As of this moment, if one creates a homebrew archetype with a flavorful spell list that isn't entirely made up of spells from the basic rules (and I think the Elemental Evil's Player's Companion) it cannot be published. I reason that this is designed so that free users can theoretically use any archetype in the homebrew database, but I'm increasingly annoyed by its limitation. For example I'm currently working on a druid archetype that's focused on darkness and cold magic (Circle of Winter) and I can't put super flavorful spells like shadow blade and shadow of moil in its spell list since they're from XGtE.
What I propose is that instead of banning archetypes that use the additional resources we've purchased, create a "source" filter for the homebrew archetype section similar to what can be found in the official spell section. This way players can filter homebrew entries based upon the content they own, rather than being forced to only use basic rules content. (Or just create a toggle to hide all archetypes that utilize spells one doesn't own on DDB.)
If I have understood staff correctly, it's more than just about convenience. I believe it is the case that using a subclass, item, etc. that uses purchased content a user doesn't have will break their character sheet, and it is this concern that is a big part of the current ban. I think, although I'm not sure, they are hoping to eventually find a solution for this.
In the meantime, keep in mind that you don't need to be able to publish homebrew in order for your players to use that homebrew in your own campaigns. You only need to publish if you want to share with the wider public.
Yeah, but I'm a content creator whom wants to eventually share all my homebrew archetypes with my audiences both as PDFs and on DnDBeyond. I hope they figure out a solution soon.
I want to second my disappointment in this, I was just about ready to publish a warlock archetype when I realised I couldn't because a single spell I added to its expanded spell list (Dissonant Whispers) is not part of the basic rules list...despite being published in the PHB? I really don't understand the process for choosing open-licence spells. I get why the publishers try to keep spells outside of the PHB from being added to class archetype lists, but you'd think for spells in the PHB it would be okay to allow it.
Hopefully the dev team figures out a solution to the issue soon. Even if it's something as simple as a lockout for people who don't have access to the necessary content, I'd much rather have the option to allow people to see the archetypes and have the option of adding them if they have the necessary content rather than wholesale not allowing the content to be published at all.
The Basic Rules & SRD are subsets of the PHB material: that is everything in the Basic Rules and SRD is in the PHB, but not everything in the PHB is in the Basic Rules and SRD. (E.g. the the SRD contains one subrace each of each race in the PHB, and one archetype/subclass of each class; not all the spells are included, and those spells that include an IP protect name like Tensor are renamed if included in the SRD) This was the decision of Wizards of the Coast, and in place well before DnDBeyond existed. (The Basic Rules and SRD were first released as PDFs)
I don't object to the framework for publishing subclasses to be changed to allow for the inclusion of non-SRD spells, so long as it doesn't create problems for folks who haven't purchased the material the subclass draws from. On the other hand, there is limited developer "bandwidth," and I personally would prefer to see that spent on other improvements first. Of course, that's not my call, and I'm only one voice among myriads.
The Basic Rules & SRD are subsets of the PHB material: that is everything in the Basic Rules and SRD is in the PHB, but not everything in the PHB is in the Basic Rules and SRD. (E.g. the the SRD contains one subrace each of each race in the PHB, and one archetype/subclass of each class; not all the spells are included, and those spells that include an IP protect name like Tensor are renamed if included in the SRD) This was the decision of Wizards of the Coast, and in place well before DnDBeyond existed. (The Basic Rules and SRD were first released as PDFs)
I don't object to the framework for publishing subclasses to be changed to allow for the inclusion of non-SRD spells, so long as it doesn't create problems for folks who haven't purchased the material the subclass draws from. On the other hand, there is limited developer "bandwidth," and I personally would prefer to see that spent on other improvements first. Of course, that's not my call, and I'm only one voice among myriads.
I understand that the basic rules/SRD content is all included in the PHB but not visa-versa. I guess I just don't see the reasoning behind what spells get chosen for open licencing and which don't.
And I do understand the dev team have limited time and resources, I don't want to make it seem like I'm demanding they fix this issue right now. Just wanted to throw my voice into the mix and show my support for this being looked into at some point. I agree with Jedd that I'd much rather see a content filter that allows people access to archetypes with content from specific splat so long as they have it purchased. I'd be nice to allow people access to the content even if they don't have the splat and just lock out spells that they haven't purchased, but I'm guessing it'd be easier to develop a filter than to fix the character sheets so they don't break when you try to access content you don't have available to you.
HartlessD20, If a archetype linking to a non-SRD spell breaks the system, how do you handle it when a user purchases a book (such as XGtE)? The Oath of Conquest links to Armor of Agathys, and the Forge Domain links to both Searing Smite and Elemental Weapon - none of which are SRD spells. In both cases, it's not even an expanded spell list where it's an option, but divine spells that are automatically added to that class' character sheet. So why would that not break the character sheet in the way you mentioned?
If there's some exception-based programming behind the scenes (such as by purchasing those classes you also "purchase" those spells, even if you don't own them), then how about we implement a toggle in the homebrew archetypes that filters out content that uses sources you don't own? And/or make it where a user cannot add an archetype to his or her collection if that archetype links to spells he or she does not own? One thing I'm seeing a lot as a "fix" for the above issue is listing spells in the subclass description, but not linking them into the build itself. But this solution is an even more problematic issue to the community as it prevents even paying users from adding those subclass options to their sheet legitimately, causing confusion and an overall deterioration of the quality of homebrew listed on DnDBeyond.
It has more to do with the current functionality of the sheet, meaning we don't show data the user doesn't have legitimate access to and disable it. Once that is corrected in future improvements to the sheet, we will more than likely remove the publish block.
Emphasis mine.
Considering the new character sheet is DDB's current major project, this gives me hope that this issue will be fixed relatively soon.
As of this moment, if one creates a homebrew archetype with a flavorful spell list that isn't entirely made up of spells from the basic rules (and I think the Elemental Evil's Player's Companion) it cannot be published. I reason that this is designed so that free users can theoretically use any archetype in the homebrew database, but I'm increasingly annoyed by its limitation. For example I'm currently working on a druid archetype that's focused on darkness and cold magic (Circle of Winter) and I can't put super flavorful spells like shadow blade and shadow of moil in its spell list since they're from XGtE.
What I propose is that instead of banning archetypes that use the additional resources we've purchased, create a "source" filter for the homebrew archetype section similar to what can be found in the official spell section. This way players can filter homebrew entries based upon the content they own, rather than being forced to only use basic rules content. (Or just create a toggle to hide all archetypes that utilize spells one doesn't own on DDB.)
Subclasses: Path of the Marauder, Way of the Golden Fist, Way of the Yamabushi. Feats: Melee Training, Olympian Physique. Spells: Arcane Recall, Banker's Purse, Coin Shot, Moonfire Blade.
If I have understood staff correctly, it's more than just about convenience. I believe it is the case that using a subclass, item, etc. that uses purchased content a user doesn't have will break their character sheet, and it is this concern that is a big part of the current ban. I think, although I'm not sure, they are hoping to eventually find a solution for this.
In the meantime, keep in mind that you don't need to be able to publish homebrew in order for your players to use that homebrew in your own campaigns. You only need to publish if you want to share with the wider public.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Yeah, but I'm a content creator whom wants to eventually share all my homebrew archetypes with my audiences both as PDFs and on DnDBeyond. I hope they figure out a solution soon.
Subclasses: Path of the Marauder, Way of the Golden Fist, Way of the Yamabushi. Feats: Melee Training, Olympian Physique. Spells: Arcane Recall, Banker's Purse, Coin Shot, Moonfire Blade.
I want to second my disappointment in this, I was just about ready to publish a warlock archetype when I realised I couldn't because a single spell I added to its expanded spell list (Dissonant Whispers) is not part of the basic rules list...despite being published in the PHB? I really don't understand the process for choosing open-licence spells. I get why the publishers try to keep spells outside of the PHB from being added to class archetype lists, but you'd think for spells in the PHB it would be okay to allow it.
Hopefully the dev team figures out a solution to the issue soon. Even if it's something as simple as a lockout for people who don't have access to the necessary content, I'd much rather have the option to allow people to see the archetypes and have the option of adding them if they have the necessary content rather than wholesale not allowing the content to be published at all.
The Basic Rules & SRD are subsets of the PHB material: that is everything in the Basic Rules and SRD is in the PHB, but not everything in the PHB is in the Basic Rules and SRD. (E.g. the the SRD contains one subrace each of each race in the PHB, and one archetype/subclass of each class; not all the spells are included, and those spells that include an IP protect name like Tensor are renamed if included in the SRD) This was the decision of Wizards of the Coast, and in place well before DnDBeyond existed. (The Basic Rules and SRD were first released as PDFs)
I don't object to the framework for publishing subclasses to be changed to allow for the inclusion of non-SRD spells, so long as it doesn't create problems for folks who haven't purchased the material the subclass draws from. On the other hand, there is limited developer "bandwidth," and I personally would prefer to see that spent on other improvements first. Of course, that's not my call, and I'm only one voice among myriads.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Yeah, that's why I'm hoping they implement a "source" filter in the homebrew section.
Subclasses: Path of the Marauder, Way of the Golden Fist, Way of the Yamabushi. Feats: Melee Training, Olympian Physique. Spells: Arcane Recall, Banker's Purse, Coin Shot, Moonfire Blade.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/d-d-beyond-feedback/16017-homebrew-content-that-uses-non-srd-resources
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
I responded to @HartlessD20 with this:
Subclasses: Path of the Marauder, Way of the Golden Fist, Way of the Yamabushi. Feats: Melee Training, Olympian Physique. Spells: Arcane Recall, Banker's Purse, Coin Shot, Moonfire Blade.
From @HartlessD20:
Emphasis mine.
Considering the new character sheet is DDB's current major project, this gives me hope that this issue will be fixed relatively soon.
Subclasses: Path of the Marauder, Way of the Golden Fist, Way of the Yamabushi. Feats: Melee Training, Olympian Physique. Spells: Arcane Recall, Banker's Purse, Coin Shot, Moonfire Blade.
Thanks for sharing, Jedd. That's great news.