I remember the firs WOTC books coming out, when the first new WOTC PHB hit and the groups that I played with read them and we stopped playing D&D. After that we played various other RPGs but this is why I left D&D in the 90's. 5e was fine the way it was, if you want to play 6e, that's great, but it is a different game and 5e should have a chance to die out on its own. If 6e really is better, let it stand side by side with 5e for a while and let people migrate on their own. Especially since the new books are not entirely out, no 2024 DMG= incomplete system, and I will not buy into a new addition that does not have its own DMG.
There likely won't be a 6e for at least another 10 years
Call it whatever you want. e5.5, 5e24, 5e2024, 6e - what just came out IS a new edition whether people want to believe it or not. When the much needed v3.5 came out to fix the broken v3, no one tried saying "this isn't a new edition". 5e24 made more changes to 5e than v3.5 made to v3.
This is a new edition, and this has been a complete mess.
All three core books should have been released at the same time.
People should have been given a choice as to which version they wished to play or stick with.
And here's the big one... they should have completely re-written, from scratch, DnD Beyond's code for the new edition - even if that meant having two standalone versions (5e and 5e24).
DnDBeyond was programmed to handle the 5e core books, but because they had no real connection of WoTC had no idea what to expect in future sourcebooks. When those sourcebooks came out, they had to jury rig a patchwork of workarounds to get that info to work in DnDBeyond. Still, there were some things they just couldn't get to work because their original program wasn't set up to handle it. DnDBeyond's code was already stretched to the breaking point before 5e24 was even announced. There were many things in Tasha's (just for example) that they simply couldn't get added because it conflicted too much with the tangled mess of coding that already existed. That's because each source that came out (with no warning to the programmers), had to be finessed in around all the workarounds for the previous sourcebooks' material.
Once it was announced that a new version (or non-version) was coming out - they should have completely re-written the entire program from scratch, now that they had an idea of how to design a better system that would allow everything to play nice with each other. I'm guessing Hasbro didn't want to pay for that.
So, here we are - with a broken tangled mess of code that simply doesn't work. It works (mostly) with pure 2014 PHB content, it works (mostly) with pure 2024 PHG content, but good luck trying to get a 2024 PHB character to work with Expanded Sources (Tasha's, Xanathar's, Monsters of Multiverse).
Yes, this has been a horrible roll-out (and i'm not even touching the pre-order mess of getting authorization from 3rd parties like Paypal for a single large transaction, then for some reason breaking it into smaller chunks when it came time to actually bill (which would need separate authorizations) and trying to use the initial authorization - then standing there with a confused look on their faces when it gets denied and hundreds of pre-orders get cancelled).
RIght now they have 3 choices.
1. Bite the bullet, and get started on the very time consuming, very expensive task of doing a complete re-write of the program as soon as possible.
2. Cross their fingers and 'hope' they can find yet another set of work-a-rounds to cram Expanded content in, in such as way that it can work with 2024 characters.
3. Leave things as is, and watch their subscriber base trickle away (ok, more than a trickle, more like a route) to competitors.
The real shame is that ALL of this, was foreseeable. At many points, someone had to have warned of these issues, and at each point someone made a decision not to deal with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
The decision to make everything pre 2024 "Legacy" is one thing... deliberately making purchased content hard to find just completely destroys trust.
I don't want to purchase further content from D&D Beyond, because I have no guarantee that they won't make my purchase obsolete in future by gradually making it even harder to find, or "refreshing" the content in a way that removes material I valued.
Other VTTs allow you to choose which sourcebooks you have active for a given campaign. With DnDB, if it isn't the latest content, good luck finding it and using it.
I'm beyond angry with this implementation, but it does at least demonstrate a clear conflict of interest which shows that no-one should migrate onto DnDB as a VTT platform. System-agnostic VTTs are in the business of selling VTTs and therefore have a clear purpose to give DMs something that works. Hasbro want to sell product licenses, and they've demonstrated that to do that they are willing to torch the usability of previously purchased content.
Thank you Hasbro for demonstrating that you can't be trusted to operate a VTT, I will not be interested in any of the functionality you're busily copying from other VTTs because you've clearly shown that if I do migrate to your platform, you won't behave in a reputable manner.
New editions are not backwards compatible. This is not a new edition. And before you get on your rant train about "ItS nOt BacKwArdS ComPaTiBlE". It is, whether you like it or not. It is not a new edition, no matter how much people cry and scream about it. If a feature isn't revised, you can use that feature on a 2024 character. Adventurers League, the official organized play program, is also supporting old content.
New editions are not backwards compatible. This is not a new edition. And before you get on your rant train about "ItS nOt BacKwArdS ComPaTiBlE". It is, whether you like it or not. It is not a new edition, no matter how much people cry and scream about it. If a feature isn't revised, you can use that feature on a 2024 character. Adventurers League, the official organized play program, is also supporting old content.
To build on this, the new books are a revision rather than a new edition, more similar to a patch in videogame terms. The skeleton is still 5E, which is why you can take things that haven't been updated and still use them and for the most part plug-n-play them. There is a lot of misinformation out there being pushed about this and the new books in general; however the DDB character creator roll-out is not a representation of how the books are supposed to work. Technical issues of a website have nothing to do with the rules, and there are many pushing that as evidence to support their claims
I remember the firs WOTC books coming out, when the first new WOTC PHB hit and the groups that I played with read them and we stopped playing D&D. After that we played various other RPGs but this is why I left D&D in the 90's. 5e was fine the way it was, if you want to play 6e, that's great, but it is a different game and 5e should have a chance to die out on its own. If 6e really is better, let it stand side by side with 5e for a while and let people migrate on their own. Especially since the new books are not entirely out, no 2024 DMG= incomplete system, and I will not buy into a new addition that does not have its own DMG.
Why is you leaving in the 90s relevent to 2024 PHB being released?
3rd edition was released 2000 after the 97 takeover, so it's not really relevent to you stopping in the 90s during 2nd edition era. And on top of that, 3rd edition was a vast improvement for us Thief (now Rogue) players, what with the ability to sneak attack (no longer backstab) some (stupid undead, oozes, immune to crit things etc) things.
Also, the 2024 DMG will be released later - I don't particularly agree with this move and think it's very shoddy too, but eh.
If you read the 2024 PHB you'll note that it has done a decent job of not going over the top in terms of power, but provides more options for level 1-4 characters (and 5-10, but they were already okay). I feel sorry for Paladins in 2024 because divine smite being a bonus action spell sucks... BUT at the same time, paladins can now dual wield with a scimitar and still get to smite! (and if you use scimitar/shortsword with extra attack you can scimitar > offhand shortsword > adv scimitar swing to try and fish for a crit to smite on)
You're talking about 2024e rules as if that's somehow relevant to the roll-out on DnDBeyond.
A vaguely competent DM of a pen & paper campaign will be able to pick and choose how they work 2014e and 2024e together. That's not the issue.
The issue is the usability of 2014e content on DnDBeyond, which DMs have spent a lot of money on (towards $1000 in my case).
Other DM tools not produced by Hasbro have, very sensibly, allowed DMs to set which content they have enabled. No confusion between editions, just pick and choose your defaults.
DnDBeyond have implemented 2024e as the default, deliberately messing up the user experience for DMs with a lot of 2014e content they'd like to access as easily here as they can on other platforms.
But hey, you can roll up a dual-weilding paladin. That totally outweighs a conscious design choice by WOTC's official VTT platform to muck up the usability of older content that DMs have collectively spent tens of millions if not hundreds of millions on.
New editions are not backwards compatible. This is not a new edition. And before you get on your rant train about "ItS nOt BacKwArdS ComPaTiBlE". It is, whether you like it or not. It is not a new edition, no matter how much people cry and scream about it. If a feature isn't revised, you can use that feature on a 2024 character. Adventurers League, the official organized play program, is also supporting old content.
Many TTRPGs have backwards compatibility in their different editions, so compatibility isn't an inherent factor in what defines an edition change. But whether it's an edition or a revision, the intent should be to address issues players have and codify the best state of the game. But let's say for the sake of argument that somehow compatibility means it's not an edition change, as the 2024 rules in theory feature compatibility.
In play, it ultimately does not. Classes are more powerful. Spell balance is tipped toward bigger numbers and more power as well. Contagion suddenly does 11d8 necrotic damage instead of functioning solely as a powerful debuff?
Run a game with a 5e PC next to a 2024 rules PC, and if the new books by design outshine the original, they are mechanically incompatible. It makes rolling up with a 5e character feel like a poor or worse option. WotC can say all they want that this isn't an edition change, but it's not 5th edition.
That doesn't make it bad, and everyone who wants to go play the new edition can have fun doing so. Maybe some tables don't care. Mine does, very much. And DDB should sort out how to allow 5e to still be convenient to use without the new invasive revision/edition. DDB went from convenient and easy to irritating and frustrating overnight, but it can easily be fixed.
The only reason they haven't is to encourage people to buy the new books while they treat D&D like some sort of liveplay game, as 5e is slowly and quietly phased out.
New editions are not backwards compatible. This is not a new edition. And before you get on your rant train about "ItS nOt BacKwArdS ComPaTiBlE". It is, whether you like it or not. It is not a new edition, no matter how much people cry and scream about it. If a feature isn't revised, you can use that feature on a 2024 character. Adventurers League, the official organized play program, is also supporting old content.
Many TTRPGs have backwards compatibility in their different editions, so compatibility isn't an inherent factor in what defines an edition change. But whether it's an edition or a revision, the intent should be to address issues players have and codify the best state of the game. But let's say for the sake of argument that somehow compatibility means it's not an edition change, as the 2024 rules in theory feature compatibility.
In play, it ultimately does not. Classes are more powerful. Spell balance is tipped toward bigger numbers and more power as well. Contagion suddenly does 11d8 necrotic damage instead of functioning solely as a powerful debuff?
Run a game with a 5e PC next to a 2024 rules PC, and if the new books by design outshine the original, they are mechanically incompatible. It makes rolling up with a 5e character feel like a poor or worse option. WotC can say all they want that this isn't an edition change, but it's not 5th edition.
That doesn't make it bad, and everyone who wants to go play the new edition can have fun doing so. Maybe some tables don't care. Mine does, very much. And DDB should sort out how to allow 5e to still be convenient to use without the new invasive revision/edition. DDB went from convenient and easy to irritating and frustrating overnight, but it can easily be fixed.
The only reason they haven't is to encourage people to buy the new books while they treat D&D like some sort of liveplay game, as 5e is slowly and quietly phased out.
A rules refresh is not a new edition, no matter how many try to push this message. Look at the changes between 3.5E and 4E, or 4E to 5E. The rules are completely incompatible between those rulesets. You can't take things from 3.5E and expect them to work out of the gate with 5E, never mind 4E to 5E; however you can take things from 5E 2014, use them with 5E 2024 and may only run into a few hiccups with some (Shepherd Druid). Updated spells are NOT an indication of mechanical incompatibility, and you can use the 2024 spells with a 2014 character unless YOU choose not to.Sure, classes are more powerful, but you should be using the 2024 classes anyways; and if you use the 2014 classes on a mixed table, you can use the 2024 spells and items even if you can't use things like Weapon Mastery.
Ultimately, Backwards Compatibility goes up from 2014 to 2024, not down from 2024 to 2014, and that's where people are making mistakes.
This is far from a rules refresh, it’s a rules rewrite. Believe what you and others will, for a good number of people who have been doing this for decades, it’s a new edition of the game no matter who tries to say otherwise.
4e was garbage, that’s why it barely got 18 months of life, and was then redesigned with 3.5e flavor to make 5e.
When even the designer goes public and states the new is designed replace the old, and the default design of characters is the forced new rules, with work arounds that are designed to push the new, and bury the old, well if that is not only a new edition, but considering how they had well over three years before now to get this right, and one can confidently state this roll-out was and is the worst D&D in the history of the game.
How was 4e garbage? How are you being 'forced' to play the 2024 rules?
That's the disconnect here. Why "should" I? Nobody at my table wants to use them. We're perfectly happy with 5e, as is. We have problems with the 2024 rules, and do not like or want them. You're free to enjoy them, and call it whatever you want. I've played every and ran games in every edition and revision since AD&D. I was curious about the 2024 rules but after reviewing, personally find them presently very intrusive to running 5e games in DDB.
It is not an unreasonable request to be able to use what we've paid a subscription for, for 7 years. To use DDB to help run 5e games and not be inundated with unwanted changes. Outside of the tools and services, anyone can play however they like and that's the beauty of the game. But I don't want the 2024 rules, and my players don't want the 2024 rules, and we'd like the option to hide the 2024 rules. Otherwise, subs will remain cancelled, as the tool is no longer useful for our needs. I'd even pay an additional fee just to not see the 2024 rules, as DDB used to be that convenient.
That's the disconnect here. Why "should" I? Nobody at my table wants to use them. We're perfectly happy with 5e, as is. We have problems with the 2024 rules, and do not like or want them. You're free to enjoy them, and call it whatever you want. I've played every and ran games in every edition and revision since AD&D. I was curious about the 2024 rules but after reviewing, personally find them presently very intrusive to running 5e games in DDB.
It is not an unreasonable request to be able to use what we've paid a subscription for, for 7 years. To use DDB to help run 5e games and not be inundated with unwanted changes. Outside of the tools and services, anyone can play however they like and that's the beauty of the game. But I don't want the 2024 rules, and my players don't want the 2024 rules, and we'd like the option to hide the 2024 rules. Otherwise, subs will remain cancelled, as the tool is no longer useful for our needs. I'd even pay an additional fee just to not see the 2024 rules, as DDB used to be that convenient.
That's your prerogative, but DDB was built to always run the latest version of the game. Every time an errata was published the website updated to the latest version, and this being a revision will obviously have the latest version as the default on the website. To think it wasn't going to be the case was wishful thinking. Now, I do give you that the website should create a toggle to hide the 2024 rules, but I don't expect that to be the priority when the website already has issues fully implementing the 2024 rules. Once that's done, I can see them making that toggle if people continue to request it.
But please, by all means, let me get my coffee and see if you can ever possibly change a large majority of the community’s mind on this, let alone those who know better than to believe the constant bs Wizards as of late has been shoveling in an attempt to save it own behind.
You say the majority, but that's your optics without ANY proof. Where's your statistics? Where's the survey data? Where are your numbers backed by hard data? Reddit is the most unreliable source for numbers, never mind EN World.This statement sounds like hyperbole to justify your disdain for the rules and the website issues, but you don't know whether it's true or not because the book officially came out on 17 September, with limited release two weeks prior. If you've been through this 4 times, then you know people complain every single time there's a change in rules, but they either switch, move on or stay behind with the old. Always happens!
To think it wasn't going to be the case was wishful thinking.
That I can agree on; I fully expected this to be a mess when they launched the 2024 books. That "DDB was built to always run the latest version of the game" is only a half truth as is was originally a third party product for the current edition in 2017, which was 5e. It was owned by Curse, then acquired by Fandom, then Hasbro bought it in 2022.
Through their misleading marketing, I at least had my fingers crossed they'd take the opportunity and not hard shaft people who wanted to stick with core 5e. Maybe with implementing generational editions, it would possibly be an opportunity to support even earlier versions and editions. AD&D, 3.5, even 4th edition. Certainly fits the "One DND" marketing and have a singular place where the way you want to play is supported, and materials available to purchase, etc.
Instead of when they initially tried to make 5e into homebrew.
So hey, right now, there's people excited for the 2024 rules. I get it. And they don't care if the ********et gets ruined to run it. Even though it would've just been entirely possible to just, preserve the version people still wanted, while adding the option to use 2024 rules for those who wanted it.
And hey, DDB, I'd pay double the previous cost of my cancelled master tier just to have core 5e only. I'd pay $100 out of spite just to not use the 2024 rules.
To think it wasn't going to be the case was wishful thinking.
That I can agree on; I fully expected this to be a mess when they launched the 2024 books. That "DDB was built to always run the latest version of the game" is only a half truth as is was originally a third party product for the current edition in 2017, which was 5e. It was owned by Curse, then acquired by Fandom, then Hasbro bought it in 2022.
Through their misleading marketing, I at least had my fingers crossed they'd take the opportunity and not hard shaft people who wanted to stick with core 5e. Maybe with implementing generational editions, it would possibly be an opportunity to support even earlier versions and editions. AD&D, 3.5, even 4th edition. Certainly fits the "One DND" marketing and have a singular place where the way you want to play is supported, and materials available to purchase, etc.
Instead of when they initially tried to make 5e into homebrew.
So hey, right now, there's people excited for the 2024 rules. I get it. And they don't care if the ********et gets ruined to run it. Even though it would've just been entirely possible to just, preserve the version people still wanted, while adding the option to use 2024 rules for those who wanted it.
And hey, DDB, I'd pay double the previous cost of my cancelled master tier just to have core 5e only. I'd pay $100 out of spite just to not use the 2024 rules.
TBH, I don't like how they did things either. To me it looks like they waited until the midnight hour to start tinkering with the website and had no proper plan on how to implement it.
TBH, I don't like how they did things either. To me it looks like they waited until the midnight hour to start tinkering with the website and had no proper plan on how to implement it.
As someone who works in administration, I assume the devs were put between a rock and a hard place, and my frustration is truly toward the management. The lack of response also rings of management problems. I was originally excited to check out 2024 content, if only at my leisure. The new art is gorgeous, and the organization is improved... though I would've gone with ancestries > species, but it's whatever. And my table hates the class and spell changes.
But yeah. I'm here, frustrated, because I'm happy to keep paying for this product for 5e. If it ceases to function properly, I'll be off with pen and paper, or a new system entirely.
TBH, I don't like how they did things either. To me it looks like they waited until the midnight hour to start tinkering with the website and had no proper plan on how to implement it.
As someone who works in administration, I assume the devs were put between a rock and a hard place, and my frustration is truly toward the management. The lack of response also rings of management problems. I was originally excited to check out 2024 content, if only at my leisure. The new art is gorgeous, and the organization is improved... though I would've gone with ancestries > species, but it's whatever. And my table hates the class and spell changes.
But yeah. I'm here, frustrated, because I'm happy to keep paying for this product for 5e. If it ceases to function properly, I'll be off with pen and paper, or a new system entirely.
I wonder why. The class changes are an improvement over the 2014 ones, and a lot of the middling spells have been improved, barring a few exceptions. Of course, there are a few outlier spells **Cough**CME**Cough**, but for the most part problematic spells were toned down. The floor may have been raised for power, but the ceiling remains mostly the same as 2014.
4e was rejected by the majority of the community, and like now only a handful of people ever thought it was better than 3.5, or anything previous, but was ultimately replaced by 5e, what 3-4 years after release? After 3.0e, 4e had the second shortest run in the history of the game.
And yea, the statement that 5.24, 5.5, 20245e is practically getting shoved down the publics throats is obvious, look at how many people have posted in the forums in general how the sudden release and change is unwarranted and unwanted at the current time.
People will ether give up and just change so they don’t feel left out, which is what the company is banking on, or they will say once again to hell with D&D till it gets it’s act together. This is not the first rules change for some, and for others it’s a confusing time as to what is going on. I been through this now 4 times, and experience shows this is just as bad as 4e was. Piss poor design, coupled with controversy and disappointment and disapproval.
Because sooner or later a rewrite of the options that are currently possible to backward use, which is the wrong terminology to use considering one has to make the adjustment of the old to fit the new, will eventually get made.
Hell, just look at the Char builder. Rather than keeping the old rules the default, and have the new under a toggle that would allow the site to backend work on getting the new up to snuff, and allow any new changes in the rules and functionality to progress with little resistance, the new are now the default and work by the public is needed to make the old fit the new. That is the same as shoving the new in a persons face and telling them to deal with it.
piss poorly designed rule set, and even more piss poorly thought of implemented functionality, and the absolute mentality that somehow this is just a revision, propagated by a handful of individuals who have demonstrated their lack of experience in the game, and yea it’s as though it’s getting reamed right up you know where.
But please, by all means, let me get my coffee and see if you can ever possibly change a large majority of the community’s mind on this, let alone those who know better than to believe the constant bs Wizards as of late has been shoveling in an attempt to save it own behind.
An appeal to popularity. Something being popular or unpopular is not an actual indication of its quality. Have you tried to use social media?
A company has an incentive to promote their product. That is not forcing you to use it. Care to try again on how you are being forced to use it?
You seem confused about what it means to be 'unwarranted'. The 2014 rules were in desperate need of cleanup. There were more holes, ambiguity, and outright exploitable RAW elements that warranted a revision. I will grant you that some people with little control of their own emotions have been pounding away at their keyboards about how they didn't want it though.
Yes, again, a company is incentivized to promote their product and the very thing you say they are banking on is consumer decision, which, according to you, is an indication of its quality. This is a bit of a mixed message, as you are saying it is unwanted and therefore is bad. If more people move to the new rules, something they have 100% control over, then it is either curiosity or preference that made the player do so and suggests that they are better than the 2014 rules. Will you admit to the 2024 rules superiority once it is played more often than 2014 rules? If this is your argument, you are obligated to.
Anyone who wants to avoid being 'left out' are also making the decision to join those people, which, to be clear, they 100% do not have to do. People still play 3.5.
Yes, many people have seen many new editions. I am not sure what this has to do with either 4e being garbage or the 2024 rules being forced down people's throats. Please focus and come back to my question.
As revisions are given for 2014 to update them for 2024 rules, it is true that those 2014 options will no longer be options for those playing 2024 rules. Those who insist on playing 2014 rules will continue to be able to do so. Again, this fails to demonstrate how 2024 is being forced down your throat. Rather, it is a projection that 2024 rules will have more options in the near future, which, well... no kidding.
Why would old rules be the default? This is the official site for D&D. Obviously the default will be the most current rules available and that has literally always been the case for the entire life of this site. Every time errata has come out, it has been updated here immediately before the books even finished printing. You still have the option to use old rules however. That is the exception and it was done to accommodate those spewing hate all over the forums demanding 2014 5e like a feral raccoon would its pile of garbage.
How you feel about the 2024 rules in no way addresses my question...
I don't need to change the minds of the haters on this site. Just like every other mindless rampage that has happened here over the years, they will come, crap all over the forums, and be gone in a few months. But quietly, there will be a shift to using the 2024 rules and a year from now, people will forget that they ever cared so much about 2014 rules. Just like when Tasha's came out, just like when Monsters of the Multiverse came out, just like when Strixhaven came out. Just like Wild Beyond the Witchlight came out... and many others I can't remember. You guys can't maintain your own momentum. You never do.
That is all.
I remember the firs WOTC books coming out, when the first new WOTC PHB hit and the groups that I played with read them and we stopped playing D&D. After that we played various other RPGs but this is why I left D&D in the 90's. 5e was fine the way it was, if you want to play 6e, that's great, but it is a different game and 5e should have a chance to die out on its own. If 6e really is better, let it stand side by side with 5e for a while and let people migrate on their own. Especially since the new books are not entirely out, no 2024 DMG= incomplete system, and I will not buy into a new addition that does not have its own DMG.
DND Beyond Legendary Bundle Holder
There likely won't be a 6e for at least another 10 years
Call it whatever you want. e5.5, 5e24, 5e2024, 6e - what just came out IS a new edition whether people want to believe it or not. When the much needed v3.5 came out to fix the broken v3, no one tried saying "this isn't a new edition". 5e24 made more changes to 5e than v3.5 made to v3.
This is a new edition, and this has been a complete mess.
All three core books should have been released at the same time.
People should have been given a choice as to which version they wished to play or stick with.
And here's the big one... they should have completely re-written, from scratch, DnD Beyond's code for the new edition - even if that meant having two standalone versions (5e and 5e24).
DnDBeyond was programmed to handle the 5e core books, but because they had no real connection of WoTC had no idea what to expect in future sourcebooks. When those sourcebooks came out, they had to jury rig a patchwork of workarounds to get that info to work in DnDBeyond. Still, there were some things they just couldn't get to work because their original program wasn't set up to handle it. DnDBeyond's code was already stretched to the breaking point before 5e24 was even announced. There were many things in Tasha's (just for example) that they simply couldn't get added because it conflicted too much with the tangled mess of coding that already existed. That's because each source that came out (with no warning to the programmers), had to be finessed in around all the workarounds for the previous sourcebooks' material.
Once it was announced that a new version (or non-version) was coming out - they should have completely re-written the entire program from scratch, now that they had an idea of how to design a better system that would allow everything to play nice with each other. I'm guessing Hasbro didn't want to pay for that.
So, here we are - with a broken tangled mess of code that simply doesn't work. It works (mostly) with pure 2014 PHB content, it works (mostly) with pure 2024 PHG content, but good luck trying to get a 2024 PHB character to work with Expanded Sources (Tasha's, Xanathar's, Monsters of Multiverse).
Yes, this has been a horrible roll-out (and i'm not even touching the pre-order mess of getting authorization from 3rd parties like Paypal for a single large transaction, then for some reason breaking it into smaller chunks when it came time to actually bill (which would need separate authorizations) and trying to use the initial authorization - then standing there with a confused look on their faces when it gets denied and hundreds of pre-orders get cancelled).
RIght now they have 3 choices.
1. Bite the bullet, and get started on the very time consuming, very expensive task of doing a complete re-write of the program as soon as possible.
2. Cross their fingers and 'hope' they can find yet another set of work-a-rounds to cram Expanded content in, in such as way that it can work with 2024 characters.
3. Leave things as is, and watch their subscriber base trickle away (ok, more than a trickle, more like a route) to competitors.
The real shame is that ALL of this, was foreseeable. At many points, someone had to have warned of these issues, and at each point someone made a decision not to deal with it.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
The decision to make everything pre 2024 "Legacy" is one thing... deliberately making purchased content hard to find just completely destroys trust.
I don't want to purchase further content from D&D Beyond, because I have no guarantee that they won't make my purchase obsolete in future by gradually making it even harder to find, or "refreshing" the content in a way that removes material I valued.
Other VTTs allow you to choose which sourcebooks you have active for a given campaign. With DnDB, if it isn't the latest content, good luck finding it and using it.
I'm beyond angry with this implementation, but it does at least demonstrate a clear conflict of interest which shows that no-one should migrate onto DnDB as a VTT platform. System-agnostic VTTs are in the business of selling VTTs and therefore have a clear purpose to give DMs something that works. Hasbro want to sell product licenses, and they've demonstrated that to do that they are willing to torch the usability of previously purchased content.
Thank you Hasbro for demonstrating that you can't be trusted to operate a VTT, I will not be interested in any of the functionality you're busily copying from other VTTs because you've clearly shown that if I do migrate to your platform, you won't behave in a reputable manner.
New editions are not backwards compatible. This is not a new edition. And before you get on your rant train about "ItS nOt BacKwArdS ComPaTiBlE". It is, whether you like it or not. It is not a new edition, no matter how much people cry and scream about it. If a feature isn't revised, you can use that feature on a 2024 character. Adventurers League, the official organized play program, is also supporting old content.
To build on this, the new books are a revision rather than a new edition, more similar to a patch in videogame terms. The skeleton is still 5E, which is why you can take things that haven't been updated and still use them and for the most part plug-n-play them. There is a lot of misinformation out there being pushed about this and the new books in general; however the DDB character creator roll-out is not a representation of how the books are supposed to work. Technical issues of a website have nothing to do with the rules, and there are many pushing that as evidence to support their claims
Why is you leaving in the 90s relevent to 2024 PHB being released?
3rd edition was released 2000 after the 97 takeover, so it's not really relevent to you stopping in the 90s during 2nd edition era. And on top of that, 3rd edition was a vast improvement for us Thief (now Rogue) players, what with the ability to sneak attack (no longer backstab) some (stupid undead, oozes, immune to crit things etc) things.
Also, the 2024 DMG will be released later - I don't particularly agree with this move and think it's very shoddy too, but eh.
If you read the 2024 PHB you'll note that it has done a decent job of not going over the top in terms of power, but provides more options for level 1-4 characters (and 5-10, but they were already okay). I feel sorry for Paladins in 2024 because divine smite being a bonus action spell sucks... BUT at the same time, paladins can now dual wield with a scimitar and still get to smite! (and if you use scimitar/shortsword with extra attack you can scimitar > offhand shortsword > adv scimitar swing to try and fish for a crit to smite on)
You're talking about 2024e rules as if that's somehow relevant to the roll-out on DnDBeyond.
A vaguely competent DM of a pen & paper campaign will be able to pick and choose how they work 2014e and 2024e together. That's not the issue.
The issue is the usability of 2014e content on DnDBeyond, which DMs have spent a lot of money on (towards $1000 in my case).
Other DM tools not produced by Hasbro have, very sensibly, allowed DMs to set which content they have enabled. No confusion between editions, just pick and choose your defaults.
DnDBeyond have implemented 2024e as the default, deliberately messing up the user experience for DMs with a lot of 2014e content they'd like to access as easily here as they can on other platforms.
But hey, you can roll up a dual-weilding paladin. That totally outweighs a conscious design choice by WOTC's official VTT platform to muck up the usability of older content that DMs have collectively spent tens of millions if not hundreds of millions on.
Many TTRPGs have backwards compatibility in their different editions, so compatibility isn't an inherent factor in what defines an edition change. But whether it's an edition or a revision, the intent should be to address issues players have and codify the best state of the game. But let's say for the sake of argument that somehow compatibility means it's not an edition change, as the 2024 rules in theory feature compatibility.
In play, it ultimately does not. Classes are more powerful. Spell balance is tipped toward bigger numbers and more power as well. Contagion suddenly does 11d8 necrotic damage instead of functioning solely as a powerful debuff?
Run a game with a 5e PC next to a 2024 rules PC, and if the new books by design outshine the original, they are mechanically incompatible. It makes rolling up with a 5e character feel like a poor or worse option. WotC can say all they want that this isn't an edition change, but it's not 5th edition.
That doesn't make it bad, and everyone who wants to go play the new edition can have fun doing so. Maybe some tables don't care. Mine does, very much. And DDB should sort out how to allow 5e to still be convenient to use without the new invasive revision/edition. DDB went from convenient and easy to irritating and frustrating overnight, but it can easily be fixed.
The only reason they haven't is to encourage people to buy the new books while they treat D&D like some sort of liveplay game, as 5e is slowly and quietly phased out.
2024A rules refresh is not a new edition, no matter how many try to push this message. Look at the changes between 3.5E and 4E, or 4E to 5E. The rules are completely incompatible between those rulesets. You can't take things from 3.5E and expect them to work out of the gate with 5E, never mind 4E to 5E; however you can take things from 5E 2014, use them with 5E 2024 and may only run into a few hiccups with some (Shepherd Druid). Updated spells are NOT an indication of mechanical incompatibility, and you can use the 2024 spells with a 2014 character unless YOU choose not to.Sure, classes are more powerful, but you should be using the 2024 classes anyways; and if you use the 2014 classes on a mixed table, you can use the 2024 spells and items even if you can't use things like Weapon Mastery.
Ultimately, Backwards Compatibility goes up from 2014 to 2024, not down from 2024 to 2014, and that's where people are making mistakes.
How was 4e garbage? How are you being 'forced' to play the 2024 rules?
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
That's the disconnect here. Why "should" I? Nobody at my table wants to use them. We're perfectly happy with 5e, as is. We have problems with the 2024 rules, and do not like or want them. You're free to enjoy them, and call it whatever you want. I've played every and ran games in every edition and revision since AD&D. I was curious about the 2024 rules but after reviewing, personally find them presently very intrusive to running 5e games in DDB.
It is not an unreasonable request to be able to use what we've paid a subscription for, for 7 years. To use DDB to help run 5e games and not be inundated with unwanted changes. Outside of the tools and services, anyone can play however they like and that's the beauty of the game. But I don't want the 2024 rules, and my players don't want the 2024 rules, and we'd like the option to hide the 2024 rules. Otherwise, subs will remain cancelled, as the tool is no longer useful for our needs. I'd even pay an additional fee just to not see the 2024 rules, as DDB used to be that convenient.
2024That's your prerogative, but DDB was built to always run the latest version of the game. Every time an errata was published the website updated to the latest version, and this being a revision will obviously have the latest version as the default on the website. To think it wasn't going to be the case was wishful thinking. Now, I do give you that the website should create a toggle to hide the 2024 rules, but I don't expect that to be the priority when the website already has issues fully implementing the 2024 rules. Once that's done, I can see them making that toggle if people continue to request it.
You say the majority, but that's your optics without ANY proof. Where's your statistics? Where's the survey data? Where are your numbers backed by hard data? Reddit is the most unreliable source for numbers, never mind EN World.This statement sounds like hyperbole to justify your disdain for the rules and the website issues, but you don't know whether it's true or not because the book officially came out on 17 September, with limited release two weeks prior. If you've been through this 4 times, then you know people complain every single time there's a change in rules, but they either switch, move on or stay behind with the old. Always happens!
That I can agree on; I fully expected this to be a mess when they launched the 2024 books. That "DDB was built to always run the latest version of the game" is only a half truth as is was originally a third party product for the current edition in 2017, which was 5e. It was owned by Curse, then acquired by Fandom, then Hasbro bought it in 2022.
Through their misleading marketing, I at least had my fingers crossed they'd take the opportunity and not hard shaft people who wanted to stick with core 5e. Maybe with implementing generational editions, it would possibly be an opportunity to support even earlier versions and editions. AD&D, 3.5, even 4th edition. Certainly fits the "One DND" marketing and have a singular place where the way you want to play is supported, and materials available to purchase, etc.
Instead of when they initially tried to make 5e into homebrew.
So hey, right now, there's people excited for the 2024 rules. I get it. And they don't care if the ********et gets ruined to run it. Even though it would've just been entirely possible to just, preserve the version people still wanted, while adding the option to use 2024 rules for those who wanted it.
And hey, DDB, I'd pay double the previous cost of my cancelled master tier just to have core 5e only. I'd pay $100 out of spite just to not use the 2024 rules.
2024TBH, I don't like how they did things either. To me it looks like they waited until the midnight hour to start tinkering with the website and had no proper plan on how to implement it.
As someone who works in administration, I assume the devs were put between a rock and a hard place, and my frustration is truly toward the management. The lack of response also rings of management problems. I was originally excited to check out 2024 content, if only at my leisure. The new art is gorgeous, and the organization is improved... though I would've gone with ancestries > species, but it's whatever. And my table hates the class and spell changes.
But yeah. I'm here, frustrated, because I'm happy to keep paying for this product for 5e. If it ceases to function properly, I'll be off with pen and paper, or a new system entirely.
2024I wonder why. The class changes are an improvement over the 2014 ones, and a lot of the middling spells have been improved, barring a few exceptions. Of course, there are a few outlier spells **Cough**CME**Cough**, but for the most part problematic spells were toned down. The floor may have been raised for power, but the ceiling remains mostly the same as 2014.
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