I have completely given up waiting for this feature that would literally take a qualified software developer about one hour do and another two hours for a QA person to test it. Hell, I'd test it for them freely considering it's my actual job. For the love of Cord.

Quote from Keerkaro >>

I'll bump this as well. I also DM and one of my players is diagnosed and simply can't not look at others classes and races and everything else. Luckily we can use the Private option to at least hide stats etc, but he always stalks the campaign even before it starts and spoils himself and everyone else because he can't keep a secret whatsoever :') Some peeps would like their class and/or races to be hidden for RP purposes or story, and we can't do that.. the only option is still to just separate the characters into different campaigns, which is annoying, or just add them literally a second before we start playing or after they get introduced to avoid spoiling, but it still shows the class and race which remains the issue. Getting just a simple ,,HIDE CHARACTER,, function for DMs within a campaign would solve so many problems. 

I just saw this post is here for 5 YEARS already. 

Please Beyond, we beg you! \ToT/

 You can already block Adventures from being viewed by compulsive players.

Blocking a source will hide compendium content to prevent players from reading it unless they own it. No options or content will be removed from other tools such as the character builder, character sheet, or encounter builder.

As far as player vs player secrets, it probably hasn't been done because this is a collaborative game and those kinds of 'bait and switch' tricks are antithetical to the philosophy of the game. You can do a workaround though, for the person who really really thinks the changeling gag is a fun idea for some reason: you can build the PC that you are trying to deceive with, then when the reveal happens, swap in the actual PC sheet. If the player really wants to run the con, they should be willing to manage two character sheets.

Or, you know, just give us the easy fix feature. 

This isn't even player vs player. This is allowing for additional storytelling devices that make it more rich for all involved, including those who had the secret kept from them until the satisfying reveal. This actually happened twice in my game (one with a changeling and one with an aasimar), to the delight if all, being described as epic. It can be extremely rewarding to the overall experience when players get to have cool reveal moments from their backstory, or in this case their very identity, that the rest of the party did not know, not just the GM coming out with all the unknown reveals. All we're asking for is a ridiculously easy fix to an oversight that would make our lives easier... Which is kind of the point of DDB

Quote from DrLimelight >>

Or, you know, just give us the easy fix feature. 

This isn't even player vs player. This is allowing for additional storytelling devices that make it more rich for all involved, including those who had the secret kept from them until the satisfying reveal. This actually happened twice in my game (one with a changeling and one with an aasimar), to the delight if all, being described as epic. It can be extremely rewarding to the overall experience when players get to have cool reveal moments from their backstory, or in this case their very identity, that the rest of the party did not know, not just the GM coming out with all the unknown reveals. All we're asking for is a ridiculously easy fix to an oversight that would make our lives easier... Which is kind of the point of DDB

Your ask doesn't create additional storytelling devices that make the play experience more rich; they implement a tool that sows distrust at the table and leaves people feeling that they were treated unfairly. Apparently WotC agrees, since this is, according to you, an easy fix and yet you have not been given it despite 5 years of asking/demanding it. The reveal is only satisfying for the deceiver and decidedly unsatisfying for the duped players. At best, the fooled players will be indifferent to the reveal and more likely, they will have a big problem with the player deceiving the players. Trust between players takes the hit in this situation and trust is needed in D&D. It is actually vital. This is on the same level as the edgy rogue stealing from the party. There are probably rare instances where the players will roll with it and some might even find it a fun storytelling element, but that is not how most will take it. When you remove all means of the players from uncovering the truth and then spring that truth on them, they will feel that their hands were tied behind their backs just for the sake of one player to have a rather unremarkable, uninteresting 'surprise'.

Nothing is stopping the GM from making a reveal to the party and in fact, that is their job. It is the job of the players to solution out surprising reveals from the GM and you can't do that if you can't trust the person sitting across from you to play fairly or to respect the social contracts of the game. You are not asking for tools for the GM to surprise the players, as GMs do not have PC sheets - you are asking for tools for the player to deceive other players. So yes, it is player vs player, but in a social encounter you make unwinnable, rather than a combat encounter. Players can reveal aspects of themselves without being deceitful and PC reveals to PCs can be done without deceiving the players.

You may really want this in your game but DDB doesn't cater to every player's needs and has never claimed to. You have a viable workaround though, in the recommendation I gave you above.

That was quite the diatribe, and extremely dismissive at that.  I will try not to be. 

I have no problem with you disagreeing.  However, I just mentioned two firsthand experiences my table had that were absolutely rich doing exactly what you are discounting as "unsatisfying" and "unfair."  They were not deceitful or undermining trust; they were parts of the character's lives that they had not yet chosen to share, much like a vital backstory piece in many other campaigns.  As I already said, all the players thought it was awesome.  And to be clear, these are cousins, siblings, and my wife, all of whom give me feedback and constructive criticism all the time, because we all like and trust each other.  

To assist your imagination with how it could be possible for this to enrich the story, here are the examples.  In one instance, it was a changeling who was unsure how the party would feel about him (as a character, not the player), as he always kept that part of himself a secret due to racism and other social pressures.  He also started as a more chaotic neutral PC who is experiencing quite a character arc.  His reveal garnered more trust and camaraderie amongst the other PCs, as they saw how difficult this was for him to open up in this way. One of the PCs (his best friend and connection to the group) already knew, but let him have his space.  In the other case, it was an aasimar who was just coming into her powers.  When she used her aasimar protector powers for the first time, the (actual players of the) party cheered in delight at this newfound power in their group, as it helped them overcome a powerful bandit group they were facing in a climactic end to the first arc of our campaign.  For storytelling flavor, she also played this in-game as if she was just finding the powers herself (they had just hit 3rd level), and she was not the human everyone (including herself) thought her to be.

My players still talk about how awesome they found these reveals to be, and in real life time, this happened about 3 years ago in a campaign we are still playing.  They could not have been as epic to the other players if they knew from the start, much like a GM payoff of a plot point like I was trying to reference.

Now, to be fair to you, there are certainly ways that this could be, as you said, some kind of trust killer.  But there are countless ways to do that in any instance and with any tools that are already available.  People definitely need to be alert for groups that are toxic and unhealthy to be a part of.  That is a point worth reminding people about, and I can appreciate your zealous guarding of the trust of the game.  It sounds like you've been around or seen some shady crap that ruins games, and I'm sorry if that's the case.  That sucks.  I definitely don't let any chaotic evil rogues steal from the party, or the barbarian knock him unconscious to get it back.  That's just not fun (unless this was some kind of gag one-shot that everyone was in on and was literally the premise of that particular game--there are exceptions to nearly every rule). 

But that's not what I want the feature for, nor, I assume, what most of us here are wanting it for.  Perhaps be willing to open your mind somewhat to options, as that is a major hallmark of the game.  You cannot press your opinion against that facts of our table's experiences.  If you don't want the feature, that's totally fine; even if it were available you can always choose not to use it.  But please don't be so dismissive about others' imaginations in regards to an imagination-based game, and especially not of our real life experiences.  We here have obviously done a lot of workarounds for our own games, we are just asking for a feature that would make it as easy as it would be in the pencil and paper era. 

But thanks for bringing more attention to our thread!

As I said, DDB does not cater to every table. Perhaps you did not read the entirety of my post, as I specifically gave room in my post for tables where the players would not respond poorly, few as they are. However, when you are deceiving your fellow players, you are, by definition, being deceitful. Some tables can roll with it, but this game is not defined by the rare and exceptional tables; it is silly to hold everyone to the Critical Role gold standard of play.

Deceive the PCs, not the Players. These are very different things and your changeling who worries about racism is a common trope and can be used in fun ways, but that does not require Player deception to see unfold in a satisfying way. Nothing you described in this example needed the player deception to happen, as it was all in-character, and could have been just as satisfying, arguably more so, by enlisting the aid of the players to tell that story. 

Having the feature would actually create more problems than it would solve. Because for every 1:1000 tables that uses it with consideration of the boundaries and needs of the others at the table, there are 999 that would not, and every edgelord in existence would pound that toggle and make it a chore to find out who everyone else is even playing with.

No thanks. I recommend that you leverage the tools you have already created for this purpose, or use the one I offered, which is actually an extremely reasonable workaround to give you virtually everything you need. The needs of the many...

^ There are almost a hundred people here who disagree with you and if your opinion isn't helpful to this thread please keep it to yourself. We are asking for something from the devs and it is not your place to tell us we're wrong. Go elsewhere.

Quote from dgibby11 >>

^ There are almost a hundred people here who disagree with you and if your opinion isn't helpful to this thread please keep it to yourself. We are asking for something from the devs and it is not your place to tell us we're wrong. Go elsewhere.

 My posts are directly on topic, yours is not. 

I have a vested interest in you 'nearly 100' people not getting what you want and will share why because it is my responsibility as a participant of this community to make sure that my voice is also heard. If the dev team reads this thread and sees no disagreement, they might think the want is virtually universal. It is not and there is a strong reason to not make it an option, as outlined above.

I was elsewhere, thank you. You summoned me back.