the time that it made more sense to keep IP within the wheelhouse of those who actually manage IP and license out their branding than to run a whole production company (that assumes the most risk if a venture fails).
This seems like the natural move as D&D continues to expand with a TV show in the works, multiple games in the works, and new novels getting published. Bring the control over all those different products under one roof to streamline the process, concentrate the funding in a singular department instead of spreading it across other gaming and licensing departments, and better ensure the left hand knows what the right might be doing when producing these products.
Perhaps more importantly, it is pretty clear a lot of those who actually work for D&D, including in executive positions at D&D, are long-time players who love the product. Giving them greater control over the D&D IP seems like a major win to me - I would much rather have D&D fans be negotiating and overseeing licensing deals than some person in a larger books/games/visual media department whose understanding of D&D is limited to the memos on their desk.
I read this guy's CV: microsoft, ubisoft, EA, disney, VP of digital games for wotc. All corporate names that are beloved by video gamers....not.
Colour me skeptical that this fellow is a fan of the tabletop game, no matter if he says he plays with the same crew that started with Basic Set, per his LinkedIn. If that is true, he will immediately embark on re-selling/re=packaging the classic editions of the game. I am running two tables at a convention in October. Of the 34 tables that are signed up so far, ZERO are running 5e. I am running AD&D 1e, and Shadowdark. My SD table is already full, at 6, and the 1e is at 4 of 6, so far. BECMI is running at about 3 of the tables, at least. There is more demand for the classic editions than many think, and if this new leader is actually a BECMI guy like he says he is, he will pounce on that wasted opportunity.
So, in an effort to engage honestly, what would you want his resume to say? Would you prefer someone with no corporate management experience? Are there companies you would find acceptable? Who would be acceptable to put in charge of D&D, either if you have a specific person in mind, or if not just what would their resume look like?
And when you say re-package, you mean in print? Because, of course, you can just go buy the old books right now from drivethrurpg, and they are official WotC products, so wizards is certainly getting a cut from any sales there for about 0 effort on their part. I actually could get behind a re-print. Some kind of limited-edition nostalgia slipcover. I wouldn't go back to playing that mess of an edition 1e was, but I might buy it.
This is not exactly unexpected or abnormal. Hasbro's poor organizational structure has been evident for quite some time - they grew fairly big and diversified into a number of different spheres, then when their major purchaser (Toys R Us) collapsed and supply chain issues during COVID hit, their overextension became a liability. Their recent trend has been to prune brands that are not performing and try and consolidate brands into a single place, so they do not have multiple competing executive officers each with their own slice of the same pie. For example, Hasbro sold off its entertainment production after the D&D movie came out and made comments at the time that it made more sense to keep IP within the wheelhouse of those who actually manage IP and license out their branding than to run a whole production company (that assumes the most risk if a venture fails).
This seems like the natural move as D&D continues to expand with a TV show in the works, multiple games in the works, and new novels getting published. Bring the control over all those different products under one roof to streamline the process, concentrate the funding in a singular department instead of spreading it across other gaming and licensing departments, and better ensure the left hand knows what the right might be doing when producing these products.
Perhaps more importantly, it is pretty clear a lot of those who actually work for D&D, including in executive positions at D&D, are long-time players who love the product. Giving them greater control over the D&D IP seems like a major win to me - I would much rather have D&D fans be negotiating and overseeing licensing deals than some person in a larger books/games/visual media department whose understanding of D&D is limited to the memos on their desk.
I read this guy's CV: microsoft, ubisoft, EA, disney, VP of digital games for wotc. All corporate names that are beloved by video gamers....not.
Colour me skeptical that this fellow is a fan of the tabletop game, no matter if he says he plays with the same crew that started with Basic Set, per his LinkedIn. If that is true, he will immediately embark on re-selling/re=packaging the classic editions of the game. I am running two tables at a convention in October. Of the 34 tables that are signed up so far, ZERO are running 5e. I am running AD&D 1e, and Shadowdark. My SD table is already full, at 6, and the 1e is at 4 of 6, so far. BECMI is running at about 3 of the tables, at least. There is more demand for the classic editions than many think, and if this new leader is actually a BECMI guy like he says he is, he will pounce on that wasted opportunity.
So, in an effort to engage honestly, what would you want his resume to say? Would you prefer someone with no corporate management experience? Are there companies you would find acceptable? Who would be acceptable to put in charge of D&D, either if you have a specific person in mind, or if not just what would their resume look like?
And when you say re-package, you mean in print? Because, of course, you can just go buy the old books right now from drivethrurpg, and they are official WotC products, so wizards is certainly getting a cut from any sales there for about 0 effort on their part. I actually could get behind a re-print. Some kind of limited-edition nostalgia slipcover. I wouldn't go back to playing that mess of an edition 1e was, but I might buy it.
Someone I know just mentioned in a Discord channel this new boss' CV reads like something equivalent to Darth Vader. Who would I find as a better alternative? Someone who plays the old editions, loves the tabletop game concept, and has created content as an indy producer, especially one who runs their own business. Someone who understand no one who actually spends money on D&D cares about branded sneakers and lunchboxes. D&D has never been, and never will be, a billion dollar revenue stream. Of course, when D&D Go is created, that will make a liar of me. Monopoly Go is a billion dollar app. But it is not Monopoly. The LAST thing I want is another microsoft exec running the show. BTW, you might want to look up what happened to the previous microsoft exec who left for Funko about a year ago.
I wouldn’t take a victory lap on that front yet; a petition just gets legislators to look at something. It doesn’t make them care. Particularly because unless a clear majority gets behind it, blocs are gonna start horse trading over it for their own interests.
No one is taking a victory lap, but if anyone is gonna look out for consumers it would be the EU, they forced Apple to ditch proprietary charging connectors, and electronics manufacturers to use lead free solder, and both of those rulings started with petitions that led to global changes. It has to start somewhere, and while Brazil may be overlooked by big businesses the EU can definitely grab them by the short and curly's to affect some change.
JustaFarmer came very close to owing me a new laptop, because I almost did a spit-take at the idea that reprinting old rulesets that are incompatible with the current rules is a slam-dunk winner from a business perspective
Or a logic perspective, for that matter, because I'm sure all those people still playing AD&D and BECMI in the year 2025 1) don't already have those rules and 2) are just dying to give money to WOTC
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
We're back to the "Authority says a thing, P A N I K" cycle again.
Chris Cocks, as much as I dislike him, could mention his preferred breakfast is pancakes, & that would mean Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition is dying because it hates all bagels & is conspiring against the bialy industry.
Also, re-examine lionizing the indie scene as good for experience in running a company. The ongoing DriveThruRPG debacle should temper this line of thinking.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
Honestly, calling it a 'franchise model' is the weirdest thing about all of this. It's an org chart shuffle, which it's anyone's guess what actually even means. It sounds vaguely like they're switching from having separate Media, Publishing, Gaming, etc, divisions under WotC, and then a D&D subdivision under those things, to having a D&D division under WotC, and then Media, Publishing, Gaming, etc under it. Which could be good, bad, or irrelevant, with my default bet being 'irrelevant'. Though it will probably prevent nonsense along the scale of Project Sigil (under their gaming division) and Maps (under their publishing division) competing with one another.
No one seems to have a good handle on the term "franchise model".
https://www.wargamer.com/dnd/full-franchise-model
Well, the article is based on a linkedin post, and that post defines it as: "So, what happened today? We shifted our structure internally and D&D moved to a full franchise model, meaning everything: books, video games, film, and TV – everything touching the franchise lives under one roof. The impact here cannot be overstated; this is massive for D&D and will allow a strong, coordinated, and well-funded approach for the franchise, and most importantly, for us, the fans."
Though I agree that does leave open lots of room for interpretation. As the article notes, there's a lot of video games in development, but all of them are by 3rd party companies. So maybe it means the person on the WotC side that handles the licensing is now a direct report to the new head of the franchise (Dan Ayoub)? And whoever is taking over for Perkins and Crawford also reports to him, etc?
I'm thinking it's more the franchise like Marvel is a franchise that has comics, the MCU, video games, merchandising, other stuff, that kind of thing. It will probably let them coordinate a marketing strategy a bit better. (Like how did they not release an adapted BG3 hardcover adventure? I guess no one predicted it to be as big as it was, but still.) And maybe it will let them coordinate with MtG better. Like how we know we're getting a new MtG setting, and maybe they try and time it with the release of the new cards.
The 1st question that pops up: What happens to 3rd party indies that produce content for D&D? Maybe wotc makes an announcement. Maybe wotc does not.
I don't know that anything can happen with them. The SRD is in creative commons. It can't ever be taken out. What announcement would or could WotC make?
This is not exactly unexpected or abnormal. Hasbro's poor organizational structure has been evident for quite some time - they grew fairly big and diversified into a number of different spheres, then when their major purchaser (Toys R Us) collapsed and supply chain issues during COVID hit, their overextension became a liability. Their recent trend has been to prune brands that are not performing and try and consolidate brands into a single place, so they do not have multiple competing executive officers each with their own slice of the same pie. For example, Hasbro sold off its entertainment production after the D&D movie came out and made comments at the time that it made more sense to keep IP within the wheelhouse of those who actually manage IP and license out their branding than to run a whole production company (that assumes the most risk if a venture fails).
This seems like the natural move as D&D continues to expand with a TV show in the works, multiple games in the works, and new novels getting published. Bring the control over all those different products under one roof to streamline the process, concentrate the funding in a singular department instead of spreading it across other gaming and licensing departments, and better ensure the left hand knows what the right might be doing when producing these products.
Perhaps more importantly, it is pretty clear a lot of those who actually work for D&D, including in executive positions at D&D, are long-time players who love the product. Giving them greater control over the D&D IP seems like a major win to me - I would much rather have D&D fans be negotiating and overseeing licensing deals than some person in a larger books/games/visual media department whose understanding of D&D is limited to the memos on their desk.
I saw an entire YouTube video earlier that thought it was somehow turning D&D into something akin to McDonalds franchises and I’m still not entirely sure how they thought that would even work
Personally I can’t see a down side to having everything under one umbrella. It’ll stop it from feeling quite so disjointed and we might actually see D&D capitalising on the success of one thing by releasing tie ins in exactly the way we didn’t get with Baulders Gate 3
I really wish that such a poor attempt to understand what is happening wasn’t both predictable and inevitable, but here we are.
Considering Nintendo's current fiasco and the petition in the EU, I wouldn't be surprised to see some drastic changes to they way things are done in the TTRPG sector of gaming soon. One of the few benefits of a global economy.
I wouldn’t take a victory lap on that front yet; a petition just gets legislators to look at something. It doesn’t make them care. Particularly because unless a clear majority gets behind it, blocs are gonna start horse trading over it for their own interests.
I want to not worry, but this is Hasbro-WoTC, i am very ill at ease hearing this given their recent history. I just hope my fears turn out to be unfounded.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
I read this guy's CV: microsoft, ubisoft, EA, disney, VP of digital games for wotc. All corporate names that are beloved by video gamers....not.
Colour me skeptical that this fellow is a fan of the tabletop game, no matter if he says he plays with the same crew that started with Basic Set, per his LinkedIn. If that is true, he will immediately embark on re-selling/re=packaging the classic editions of the game. I am running two tables at a convention in October. Of the 34 tables that are signed up so far, ZERO are running 5e. I am running AD&D 1e, and Shadowdark. My SD table is already full, at 6, and the 1e is at 4 of 6, so far. BECMI is running at about 3 of the tables, at least. There is more demand for the classic editions than many think, and if this new leader is actually a BECMI guy like he says he is, he will pounce on that wasted opportunity.
"We are investing heavily in D&D"
"OH NOOOOOOOOO!"
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I mean, anymore it feels like people are ready to predict 31 flavors of doom every time a WotC exec says or does anything in the direction of D&D.
So, in an effort to engage honestly, what would you want his resume to say? Would you prefer someone with no corporate management experience? Are there companies you would find acceptable? Who would be acceptable to put in charge of D&D, either if you have a specific person in mind, or if not just what would their resume look like?
And when you say re-package, you mean in print? Because, of course, you can just go buy the old books right now from drivethrurpg, and they are official WotC products, so wizards is certainly getting a cut from any sales there for about 0 effort on their part. I actually could get behind a re-print. Some kind of limited-edition nostalgia slipcover. I wouldn't go back to playing that mess of an edition 1e was, but I might buy it.
Someone I know just mentioned in a Discord channel this new boss' CV reads like something equivalent to Darth Vader. Who would I find as a better alternative? Someone who plays the old editions, loves the tabletop game concept, and has created content as an indy producer, especially one who runs their own business. Someone who understand no one who actually spends money on D&D cares about branded sneakers and lunchboxes. D&D has never been, and never will be, a billion dollar revenue stream. Of course, when D&D Go is created, that will make a liar of me. Monopoly Go is a billion dollar app. But it is not Monopoly. The LAST thing I want is another microsoft exec running the show. BTW, you might want to look up what happened to the previous microsoft exec who left for Funko about a year ago.
No one is taking a victory lap, but if anyone is gonna look out for consumers it would be the EU, they forced Apple to ditch proprietary charging connectors, and electronics manufacturers to use lead free solder, and both of those rulings started with petitions that led to global changes. It has to start somewhere, and while Brazil may be overlooked by big businesses the EU can definitely grab them by the short and curly's to affect some change.
So, you want someone with no corporate managment experience. You understand that his chair isn't about project development?
JustaFarmer came very close to owing me a new laptop, because I almost did a spit-take at the idea that reprinting old rulesets that are incompatible with the current rules is a slam-dunk winner from a business perspective
Or a logic perspective, for that matter, because I'm sure all those people still playing AD&D and BECMI in the year 2025 1) don't already have those rules and 2) are just dying to give money to WOTC
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
We're back to the "Authority says a thing, P A N I K" cycle again.
Chris Cocks, as much as I dislike him, could mention his preferred breakfast is pancakes, & that would mean Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition is dying because it hates all bagels & is conspiring against the bialy industry.
Also, re-examine lionizing the indie scene as good for experience in running a company. The ongoing DriveThruRPG debacle should temper this line of thinking.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
Honestly, calling it a 'franchise model' is the weirdest thing about all of this. It's an org chart shuffle, which it's anyone's guess what actually even means. It sounds vaguely like they're switching from having separate Media, Publishing, Gaming, etc, divisions under WotC, and then a D&D subdivision under those things, to having a D&D division under WotC, and then Media, Publishing, Gaming, etc under it. Which could be good, bad, or irrelevant, with my default bet being 'irrelevant'. Though it will probably prevent nonsense along the scale of Project Sigil (under their gaming division) and Maps (under their publishing division) competing with one another.