They didn't give me a free item, they took away the item that I payed for when I bought the online version of the 2014 PHB—the item I could use on the interactive character sheet at the center of their service—and replaced it with the 2024 version. Which has differing stats in several cases, and now I have to be on watch for future changed items with differing stats.
The existing site already shows how it would be done. You can already select between 2014 and 2024 versions of most items. It's so simple, they already did it. To fully implement it, all they'd need to do is
add back in the 2014 versions of items and tag them as 2014
have the default filter preferentially show 2024 versions (so if there is no 2024 version, show the 2014 version)
add a 2014-only filter. With that, everybody would be happy. 2014 players would get 2014 versions. 2024 players would get everything, but only the newest version, with no duplicates. Et voila.
I understand why they're not upset now: because the new changes don't affect their table. They don't have to be on the lookout for new changes that leak through to their table. They don't have to homebrew anything. They're happy letting people who don't play the way they do struggle.
You may have misunderstood my post. I was asking why would they do this in response to your voiced concern that they would be overwriting your existing items with the new items. My response to that is that now, they are more likely to just not do that and make you pay for the new version, which they already are doing. The items you have mentioned are virtually identical to the 2014 versions and part of the Free Rules, which I already admitted were replaced. The Free Rules are the only things that are free on this site. Why give you free stuff when they can just charge you instead and make some money? The Ring of Free action, for example, has an 's' and the word 'conditions' added. It is literally the same item. Why have two items just for that? That is simply clutter for your comfort, at the great expense of others who prefer less clutter.
So, you can't show us how easy it is in practice? In my experience in the professional world, the person who thinks the solution is 'so easy' generally burdens others with a lot of work for them to maintain that illusion. Build it. If it is easy, you should be able to whip it up in a few minutes, right?
I am sure they have already explained why they are not upset, so I won't dare trying to put words in their mouth, but I will say that looking at your cited examples of change, you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
For hopefully the last time: 2014 players cannot trust DDB not to overwrite their equipment with 2024 versions. That is the major issue. Future items. Ongoing issues.
As for the difficulty of separating the rules: speaking as someone with experience working with databases, it is not at all impossible. It's actually incredibly easy. It's actually not even hard to implement a solution that would avoid players having to view duplicate items in a dropdown, if that's deemed important.
Er, source? Most users were absolutely up in arms this past summer when Wizards said they weren't going to duplicate every single item and spell. It was a really big deal.
Why would WotC give you a free item when they could (and have) just thrown it under a new product title that you have to pay money to access? The only stuff that even shows up are part of the free rules, which won't see changes once the monsters are finally loaded into it.
If it was incredibly easy, why not build an example of how it is done? I see external software devs on this site all the time offering support for their extensions. Surely your solution is less complicated than what they have made.
Most people were frustrated over the summer because they thought they were going to lose access to the things they had purchased and needed to do the work themselves to homebrew hundreds of items. The user you are talking to was one of the frustrated users, actually. If they aren't upset now, maybe you should try understanding why that is the case. Once everyone learned that their old items were safe and sound, very few had problems with the arrangement, which is why the voices on this issue are reduced to a handful spread over three or four threads instead of literally hundreds of users pounding their keyboards into pieces.
Honestly users like you are why Hasbro get away with their nonsense. Just ignoring legitimate complaints by other users to tote the party agenda, for a company you don't even work for. They are changing items. Whether it's only certain ones and it only affects some users is irrelevant. Wizard's said they'd not do it and have done it. And the fear is that they'll continue to do it. Going on past experience with Beyond since it was purchased by Wizard's and its gradual decline in service quality, it'll likely continue to happen. They want to push 2024 and get people into a subscription service for Sigil. It's been the obvious case for a couple years now. I don't understand how people like you don't see this and allow it to continue, by shutting down honest feedback and complaints from other players, it's ridiculous.
Complaints are not legitimate just because you have strong feelings about them.
Complaints are not legitimate just because you have strong feelings about them.
Complaints about a paid service being worse and different from what was promised are legitimate.
In terms of being different... You paid for content that gave you a disclaimer at time of purchase that they can do whatever they want with that content at any time. So, on those grounds, the complaints are not legitimate at all since you agreed to that before buying.
Worse is very subjective and the fact that people disagree with you on this forum is evidence that not everyone shares your opinion. I was one of those users who wanted the free PHB changes. I didn't get it because the people of the forums made their frustrations known. Are my complaints legitimate simply because I wanted things the other way?
And yea, DDB going back on their word and Surprise!
A simple toggle to allow just 2014 or just 2024 material was a possibility but no, just slowly change the 2014 material to 2024 and they are just going to accept it.
Total bs IMHOO, now even the 2014 basic rules are getting changed to 2024 and nothing of 2014 will remain. WTH?
As another user there have mentioned, there is no point in having duplicates if there is little to no change.
It is the solution that most users on Beyond are okay with. Most users are not okay with duplicating every item single item.
All of the rules that have a legacy version have that text at the very bottom of the box. It's hardly an impact on you if there's a duplicate version of other things. You can always just ignore those if you don't need them. After all, it's not that much of an impact to you currently with the dual content. With toggles, we can switch off the content we don't need (whichever that is) and you can leave or toggle as desired.
But with all that content that you can readily go through with those double details at this present time, I still don't see what the problem is. It's not too hard to just not interact with the version you didn't want if that was the case.
I do not know what else to say besides that there are more users who prefer the current implementation than not, and Beyond would rather inconvenience a minority of users than a majority of users. I do not want to see an item duplicated if the only changes are cosmetic. I do want to see items duplicated if there are significant changes.
The item drop down menu is already extremely bloated as is. I am not okay with seeing dozens and dozens of variations of dragon scale mail, armors of resistance, Ioun stones, etc.; it makes finding and scrolling through items a pain in the ass. It would be nice if Beyond's system and software is better, and allow magic items to be more customizable, so we do not need to have multiple entries of certain magic items. However, given the system's limitations, while I might not be completely okay with the implementation, I accept its limitations and find the implementation bearable.
I've noticed that the bulk of people I have spoken to have been quite unhappy with how it has been implimented to varying extents, most of them agreeing that a toggle would be a sleek and useful solution as people could interact with it or not at their leisure. It seems that you perhaps speak with people of the opposite persuasion, but I can't speak for you. Again, a set of toggles would be perfect as the vast majority of people would be pleased with that, and only a small demographic would be perhaps needing to continue to ignore half the content as it is needed.
I do not see why something that would benefit the majority would be such a conflict for them to implement as the minority would be the ones displeased as opposed to the majority displeased as they are now. I'm sorry that it would affect you in a seemingly negative light, but most people do stick with one rule set and cherry pick in homebrew rules instead of picking between two sets of rules that don't quite sync up nicely. I understand that you and likely others all share in such a brew style, but it would be the smaller of the groups.
Once again, man, it's not the existing changed equipment. It's the ongoing unsurety about parts of the game not being overwritten. If there were some kind of iron-clad guarantee that there would never again be any 2024 leaks into the 2014 rules, then these small issues wouldn't really be worth worrying about. But based on how things have gone so far, no such guarantee can be assumed.
If you are asking Beyond to completely isolate 2024 from 2014 rules, that is impossible on a practical level and they will not guarantee that. There is always going to be some leakage, but those leakages will be clearly marked and identified. For example, tool tips display both the old and new rules, and I do not think the existing framework has the ability to use toggles to give users alternate tooltips. For items, it makes sense for items that have been significantly changed to be duplicated. However, it does not make sense for items that have little to no changes to be duplicated.
Okay, man, I have explained at least three different times what the actual problem is, and you have refused to address it. I don't want to assume bad faith on your part, but you're making it difficult.
For hopefully the last time: 2014 players cannot trust DDB not to overwrite their equipment with 2024 versions. That is the major issue. Future items. Ongoing issues.
As for the difficulty of separating the rules: speaking as someone with experience working with databases, it is not at all impossible. It's actually incredibly easy. It's actually not even hard to implement a solution that would avoid players having to view duplicate items in a dropdown, if that's deemed important
As I have already said, Beyond will not promise that. There will be changes. Since the beginning, before Wizards even stepped in, Beyond aims to reflect the latest version of the game to the best of its ability. Many users expect Beyond to follow errata and the latest updates. If you want a digital tool set that preserves the game as it was, with exact wording and all, you will be looking at Sheets and Excel. You can check out Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds, and they probably do a better job of separating 2014 from 2024 content and content preservation than Beyond, but I do not think even they can provide you a version of the game you want with zero changes, errata, and updates.
Beyond is designed to be easy to get into and be as convenient as possible. If a person wants to utilize any niche rules or do anything remotely slightly advanced, Beyond is the wrong tool for that. Beyond cannot implement RAW correctly and in its entirety, it will not even let new users easily access old UA that developers have already implemented. As reasonable and as simple as preserving the game is for you, it is not simple nor reasonable for Beyond.
No, the problem is you and others don’t care for 2014 rules and could care less about anything unless it directly affects you.
Not everyone is interested in the 2024 at the moment, and the insistence that absolutely everyone should be switching to a set of rules that are absolutely ridiculous as a revision when we were assured that users would not have material changed is as careless as ever, and because of others like yourself who are willing to just “ignore” the fact that both this site and the company that owns it have consistently ignored the majority of users that have repeatedly complained about the lack of transparency about changes to the site and when changes would occur, well the fact that this thread is about how DDB and Wizbro has been slowly and methodically switching out elements of the 2014 core rules with 2024 material well after they( Wizbro ) said they weren’t going to continue changing material is just another example of the community told one thing and getting shafted by the other.
I do not care about edition wars, 5e is still 5e. Absolutely no one does pure default 2014 5e RAW either, and everyone uses optional rules and homebrews to some degree. Most people care about D&D, they just do not care about how pure it is.
A minority of users here wanting every item to be duplicated does not care about what the majority of users want either. A majority of users already do not like the bloat, and will be more upset with Wizards and Beyond for not listening to them. Most users will agree that it is unreasonable to duplicate every item for minor changes.
For hopefully the last time: 2014 players cannot trust DDB not to overwrite their equipment with 2024 versions. That is the major issue. Future items. Ongoing issues.
As for the difficulty of separating the rules: speaking as someone with experience working with databases, it is not at all impossible. It's actually incredibly easy. It's actually not even hard to implement a solution that would avoid players having to view duplicate items in a dropdown, if that's deemed important.
Er, source? Most users were absolutely up in arms this past summer when Wizards said they weren't going to duplicate every single item and spell. It was a really big deal.
Why would WotC give you a free item when they could (and have) just thrown it under a new product title that you have to pay money to access? The only stuff that even shows up are part of the free rules, which won't see changes once the monsters are finally loaded into it.
If it was incredibly easy, why not build an example of how it is done? I see external software devs on this site all the time offering support for their extensions. Surely your solution is less complicated than what they have made.
Most people were frustrated over the summer because they thought they were going to lose access to the things they had purchased and needed to do the work themselves to homebrew hundreds of items. The user you are talking to was one of the frustrated users, actually. If they aren't upset now, maybe you should try understanding why that is the case. Once everyone learned that their old items were safe and sound, very few had problems with the arrangement, which is why the voices on this issue are reduced to a handful spread over three or four threads instead of literally hundreds of users pounding their keyboards into pieces.
Honestly users like you are why Hasbro get away with their nonsense. Just ignoring legitimate complaints by other users to tote the party agenda, for a company you don't even work for. They are changing items. Whether it's only certain ones and it only affects some users is irrelevant. Wizard's said they'd not do it and have done it. And the fear is that they'll continue to do it. Going on past experience with Beyond since it was purchased by Wizard's and its gradual decline in service quality, it'll likely continue to happen. They want to push 2024 and get people into a subscription service for Sigil. It's been the obvious case for a couple years now. I don't understand how people like you don't see this and allow it to continue, by shutting down honest feedback and complaints from other players, it's ridiculous.
You do not have to like what Beyond and a majority of users on the site compromise on and agree to. I certainly do not. I think it is bonkers and pointless for Beyond to step into the VTT space, and I think Beyond should focus on digital tools making in-person play easier, but it seems like a majority users want a VTT and Wizards is listening to them. However, I am not going to tell Beyond to ignore the majority of users and focus on only digital tools that helps with in-person play.
in 2 years there will be no 2014. only the people that have the old paper books would even buy the so called digital book online in here. no one new to the game would buy 2014 pb dm mm at all. they would purchase the 2024 only. the reason why a lot of us are upset on here is because we spent money and its being changed, hidden, hard to find, being phased out. we are kind of tired of being nickel and dimed to death every time. funny thing is most of us would go completely 2024 if they didn't half azz the PB subclasses. why make a great book and leave out half the subclasses? clearly, they will have PB2 it seems and be required to purchase it too.
The 2014 rules are still here. It might not be in the form you like, but it is still here and it still functions the same. People who like to mix and match rules will also buy the old books for more options.
If finances are an issue for you, you should not be spending money on D&D in the first place. D&D is free, and its paid content can be accessed for free too, just ask your D&D community for help to get content sharing. If you are not a fan of how Beyond does things, there is Roll20, Fantasy Grounds, and Foundry, and I am sure there is a GM out there who can you hook up with other official digital tools.
in 2 years there will be no 2014. only the people that have the old paper books would even buy the so called digital book online in here. no one new to the game would buy 2014 pb dm mm at all. they would purchase the 2024 only. the reason why a lot of us are upset on here is because we spent money and its being changed, hidden, hard to find, being phased out. we are kind of tired of being nickel and dimed to death every time. funny thing is most of us would go completely 2024 if they didn't half azz the PB subclasses. why make a great book and leave out half the subclasses? clearly, they will have PB2 it seems and be required to purchase it too.
And what happens when the next edition comes out? People will get the same experience, this is not a platform to buy into.
Basically this. Do not buy into Beyond or any digital toolset until you have done your research. Obviously, there is a limit to what you can foresee and expect, but if I had known Beyond will turn out the way it is, I probably would have went with Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds instead. It will be less convenient since I will be stuck with a laptop instead of using a smartphone, but at least RAW and optional rules will be more implemented and complete.
Beyond gets the job done for me, so I am sticking with Beyond. I do not want to lose access to VGTM and MTOF just for more advanced features that I rarely use.
they will take 2024 out for 10 to 14 years and make a new version update of 5e. remember the push is to go all digital.
If they are pushing for all digital, they are doing a really poor job of it. I mean, we can all literally see how Hasbro/Wizards is running Beyond. 2014 RAW is not even fully implemented to this day.
Mats and minis will always be a thing. Physical books will always be a thing. TTRPGs are already really niche, digital only TTRPGs are going to be even more niche, and with D&D being a gateway TTRPG focusing on mass appeal, I do not see D&D ever go in that direction.
Complaints are not legitimate just because you have strong feelings about them.
Complaints about a paid service being worse and different from what was promised are legitimate.
In terms of being different... You paid for content that gave you a disclaimer at time of purchase that they can do whatever they want with that content at any time. So, on those grounds, the complaints are not legitimate at all since you agreed to that before buying.
Worse is very subjective and the fact that people disagree with you on this forum is evidence that not everyone shares your opinion. I was one of those users who wanted the free PHB changes. I didn't get it because the people of the forums made their frustrations known. Are my complaints legitimate simply because I wanted things the other way?
There is an update I've linked several times where dndbeyond said very specifically that they would not do what they are currently doing. So the service is different from promised. And no, there's nothing subjective about having to homebrew items because they've been altered.
I've noticed that the bulk of people I have spoken to have been quite unhappy with how it has been implimented to varying extents, most of them agreeing that a toggle would be a sleek and useful solution as people could interact with it or not at their leisure. It seems that you perhaps speak with people of the opposite persuasion, but I can't speak for you. Again, a set of toggles would be perfect as the vast majority of people would be pleased with that, and only a small demographic would be perhaps needing to continue to ignore half the content as it is needed.
I do not see why something that would benefit the majority would be such a conflict for them to implement as the minority would be the ones displeased as opposed to the majority displeased as they are now. I'm sorry that it would affect you in a seemingly negative light, but most people do stick with one rule set and cherry pick in homebrew rules instead of picking between two sets of rules that don't quite sync up nicely. I understand that you and likely others all share in such a brew style, but it would be the smaller of the groups.
You have not seen the dozens and dozens of pages of people wanting to keep 2014, and many people also do not want things to be duplicated if there is little to no change.
And before the 2024 core rule books, there has always been posts after posts of people wanting to get rid of some homebrew content they published because it clogs up their drop down menus over time, making their homebrew toggle a pain to use. Drop down menu bloat is a real issue people have.
There is a difference between a implementing a toggle and duplicating every single item. I want a toggle. It helps to find and narrow things down. I do not want every single item duplicated as OP and others want. These are two separate issues.
In terms of being different... You paid for content that gave you a disclaimer at time of purchase that they can do whatever they want with that content at any time. So, on those grounds, the complaints are not legitimate at all since you agreed to that before buying.
Worse is very subjective and the fact that people disagree with you on this forum is evidence that not everyone shares your opinion. I was one of those users who wanted the free PHB changes. I didn't get it because the people of the forums made their frustrations known. Are my complaints legitimate simply because I wanted things the other way?
There is an update I've linked several times where dndbeyond said very specifically that they would not do what they are currently doing. So the service is different from promised. And no, there's nothing subjective about having to homebrew items because they've been altered.
And I acknowledged that there are items in the Free Rules that are not in keeping with that statement. The changes are almost all trivial and the rest of the changes they can just force you to buy instead of just giving them to you for free. Mountain out of molehill.
If you are going to homebrew an item just to make sure it drops an 's', then that is not an indication that the site is worse. Rather, that is an indication of the lengths you will go just to avoid seeing meaningless changes. You burden yourself with pointless work.
You also did not answer my question. Are my complaints legitimate when I wanted the free book upgrade? Or is it not legitimate because it isn't what you want?
Edit: I went back and read your link to the changelog and realized that you have been misleading people. Your entire issue with these changes, according to the cited changelog, is whether the items are in line with the 2014 rules. This is still the case even on the items which would be updated. Just because there are some minor updates to language, does not mean that they are no longer in line with 2014 rules. They operate exactly as they should in the 2014 rules. Having a problem with every character of text being identical is very different and very much not promised by DDB.
As I have already said, Beyond will not promise that. There will be changes.
They have already promised not to do the specific thing they are doing. I linked it in my original post.
I do not know how else to put it, but what you classify as changes is not what Beyond classify as changes.
Changing citations is not signficant. Changing a few words that has no impact on gameplay is not signficant. Adding a passage about weapon mastery is not signficant. You may see these as significant changes, but not Beyond and most users. Beyond will always try to reflect the latest version of the game.
Here is the changelog with the question and part of the answer you left out: https://www.dndbeyond.com/changelog#FrequentlyAskedQuestion " Will my previous character sheets be affected? The game mechanics for your 2014 characters will not be impacted, and all spells, abilities, items, and conditions will display information in line with 2014 rules. Your previous character sheets will receive some updated terminology, as explained in “Changes in Terminology” below. ... Other Changes in Terminology In the Character Builder and elsewhere on D&D Beyond, you will see updates to other game terminology. "
To most users and my understanding, if an item is mechanically the same, while it may have updated wording, it will still be in line with the 2014 rules. I do not care if it is cosmetically different as long as the mechanics are the same, and most users feel the same way. If a person want a digital tool set that never changes anything, Beyond is not the right toolset for that person.
As I have already said, Beyond will not promise that. There will be changes.
They have already promised not to do the specific thing they are doing. I linked it in my original post.
I do not know how else to put it, but what you classify as changes is not what Beyond classify as changes.
Changing citations is not signficant. Changing a few words that has no impact on gameplay is not signficant. Adding a passage about weapon mastery is not signficant. You may see these as significant changes, but not Beyond and most users. Beyond will always try to reflect the latest version of the game.
Here is the changelog with the question and part of the answer you left out: https://www.dndbeyond.com/changelog#FrequentlyAskedQuestion " Will my previous character sheets be affected? The game mechanics for your 2014 characters will not be impacted, and all spells, abilities, items, and conditions will display information in line with 2014 rules. Your previous character sheets will receive some updated terminology, as explained in “Changes in Terminology” below. ... Other Changes in Terminology In the Character Builder and elsewhere on D&D Beyond, you will see updates to other game terminology. "
To most users and my understanding, if an item is mechanically the same, while it may have updated wording, it will still be in line with the 2014 rules. I do not care if it is cosmetically different as long as the mechanics are the same, and most users feel the same way. If a person want a digital tool set that never changes anything, Beyond is not the right toolset for that person.
I didn't leave anything out, that's the specific citation I'm talking about: all spells, abilities, items, and conditions will display information in line with 2014 rules.
And I acknowledged that there are items in the Free Rules that are not in keeping with that statement. The changes are almost all trivial and the rest of the changes they can just force you to buy instead of just giving them to you for free. Mountain out of molehill.
If you are going to homebrew an item just to make sure it drops an 's', then that is not an indication that the site is worse. Rather, that is an indication of the lengths you will go just to avoid seeing meaningless changes. You burden yourself with pointless work.
You also did not answer my question. Are my complaints legitimate when I wanted the free book upgrade? Or is it not legitimate because it isn't what you want?
Edit: I went back and read your link to the changelog and realized that you have been misleading people. Your entire issue with these changes, according to the cited changelog, is whether the items are in line with the 2014 rules. This is still the case even on the items which would be updated. Just because there are some minor updates to language, does not mean that they are no longer in line with 2014 rules. They operate exactly as they should in the 2014 rules. Having a problem with every character of text being identical is very different and very much not promised by DDB.
No, I am not misleading anyone. Changing the lance from a d12 to a d10 and removing the 10-foot minimun distance is not a "minor update to language". I don't mean to be brusque, but this has been covered multiple times throughout the thread: some 2024 items have different stats, and those stats are overwriting 2014 items on character sheets.
This is the part where I get told that I can fix these minor bugs myself by creating homebrew items. At which point I reiterate my issue that I don't want to have to keep an eye on all of my equipment and rules to make sure it hasn't be overwritten by some 2024 splatbook that just came out.
Stats are being changed. So long as dndbeyond continues overwriting 2014 databases with 2024 entries, that will continue to be an issue. The easiest way to make everyone happy is to maintain separate items, spells, etc for each edition and filter them.
As for your question, you are still able to access the version of the rules, spells, and items you want to use on your character sheet. I am not. So no, I don't view your complaint as valid.
No, I am not misleading anyone. Changing the lance from a d12 to a d10 and removing the 10-foot minimun distance is not a "minor update to language". I don't mean to be brusque, but this has been covered multiple times throughout the thread: some 2024 items have different stats, and those stats are overwriting 2014 items on character sheets.
This is the part where I get told that I can fix these minor bugs myself by creating homebrew items. At which point I reiterate my issue that I don't want to have to keep an eye on all of my equipment and rules to make sure it hasn't be overwritten by some 2024 splatbook that just came out.
Stats are being changed. So long as dndbeyond continues overwriting 2014 databases with 2024 entries, that will continue to be an issue. The easiest way to make everyone happy is to maintain separate items, spells, etc for each edition and filter them.
As for your question, you are still able to access the version of the rules, spells, and items you want to use on your character sheet. I am not. So no, I don't view your complaint as valid.
I never said that literally no items have seen significant or noteworthy mechanical changes. In fact, in the very post you are responding to, I said almost all changes are trivial. Almost. Regardless, the items are still in your PHB exactly as they were a year ago.
If you expect me to read every post in this thread, you are dreaming. Edit your OP to include relevant information to avoid having a retread. Since you are supposedly a firm believer in people just doing things that are 'easy' for the sake of other's convenience, it is fair to ask why you haven't done so yet.
Then don't keep an eye out. If you don't notice the change, does it really matter? If a tree falls in a forest...
That does not make everyone happy, as has been pointed out several times since I have been here. What you mean is that it makes you happy and therefore what anyone else wants doesn't matter.
No no, that is not the case. I wanted the free upgrade that was going to originally be given and was rescinded when the forums blew up. The PHB is not the Free Rules, so I was not able to access these changes until I bought it. It seems like you have a strange and uneven sense of what is legitimate, where your complaints are valid because you feel them strongly, while mine are not because they were not shared universally. This thread conversation is evidence that your complaints are not universally shared either; many are okay with the changes.
No, I am not misleading anyone. Changing the lance from a d12 to a d10 and removing the 10-foot minimun distance is not a "minor update to language". I don't mean to be brusque, but this has been covered multiple times throughout the thread: some 2024 items have different stats, and those stats are overwriting 2014 items on character sheets.
This is the part where I get told that I can fix these minor bugs myself by creating homebrew items. At which point I reiterate my issue that I don't want to have to keep an eye on all of my equipment and rules to make sure it hasn't be overwritten by some 2024 splatbook that just came out.
Stats are being changed. So long as dndbeyond continues overwriting 2014 databases with 2024 entries, that will continue to be an issue. The easiest way to make everyone happy is to maintain separate items, spells, etc for each edition and filter them.
As for your question, you are still able to access the version of the rules, spells, and items you want to use on your character sheet. I am not. So no, I don't view your complaint as valid.
I never said that literally no items have seen significant or noteworthy mechanical changes. In fact, in the very post you are responding to, I said almost all changes are trivial. Almost. Regardless, the items are still in your PHB exactly as they were a year ago.
If you expect me to read every post in this thread, you are dreaming. Edit your OP to include relevant information to avoid having a retread. Since you are supposedly a firm believer in people just doing things that are 'easy' for the sake of other's convenience, it is fair to ask why you haven't done so yet.
Then don't keep an eye out. If you don't notice the change, does it really matter? If a tree falls in a forest...
That does not make everyone happy, as has been pointed out several times since I have been here. What you mean is that it makes you happy and therefore what anyone else wants doesn't matter.
No no, that is not the case. I wanted the free upgrade that was going to originally be given and was rescinded when the forums blew up. The PHB is not the Free Rules, so I was not able to access these changes until I bought it. It seems like you have a strange and uneven sense of what is legitimate, where your complaints are valid because you feel them strongly, while mine are not because they were not shared universally. This thread conversation is evidence that your complaints are not universally shared either; many are okay with the changes.
1 and 2. You accused me of being misleading, based on the changes being "minor updates to language". If you're going to make a charge like that, the onus is on you to make sure you're correct. Alternatively, you could choose not to make these kinds of accusations, and help keep the temperature of the discussion cool.
3. I use this site because it helps me keep things fair across a large number of games. That becomes impossible if I can't trust it to provide me with accurate information on the rules.
4. I've already provided, as you yourself requested, a template for how to address everyone's concerns.
5. That's unfortunate for you. I never claimed my complaints are universal. I claimed they were based on statements and promises made by ddb/wizards.
1 and 2. You accused me of being misleading, based on the changes being "minor updates to language". If you're going to make a charge like that, the onus is on you to make sure you're correct. Alternatively, you could choose not to make these kinds of accusations, and help keep the temperature of the discussion cool.
3. I use this site because it helps me keep things fair across a large number of games. That becomes impossible if I can't trust it to provide me with accurate information on the rules.
4. I've already provided, as you yourself requested, a template for how to address everyone's concerns.
5. That's unfortunate for you. I never claimed my complaints are universal. I claimed they were based on statements and promises made by ddb/wizards.
1.I would say that the onus is on you to represent your grievances in an accurate and full manner to avoid being accused of misleading others when you make alarmist, vague, and bombastic statements with heavy implication. You are in control of your own actions and I take no responsibility for your choices. The onus is not on me to read the entirety of this thread and if you are tired of having the same conversation over and again with others, update your OP to be accurate so we can avoid it.
3. Then don't use it.
4. Actually, I asked you to demonstrate the ease in which it can be done because you, the person who claimed to be knowledgeable on these things, said it was easy to make the changes. Prove it.
5. It was unfortunate for me, just like you not getting what you want now is unfortunate for you.
None of this fencing proves that this is an inconvenience for more than a handful of users. It is unfortunate that not everyone is going to be happy when a company does something, but that is business; not everyone can be happy. There are just as many opinions on how to make DDB great as there are grains of sand on a beach and some 'expert' user on DDB forums is no more enlightened on how to go about it than anyone else. What I can see however, is that the amount of users who are upset that the lance was changed from a d12 to a d10 are so few in number that it is barely worth responding to. This is in stark contrast to the original PR blunder over the summer, which, in my opinion, could have been widely and happily accepted if DDB paid for a decent PR team. We can't go back however, only forward, so we have what makes most happy and a few are left wanting. There is no perfect solution, there is only what most will accept and it seems, based on this and a few other threads, to be where we are at now.
Complaints are not legitimate just because you have strong feelings about them.
I'm confused by your definition when a complaint is ever legitimate then? Someone will disagree and agree in an argument in every case.
A material impact on most users. I am not seeing that here.
So one person gets a bad car from the factory that blows up and injures them but literally no one else with that model has the fault. In your mind, that's not a legitimate complaint, because it's not a widespread opinion/issue? [Redacted]
A complaint is a complaint. Regardless of how big or how small and whether or not it fits with your world view. If someone is aggrieved by something, then it's valid. If someone feels or thinks something, it's valid.
DM subscriber since I joined this website. Ended my subscription June 2024 due to the removal of individual purchases. Was the only reason I ever bothered with this website. I use it for character building for my players and occasional referencing. I don't want digital books that can be removed whenever the company sees fit.
January 2025: seems it was a correct move. They're removing 2014 content that we paid for in lieu of their new version of the game. You only rent content on here, never own.
[Redacted] There is a legitimate issue with this site since the fumbled rollout of the 2024 'upgrade', and those of us that want to continue using the site and the original version of 5e rules should be provided for. I don't want to see ANY of the inferior 2024 content at the character sheet level, at all. Subscription remains cancelled until this site-breaking issue is resolved.
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
Complaints are not legitimate just because you have strong feelings about them.
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
Complaints about a paid service being worse and different from what was promised are legitimate.
In terms of being different... You paid for content that gave you a disclaimer at time of purchase that they can do whatever they want with that content at any time. So, on those grounds, the complaints are not legitimate at all since you agreed to that before buying.
Worse is very subjective and the fact that people disagree with you on this forum is evidence that not everyone shares your opinion. I was one of those users who wanted the free PHB changes. I didn't get it because the people of the forums made their frustrations known. Are my complaints legitimate simply because I wanted things the other way?
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I've noticed that the bulk of people I have spoken to have been quite unhappy with how it has been implimented to varying extents, most of them agreeing that a toggle would be a sleek and useful solution as people could interact with it or not at their leisure. It seems that you perhaps speak with people of the opposite persuasion, but I can't speak for you. Again, a set of toggles would be perfect as the vast majority of people would be pleased with that, and only a small demographic would be perhaps needing to continue to ignore half the content as it is needed.
I do not see why something that would benefit the majority would be such a conflict for them to implement as the minority would be the ones displeased as opposed to the majority displeased as they are now. I'm sorry that it would affect you in a seemingly negative light, but most people do stick with one rule set and cherry pick in homebrew rules instead of picking between two sets of rules that don't quite sync up nicely. I understand that you and likely others all share in such a brew style, but it would be the smaller of the groups.
As I have already said, Beyond will not promise that. There will be changes. Since the beginning, before Wizards even stepped in, Beyond aims to reflect the latest version of the game to the best of its ability. Many users expect Beyond to follow errata and the latest updates. If you want a digital tool set that preserves the game as it was, with exact wording and all, you will be looking at Sheets and Excel. You can check out Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds, and they probably do a better job of separating 2014 from 2024 content and content preservation than Beyond, but I do not think even they can provide you a version of the game you want with zero changes, errata, and updates.
Beyond is designed to be easy to get into and be as convenient as possible. If a person wants to utilize any niche rules or do anything remotely slightly advanced, Beyond is the wrong tool for that. Beyond cannot implement RAW correctly and in its entirety, it will not even let new users easily access old UA that developers have already implemented. As reasonable and as simple as preserving the game is for you, it is not simple nor reasonable for Beyond.
I do not care about edition wars, 5e is still 5e. Absolutely no one does pure default 2014 5e RAW either, and everyone uses optional rules and homebrews to some degree. Most people care about D&D, they just do not care about how pure it is.
A minority of users here wanting every item to be duplicated does not care about what the majority of users want either. A majority of users already do not like the bloat, and will be more upset with Wizards and Beyond for not listening to them. Most users will agree that it is unreasonable to duplicate every item for minor changes.
You do not have to like what Beyond and a majority of users on the site compromise on and agree to. I certainly do not. I think it is bonkers and pointless for Beyond to step into the VTT space, and I think Beyond should focus on digital tools making in-person play easier, but it seems like a majority users want a VTT and Wizards is listening to them. However, I am not going to tell Beyond to ignore the majority of users and focus on only digital tools that helps with in-person play.
The 2014 rules are still here. It might not be in the form you like, but it is still here and it still functions the same. People who like to mix and match rules will also buy the old books for more options.
If finances are an issue for you, you should not be spending money on D&D in the first place. D&D is free, and its paid content can be accessed for free too, just ask your D&D community for help to get content sharing. If you are not a fan of how Beyond does things, there is Roll20, Fantasy Grounds, and Foundry, and I am sure there is a GM out there who can you hook up with other official digital tools.
Basically this. Do not buy into Beyond or any digital toolset until you have done your research. Obviously, there is a limit to what you can foresee and expect, but if I had known Beyond will turn out the way it is, I probably would have went with Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds instead. It will be less convenient since I will be stuck with a laptop instead of using a smartphone, but at least RAW and optional rules will be more implemented and complete.
Beyond gets the job done for me, so I am sticking with Beyond. I do not want to lose access to VGTM and MTOF just for more advanced features that I rarely use.
If they are pushing for all digital, they are doing a really poor job of it. I mean, we can all literally see how Hasbro/Wizards is running Beyond. 2014 RAW is not even fully implemented to this day.
Mats and minis will always be a thing. Physical books will always be a thing. TTRPGs are already really niche, digital only TTRPGs are going to be even more niche, and with D&D being a gateway TTRPG focusing on mass appeal, I do not see D&D ever go in that direction.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
There is an update I've linked several times where dndbeyond said very specifically that they would not do what they are currently doing. So the service is different from promised. And no, there's nothing subjective about having to homebrew items because they've been altered.
They have already promised not to do the specific thing they are doing. I linked it in my original post.
You have not seen the dozens and dozens of pages of people wanting to keep 2014, and many people also do not want things to be duplicated if there is little to no change.
And before the 2024 core rule books, there has always been posts after posts of people wanting to get rid of some homebrew content they published because it clogs up their drop down menus over time, making their homebrew toggle a pain to use. Drop down menu bloat is a real issue people have.
There is a difference between a implementing a toggle and duplicating every single item. I want a toggle. It helps to find and narrow things down. I do not want every single item duplicated as OP and others want. These are two separate issues.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
And I acknowledged that there are items in the Free Rules that are not in keeping with that statement.The changes are almost all trivial and the rest of the changes they can just force you to buy instead of just giving them to you for free. Mountain out of molehill.If you are going to homebrew an item just to make sure it drops an 's', then that is not an indication that the site is worse. Rather, that is an indication of the lengths you will go just to avoid seeing meaningless changes. You burden yourself with pointless work.
You also did not answer my question. Are my complaints legitimate when I wanted the free book upgrade? Or is it not legitimate because it isn't what you want?
Edit: I went back and read your link to the changelog and realized that you have been misleading people. Your entire issue with these changes, according to the cited changelog, is whether the items are in line with the 2014 rules. This is still the case even on the items which would be updated. Just because there are some minor updates to language, does not mean that they are no longer in line with 2014 rules. They operate exactly as they should in the 2014 rules. Having a problem with every character of text being identical is very different and very much not promised by DDB.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I do not know how else to put it, but what you classify as changes is not what Beyond classify as changes.
Changing citations is not signficant. Changing a few words that has no impact on gameplay is not signficant. Adding a passage about weapon mastery is not signficant. You may see these as significant changes, but not Beyond and most users. Beyond will always try to reflect the latest version of the game.
Here is the changelog with the question and part of the answer you left out:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/changelog#FrequentlyAskedQuestion
"
Will my previous character sheets be affected?
The game mechanics for your 2014 characters will not be impacted, and all spells, abilities, items, and conditions will display information in line with 2014 rules. Your previous character sheets will receive some updated terminology, as explained in “Changes in Terminology” below.
...
Other Changes in Terminology
In the Character Builder and elsewhere on D&D Beyond, you will see updates to other game terminology.
"
To most users and my understanding, if an item is mechanically the same, while it may have updated wording, it will still be in line with the 2014 rules. I do not care if it is cosmetically different as long as the mechanics are the same, and most users feel the same way. If a person want a digital tool set that never changes anything, Beyond is not the right toolset for that person.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
I didn't leave anything out, that's the specific citation I'm talking about: all spells, abilities, items, and conditions will display information in line with 2014 rules.
No, I am not misleading anyone. Changing the lance from a d12 to a d10 and removing the 10-foot minimun distance is not a "minor update to language". I don't mean to be brusque, but this has been covered multiple times throughout the thread: some 2024 items have different stats, and those stats are overwriting 2014 items on character sheets.
This is the part where I get told that I can fix these minor bugs myself by creating homebrew items. At which point I reiterate my issue that I don't want to have to keep an eye on all of my equipment and rules to make sure it hasn't be overwritten by some 2024 splatbook that just came out.
Stats are being changed. So long as dndbeyond continues overwriting 2014 databases with 2024 entries, that will continue to be an issue. The easiest way to make everyone happy is to maintain separate items, spells, etc for each edition and filter them.
As for your question, you are still able to access the version of the rules, spells, and items you want to use on your character sheet. I am not. So no, I don't view your complaint as valid.
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
1 and 2. You accused me of being misleading, based on the changes being "minor updates to language". If you're going to make a charge like that, the onus is on you to make sure you're correct. Alternatively, you could choose not to make these kinds of accusations, and help keep the temperature of the discussion cool.
3. I use this site because it helps me keep things fair across a large number of games. That becomes impossible if I can't trust it to provide me with accurate information on the rules.
4. I've already provided, as you yourself requested, a template for how to address everyone's concerns.
5. That's unfortunate for you. I never claimed my complaints are universal. I claimed they were based on statements and promises made by ddb/wizards.
1.I would say that the onus is on you to represent your grievances in an accurate and full manner to avoid being accused of misleading others when you make alarmist, vague, and bombastic statements with heavy implication. You are in control of your own actions and I take no responsibility for your choices. The onus is not on me to read the entirety of this thread and if you are tired of having the same conversation over and again with others, update your OP to be accurate so we can avoid it.
3. Then don't use it.
4. Actually, I asked you to demonstrate the ease in which it can be done because you, the person who claimed to be knowledgeable on these things, said it was easy to make the changes. Prove it.
5. It was unfortunate for me, just like you not getting what you want now is unfortunate for you.
None of this fencing proves that this is an inconvenience for more than a handful of users. It is unfortunate that not everyone is going to be happy when a company does something, but that is business; not everyone can be happy. There are just as many opinions on how to make DDB great as there are grains of sand on a beach and some 'expert' user on DDB forums is no more enlightened on how to go about it than anyone else. What I can see however, is that the amount of users who are upset that the lance was changed from a d12 to a d10 are so few in number that it is barely worth responding to. This is in stark contrast to the original PR blunder over the summer, which, in my opinion, could have been widely and happily accepted if DDB paid for a decent PR team. We can't go back however, only forward, so we have what makes most happy and a few are left wanting. There is no perfect solution, there is only what most will accept and it seems, based on this and a few other threads, to be where we are at now.
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
A material impact on most users. I am not seeing that here.
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
So one person gets a bad car from the factory that blows up and injures them but literally no one else with that model has the fault. In your mind, that's not a legitimate complaint, because it's not a widespread opinion/issue? [Redacted]
A complaint is a complaint. Regardless of how big or how small and whether or not it fits with your world view. If someone is aggrieved by something, then it's valid. If someone feels or thinks something, it's valid.
[Redacted]
DM subscriber since I joined this website. Ended my subscription June 2024 due to the removal of individual purchases. Was the only reason I ever bothered with this website. I use it for character building for my players and occasional referencing. I don't want digital books that can be removed whenever the company sees fit.
January 2025: seems it was a correct move. They're removing 2014 content that we paid for in lieu of their new version of the game. You only rent content on here, never own.
[Redacted] There is a legitimate issue with this site since the fumbled rollout of the 2024 'upgrade', and those of us that want to continue using the site and the original version of 5e rules should be provided for. I don't want to see ANY of the inferior 2024 content at the character sheet level, at all. Subscription remains cancelled until this site-breaking issue is resolved.
How do you define "most users" in the context of your statement?
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.