You can now edit a monster's HP directly from their token instead of having to cross-reference to the left-hand side (which I found quite confusing because, although tokens of multiple identical monsters got renamed to A, B, C etc, that naming kept changing every time I hid or revealed a creature).
Even better, you can now filter the token list, including ignoring legacy, so no more duplicates.
I guess Maps is getting there. It has a way to go, but it's getting there.
None of this addresses the significant concerns on this thread - the fact Maps is an inferior tool for encounter building, and Wizards is refusing to update the system with a better UI for pen and paper play.
You can now edit a monster's HP directly from their token instead of having to cross-reference to the left-hand side (which I found quite confusing because, although tokens of multiple identical monsters got renamed to A, B, C etc, that naming kept changing every time I hid or revealed a creature).
Even better, you can now filter the token list, including ignoring legacy, so no more duplicates.
I guess Maps is getting there. It has a way to go, but it's getting there.
None of this addresses the significant concerns on this thread - the fact Maps is an inferior tool for encounter building, and Wizards is refusing to update the system with a better UI for pen and paper play.
This is my biggest issue. I don't have any problem with the map tool being developed I totally get who its for and why. Pen and paper is the literal foundation of the game and a significant chunk of the userbase is still playing with it. Trying to use maps for the purpose of an Encounter Planner/Initiative tracker will be long term clumsy and awkward. I don't understand why they can't commit to developing both, it's not like they don't have the resources to do so.
I understand what they are trying to do with the online maps, but it does little for me. I suspect that I will use it at some point, but it will be limited. Me and my long time groups play like we have been for 35 years. And I have new players that join us all the time. D&D Beyond needs to stop trying to force the player base into the online world only, and try supporting those people that actually want to gather together as a group of friends and play. They can continue to develop the maps and the online play, but don't abandon the ones that have little need of the online play. Let us keep the option of having a tool at our disposal without having to get dragged into something we have no need of.
I only use encounter builder and have loved it. There are a few things I wish it had like adding conditions to a monster (maybe I'm doing it wrong). It is disheartening to hear they won't be updating it. I only do face to face DnD as a DM and wet erase marker for maps. Encounter builder helped me with initiative order, monster stat blocks, tracking health, etc.
I tried to give the maps tool a second chance to try and build an encounter for an upcoming con and it is still completely unusable for me, because it requires ready built player characters in the campaign. Without generic placeholders for player characters it is entirely useless. I don't want to create multiple new player characters every time I want to prep an adventure for a con. I mean, I guess I could create an entire campaign for encounter building, populate it with player characters and manually change each of their levels every time I want to build a new adventure, but that is still a huge pain in the ass. Add to that all the other issues people here have mentioned – requiring a map to place the tokens, the huge amount of screen real estate everything takes up, the lack of information in the condensed stat blocks of the monsters…the entire tool is just complete garbage and does not even deserve the "beta" designation. If I was working on DDB, I'd be embarrassed to have released it in its current state.
I don't want to sit here and wait for the devs to potentially, maybe one day bring the tool up to a usable state. The old encounter builder is perfectly functional, great even. All it needs is a toggle to switch between XP calculation methods. Any intern could cobble that together in the span of an afternoon, I am sure of it.
In the meantime, I'll just do my XP calculation by hand, because that is still better and quicker than the garbage the DDB team gave us with the map tool. Absolutely ridiculous.
I think the XP-calculations is still the based on the monsters you are choosing. So what I do, is just to see the total xp (without multiplier) and compare it to the 2024 table in the DMG.
I think the XP-calculations is still the based on the monsters you are choosing. So what I do, is just to see the total xp (without multiplier) and compare it to the 2024 table in the DMG.
But I would love it to be updated.
They both involve totaling the XP of the monsters you select, but the two frameworks diverge from there. The 2014 rules have four difficulty categories whereas the 2024 rules have only three. Even after eliminating the "Easy" column from the 2014 rules, the XP values themselves change as you get into the higher character levels: "Medium" (2014) and "Low" (2020) diverge at 8th level; "Hard" (2014) and "Moderate" (2024) diverge at 6th level; and "Deadly" (2014) and "High" (2024) diverge at 9th level. And, of course, there are no modifiers for number of monsters in the encounter, just straight up XP totals.
Encounters does not take into account the new monsters Initiative bonuses either (though maps does not seem to either with most of it's monsters)
The initiative bonus isn't new information: it just wasn't explicitly called out before.
Yes, I am aware but lots of monsters have bonuses to their Initiative, and Encounters does not currently take it into account. (Maps looks like it’s starting to.
I think the XP-calculations is still the based on the monsters you are choosing. So what I do, is just to see the total xp (without multiplier) and compare it to the 2024 table in the DMG.
But I would love it to be updated.
They both involve totaling the XP of the monsters you select, but the two frameworks diverge from there. The 2014 rules have four difficulty categories whereas the 2024 rules have only three. Even after eliminating the "Easy" column from the 2014 rules, the XP values themselves change as you get into the higher character levels: "Medium" (2014) and "Low" (2020) diverge at 8th level; "Hard" (2014) and "Moderate" (2024) diverge at 6th level; and "Deadly" (2014) and "High" (2024) diverge at 9th level. And, of course, there are no modifiers for number of monsters in the encounter, just straight up XP totals.
last I checked Maps was not even calculating the new rules correctly.
I think the XP-calculations is still the based on the monsters you are choosing. So what I do, is just to see the total xp (without multiplier) and compare it to the 2024 table in the DMG.
But I would love it to be updated.
They both involve totaling the XP of the monsters you select, but the two frameworks diverge from there. The 2014 rules have four difficulty categories whereas the 2024 rules have only three. Even after eliminating the "Easy" column from the 2014 rules, the XP values themselves change as you get into the higher character levels: "Medium" (2014) and "Low" (2020) diverge at 8th level; "Hard" (2014) and "Moderate" (2024) diverge at 6th level; and "Deadly" (2014) and "High" (2024) diverge at 9th level. And, of course, there are no modifiers for number of monsters in the encounter, just straight up XP totals.
2024 has a fourth 'unnamed' Deadly category. This is because Hard only goes up to the maximum of the Hard budget. Any XP over this level is effectively Deadly.
However, as @Envyus says, the Maps calculator is broken, as it uses the XP maximums for each bracket as a minimum instead.
I'm just adding my voice in the vain hope that someone might listen if enough people call for it. Come on Wizards do the right thing and don't force us arbitrarily onto the maps tool. Everything written above, the Encounter tools is just so much better.
Yeah, I mean, guess what WoTC? Try to force us to use a tool that's crap compared to your competitors (Maps vs. every other VTT map option) and ppl are gonna get pissed and/or obdurate about using it.
I'll not be using Maps...ever...[REDACTED]
So I'll limp along until Feb of 2026, since I've already paid my annual fee, and then I'll move off of DnD Beyond because you're really not worth the money if you're not going to serve our needs instead of your own laziness. ESPECIALLY if I don't actually own the material here and you can take it away or do whatever you want with it, whenever you want.
Yeah, I'm really disappointed that the encounter builder is gonna be stuck in 2014 edition. It really helped a lot of my friends try out DMing without getting overwhelmed and stuck in the weeds of combat design. We can't all buy a subscription to use the native VTT just to build encounters, since we play a lot of pen and paper DND. We buy all of our books through here and content share what we need. I just wish we didn't all have to use a subscription to build an encounter with shared content. If they're really interested in preserving one of their good tools, they really need to reconsider this move.
With the 5.2 SRD coming out I was tempted to write my own Builder, but Kobold Fight Club has been updated to calculate 2024, and the SRD should allow them to use the new monsters in that SRD.
+1 to update the encounter tool with the 2024 XP method. Please! Maps is a mess, having to go back and forth for initiative and seeing the monster stats and rolling... I cannot believe that they don't implemented the rolling dice on the screen...
But I would prefer they at least fix the game log first. Half the time, a player's dice rolls appear in the main game log (the one you see from the Campaign page or character) but not in the Maps game log. Sometimes the attack roll will be in both logs, but the damage roll will only appear in one log. Its all over the place.
None of this addresses the significant concerns on this thread - the fact Maps is an inferior tool for encounter building, and Wizards is refusing to update the system with a better UI for pen and paper play.
This is my biggest issue. I don't have any problem with the map tool being developed I totally get who its for and why. Pen and paper is the literal foundation of the game and a significant chunk of the userbase is still playing with it. Trying to use maps for the purpose of an Encounter Planner/Initiative tracker will be long term clumsy and awkward. I don't understand why they can't commit to developing both, it's not like they don't have the resources to do so.
I understand what they are trying to do with the online maps, but it does little for me. I suspect that I will use it at some point, but it will be limited. Me and my long time groups play like we have been for 35 years. And I have new players that join us all the time. D&D Beyond needs to stop trying to force the player base into the online world only, and try supporting those people that actually want to gather together as a group of friends and play. They can continue to develop the maps and the online play, but don't abandon the ones that have little need of the online play. Let us keep the option of having a tool at our disposal without having to get dragged into something we have no need of.
I only use encounter builder and have loved it. There are a few things I wish it had like adding conditions to a monster (maybe I'm doing it wrong). It is disheartening to hear they won't be updating it. I only do face to face DnD as a DM and wet erase marker for maps. Encounter builder helped me with initiative order, monster stat blocks, tracking health, etc.
DM Billy
"Have Fun & Roll Dice"
I tried to give the maps tool a second chance to try and build an encounter for an upcoming con and it is still completely unusable for me, because it requires ready built player characters in the campaign. Without generic placeholders for player characters it is entirely useless. I don't want to create multiple new player characters every time I want to prep an adventure for a con. I mean, I guess I could create an entire campaign for encounter building, populate it with player characters and manually change each of their levels every time I want to build a new adventure, but that is still a huge pain in the ass. Add to that all the other issues people here have mentioned – requiring a map to place the tokens, the huge amount of screen real estate everything takes up, the lack of information in the condensed stat blocks of the monsters…the entire tool is just complete garbage and does not even deserve the "beta" designation. If I was working on DDB, I'd be embarrassed to have released it in its current state.
I don't want to sit here and wait for the devs to potentially, maybe one day bring the tool up to a usable state. The old encounter builder is perfectly functional, great even. All it needs is a toggle to switch between XP calculation methods. Any intern could cobble that together in the span of an afternoon, I am sure of it.
In the meantime, I'll just do my XP calculation by hand, because that is still better and quicker than the garbage the DDB team gave us with the map tool. Absolutely ridiculous.
I think the XP-calculations is still the based on the monsters you are choosing. So what I do, is just to see the total xp (without multiplier) and compare it to the 2024 table in the DMG.
But I would love it to be updated.
The initiative bonus isn't new information: it just wasn't explicitly called out before.
They both involve totaling the XP of the monsters you select, but the two frameworks diverge from there. The 2014 rules have four difficulty categories whereas the 2024 rules have only three. Even after eliminating the "Easy" column from the 2014 rules, the XP values themselves change as you get into the higher character levels: "Medium" (2014) and "Low" (2020) diverge at 8th level; "Hard" (2014) and "Moderate" (2024) diverge at 6th level; and "Deadly" (2014) and "High" (2024) diverge at 9th level. And, of course, there are no modifiers for number of monsters in the encounter, just straight up XP totals.
Yes, I am aware but lots of monsters have bonuses to their Initiative, and Encounters does not currently take it into account. (Maps looks like it’s starting to.
last I checked Maps was not even calculating the new rules correctly.
2024 has a fourth 'unnamed' Deadly category. This is because Hard only goes up to the maximum of the Hard budget. Any XP over this level is effectively Deadly.
However, as @Envyus says, the Maps calculator is broken, as it uses the XP maximums for each bracket as a minimum instead.
I play at a physical table so I do NOT want to use “Maps” but I do like running encounters with the Encounter building tool.
I need the Encounter Builder updated to 2024 rules please.🙏
Feats - Hermit Crab & Superhero Landing
Item - Alertness & Skeleton Key
+1 to update the encounter tool with the 2024 XP table method. This already exists in Maps, just port it to Encounters.
I'm just adding my voice in the vain hope that someone might listen if enough people call for it. Come on Wizards do the right thing and don't force us arbitrarily onto the maps tool. Everything written above, the Encounter tools is just so much better.
Giving this a bump, as well.
Yeah, I mean, guess what WoTC? Try to force us to use a tool that's crap compared to your competitors (Maps vs. every other VTT map option) and ppl are gonna get pissed and/or obdurate about using it.
I'll not be using Maps...ever...[REDACTED]
So I'll limp along until Feb of 2026, since I've already paid my annual fee, and then I'll move off of DnD Beyond because you're really not worth the money if you're not going to serve our needs instead of your own laziness. ESPECIALLY if I don't actually own the material here and you can take it away or do whatever you want with it, whenever you want.
Thanks,
Yeah, I'm really disappointed that the encounter builder is gonna be stuck in 2014 edition. It really helped a lot of my friends try out DMing without getting overwhelmed and stuck in the weeds of combat design. We can't all buy a subscription to use the native VTT just to build encounters, since we play a lot of pen and paper DND. We buy all of our books through here and content share what we need. I just wish we didn't all have to use a subscription to build an encounter with shared content. If they're really interested in preserving one of their good tools, they really need to reconsider this move.
With the 5.2 SRD coming out I was tempted to write my own Builder, but Kobold Fight Club has been updated to calculate 2024, and the SRD should allow them to use the new monsters in that SRD.
+1 to update the encounter tool with the 2024 XP method. Please! Maps is a mess, having to go back and forth for initiative and seeing the monster stats and rolling... I cannot believe that they don't implemented the rolling dice on the screen...
Rolling dice is one thing.
But I would prefer they at least fix the game log first. Half the time, a player's dice rolls appear in the main game log (the one you see from the Campaign page or character) but not in the Maps game log. Sometimes the attack roll will be in both logs, but the damage roll will only appear in one log. Its all over the place.
Do I need to own the 2024 DMG to use the 2024 encounter builder on the site?
Occassional Dungeon Master.