Public Mod Note(Stormknight): I agree that it's not ideal - this is the first time that Wizards of the Coast have presented new content in this manner. These spells are presented as optional in chapter 1 and standard in chapter 3.
I asked a question earlier about the optional features for spells but found out it's way worse than I thought. I used the example of Mind Sliver for Warlocks. The optional features shows Mind Sliver on the list for Warlocks, but even with the feature disabled it can be picked by that character. Why put it in the optional box if the box being disabled doesn't prevent it from being picked? It's not coming from another source since the cantrip is new to Tasha's.
In fact, I temporarily changed the level of the character to 20, and it found that every spell from the Additional Warlock Spells optional feature that has an asterisk is available even if the feature is disabled! I don't know if this applies to other classes, but if the book says these spells should only be added if the feature is enabled, then no spell on that list should be available unless the feature is enabled... (excluding stuff already in other books like the 4 melee/close range cantrips from the EE Companion)
That wasn't my point. Every single spell in the optional class feature with a star is on the list in chapter 3... So if they're just on the list, then why be misleading by including it in an optional feature which can be disabled? That implies you can only use them if the optional feature is enabled... It's extremely confusing and contradictory. All the toggle actually does is enable/disable the ability to use Mislead, Planar binding, Teleportation circle, Gate, & Weird despite the list having those other starred spells which are unaffected by the toggle...
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
I agree that it's not ideal - this is the first time that Wizards of the Coast have presented new content in this manner. These spells are presented as optional in chapter 1 and standard in chapter 3.
Favoured Foe text not currently displaying the correct dice. Text reads as follows
The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it, including when you mark it, you can increase that damage by scalevalue - No level scale data available.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
Already logged - thanks!
Public Mod Note(Stormknight): This is the case for all content sourcebooks however. Ultimately the next generation of campaign management should provide more granular control for campaigns.
I asked a question earlier about the optional features for spells but found out it's way worse than I thought. I used the example of Mind Sliver for Warlocks. The optional features shows Mind Sliver on the list for Warlocks, but even with the feature disabled it can be picked by that character. Why put it in the optional box if the box being disabled doesn't prevent it from being picked? It's not coming from another source since the cantrip is new to Tasha's. [...]
That wasn't my point. Every single spell in the optional class feature with a star is on the list in chapter 3... So if they're just on the list, then why be misleading by including it in an optional feature which can be disabled? That implies you can only use them if the optional feature is enabled... It's extremely confusing and contradictory. All the toggle actually does is enable/disable the ability to use Mislead, Planar binding, Teleportation circle, Gate, & Weird despite the list having those other starred spells which are unaffected by the toggle...
Currently, the Additional Spells feature states all the spells as they appear in TCOE, including PHB spells and the "new" (new or reprinted) TCOE spells. When optional feature is selected, however, only the optional PHB spells are added the spell list, since TCOE spells are automatically added to their respective spell lists (as it was the case for other non-PHB sources like XGTE... which makes sense since most people that purchased the book likely wants these new spells in the game by default...)
However, Tasha chapter 3 does state: "This section contains new spells that the DM may add to a campaign, making them available to player character and monster spellcasters alike. [...] If you’d like to use any of these spells, talk to your DM, who may allow some, all, or none of them." (This is in fact true for any spell in the game.)
Suggestion:
Under "Additional Spells" in the Optional Feature Manager, have 1) a "Source" box ; 2) a drop down menu for official PHB optional spells.
1) the Source box could work like the Source Category box for the Search spells feature. Simply select allowed non-PHB spell sources for that character (e.g. XGTE, EGTW, SCAG, ACQ. INC, etc.) (That would also resolve the problem of DMs that want to exclude ACQ INC spells from certain campaigns).
2) drop down menu would list all the Optional PHB spells mentioned in TCOE. The player (after talking to its DM) can select some, all, or none of them.
Would likely take some work, but that would be one way to go about it. For now, to avoid confusion, it might be best to list only the extra PHB spells in these "Additional Spells" lists since TCOE spells are added by default.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
This is the case for all content sourcebooks however. Ultimately the next generation of campaign management should provide more granular control for campaigns.
if this has been mentioned sorry but I couldn't find it. The infusion Homunculus Servant no long shows a lvl 6 requirement in text but still unable to select it till lvl 6 for artificier.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
The changes to infusions for Tasha's (and the new infusions) have not been added yet.
The Fathomless' Tentacles of the Deep adds my CHA mod to the damage rolls. It shouldn't, I think.
I assume this is an issue of the same nature as the Artificer Artillerist Eldritch Cannon problem, which is apparently an issue with the core code itself with which there is no way to fix it (?)
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
It's very much on the list of changes for us to address as it affects multiple subclasses
If you multi class a monk with a fighter with the unarmed fighting style it doesn’t display the d6 or d8 unarmed attacks made as a bound action or furry of blows .just the regular monk one don’t know if this was discussed Already or not.
For a Circle of the Stars Druid, I believe we're supposed to have the Guiding Bolt spell always prepared (and not counting towards total), but at the moment it appears that only the proficiency-based usage is enabled.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
Just click the appropriate spell slot to mark it off.
I purchased the subclass package for this book, but I cannot access the variant class features in the character builder, is this a problem or do I need to purchase a different part of the book?
I purchased the subclass package for this book, but I cannot access the variant class features in the character builder, is this a problem or do I need to purchase a different part of the book?
the variant class features are not an independant thing, you have to purchase the whole book. ...for some reason
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
The extra spells for the genie warlock are not separated by/locked behind which type of genie you choose. Even if you pick dao you have access to the options for efreeti, marid, and djinni.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
This is a known limitation - please see page 1 of this thread.
Why were my posts deleted? I can't see them at all.
DDB staff periodically go through and delete reports of already-known issues. It makes it difficult to find actually new issues when 90% of the posts are things that have been in the OP since the book was released. Other posts that may distract from the purpose of the thread are also culled (I wouldn’t be shocked if this one is, but hopefully it’s at least useful to you if you should see it).
Lolz it would be nice if they actually fixed some of the issues they are deleting or at the very least gave us an explicit acknowledgment of how significant / timely the work needed to correct is. Again as I and many others have written here the way they keep their lips tightly sealed conveys a very poor customer service image. When you pay for something you should either receive it on time or be informed as to why you don't have it and what steps are being taken to deliver it. Anything else is just sloppy and poor way to treat paying customers.
Imagine ordering a burger and large fries in a restaurant. you are brought a burger without a bun and a half order of fries and 10 minutes later you are told by the waitstaff that the deep fryer has malfunctioned. You can sort of infer from that that you might not get the rest of your fries anytime soon, until they fix the fryer. But what does that have to do with the bun of your burger. Well you just don't know because.... poor communication. The manager of the restaurant should have visited your table by now to tell you that it might be next Tuesday before you get the rest of your meal, but instead she's nowhere to be seen.
It's very simple, and I'm sorry to flog a dead horse but when people pay for something they are entitled to know stuff. Let's see how long it takes them to delete this post....
Unfortunately in this universe we live in, programming is not so simple a task as is preparing a burger. Estimating how much time it would take to correct any given issue assumes they have identified the problem and know a solution that is guaranteed to work. They can estimate but not necessarily as accurately as people would like.
Meanwhile, if you have purchased the book, you still have access to the digital content of the book itself, which is, as far as I can tell, the same price as the print version. And most certainly is identical content. It is not like you have gotten nothing for your money. Meanwhile, I know this is a radical thought, but those rules can still be applied old school pencil and paper style, by actually learning them and applying them manually.... something else that does not apply with the order of a burger.
Of course you are right the material is available and up and we can play with pencil and paper, and that is great. But I don't need DDB to read the book, I could read that in hardback format. Their added value really is the online tools. And sure, I know the burger metaphor (where my intent was tongue in cheek) is overly simplistic and of course you rightly say it is not as simple as that. But what IS / SHOULD BE as simple is good communication and customer service. I do not (and it's my opinion and perhaps not shared by all subscribers/customers) feel that DDB staff are providing sufficiently clear communication on many of the bugs and faults that exist.
Take the Ranger's Primal Companion for example. We already know / have seen that companions for other classes e.g. Artificer/Alchemist can be created so that they are addable as Extras. Now, these might not scale properly in every regard... hell, even the original beast companion last time I looked did not scale properly on attacks. DDB could have (and still can) say, look we are adding Beasts of the Air/Land/Sea in this imperfect way, so you can at least add them to your sheets blah blah blah, instead of simply offering a rather cryptic deflecting remark about 'entitlements'. What in the world does that mean and why, as a customer, should I be required to guess.
Furthermore, while I totally respect your PoV and right to offer a mitigating response on behalf of DDB, it really should not be necessary nor is it ideal for another customer (i.e. your good self) to have to step up and offer such perspective on behalf of the entity that is being paid to provide it.
For me this is not a technical issue, and everything you and other 'defenders' cite on the technical challenges is completely valid and correct. For me this is a customer service and communication issue, and it comes down to the principle which used to prevail, that when someone pays for something they should receive it or if that is not feasible in the immediate moment they should be offered plausible, timely and clear explanations as to what the work plans (and whenever possible timelines) are for providing that which has been paid for.
The customer services attitudes on deliver of Tasha's reminds me of what you get from a monopoly such as BT (British Telecom) in the UK, where the seller / provider knows they're the only game in town with no competition and they can deliver stuff whenever they like as there is really no risk that customers go elsewhere. That is what annoys me. A little bit better communication and at effort on their part to convey more info would go a long way in satisfying me.
Why can't we use "Custom Lineage" as noted in the book? Sure I can change a fee of origin features, but what is it about that custom race with +2 to any ability and a feat, with darkvision, etc.?
Been looking on Youtube and some comments here, nobody seems to address this, or am I missing something?
Also, yes, I do own the full book.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
It's something we're looking at the best/correct way to implement. It's not been forgotten!
For me this is not a technical issue, and everything you and other 'defenders' cite on the technical challenges is completely valid and correct. For me this is a customer service and communication issue, and it comes down to the principle which used to prevail, that when someone pays for something they should receive it or if that is not feasible in the immediate moment they should be offered plausible, timely and clear explanations as to what the work plans (and whenever possible timelines) are for providing that which has been paid for.
The customer services attitudes on deliver of Tasha's reminds me of what you get from a monopoly such as BT (British Telecom) in the UK, where the seller / provider knows they're the only game in town with no competition and they can deliver stuff whenever they like as there is really no risk that customers go elsewhere. That is what annoys me. A little bit better communication and at effort on their part to convey more info would go a long way in satisfying me.
Hi there,
I'm sorry you feel that way - we've worked hard on resolving issues as well as making sure we've communicated what's going on - see the start of this thread.
Please can you explain what you feel that better communication would look like?
We're always looking to improve and, if we're falling short, I'd like to understand some specifics.
The Ranger Primal Companion isn't working due to a technical issue that requires a developer to resolve (as in the Game Content team can't resolve it). If I were to get a developer to explain in more detail what the problem is, I expect it would be even less informative than the current statement, as it would require knowledge of the internal code. I could have just written, "technical issue" but that felt lazy and generic. There is a genuine problem and like all of the other issues, it's in a resolution stack and assigned to people to resolve.
Upon receiving the TCoE, I assumed that the spells are then available for my homebrew class option spells.
For example, cantrips like Booming Blade and other SCAG cantrips, are suppose to be available now for homebrew, granted I have not purchase the SCAG book nor its contents before.
BUT they don't pop up when I type them in.
Can you fix this?
Thanks, it pops up on my homebrew custom spells...
Thanks for the update - I think it would help if on the 2nd post on the thread had an updated each day even if there is nothing new to report - something like Wed 25th - Still working on issues posted above.
I check most days to see if the issue that I am looking forward to getting fixed is done. But from the 2nd post there was a report each day then it stopped forcing me to look through the 51 other pages to see if there has been an update. By seeing that post updated each day I know I am up to date with information.
I am not in a supper hurry I am sure it will work and as usual work well, I love and use DDB all the time and recommend it in a heartbeat. Just responding to the "Please can you explain what you feel that better communication would look like?"
Hope I have made my point clear. Keep up the good work.
Public Mod Note
(Stormknight):
I'll resume the daily posts on Monday - currently pretty much everyone in the US is on holiday for Thanksgiving
For me this is not a technical issue, and everything you and other 'defenders' cite on the technical challenges is completely valid and correct. For me this is a customer service and communication issue, and it comes down to the principle which used to prevail, that when someone pays for something they should receive it or if that is not feasible in the immediate moment they should be offered plausible, timely and clear explanations as to what the work plans (and whenever possible timelines) are for providing that which has been paid for.
The customer services attitudes on deliver of Tasha's reminds me of what you get from a monopoly such as BT (British Telecom) in the UK, where the seller / provider knows they're the only game in town with no competition and they can deliver stuff whenever they like as there is really no risk that customers go elsewhere. That is what annoys me. A little bit better communication and at effort on their part to convey more info would go a long way in satisfying me.
Hi there,
I'm sorry you feel that way - we've worked hard on resolving issues as well as making sure we've communicated what's going on - see the start of this thread.
Please can you explain what you feel that better communication would look like?
We're always looking to improve and, if we're falling short, I'd like to understand some specifics.
The Ranger Primal Companion isn't working due to a technical issue that requires a developer to resolve (as in the Game Content team can't resolve it). If I were to get a developer to explain in more detail what the problem is, I expect it would be even less informative than the current statement, as it would require knowledge of the internal code. I could have just written, "technical issue" but that felt lazy and generic. There is a genuine problem and like all of the other issues, it's in a resolution stack and assigned to people to resolve.
Stormnight,
thanks for your reply. That's appreciated, as is the feedback on the specific example (Primal Companion) that I cited. I don't wish to get into a tit-for-tat debate with you or anyone else about what can be done on this or that specific bug, as that would surely be counterproductive. I suppose what I'm arguing for in general is more (rather than less) information and clarity on level of complexity and time required for fixes on key elements of character builder features in particular.
To stick with the Primal Companion example I already cited, I prefer to have as information as possible without being confusing (and also possibly indicating what sort of timeline you are operating on to either provide the next update or the resolution). Whilst I realise it might not be easy on your side for developers and coders to indicate precise targets for resolution, it is also important for DDB team to realise that on the customer side it is frustrating to have absolutely NO idea if something is expected to be a few hours, days or even weeks or months. For something like the Primal Companion, you will certainly realise is it is key to the Beast Master subclass fix that so many people have waited years for, and is quite a big reason for some of us to be excited about Tasha's. So you guys must also appreciate how annoyed a lot of ranger players have felt for some time and how they have awaited the Optional Class Features in TGtE.... and, here we are, basically the main ones - replacements for Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, and the BM companion, are broken. Therefore, giving folks an explicit signal that it is a priority for you and also when it might be resolved- even if that has to be modified as new info comes to light- in my opinion would be a great way to excel on the customer service side. As it stands in the initial update statement, simply calling it an entitlements issue means absolutely nothing to customers on the outside looking in.
Just an idea, but if DDB developers do expect the fix for Primal Companion to take weeks or months, and not just days, then the nice and simple thing to do as an interim measure, might be to pop a creature stat block up that can be added as an extra in the same way you currently do for normal Beast Master Companions or Artificers. That would be an easily delivered good-faith gesture that I'm sure would go over well with many customers until you get the licensing issue sorted that allows you to deliver the feature as intended.
As a customer, I'm always one that prefers more information than too little. I understand that some of your other clients might be the opposite, and I respect that. All I can do here is pass on my opinion, and again, I am grateful for your reply above. Good luck in the rest of the roll-out and bug resolution, I'm sure you guys will get it right in the end.
Telekinetic - we don't currently have a way to grant extra range to the mage hand cantrip.
Thought about just adding a new VERSION of Mage Hand, call it Telekinetic Hand; that is essentially mage hand with the new range; and side step whatever scripting wall you have hit with the range of mage hand??
I saw the note Stormknight added: "Public Mod Note (Stormknight): The Mind Sliver spell is designated as being on the Sorcerer, Warlock & Wizard spell lists in chapter 3. https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/tcoe/magical-miscellany#Spells "
That wasn't my point. Every single spell in the optional class feature with a star is on the list in chapter 3... So if they're just on the list, then why be misleading by including it in an optional feature which can be disabled? That implies you can only use them if the optional feature is enabled... It's extremely confusing and contradictory. All the toggle actually does is enable/disable the ability to use Mislead, Planar binding, Teleportation circle, Gate, & Weird despite the list having those other starred spells which are unaffected by the toggle...
Favoured Foe text not currently displaying the correct dice. Text reads as follows
The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it, including when you mark it, you can increase that damage by scalevalue - No level scale data available.
Currently, the Additional Spells feature states all the spells as they appear in TCOE, including PHB spells and the "new" (new or reprinted) TCOE spells. When optional feature is selected, however, only the optional PHB spells are added the spell list, since TCOE spells are automatically added to their respective spell lists (as it was the case for other non-PHB sources like XGTE... which makes sense since most people that purchased the book likely wants these new spells in the game by default...)
However, Tasha chapter 3 does state: "This section contains new spells that the DM may add to a campaign, making them available to player character and monster spellcasters alike. [...] If you’d like to use any of these spells, talk to your DM, who may allow some, all, or none of them." (This is in fact true for any spell in the game.)
Suggestion:
Under "Additional Spells" in the Optional Feature Manager, have 1) a "Source" box ; 2) a drop down menu for official PHB optional spells.
1) the Source box could work like the Source Category box for the Search spells feature. Simply select allowed non-PHB spell sources for that character (e.g. XGTE, EGTW, SCAG, ACQ. INC, etc.) (That would also resolve the problem of DMs that want to exclude ACQ INC spells from certain campaigns).
2) drop down menu would list all the Optional PHB spells mentioned in TCOE. The player (after talking to its DM) can select some, all, or none of them.
Would likely take some work, but that would be one way to go about it. For now, to avoid confusion, it might be best to list only the extra PHB spells in these "Additional Spells" lists since TCOE spells are added by default.
My Homebrew: Magic Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | My house rules
Currently playing: Fai'zal - CN Githyanki Rogue (Candlekeep Mysteries, Forgotten Realms) ; Zeena - LN Elf Sorcerer (Dragonlance)
Playing D&D since 1st edition. DMs Guild Author: B.A. Morrier (4-5⭐products! Please check them out.) Twitter: @benmorrier he/him
if this has been mentioned sorry but I couldn't find it. The infusion Homunculus Servant no long shows a lvl 6 requirement in text but still unable to select it till lvl 6 for artificier.
The Fathomless' Tentacles of the Deep adds my CHA mod to the damage rolls. It shouldn't, I think.
I assume this is an issue of the same nature as the Artificer Artillerist Eldritch Cannon problem, which is apparently an issue with the core code itself with which there is no way to fix it (?)
If you multi class a monk with a fighter with the unarmed fighting style it doesn’t display the d6 or d8 unarmed attacks made as a bound action or furry of blows .just the regular monk one don’t know if this was discussed Already or not.
For a Circle of the Stars Druid, I believe we're supposed to have the Guiding Bolt spell always prepared (and not counting towards total), but at the moment it appears that only the proficiency-based usage is enabled.
I purchased the subclass package for this book, but I cannot access the variant class features in the character builder, is this a problem or do I need to purchase a different part of the book?
the variant class features are not an independant thing, you have to purchase the whole book. ...for some reason
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Another issue for Tentacles of the Deep: when i reach lvl 10, the bonus action did not upgrade the damage to 2d8.
Evard black tentacles also did not show up as a spell i know and can upcast, only as a limited use spell.
The extra spells for the genie warlock are not separated by/locked behind which type of genie you choose. Even if you pick dao you have access to the options for efreeti, marid, and djinni.
Of course you are right the material is available and up and we can play with pencil and paper, and that is great. But I don't need DDB to read the book, I could read that in hardback format. Their added value really is the online tools. And sure, I know the burger metaphor (where my intent was tongue in cheek) is overly simplistic and of course you rightly say it is not as simple as that. But what IS / SHOULD BE as simple is good communication and customer service. I do not (and it's my opinion and perhaps not shared by all subscribers/customers) feel that DDB staff are providing sufficiently clear communication on many of the bugs and faults that exist.
Take the Ranger's Primal Companion for example. We already know / have seen that companions for other classes e.g. Artificer/Alchemist can be created so that they are addable as Extras. Now, these might not scale properly in every regard... hell, even the original beast companion last time I looked did not scale properly on attacks. DDB could have (and still can) say, look we are adding Beasts of the Air/Land/Sea in this imperfect way, so you can at least add them to your sheets blah blah blah, instead of simply offering a rather cryptic deflecting remark about 'entitlements'. What in the world does that mean and why, as a customer, should I be required to guess.
Furthermore, while I totally respect your PoV and right to offer a mitigating response on behalf of DDB, it really should not be necessary nor is it ideal for another customer (i.e. your good self) to have to step up and offer such perspective on behalf of the entity that is being paid to provide it.
For me this is not a technical issue, and everything you and other 'defenders' cite on the technical challenges is completely valid and correct. For me this is a customer service and communication issue, and it comes down to the principle which used to prevail, that when someone pays for something they should receive it or if that is not feasible in the immediate moment they should be offered plausible, timely and clear explanations as to what the work plans (and whenever possible timelines) are for providing that which has been paid for.
The customer services attitudes on deliver of Tasha's reminds me of what you get from a monopoly such as BT (British Telecom) in the UK, where the seller / provider knows they're the only game in town with no competition and they can deliver stuff whenever they like as there is really no risk that customers go elsewhere. That is what annoys me. A little bit better communication and at effort on their part to convey more info would go a long way in satisfying me.
Peace.
---
Don't be Lawful Evil
Why can't we use "Custom Lineage" as noted in the book? Sure I can change a fee of origin features, but what is it about that custom race with +2 to any ability and a feat, with darkvision, etc.?
Been looking on Youtube and some comments here, nobody seems to address this, or am I missing something?
Also, yes, I do own the full book.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersHi there,
I'm sorry you feel that way - we've worked hard on resolving issues as well as making sure we've communicated what's going on - see the start of this thread.
Please can you explain what you feel that better communication would look like?
We're always looking to improve and, if we're falling short, I'd like to understand some specifics.
The Ranger Primal Companion isn't working due to a technical issue that requires a developer to resolve (as in the Game Content team can't resolve it). If I were to get a developer to explain in more detail what the problem is, I expect it would be even less informative than the current statement, as it would require knowledge of the internal code. I could have just written, "technical issue" but that felt lazy and generic. There is a genuine problem and like all of the other issues, it's in a resolution stack and assigned to people to resolve.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | 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!"🔊
Thanks, it pops up on my homebrew custom spells...
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!
Thanks for the update - I think it would help if on the 2nd post on the thread had an updated each day even if there is nothing new to report - something like Wed 25th - Still working on issues posted above.
I check most days to see if the issue that I am looking forward to getting fixed is done. But from the 2nd post there was a report each day then it stopped forcing me to look through the 51 other pages to see if there has been an update. By seeing that post updated each day I know I am up to date with information.
I am not in a supper hurry I am sure it will work and as usual work well, I love and use DDB all the time and recommend it in a heartbeat. Just responding to the "Please can you explain what you feel that better communication would look like?"
Hope I have made my point clear. Keep up the good work.
I purchased this for myself but want to also gift it to my boyfriend, how can I do this? I can't seem to find the option to buy it as a gift.
Stormnight,
thanks for your reply. That's appreciated, as is the feedback on the specific example (Primal Companion) that I cited. I don't wish to get into a tit-for-tat debate with you or anyone else about what can be done on this or that specific bug, as that would surely be counterproductive. I suppose what I'm arguing for in general is more (rather than less) information and clarity on level of complexity and time required for fixes on key elements of character builder features in particular.
To stick with the Primal Companion example I already cited, I prefer to have as information as possible without being confusing (and also possibly indicating what sort of timeline you are operating on to either provide the next update or the resolution). Whilst I realise it might not be easy on your side for developers and coders to indicate precise targets for resolution, it is also important for DDB team to realise that on the customer side it is frustrating to have absolutely NO idea if something is expected to be a few hours, days or even weeks or months. For something like the Primal Companion, you will certainly realise is it is key to the Beast Master subclass fix that so many people have waited years for, and is quite a big reason for some of us to be excited about Tasha's. So you guys must also appreciate how annoyed a lot of ranger players have felt for some time and how they have awaited the Optional Class Features in TGtE.... and, here we are, basically the main ones - replacements for Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, and the BM companion, are broken. Therefore, giving folks an explicit signal that it is a priority for you and also when it might be resolved- even if that has to be modified as new info comes to light- in my opinion would be a great way to excel on the customer service side. As it stands in the initial update statement, simply calling it an entitlements issue means absolutely nothing to customers on the outside looking in.
Just an idea, but if DDB developers do expect the fix for Primal Companion to take weeks or months, and not just days, then the nice and simple thing to do as an interim measure, might be to pop a creature stat block up that can be added as an extra in the same way you currently do for normal Beast Master Companions or Artificers. That would be an easily delivered good-faith gesture that I'm sure would go over well with many customers until you get the licensing issue sorted that allows you to deliver the feature as intended.
As a customer, I'm always one that prefers more information than too little. I understand that some of your other clients might be the opposite, and I respect that. All I can do here is pass on my opinion, and again, I am grateful for your reply above. Good luck in the rest of the roll-out and bug resolution, I'm sure you guys will get it right in the end.
Regards
G
---
Don't be Lawful Evil
Thought about just adding a new VERSION of Mage Hand, call it Telekinetic Hand; that is essentially mage hand with the new range; and side step whatever scripting wall you have hit with the range of mage hand??