Your custom class abilities that you mentioned would be very easy to code.
For who?
For the folks at DDB? Possibly (certainly not in the case of my last example, which I suspect you might have misunderstood.)
But if we're all submitting new class features to them to code, not only would that mean they'd have to code hundreds (thousands?) of new classes--most of which wouldn't just be a simple tracker, I'd wager--they'd have to add them ALL to the codebase. As I said, I think the reasons why that wouldn't work are kinda obvious.
If you're saying it would be "easy to code" for the average user of the site.... let's just say I would disagree with that.
Your custom class abilities that you mentioned would be very easy to code.
For who?
For the folks at DDB? Possibly (certainly not in the case of my last example, which I suspect you might have misunderstood.)
But if we're all submitting new class features to them to code, not only would that mean they'd have to code hundreds (thousands?) of new classes--most of which wouldn't just be a simple tracker, I'd wager--they'd have to add them ALL to the codebase. As I said, I think the reasons why that wouldn't work are kinda obvious.
If you're saying it would be "easy to code" for the average user of the site.... let's just say I would disagree with that.
I'm not sure I am understanding. When you say, "code" do you literally mean writing C# into the the character sheet creator and/or encounter builder? That would certainly not be necessary. If so it would mean that homebrew spells and feats would also need to be "coded." Most homebrew stuff is just descriptions, where there are usable mechanics pretty much everything is already covered. Where it's not you always have the option of basing it on a spell. Take a look at the custom feat creator, class features would look pretty much the same.
Answers to your questions...
"What if your new class feature is a singular resource that you gain and lose repeatedly throughout a combat to influence the action economy of the combat?" -- include a "number of uses" which already exists.
"What if your new class is a 'full spellcaster,' but without Pact Magic or Spellcasting (IOW, no spell slots) and instead they use your new 'Spelldance' feature?" -- I don't know how "Spelldance" would work without spell slots, but if there are no spell slots then there are no mechanics to worry about.
"What if characters using your new martial class are supposed to have their stats shift in a pre-determined fashion based on the IRL current phase of the moon while you play?" --I'm not aware of anything in DDB that includes mechanics based anything going on in real life.
I'm sure the reality is that DDB and WotC don't include homebrew classes becasue they are not supported in the rules. The DMG has guidelines for custom spells, magic items, etc, but not classes. It is also why I doubt we will ever see homebrew mundane items. The mentality seems to be that if it wasn't written into the rules, it must be against the rules.
I'm not sure I am understanding. When you say, "code" do you literally mean writing C# into the the character sheet creator and/or encounter builder?
By "code," I mean provide a detailed algorithm/description for how to view/represent the feature, how to make it function, and how to have it interact with the rest of the character sheet. Whether in C#, Javascript, HTML or some scripting language specifically designed for use on the site.
That would certainly not be necessary. If so it would mean that homebrew spells and feats would also need to be "coded." Most homebrew stuff is just descriptions, where there are usable mechanics pretty much everything is already covered. Where it's not you always have the option of basing it on a spell. Take a look at the custom feat creator, class features would look pretty much the same.
If the only new class features you allow are similar to existing class features, similar to how custom feats must be similar to existing feats, that's a different story. But if you want to allow potentially any sort of new class feature, unique from the existing ones (which class features typically are,) that's where the problem arises; at that point, you need someone to code (using the above definition) that for the class if you want an actual, functioning checkbox/option on your character sheet.
"What if your new class feature is a singular resource that you gain and lose repeatedly throughout a combat to influence the action economy of the combat?"
-- include a "number of uses" which already exists.
Sure, you can show "number of uses" because that's functionally the same as a lot of other features. But what about having the presence/absence of that resource affect one's stats? Which ones, and how much? Then, how about affecting those stats based on how many times the singular resource has been used this combat, in conjunction with, say, proficiency bonus?
If you just have a non-functional checkbox that just sits there and does nothing, that's easy... but why even bother if that's all it is? For it to affect the rest of the character sheet, you're either going to need a formal description of the mechanics, or else you're going to need a number of drop-down menus and options that gets more complicated the more broadly you allow users to define the feature (moreso than the feat creator, which is already kind of a mess.) Each element needs to be specified in detail, precisely--and that's the simplest example!
"What if your new class is a 'full spellcaster,' but without Pact Magic or Spellcasting (IOW, no spell slots) and instead they use your new 'Spelldance' feature?"
-- I don't know how "Spelldance" would work without spell slots, but if there are no spell slots then there are no mechanics to worry about.
I left the mechanics of "Spelldance" vague to emphasize the point--they can be whatever the user is imagining, which means you basically need code (or something as complex) to allow the user to describe it. It's not at all true that without spell slots, there are no mechanics. What if Spelldance burns HP to cast spells? What if it requires a daily ritual sacrifice of some beast, and grants cumulative stat bonuses based on the beast sacrificed, but your spell options are also limited based on the beast sacrificed, and you take a level of exhaustion after each casting? The mechanical possibilities are endless.
"What if characters using your new martial class are supposed to have their stats shift in a pre-determined fashion based on the IRL current phase of the moon while you play?"
--I'm not aware of anything in DDB that includes mechanics based anything going on in real life.
Exactly. That's my point exactly. Just the beginnings of the mechanics for that new feature don't even exist--you'd basically need to ensure the scripting language somehow allowed pulling realtime data from the web.
Even if you instead insisted the player just manually select a phase and have THAT choice update the character sheet stats, that's still all going to have to be detailed. And that's just one example of an esoteric requirement for a new class feature, a requirement that really isn't even unreasonable (I'd even argue it's how "Lunar Sorcerers" should really have been done.)
This isn't nearly as big of a deal with a subclass. With them, you may not get a useful implementation of some new subclass feature you want, but since the class features are still present, you can still just describe the effect and let the player adjust the sheet manually; the core of the class is still available. When the core of the class is a unique, complex feature that itself can't really be implemented... you're going to have a rather useless character sheet.
I'm sure the reality is that DDB and WotC don't include homebrew classes becasue they are not supported in the rules. The DMG has guidelines for custom spells, magic items, etc, but not classes. It is also why I doubt we will ever see homebrew mundane items. The mentality seems to be that if it wasn't written into the rules, it must be against the rules.
I tend to agree with you--that mindset certainly seems to be part of the issue. But the time and cost required to allow creating useful new features from scratch also don't seem worth it, IMO.
It is already basically possible to create a new class -- just start with an existing class that's similar to what you want and create a subclass that gives out its class features as replacements for features in the base class. This has a bunch of limitations, but it's doable for most of what people want. It's just a big pain to actually implement.
Sure, you can show "number of uses" because that's functionally the same as a lot of other features. But what about having the presence/absence of that resource affect one's stats? Which ones, and how much? Then, how about affecting those stats based on how many times the singular resource has been used this combat, in conjunction with, say, proficiency bonus?
If you just have a non-functional checkbox that just sits there and does nothing, that's easy... but why even bother if that's all it is? For it to affect the rest of the character sheet, you're either going to need a formal description of the mechanics, or else you're going to need a number of drop-down menus and options that gets more complicated the more broadly you allow users to define the feature (moreso than the feat creator, which is already kind of a mess.) Each element needs to be specified in detail, precisely--and that's the simplest example!
Why use dndbeyond at all if that's the position we're taking? Very few class features interact with the sheet beyond a check box. Rage a prime example of a simple feature that doesn't actually affect your sheet. There are very few class features integrated to that degree - artificers, and pact weapons and a few others maybe that involve items? Being able to use roll snippets and the existing tools would be enough to replicate how well they integrate things.
I would settle for just text but using the available tools. A lot can be supported with those to the same level dndbeyond supports official classes. Yes, all I'd like is to use the existing tools available and be able to insert them into classes. There are plenty of off the wall subclasses and features available on this site - full integration isn't needed to use them.
I feel like the core request here is to be able to use the tools available not to create something that can handle every possibility - that's what text descriptions and extensions are for.
But...custom feats don't have to be similar to existing feats. That was my point. Everything you are saying is already doable for all other custom content. You can go to "Create a Feat and choose "Create from scratch" and do whatever you want with it. I'm not creative enough to come up with anything, but I've gone through the steps and most all game mechanics are included. You can add prerequisites (not needed for class features), actions (which include many game mechanics like range, save, damage, dice count..), modifiers, even creatures (existing monsters or custom creature). And if you need more than that, you can always add a spell.
"But what about having the presence/absence of that resource affect one's stats? Which ones, and how much?" --this can be done via modifiers..
"Just the beginnings of the mechanics for that new feature don't even exist" --and never will exist. Your character sheet will never know the moon phase in real time or in-game time. These kinds of things always have to be written in the description and tracked by the payer and DM. You can do this in a video game because the environment is preset, but not in a table top game.
"I left the mechanics of "Spelldance" vague to emphasize the point--they can be whatever the user is imagining, which means you basically need code (or something as complex) to allow the user to describe it." --you make a very good point here, but I believe it can be accomplished as long as it follows the established game mechanics. If your process for gaining spells is based on the beast sacrificed, for instance, you are moving outside of core rules as far as mechanics goes. Which is fine but you would just need to manually adjust your spell list for that day. As far as the burning of HP and stat bonuses, those are already doable with modifiers and actions.
Try thinking of the most complicated class feature you can, and try to make it as a feat. I thin you will be surprised with what you can do. Again, I'm not creative enough to come up with anything that would be remotely challenging, but maybe you can. I'd be really interested to know where DDB fails on that. Seriously, I'm not being snarky, I really am curious top know if there is anything that you can't do with a custom feat that you should be able to do with a class feature. In my mind they are mechanically the same thing, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the difference, other than how they are used, of course.
It is already basically possible to create a new class -- just start with an existing class that's similar to what you want and create a subclass that gives out its class features as replacements for features in the base class. This has a bunch of limitations, but it's doable for most of what people want. It's just a big pain to actually implement.
I agree.
If what you want is similar to existing mechanics, and you accept the limitations, then in most cases a new class can already be created via a subclass. But that's what I'm saying... if you can already kinda do it, DDB is likely not going to put in the time and effort to redo that into a "create a class" feature.
(Note: I'm not saying DDB *shouldn't* do it, just that, in light of where we are with current bugs, it's not realistic to expect them to.)
But...custom feats don't have to be similar to existing feats. That was my point. Everything you are saying is already doable for all other custom content. You can go to "Create a Feat and choose "Create from scratch" and do whatever you want with it. I'm not creative enough to come up with anything, but I've gone through the steps and most all game mechanics are included. You can add prerequisites (not needed for class features), actions (which include many game mechanics like range, save, damage, dice count..), modifiers, even creatures (existing monsters or custom creature). And if you need more than that, you can always add a spell.
"But what about having the presence/absence of that resource affect one's stats? Which ones, and how much?" --this can be done via modifiers..
"Just the beginnings of the mechanics for that new feature don't even exist" --and never will exist. Your character sheet will never know the moon phase in real time or in-game time. These kinds of things always have to be written in the description and tracked by the payer and DM. You can do this in a video game because the environment is preset, but not in a table top game.
"I left the mechanics of "Spelldance" vague to emphasize the point--they can be whatever the user is imagining, which means you basically need code (or something as complex) to allow the user to describe it." --you make a very good point here, but I believe it can be accomplished as long as it follows the established game mechanics. If your process for gaining spells is based on the beast sacrificed, for instance, you are moving outside of core rules as far as mechanics goes. Which is fine but you would just need to manually adjust your spell list for that day. As far as the burning of HP and stat bonuses, those are already doable with modifiers and actions.
Try thinking of the most complicated class feature you can, and try to make it as a feat. I thin you will be surprised with what you can do. Again, I'm not creative enough to come up with anything that would be remotely challenging, but maybe you can. I'd be really interested to know where DDB fails on that. Seriously, I'm not being snarky, I really am curious top know if there is anything that you can't do with a custom feat that you should be able to do with a class feature. In my mind they are mechanically the same thing, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the difference, other than how they are used, of course.
First, thanks for taking the time to engage in constructive feedback. It makes delving into this much more of a legit discussion than a confrontation.
That said, I feel like I'm going in circles a bit here, but that might just be on me, so I'll take one more stab at this and try to address a couple of specific points.
"But...custom feats don't have to be similar to existing feats. That was my point."
I guess that comes down to what one means by "similar." I agree that custom feats don't have to be identical to existing feats. But I've played with the feat creator; they have to be similar in large degree to existing feats. They add an ability or weapon or attack bonus. And/or they grant a spell or two. And/or they increase a stat (such as speed.) And/or they add an existing feature (such as an Invocation or a Fighting Style.)
But it's not possible to, say, create a feat that gives a fifth 1st-level spell slot to spellcasters that already have four. Or one that lets you get and hold two Inspiration whenever the DM would give you one. Those are too dissimilar to the existing design of Feats to be included as options.
Now, that's fine for feats (IMO.) They *should* largely fit a pattern in how they work, for plenty of reasons--including that it facilitates custom/future feat creation. I'd say that's even a fair limitation for subclasses. But classes don't work like that. They can--and arguably should--differ in ways that would likely break any menu-option-based "class creator" if the class didn't already exist.
Let me give a couple of examples: First, suppose that 5E didn't have the Barbarian or Monk classes. But that DDB had tried to build a "class creator" based around all the other classes. Then someone comes to the site and has the idea for a "Tank" class. Rather than having AC based on armor and DEX, the class would have a novel new concept called "Tanker's Defense" as a core class feature, where you add STR to your AC, along with DEX, but only when you meet condition X.
Now, this example obviously presents a reasonable idea--we actually have "Unarmored Defense" in an official class. In the example though, something like "Tanker's Defense" wouldn't exist among the pre-existing classes; so you couldn't just take an existing class feature and adapt it. You probably wouldn't even be able to create it as a feat--even if there was a mechanism to apply a single extra modifier to your AC, how likely is it that they would have thought to allow that modifier to be another Ability? And then have an additional menu with options allowing the feat to operate only when a specific condition is in play, and your specific condition X is actually on the list. Unless the site designers went out of their way to anticipate and allow for exactly that feature, you'd probably not be able to build it, unless they let you practically code in the mechanics for your class features.
Second example, suppose 5E didn't have the Warlock class, but again, DDB had tried to build a "class creator" based around all the other classes. You could make a full, half, or one-third spellcasting class, but those would likely be the only "spellcaster" options outside of building-in specific feats like "Magic Initiate." Then someone wants to come along and create a new class called "Warlock." Warlocks would be considered a full spellcaster, but they don't have the usual spell-slot progression, they'd instead have something called "Pact Magic." I wager there would be no options to successfully create such a class; it would be considered too dissimilar from existing classes, and the only way it would ever come about would be if you could specifically code adjustments to fundamental aspects of the class, such as number of spell slots, their level, and how they would progress per class level.
Maybe I'm just expecting everyone to expect what I would; maybe just a "rearrange what we already have" class builder with description boxes for extra stuff is what those asking for one would be satisfied with. If so, I get where they're coming from, although I still don't think DDB would spend the time to just re-organize those options into a site feature beyond what's already available. But if DDB had a "Create a Class" builder button tomorrow, I'd personally expect it to allow creating new classes as diverse as Warlocks are from Rangers are from Monks, and that these new classes would be functional, automatically calculating the numbers for you like all the others. Otherwise, what's the point, in my mind; just let users write down their "new class features" in a text box somewhere and handle it all manually.
I just think anything less than a "full" class builder would be a disappointment for many (and not at all what they'd expect either,) and that any attempt at such a system would be too cumbersome to justify the expense.
"These kinds of things always have to be written in the description and tracked by the payer and DM. You can do this in a video game because the environment is preset, but not in a table top game."
I'd argue that it's far easier to do such weird things in a pen-and-paper table-top game than in a video game, which is also part of my point. At your table, especially if it's nighttime, your DM can just look out the window, see what phase the moon is in, and give a nod to your weird custom "Lunar Power" class feature. If it was sensible and balanced, and the player did the work of looking up the lunar phase when needed, I'd let someone play such a class in my games--it wouldn't really be any hassle at all exactly BECAUSE everything is manually managed (as opposed to if I was building the next "Harvest Moon"-killer and was trying to write a script to pull the current lunar phase from the internet, then apply the bonuses at the right time within the game.)
Which is why I can see someone who created such a class IRL to fully expect some degree of support for it in a "Class Builder": it's a TTRPG. The description of the feature is just a few lines of text. It sounds simple. Even acknowledging they'd likely have to simply have a drop-down menu on their character sheet where they set the current phase of the moon, and their stats changed appropriately, it would SEEM like a reasonable ask to allow for "Lunar Power," just like it would be for "Tanker's Defense" or "Pact Magic." But without anticipating the exact features the user had in mind, the only way it would be likely that they'd actually be able to successfully build the feature on the site (or anything else esoteric and truly unique) would be via scripting or something similar.
That's what I mean when I say coding would likely be required to do a full class builder.. If you're able to create unique new classes, and you want to be the first one to create the "Spelldancer," where you simply click "Cast" and your HP automatically drops by (Spell_Level * 4 - Class_Level) points, you're probably not going to be able to do it within the limitations of whatever menu options the builder would provide--you'd need a far more low-level means of detailing the class mechanics.
I think I am getting where you're coming from. Your idea is that the mechanical restrictions of the rules as written make it impossible to add new classes becasue new classes require new rules. I have to say that I can't disagree with that sentiment. It makes sense, but I also believe that could be said about any homebrew, and that we just need to know what whatever customizations we want must fit within the parameters available or be tracked on paper.
Your example of "Tankers Defense" was great and really illuminated your point. When I think of class features I'm usually thinking about things like Second Wind that has no mechanics involved. I wasn't thinking of Unarmored Defense as an example. So I tried creating a Tankers Defense feat, and it worked out really well. Obviously it's not a class feature so I had to apply it to a level four character of an existing class, but it did work. My character now has an AC of 14 with no armor. Here is how it is broken down on the sheet:
What I couldn't do is enforce the restriction that you can not wear armor. That's funny to me becasue that mechanic already exists. I'm learning a lot about custom feats, like that you can have pre-requisites but not really any options for restrictions. I think this is a core functionality that needs to be included regardless of whether we are talking about feats or class features. Even if they did add restrictions; however, your point is still valid that they can not account for everything. But I don't think they have to. In this case, as an example, the player knows the restriction as does the DM. All that needs to be done is to not don armor, or override the AC on the character sheet, like so:
So, while I have a more enlightened understanding of your view point I stand by my initial assertion that no custom programming would need to take place in order to add custom classes. DDB provides plenty of workaround options for whatever crazy thing a player can dream up. I do think that some sort of restriction mechanics needs to be added to the homebrew system, though. That would address a great many issues.
I'd love it if DDB treated subclasses from a purchasing perspective the way they treat magic items and spells...with references! If i search for a magic item like 'dagger'...it comes up with all of them throughout all of DDB's database. If I've purchased that source pub, i can see the details (including the source pub). If I haven't purchased it, I can still see the source reference, just not the details of the magic item. Subclasses don't work like this. If I click 'cleric', it shows ONLY the subclasses I've purchased - there is no clue as to what subclasses I'm missing and nothing that points me anywhere.
In other words...show me what I want to buy. Making me go to a third party web site to find out basic info about D&D subclasses just means I find the info somewhere else...and don't give you my money.
sub races have this issue too unfortunately.
unless i'm missing something that is...in which case - design towards the idiot.
edit: this feature is on the app, but not on the web site :/
We desperately need a better way to allow/block homebrew content!
As it stands now, we can either allow all homebrew in a campaign or none.
As a DM, I want to give my players access to some of the homebrew stuff I created. What I don't want is that every player can just create homebrew feats and spells willy-nilly and have every any player use it.
Same goes for some of my own homebrew stuff I have created for testing or simply for later use.
Preferably, each campaign contains a "homebrew whitelist" that lists all the homebrew content freely available for players.
One simple one I would like is to be able to search for maps. I have purchased most of the books digitally, and sometimes I just need a quick map. Yes, I could search the internet. But since I paid for all this content (including adventure maps), why not have that indexed and searchable, just like monster stat blocks or magic items?
we still can't homebrew Invocations, magical ammunition, we still can't level up sidekicks. We still can't homebrew nonmagical items. We still can't homebrew combat maneuvers. And the encounter manager is still broken. Utter waste of your dev team
manual hp instead of having a single entry field for total rolled HP change it to be able to see what HP was rolled at each level in relation to the class for that level this way the DM can see the math behind the HP and can tell which levels the player rolled vs taking the average
manual hp instead of having a single entry field for total rolled HP change it to be able to see what HP was rolled at each level in relation to the class for that level this way the DM can see the math behind the HP and can tell which levels the player rolled vs taking the average
Yes! A request I have made in the past. This would be very helpful.
Still woud like to be able to search things in our shared Homebrew collection / creation. Have a checkbox for "include shared homebrew" when searching for feats, spells, items, subclasses, etc.
in the manage character level screen. on the levels that have the ability score improvement options. can you display the current ability score vs what it will change to
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For who?
For the folks at DDB? Possibly (certainly not in the case of my last example, which I suspect you might have misunderstood.)
But if we're all submitting new class features to them to code, not only would that mean they'd have to code hundreds (thousands?) of new classes--most of which wouldn't just be a simple tracker, I'd wager--they'd have to add them ALL to the codebase. As I said, I think the reasons why that wouldn't work are kinda obvious.
If you're saying it would be "easy to code" for the average user of the site.... let's just say I would disagree with that.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
I'm not sure I am understanding. When you say, "code" do you literally mean writing C# into the the character sheet creator and/or encounter builder? That would certainly not be necessary. If so it would mean that homebrew spells and feats would also need to be "coded." Most homebrew stuff is just descriptions, where there are usable mechanics pretty much everything is already covered. Where it's not you always have the option of basing it on a spell. Take a look at the custom feat creator, class features would look pretty much the same.
Answers to your questions...
"What if your new class feature is a singular resource that you gain and lose repeatedly throughout a combat to influence the action economy of the combat?"
-- include a "number of uses" which already exists.
"What if your new class is a 'full spellcaster,' but without Pact Magic or Spellcasting (IOW, no spell slots) and instead they use your new 'Spelldance' feature?"
-- I don't know how "Spelldance" would work without spell slots, but if there are no spell slots then there are no mechanics to worry about.
"What if characters using your new martial class are supposed to have their stats shift in a pre-determined fashion based on the IRL current phase of the moon while you play?"
--I'm not aware of anything in DDB that includes mechanics based anything going on in real life.
I'm sure the reality is that DDB and WotC don't include homebrew classes becasue they are not supported in the rules. The DMG has guidelines for custom spells, magic items, etc, but not classes. It is also why I doubt we will ever see homebrew mundane items. The mentality seems to be that if it wasn't written into the rules, it must be against the rules.
By "code," I mean provide a detailed algorithm/description for how to view/represent the feature, how to make it function, and how to have it interact with the rest of the character sheet. Whether in C#, Javascript, HTML or some scripting language specifically designed for use on the site.
If the only new class features you allow are similar to existing class features, similar to how custom feats must be similar to existing feats, that's a different story. But if you want to allow potentially any sort of new class feature, unique from the existing ones (which class features typically are,) that's where the problem arises; at that point, you need someone to code (using the above definition) that for the class if you want an actual, functioning checkbox/option on your character sheet.
Sure, you can show "number of uses" because that's functionally the same as a lot of other features. But what about having the presence/absence of that resource affect one's stats? Which ones, and how much? Then, how about affecting those stats based on how many times the singular resource has been used this combat, in conjunction with, say, proficiency bonus?
If you just have a non-functional checkbox that just sits there and does nothing, that's easy... but why even bother if that's all it is? For it to affect the rest of the character sheet, you're either going to need a formal description of the mechanics, or else you're going to need a number of drop-down menus and options that gets more complicated the more broadly you allow users to define the feature (moreso than the feat creator, which is already kind of a mess.) Each element needs to be specified in detail, precisely--and that's the simplest example!
I left the mechanics of "Spelldance" vague to emphasize the point--they can be whatever the user is imagining, which means you basically need code (or something as complex) to allow the user to describe it. It's not at all true that without spell slots, there are no mechanics. What if Spelldance burns HP to cast spells? What if it requires a daily ritual sacrifice of some beast, and grants cumulative stat bonuses based on the beast sacrificed, but your spell options are also limited based on the beast sacrificed, and you take a level of exhaustion after each casting? The mechanical possibilities are endless.
Exactly. That's my point exactly. Just the beginnings of the mechanics for that new feature don't even exist--you'd basically need to ensure the scripting language somehow allowed pulling realtime data from the web.
Even if you instead insisted the player just manually select a phase and have THAT choice update the character sheet stats, that's still all going to have to be detailed. And that's just one example of an esoteric requirement for a new class feature, a requirement that really isn't even unreasonable (I'd even argue it's how "Lunar Sorcerers" should really have been done.)
This isn't nearly as big of a deal with a subclass. With them, you may not get a useful implementation of some new subclass feature you want, but since the class features are still present, you can still just describe the effect and let the player adjust the sheet manually; the core of the class is still available. When the core of the class is a unique, complex feature that itself can't really be implemented... you're going to have a rather useless character sheet.
I tend to agree with you--that mindset certainly seems to be part of the issue. But the time and cost required to allow creating useful new features from scratch also don't seem worth it, IMO.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
It is already basically possible to create a new class -- just start with an existing class that's similar to what you want and create a subclass that gives out its class features as replacements for features in the base class. This has a bunch of limitations, but it's doable for most of what people want. It's just a big pain to actually implement.
Why use dndbeyond at all if that's the position we're taking? Very few class features interact with the sheet beyond a check box. Rage a prime example of a simple feature that doesn't actually affect your sheet. There are very few class features integrated to that degree - artificers, and pact weapons and a few others maybe that involve items? Being able to use roll snippets and the existing tools would be enough to replicate how well they integrate things.
I would settle for just text but using the available tools. A lot can be supported with those to the same level dndbeyond supports official classes. Yes, all I'd like is to use the existing tools available and be able to insert them into classes. There are plenty of off the wall subclasses and features available on this site - full integration isn't needed to use them.
I feel like the core request here is to be able to use the tools available not to create something that can handle every possibility - that's what text descriptions and extensions are for.
How to get your dice to look like the ones in my profile picture and a full site dark mode.
Tutorial thread by Hyrkali
Sidekicks, please!
We desperately want a sidekick creator, per Tasha's rules.
Please?
But...custom feats don't have to be similar to existing feats. That was my point. Everything you are saying is already doable for all other custom content. You can go to "Create a Feat and choose "Create from scratch" and do whatever you want with it. I'm not creative enough to come up with anything, but I've gone through the steps and most all game mechanics are included. You can add prerequisites (not needed for class features), actions (which include many game mechanics like range, save, damage, dice count..), modifiers, even creatures (existing monsters or custom creature). And if you need more than that, you can always add a spell.
"But what about having the presence/absence of that resource affect one's stats? Which ones, and how much?"
--this can be done via modifiers..
"Just the beginnings of the mechanics for that new feature don't even exist"
--and never will exist. Your character sheet will never know the moon phase in real time or in-game time. These kinds of things always have to be written in the description and tracked by the payer and DM. You can do this in a video game because the environment is preset, but not in a table top game.
"I left the mechanics of "Spelldance" vague to emphasize the point--they can be whatever the user is imagining, which means you basically need code (or something as complex) to allow the user to describe it."
--you make a very good point here, but I believe it can be accomplished as long as it follows the established game mechanics. If your process for gaining spells is based on the beast sacrificed, for instance, you are moving outside of core rules as far as mechanics goes. Which is fine but you would just need to manually adjust your spell list for that day. As far as the burning of HP and stat bonuses, those are already doable with modifiers and actions.
Try thinking of the most complicated class feature you can, and try to make it as a feat. I thin you will be surprised with what you can do. Again, I'm not creative enough to come up with anything that would be remotely challenging, but maybe you can. I'd be really interested to know where DDB fails on that. Seriously, I'm not being snarky, I really am curious top know if there is anything that you can't do with a custom feat that you should be able to do with a class feature. In my mind they are mechanically the same thing, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the difference, other than how they are used, of course.
I agree.
If what you want is similar to existing mechanics, and you accept the limitations, then in most cases a new class can already be created via a subclass. But that's what I'm saying... if you can already kinda do it, DDB is likely not going to put in the time and effort to redo that into a "create a class" feature.
(Note: I'm not saying DDB *shouldn't* do it, just that, in light of where we are with current bugs, it's not realistic to expect them to.)
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
First, thanks for taking the time to engage in constructive feedback. It makes delving into this much more of a legit discussion than a confrontation.
That said, I feel like I'm going in circles a bit here, but that might just be on me, so I'll take one more stab at this and try to address a couple of specific points.
"But...custom feats don't have to be similar to existing feats. That was my point."
I guess that comes down to what one means by "similar." I agree that custom feats don't have to be identical to existing feats. But I've played with the feat creator; they have to be similar in large degree to existing feats. They add an ability or weapon or attack bonus. And/or they grant a spell or two. And/or they increase a stat (such as speed.) And/or they add an existing feature (such as an Invocation or a Fighting Style.)
But it's not possible to, say, create a feat that gives a fifth 1st-level spell slot to spellcasters that already have four. Or one that lets you get and hold two Inspiration whenever the DM would give you one. Those are too dissimilar to the existing design of Feats to be included as options.
Now, that's fine for feats (IMO.) They *should* largely fit a pattern in how they work, for plenty of reasons--including that it facilitates custom/future feat creation. I'd say that's even a fair limitation for subclasses. But classes don't work like that. They can--and arguably should--differ in ways that would likely break any menu-option-based "class creator" if the class didn't already exist.
Let me give a couple of examples: First, suppose that 5E didn't have the Barbarian or Monk classes. But that DDB had tried to build a "class creator" based around all the other classes. Then someone comes to the site and has the idea for a "Tank" class. Rather than having AC based on armor and DEX, the class would have a novel new concept called "Tanker's Defense" as a core class feature, where you add STR to your AC, along with DEX, but only when you meet condition X.
Now, this example obviously presents a reasonable idea--we actually have "Unarmored Defense" in an official class. In the example though, something like "Tanker's Defense" wouldn't exist among the pre-existing classes; so you couldn't just take an existing class feature and adapt it. You probably wouldn't even be able to create it as a feat--even if there was a mechanism to apply a single extra modifier to your AC, how likely is it that they would have thought to allow that modifier to be another Ability? And then have an additional menu with options allowing the feat to operate only when a specific condition is in play, and your specific condition X is actually on the list. Unless the site designers went out of their way to anticipate and allow for exactly that feature, you'd probably not be able to build it, unless they let you practically code in the mechanics for your class features.
Second example, suppose 5E didn't have the Warlock class, but again, DDB had tried to build a "class creator" based around all the other classes. You could make a full, half, or one-third spellcasting class, but those would likely be the only "spellcaster" options outside of building-in specific feats like "Magic Initiate." Then someone wants to come along and create a new class called "Warlock." Warlocks would be considered a full spellcaster, but they don't have the usual spell-slot progression, they'd instead have something called "Pact Magic." I wager there would be no options to successfully create such a class; it would be considered too dissimilar from existing classes, and the only way it would ever come about would be if you could specifically code adjustments to fundamental aspects of the class, such as number of spell slots, their level, and how they would progress per class level.
Maybe I'm just expecting everyone to expect what I would; maybe just a "rearrange what we already have" class builder with description boxes for extra stuff is what those asking for one would be satisfied with. If so, I get where they're coming from, although I still don't think DDB would spend the time to just re-organize those options into a site feature beyond what's already available. But if DDB had a "Create a Class" builder button tomorrow, I'd personally expect it to allow creating new classes as diverse as Warlocks are from Rangers are from Monks, and that these new classes would be functional, automatically calculating the numbers for you like all the others. Otherwise, what's the point, in my mind; just let users write down their "new class features" in a text box somewhere and handle it all manually.
I just think anything less than a "full" class builder would be a disappointment for many (and not at all what they'd expect either,) and that any attempt at such a system would be too cumbersome to justify the expense.
"These kinds of things always have to be written in the description and tracked by the payer and DM. You can do this in a video game because the environment is preset, but not in a table top game."
I'd argue that it's far easier to do such weird things in a pen-and-paper table-top game than in a video game, which is also part of my point. At your table, especially if it's nighttime, your DM can just look out the window, see what phase the moon is in, and give a nod to your weird custom "Lunar Power" class feature. If it was sensible and balanced, and the player did the work of looking up the lunar phase when needed, I'd let someone play such a class in my games--it wouldn't really be any hassle at all exactly BECAUSE everything is manually managed (as opposed to if I was building the next "Harvest Moon"-killer and was trying to write a script to pull the current lunar phase from the internet, then apply the bonuses at the right time within the game.)
Which is why I can see someone who created such a class IRL to fully expect some degree of support for it in a "Class Builder": it's a TTRPG. The description of the feature is just a few lines of text. It sounds simple. Even acknowledging they'd likely have to simply have a drop-down menu on their character sheet where they set the current phase of the moon, and their stats changed appropriately, it would SEEM like a reasonable ask to allow for "Lunar Power," just like it would be for "Tanker's Defense" or "Pact Magic." But without anticipating the exact features the user had in mind, the only way it would be likely that they'd actually be able to successfully build the feature on the site (or anything else esoteric and truly unique) would be via scripting or something similar.
That's what I mean when I say coding would likely be required to do a full class builder.. If you're able to create unique new classes, and you want to be the first one to create the "Spelldancer," where you simply click "Cast" and your HP automatically drops by (Spell_Level * 4 - Class_Level) points, you're probably not going to be able to do it within the limitations of whatever menu options the builder would provide--you'd need a far more low-level means of detailing the class mechanics.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
I think I am getting where you're coming from. Your idea is that the mechanical restrictions of the rules as written make it impossible to add new classes becasue new classes require new rules. I have to say that I can't disagree with that sentiment. It makes sense, but I also believe that could be said about any homebrew, and that we just need to know what whatever customizations we want must fit within the parameters available or be tracked on paper.
Your example of "Tankers Defense" was great and really illuminated your point. When I think of class features I'm usually thinking about things like Second Wind that has no mechanics involved. I wasn't thinking of Unarmored Defense as an example. So I tried creating a Tankers Defense feat, and it worked out really well. Obviously it's not a class feature so I had to apply it to a level four character of an existing class, but it did work. My character now has an AC of 14 with no armor. Here is how it is broken down on the sheet:
10 Armor(None)
+2 Dexterity Bonus
+4 Misc Bonus(Tankers Defense)
What I couldn't do is enforce the restriction that you can not wear armor. That's funny to me becasue that mechanic already exists. I'm learning a lot about custom feats, like that you can have pre-requisites but not really any options for restrictions. I think this is a core functionality that needs to be included regardless of whether we are talking about feats or class features. Even if they did add restrictions; however, your point is still valid that they can not account for everything. But I don't think they have to. In this case, as an example, the player knows the restriction as does the DM. All that needs to be done is to not don armor, or override the AC on the character sheet, like so:
15 Armor(Armor of Gleaming, Half Plate)
+2 Dexterity Bonus(Max 2)
+4 Misc Bonus(Tankers Defense)
-4 Misc Bonus(bypass tankers defense)
So, while I have a more enlightened understanding of your view point I stand by my initial assertion that no custom programming would need to take place in order to add custom classes. DDB provides plenty of workaround options for whatever crazy thing a player can dream up. I do think that some sort of restriction mechanics needs to be added to the homebrew system, though. That would address a great many issues.
I'd love it if DDB treated subclasses from a purchasing perspective the way they treat magic items and spells...with references! If i search for a magic item like 'dagger'...it comes up with all of them throughout all of DDB's database. If I've purchased that source pub, i can see the details (including the source pub). If I haven't purchased it, I can still see the source reference, just not the details of the magic item. Subclasses don't work like this. If I click 'cleric', it shows ONLY the subclasses I've purchased - there is no clue as to what subclasses I'm missing and nothing that points me anywhere.
In other words...show me what I want to buy. Making me go to a third party web site to find out basic info about D&D subclasses just means I find the info somewhere else...and don't give you my money.
sub races have this issue too unfortunately.
unless i'm missing something that is...in which case - design towards the idiot.
edit: this feature is on the app, but not on the web site :/
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
We desperately need a better way to allow/block homebrew content!
As it stands now, we can either allow all homebrew in a campaign or none.
As a DM, I want to give my players access to some of the homebrew stuff I created.
What I don't want is that every player can just create homebrew feats and spells willy-nilly and have every any player use it.
Same goes for some of my own homebrew stuff I have created for testing or simply for later use.
Preferably, each campaign contains a "homebrew whitelist" that lists all the homebrew content freely available for players.
Would be great if Cosmic Omen weal or woe was automatically rolled for/ updated with a long rest.
Fancier immersive dice explanations of all your math, make it look cool and calculate rolls (or integrate with api like roll20)
One simple one I would like is to be able to search for maps. I have purchased most of the books digitally, and sometimes I just need a quick map. Yes, I could search the internet. But since I paid for all this content (including adventure maps), why not have that indexed and searchable, just like monster stat blocks or magic items?
we still can't homebrew Invocations, magical ammunition, we still can't level up sidekicks. We still can't homebrew nonmagical items. We still can't homebrew combat maneuvers. And the encounter manager is still broken. Utter waste of your dev team
manual hp
instead of having a single entry field for total rolled HP
change it to be able to see what HP was rolled at each level in relation to the class for that level
this way the DM can see the math behind the HP and can tell which levels the player rolled vs taking the average
Yes! A request I have made in the past. This would be very helpful.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Still woud like to be able to search things in our shared Homebrew collection / creation. Have a checkbox for "include shared homebrew" when searching for feats, spells, items, subclasses, etc.
My Homebrew: Magic Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | My house rules
Currently playing: Fai'zal - CN Githyanki Rogue (Candlekeep Mysteries, Forgotten Realms) ; Zeena - LN Elf Sorcerer (Dragonlance)
Playing D&D since 1st edition. DMs Guild Author: B.A. Morrier (4-5⭐products! Please check them out.) Twitter: @benmorrier he/him
in the manage character level screen. on the levels that have the ability score improvement options. can you display the current ability score vs what it will change to