Why would we want to expose all of the details of an adventure to the players? Is this a think we can disable or optionally disable, while still keeping player options available?
Cool, thank you very much. I just noticed that in order to build up the correct character for my daughter, that I inadvertently gave her all the details of the adventure we are currently playing. :(
Hopefully it's a fairly simple solution. Content is already categorized in the Compendium between "rules" and "adventures" so it should be possible to use that classification to permit sharing of just items classified as "rules" with a minimal amount of additional coding.
I have joined the campaign my DM created here I own the legendary bundle and have a master subscription and I turned on content sharing. Can he read compendium content I ask as I do not know? I also cannot find a FAQ anywhere on the site.
I have joined the campaign my DM created here I own the legendary bundle and have a master subscription and I turned on content sharing. Can he read compendium content I ask as I do not know? I also cannot find a FAQ anywhere on the site.
Yes, anyone in that campaign (DM included) can read the compendium you have unlocked, as well as the listings and the options in the character builder.
This should be an extremely high-priority fix IMO. The current implementation is absurd for any DM who purchases adventures through DDB. I would love to share my purchased content with my players (particularly new players, as it is nice to help them make edits to their character sheets through DDB), but not if it means revealing the adventure they are running to them!
I absolutely agree that this should be a very high priority fix. At least in my case it's prevented me from buying any adventures on D&DB, after I'd bought Lost Mines as a try-out and then realised I could restrict sharing. So this is one piece of anecdotal evidence that this omission is actually cost them sales.
I'm honestly kinda surprised so many people are so worried about this. Do you not let other GMs play with you? What do you do about people being able to buy the book themselves or just reading it at the book store? I guess I'm jist confused because I trust my players not to try and cheat. Also, what happens if I, as a player, decide to buy SKT? Can my GM lock me out of my own book because some people don't trust their players to keep their noses out of the modules?
I'm honestly kinda surprised so many people are so worried about this. Do you not let other GMs play with you? What do you do about people being able to buy the book themselves or just reading it at the book store? I guess I'm jist confused because I trust my players not to try and cheat.
Obviously no one can prevent a player from buying a copy of the book for themselves. That's the risk of running any premade adventure. And I DM for other DMs all the time (although I prefer not to DM for people who have already played and/or DMed the particular adventure.) But there's no reason why DDB needs to make it EASIER by forcing a DM who wants to share content to also provide the entire adventure for FREE to their players. I expect society not to steal from me, but I also don't just leave $20 bills laying out in public!
And the bigger issue IMO is due to DDB's biggest perk: it's robust search functionality. Searches are done across all accessible content, so if a player searching can easily be accidentally exposed to adventure-related material. (Or other DM-oriented material, such as the MM or DMG.) I am currently DMing a party who are all 100% new to D&D and I don't want to have to be explaining what they should and should not look for. They are having enough trouble figuring out the rules and their character sheets without worrying about spoilers too!
At the end of the day, it is such a simple solution -- either allowing "book by book" sharing, or at least separating "Rules" from "Adventures". (I'm actually having a hard time imagining when I would want to be sharing an adventure with a player in any circumstance...) The simplicity of the solution is what makes it absurd not to implement.
Also, what happens if I, as a player, decide to buy SKT? Can my GM lock me out of my own book because some people don't trust their players to keep their noses out of the modules?
Of course not. Content Sharing only deals with what the DM chooses to share from their own purchased content with the players. The DM has no control over content that is separately purchased by the players. In other words, a DM can only add, not subtract.
Also, what happens if I, as a player, decide to buy SKT? Can my GM lock me out of my own book because some people don't trust their players to keep their noses out of the modules?
Of course not. Content Sharing only deals with what the DM chooses to share from their own purchased content with the players. The DM has no control over content that is separately purchased by the players. In other words, a DM can only add, not subtract.
Unfortunately, it's a more complex situation than that since everyone's content is shared across a campaign. The DM isn't necessarily even the one who'd enabled content sharing. It's a tricky question, and I'm not sure what the solution is, beyond trusting your players not to cheat. In the global search, results are tagged by book, so your players can pretty easily avoid spoilers by not clicking on anything from the adventure. There are also situations where they do need access to it - for magic items, spells, etc they've earned in an adventure for example.
Any idea if/when this might be implemented? I, too, would like to unlock digital content to share, but am concerned that some of my newbies may stumble across the adventure we'll be running (either by accident or on purpose).
I'm considering buying the "Legendary Bundle" of all content if it's a fix coming soon, but if it's not going to happen any time soon, I'll have to unlock just the non-adventure books instead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If the multiverse was fair, we wouldn't need paladins.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why would we want to expose all of the details of an adventure to the players? Is this a think we can disable or optionally disable, while still keeping player options available?
Not currently. But it is a feature requested by many. Staff will take this in consideration.
Cool, thank you very much. I just noticed that in order to build up the correct character for my daughter, that I inadvertently gave her all the details of the adventure we are currently playing. :(
Hopefully it's a fairly simple solution. Content is already categorized in the Compendium between "rules" and "adventures" so it should be possible to use that classification to permit sharing of just items classified as "rules" with a minimal amount of additional coding.
The solution will be a more granular sharing/permissions framework, which will allow much more control over what is shared with whom.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I have joined the campaign my DM created here I own the legendary bundle and have a master subscription and I turned on content sharing. Can he read compendium content I ask as I do not know? I also cannot find a FAQ anywhere on the site.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
This should be an extremely high-priority fix IMO. The current implementation is absurd for any DM who purchases adventures through DDB. I would love to share my purchased content with my players (particularly new players, as it is nice to help them make edits to their character sheets through DDB), but not if it means revealing the adventure they are running to them!
I absolutely agree that this should be a very high priority fix. At least in my case it's prevented me from buying any adventures on D&DB, after I'd bought Lost Mines as a try-out and then realised I could restrict sharing. So this is one piece of anecdotal evidence that this omission is actually cost them sales.
I'm honestly kinda surprised so many people are so worried about this. Do you not let other GMs play with you? What do you do about people being able to buy the book themselves or just reading it at the book store? I guess I'm jist confused because I trust my players not to try and cheat. Also, what happens if I, as a player, decide to buy SKT? Can my GM lock me out of my own book because some people don't trust their players to keep their noses out of the modules?
DM for the Adventures in Erylia Podcast
Where five friends sit around the table and record themselves playing Dungeons and Dragons
Would you send me link to join your campaign so I can have all your books for free ..? 😉
Any idea if/when this might be implemented? I, too, would like to unlock digital content to share, but am concerned that some of my newbies may stumble across the adventure we'll be running (either by accident or on purpose).
I'm considering buying the "Legendary Bundle" of all content if it's a fix coming soon, but if it's not going to happen any time soon, I'll have to unlock just the non-adventure books instead.
If the multiverse was fair, we wouldn't need paladins.