I think the Hunter subclass should get its multiattack back. Right now, Rangers feel too reliant on Hunter’s Mark—and it’s not even a great spell. Making it a “core feature” of the class just doesn’t work well. Here’s why: • 1st level – Favored Enemy: You always have Hunter’s Mark prepared and can cast it twice for free per long rest. This one’s fine, all things considered. • 13th level – Relentless Hunter: Taking damage no longer breaks Hunter’s Mark concentration. But for a high-level feature, this is underwhelming—why not just remove the concentration requirement entirely? • 17th level – Precise Hunter: You gain advantage on attacks against your marked target. By this level, most players already have other, more reliable ways to get advantage. • 20th level – Foe Slayer: Hunter’s Mark deals a d10 instead of a d6. At level 20, this is a very weak payoff.

If Hunter’s Mark is going to be central to the Ranger, it needs a serious overhaul. As it stands, making it the core identity feels limiting and underpowered.

General Philosophy • Reduce reliance on Hunter’s Mark by offering meaningful alternatives. • Focus more on exploration, survival, and tactical versatility. • Emphasize martial prowess or spellcasting specialization depending on subclass.

⸻

Core Class Improvements

Favored Enemy (1st level)

Current: Free Hunter’s Mark twice per long rest. Suggested Change: Instead of tying it solely to Hunter’s Mark, allow players to choose from a list of favored spells (Hunter’s Mark, Ensnaring Strike, Hail of Thorns, etc.) and give them one free use per long rest. Why: Adds flexibility and lets players flavor their Ranger how they want.

⸻

Spellcasting

Suggested Change: Use Wisdom for both spellcasting and martial abilities like adding Wisdom modifier to damage for specific Ranger spells (like Hunter’s Mark). Why: Strengthens spell-martial synergy and gives Wisdom more value.

⸻

Mid-Level Features

Extra Attack / Multiattack

Suggestion: Bring back Multiattack in the Hunter subclass at 11th level (or let the player choose between Volley or Whirlwind Attack again). Alternative: Offer a feature at level 11 that allows a bonus action weapon attack after casting a Ranger spell. Why: Encourages mixing spellcasting with martial abilities instead of just spamming Hunter’s Mark or attacks.

13th level – Relentless Hunter

Current: Damage doesn’t break Hunter’s Mark concentration. Suggested Change: Remove Hunter’s Mark’s concentration requirement entirely at this level. Why: Keeps the spell useful without eating up limited concentration.

⸻

High-Level Features

17th level – Precise Hunter

Current: Advantage against marked targets. Suggested Change: Instead, allow the Ranger to deal additional damage or apply a debuff (like reducing target’s movement or giving disadvantage on next attack) to marked targets. Why: Makes marking more tactical, not just a numbers buff.

⸻

20th level – Foe Slayer

Current: Hunter’s Mark becomes d10. Suggested Change: Add something impactful, like: • Auto-crit on the first attack against a marked target each turn. • No action or bonus action needed to mark a new target when one drops. • Once per turn, when you hit a marked creature, cast a Ranger spell as a reaction (1st-2nd level only). Why: Level 20 features should feel epic, not just bump a damage die.

All great suggestions, but this thread is for improvements to tools available via DND Beyond, not the actual game rules.  Sadly, no one at DDB can change the rules.  

There are certainly features I'd like to see in DDB that give the DM a bit more control over the rules of the game. Things like being able to adjust attunement limits and customizing spells outside of just homebrew. I understand restrictions on the site's formatting, but if a player wants to lock their Armor of Agathys to an element that isn't cold, I think there should be an easy dropdown menu in the spell customisation. I've wanted to add homebrew weapons before, but if it's not one of the base weapon types, it can't be done. 
I like DDB but there's been so many ideas I've had to scrap because the platform makes it impossible to implement.

Customer Service would be nice.  I haven't received notifications in I can't remember how long.  Made several requests for help but all I hear is crickets.

I'd like a radio button to turn off (on by default) level cap, sometimes I want to make characters that have more than 20 combined levels

Likewise.  I have a couple of powerful NPCs I'd like to have a 40 levels combined for 3 Classes

Feature Request: Shillelagh Weapon Toggle (Similar to Hex Warrior)

D&D Beyond currently offers a “Hex Weapon” selector for Hexblade Warlocks, allowing them to pick a weapon and have it automatically use their Charisma modifier for attack and damage rolls. For characters who know the Shillelagh cantrip, a similar toggle would improve usability and consistency.

Proposed Feature:

• Add a “Shillelagh Weapon” button similar to the Hex Weapon button for eligible characters (those with Shillelagh prepared/known).

• When activated, it should:

  1. Allow selection of the casting ability (WIS/INT/CHA) to account for Magic Initiate.

  2. Automatically update the weapon’s damage die according to Shillelagh rules and scale based on character level.

  3. Integrate with existing features like Weapon Mastery and cantrip-based attacks (Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade).

Benefits:

• Removes the need for manual duplicate weapon creation or custom actions.

• Maintains consistent, user-friendly UI in line with Hex Warrior functionality.

• Ensures smooth integration with scaling spells and existing D&D Beyond features.

For context, I’m currently playing a high-level Druid/Cleric multiclass. I use Shillelagh on a Sun Staff combined with Green-Flame Blade and Blessed Strikes. My damage output looks like this:

• 2d6 + WIS Force (from Sun Staff)

• +1d8 Fire (Sunstaff bonus)

• +3d8 Fire (Green-Flame Blade)

• +1d8 Radiant (Blessed Strike)

Currently, Shillelagh is considered a spell in D&D Beyond, so it doesn’t automatically interact with the damage increases from magic items, Green-Flame Blade, or Blessed Strike. This requires manual tracking and custom actions. Adding a single toggle button, similar to the Hex Warrior feature, would provide a much smoother experience.

This is the old Request feature thread started by the original Dnd Beyond owners and developers (before the company was bought by WotC/Hasbro)

Many of the requests, including the ones that were given on their external platform (see page 1 of this thread), have been sadly largely ignored since WoTC took over.

And they have since "unpinned" this post, so no longer seems like a priority thread by the team.

But at any rate, there is a more recent (unofficial) Feature request thread that probably has more chance to catch the eye of of the current developers.

Look for the pink "Request" tab thread " What do you want most of D&D Beyond?" that seems more active.

Quote from Benz74M >>

This is the old Request feature thread started by the original Dnd Beyond owners and developers (before the company was bought by WotC/Hasbro)

Many of the requests, including the ones that were given on their external platform (see page 1 of this thread), have been sadly largely ignored since WoTC took over.

And they have since "unpinned" this post, so no longer seems like a priority thread by the team.

But at any rate, there is a more recent (unofficial) Feature request thread that probably has more chance to catch the eye of of the current developers.

Look for the pink "Request" tab thread " What do you want most of D&D Beyond?" that seems more active.

You mean the one that was originally started in 2017, a full year before this one, and has less than one third of the posts that this one has, and up until a few days ago also hadn't been used since mid-August?

In what way is that "more recent" or "more active" than this thread? Chances are, they're both being looked at the same amount - either not at all or they're occasionally being checked by mods and there's a slight possibility that good ideas are passed on. Use whichever thread you want, neither has "more of a chance to catch their eye" than the other (and, in fact, by posting in this one you put it back near the top of the forum, arguably making this more likely to be seen again).

Quote from Desmond_Oakenbrand >>

Quote from Benz74M >>

This is the old Request feature thread started by the original Dnd Beyond owners and developers (before the company was bought by WotC/Hasbro)

 

[...] But at any rate, there is a more recent (unofficial) Feature request thread that probably has more chance to catch the eye of of the current developers.

Look for the pink "Request" tab thread " What do you want most of D&D Beyond?" that seems more active.

You mean the one that was originally started in 2017, a full year before this one, and has less than one third of the posts that this one has, and up until a few days ago also hadn't been used since mid-August?

In what way is that "more recent" or "more active" than this thread? Chances are, they're both being looked at the same amount - either not at all or they're occasionally being checked by mods and there's a slight possibility that good ideas are passed on. Use whichever thread you want, neither has "more of a chance to catch their eye" than the other (and, in fact, by posting in this one you put it back near the top of the forum, arguably making this more likely to be seen again).

Fair enough — you’re probably right that both threads are looked at about the same. My point was just that, before I made my earlier post here, this thread had slipped several pages down with only one post in August and the previous ones back in May. The other thread I mentioned had seen more activity recently, so I figured it was worth pointing out.

But yes, paradoxically, even this exchange gives this thread a bump and puts it back near the top, which in itself might give it a second life.

Ultimately, the important thing is that mods and developers actually take note of the ideas in any of these Request threads. Some very popular requests have been sitting here (and there) for years, despite seeming relatively straightforward to implement.

I think an option to share to more than 5 active campaigns would be something people would pay for, so let master tier have its 5 then if you can add on 2 at a time for an additional fee would be something I know would be purchased by many DMs i know, especially the professional DMs that want to use DND Beyond but have a limit to sharing content and managing players in dnd beyond.

Features to make the experience much more user-friendly at the table.

- A Concentration toggle (ideally with a popup that would let you know you are concentrating if you attempt to cast another Concentration spell, but that's secondary).
- Custom Conditions
- Dynamic Conditions (i.e. when toggle on, the digital character sheet reflects the bonuses or penalties)
- A visual "Bloodied" condition when the character has 50% or fewer Hit Points (e.g. Hit Points box area turning red, like monsters in the Encounter tracker). 
- An Advantage / Disadvantage option when customizing skills
- A "Quests" tab for the notes section
- Ability to spend Hit Dice without having to take a Short Rest (so many features now allow this, example: Grim Hollow sangromancy spells...) [As of now, If you mark a Hit Die check box without taking a Short Rest, the check won't register]
- When managing Inventory on the digital character sheet, we need filters by Rarity !!! (this is really getting unwieldy with the amount of magic items now available in the game when you include 3rd party products and homebrew)
- More love for the Encounter Builder that isn't integrated to MAPS. (A "Create New Encounter" button when you finish creating an encounter would be great)... Integrate the 2024 combat encounter difficulty and XP budget (Easy, Medium, Hard, Deadly) in the non-MAPS Encounter Builder.
- When you roll digitial dice during game play on your digital character sheet, there should be a way to click on the result and see all the individual dice that were rolled (rather than just the first 6 dice) because many features now allow to reroll some 1s and 2s or poor die roll results...
- Customizable Spell Scrolls (i.e. when you add a spell scroll to your inventory, you can choose any spells in the game (that have been unlocked).

Some of these requests can be addressed in an afternoon's work by your programmers. Why they are still major "requests" after 8 years of D&D Beyond is... beyond me. 

WOULD BE VERY USEFUL AND APPRECIATED

- Better Search filters for Homebrew Creations and Homebrew Collection  (e.g. search by spell level for spells, or spell school, or CR for monsters, or Rarity for items....)
- When adding a "snippet" or "description" to a custom action on the digital character sheet ("Manage Custom"> choose an action > "General"...), the notes you put there don't appear for some reason in the Notes section of the Action, Bonus Action, Reaction or other tab. This seems like a bug that's been around for years.
- Speaking of custom actions, there should be the option to add several damage output fields for digital dice rolling. Many items or spells have several different damage rolls. E.g. a sword that deals 1d6 Slashing, but also 1d8 Necrotic damage.  
-  2024 DMG Gemstones as actual items (without having to toggle on the annoying Legacy option, which also adds all the Legacy spells and feats that we don't necessarily want... )
- Allow the creation of homebrew nonmagical items
- A "M" tag beside spell names that indicate an costly Material component that has to be provided (e.g. 300 GP diamond for Revivify).
- Ability to transfer loot items from one character to another character in the campaign. (D&D Beyond was working on that before the company got bought by WoTC)... [Edit 2025-09-11: PARTY INVENTORY is now a thing! ]
- Ability to ENABLE or DISABLE homebrew content from each participant in a shared campaign. (Very annoying that is has to be all homebrew content or nothing).
- More granularity for character options: We (or the DM) should be able to decide which book / supplement's content will be allowed for a given character... Similar to how we can already filter Partnered content in the Preferences section of the character, we should be able to decide we don't want Acquisitions Inc. content, or Spelljammer content....(In other word, Expanded Rules and Legacy Content should be more granular.) 

As someone that has been a Master Tier subscriber from day 1 and has unlocked most of the digital content on this site, I thank you for your attention to these matters, and for your hard work making all the books usable with the digital character sheet and encounter builder. But I -- and a lot of other users -- have been waiting for many of these requests for years and it's infuriating knowing some of these requests can be easily addressed. 

Question... has anyone here requested a feature and had it implemented? Or are we all just shouting into a void? The initial post links to a Zendesk tenant that's no longer valid. Is anyone actually reading this stuff? Can anyone confirm?

Quote from Dizzy111 >>

Question... has anyone here requested a feature and had it implemented? Or are we all just shouting into a void? The initial post links to a Zendesk tenant that's no longer valid. Is anyone actually reading this stuff? Can anyone confirm?

I feel like we've been shouting into the abyssal void for several years. (See my post above yours, which brings to light a lot of the long-time requests). Since WOTC's acquisition of D&D Beyond, there has been very little attention to improving the digital character sheet. Attention is on converting WOTC and 3rd party content for the character builder, making digital dice, backdrops, and the VTT MAPS. Glimpse of hope this week as Party Inventory finally became a reality. I cling on to hope.

Once you've taken a look under Beyond's hood, you'll never doubt the claims about how hard the coding is to get working, and why requests aren't immediately done.

My scream into the void for today is for the following things:

Replace the defunct ZenDesk link with a pipeline to the current devs to let them know precisely what is wanted.

Add a bounty system for catching fixable stuff with things as is.

Have an extended maintenance period where the entire site is re-coded to the point where there is no weird coding.

& the usual cries for getting all of a release working before releasing it.