Add the Mystic UA to DnDBeyond, or allow people to add Homebrew classes, not just subclasses.
I know this is constantly requested, but I really don't think it's plausible for them to implement homebrewing entire classes.
The core features of each class are quite varied; each requires specific code for them to implement the mechanics, and allow you to simply tap a checkbox and do the thing cleanly. Bardic Inspiration dice for bards. Pact spell slots, invocations and pact items for warlocks. Smites for paladins. Sorcery points and metamagic. Rage. Etc.
Unless you're just going to copy features from existing classes, there's no simple yet clean way for you to homebrew one with its own unique feature(s) and have it just work on your character sheet. You'd either be limited to basically just writing up a description of the class with no actual mechanics available on your sheet (at which point, why bother using DDB for it?) or you'd have to essentially code the mechanics yourself alongside the description (and good luck with that working right and in a timely manner.)
Combine that with THEN allowing subclasses for the new class, likely with modifications and alternate uses of the class's unique new features, and it becomes such a complex undertaking that, IMO it isn't even remotely worth the investment. (The difficulty alone is probably why no UA classes will ever be implemented unless they become official; I'm honestly kinda surprised Blood Hunter made the cut.)
Everything I highlighted in pink is currently possible to implement for subclasses with the current Homebrew tools. The only exception is that we cannot get homebrewed invocations and pact boons to list with the standard ones, but they were created using the same Options system available in the homebrewer. And if we can make subraces, then we could make subclasses too, it should be no more complicated. All in all, it really shouldn’t be that complicated to allow us to make full classes with the same restrictions that we have when making subclasses, races or anything else we can make here on DDB.
I'd like to be able to add the pre-generated characters from the starter sets (Phandelvin and Stormwreck) to my campaign. That would make things a lot easier when my players use those characters.
Aren’t those pregens already available? If so, adding them to a campaign is already possible.
I've mentioned this before, but not in here. As a subscriber at the top tier, I pay for the ability to create unlimited characters. I hate deleting or destroying old characters, after a campaign whether on paper or digitally. It would be nice to have folders to be able to organize retired characters, or concept creations into. Or at very least an archive folder. Come on, DDB... This is an easy add and would really be appreciated by everyone I think!
Add the Mystic UA to DnDBeyond, or allow people to add Homebrew classes, not just subclasses.
I know this is constantly requested, but I really don't think it's plausible for them to implement homebrewing entire classes.
The core features of each class are quite varied; each requires specific code for them to implement the mechanics, and allow you to simply tap a checkbox and do the thing cleanly. Bardic Inspiration dice for bards. Pact spell slots, invocations and pact items for warlocks. Smites for paladins. Sorcery points and metamagic. Rage. Etc.
Unless you're just going to copy features from existing classes, there's no simple yet clean way for you to homebrew one with its own unique feature(s) and have it just work on your character sheet. You'd either be limited to basically just writing up a description of the class with no actual mechanics available on your sheet (at which point, why bother using DDB for it?) or you'd have to essentially code the mechanics yourself alongside the description (and good luck with that working right and in a timely manner.)
Combine that with THEN allowing subclasses for the new class, likely with modifications and alternate uses of the class's unique new features, and it becomes such a complex undertaking that, IMO it isn't even remotely worth the investment. (The difficulty alone is probably why no UA classes will ever be implemented unless they become official; I'm honestly kinda surprised Blood Hunter made the cut.)
I disagree. I've made a subclass for wizards, since they have the least amount of skills on level up and lowest proficiencies, for the UA mystic. It won't let me share it because it adds skills at incorrect levels and it thinks that some of the text is non english cuz i copy pasted from the UA pdf, but other than that, every part of it is doable.
With the tools that you have currently, you can make basically an entire class as a subclass. All they would be changing is the level at which you select it. Put in options for casting as a full, half, or third caster. Another option for dice based skills, like bardic inspiration or battle maneuvers. Invocations and Pact Items are already doable with the current tools. Pact spell slots are doable if you are make a blood hunter subclass, so the code exists for it already. Sorcery points and rages per day are already doable with the current tools. Smites are literally just an action.
Adding in the ability to do complete classes would EASY. For a team of people, a month should be more than enough time to add that functionality and test it. There's no excuse for it to not be available after almost 6 years.
So I went to the link and created an account, but cannot find anything about voting. There is a request section, but no button or anything relating to submitting a new one. I just want dark gifts to be added to DND Beyond. It was promised in 2021 and its been two years.
I'd like to be able to add the pre-generated characters from the starter sets (Phandelvin and Stormwreck) to my campaign. That would make things a lot easier when my players use those characters.
Aren’t those pregens already available? If so, adding them to a campaign is already possible.
I'm new here, so maybe it is and I'm missing it, but here's my experience: I view my campaign, then I select "create unassigned premade character"--the starter set pre-generated characters do not come up as options.
I'd like to be able to add the pre-generated characters from the starter sets (Phandelvin and Stormwreck) to my campaign. That would make things a lot easier when my players use those characters.
Aren’t those pregens already available? If so, adding them to a campaign is already possible.
I'm new here, so maybe it is and I'm missing it, but here's my experience: I view my campaign, then I select "create unassigned premade character"--the starter set pre-generated characters do not come up as options.
You mean the pregens from Dragons of Stormwreck Isle? Did you purchase that adventure from this website? It isn’t free content.
Hunh. It looks like only the High Elf Wis, the Hill Dwarf Cleric, and the Lightfoot Halfling Rogue have been implemented, but not the Wood Elf Fighter nor the Human Paladin.
I'd like to be able to add the pre-generated characters from the starter sets (Phandelvin and Stormwreck) to my campaign. That would make things a lot easier when my players use those characters.
Aren’t those pregens already available? If so, adding them to a campaign is already possible.
I'm new here, so maybe it is and I'm missing it, but here's my experience: I view my campaign, then I select "create unassigned premade character"--the starter set pre-generated characters do not come up as options.
You mean the pregens from Dragons of Stormwreck Isle? Did you purchase that adventure from this website? It isn’t free content.
Hunh. It looks like only the High Elf Wis, the Hill Dwarf Cleric, and the Lightfoot Halfling Rogue have been implemented, but not the Wood Elf Fighter nor the Human Paladin.
The high elf wizard, Hill dwarf cleric, and light foot handling rogue are actually from LMOP. The wizard at least has a different background than the DOSI one.
Oh bother. That explains it. I own the box set of DoSI, but not the digital version. (Rookie mistake on my part.)
So, if I bought the digital version, those pregenerated PCs should show up? Or are they absent even for people who own the digital version of DoSI?
I guess not. I haven’t bought it, but I have access to it through content sharing, and even in that campaign I cannot access the DoSI pregens. I thought they had been implemented, my bad. They should be fairly easy to recreate though.
I have an idea for a good quality of life feature for classes that prepare spells, such as Cleric and Wizard
The ability to create preset lists of prepared spells and switch between them. For instance, the spells a Wizard may prepare for the day are generally dependent on what they expect to be doing that day. What they may prepare for a day of exploring/investigating/rp'ing in a city will be different from when they are heading into a deep dungeon dive. It would be handy to have the ability to create and label preset lists of prepared spells like "city" or "sea voyage" that would allow players to not have to go through their spell list each time and select and unselect which spells they want to prepare manually.
These lists could also certainly be tweaked on a case by case basis when the player wants to alter or fine tune their general list of "combat" spells when needed, but being able to create a few personalized default lists for general use would make things easier.
Add the Mystic UA to DnDBeyond, or allow people to add Homebrew classes, not just subclasses.
I know this is constantly requested, but I really don't think it's plausible for them to implement homebrewing entire classes.
The core features of each class are quite varied; each requires specific code for them to implement the mechanics, and allow you to simply tap a checkbox and do the thing cleanly. Bardic Inspiration dice for bards. Pact spell slots, invocations and pact items for warlocks. Smites for paladins. Sorcery points and metamagic. Rage. Etc.
Unless you're just going to copy features from existing classes, there's no simple yet clean way for you to homebrew one with its own unique feature(s) and have it just work on your character sheet. You'd either be limited to basically just writing up a description of the class with no actual mechanics available on your sheet (at which point, why bother using DDB for it?) or you'd have to essentially code the mechanics yourself alongside the description (and good luck with that working right and in a timely manner.)
Combine that with THEN allowing subclasses for the new class, likely with modifications and alternate uses of the class's unique new features, and it becomes such a complex undertaking that, IMO it isn't even remotely worth the investment. (The difficulty alone is probably why no UA classes will ever be implemented unless they become official; I'm honestly kinda surprised Blood Hunter made the cut.)
Everything I highlighted in pink is currently possible to implement for subclasses with the current Homebrew tools. The only exception is that we cannot get homebrewed invocations and pact boons to list with the standard ones, but they were created using the same Options system available in the homebrewer. And if we can make subraces, then we could make subclasses too, it should be no more complicated. All in all, it really shouldn’t be that complicated to allow us to make full classes with the same restrictions that we have when making subclasses, races or anything else we can make here on DDB.
Regarding the part I've highlighted in red - I would guess the difficulty lies in the fact that Subclasses, Monsters, Feats, Spells, etc. are all standalone things. Whereas each Class has to have at least one Subclass, and therefore they're need to tack Subclass creation onto the end of Class creation (as a mandatory part of Class creation), while also still allowing Subclass creation to be standalone.
It shouldn't be impossible, and I don't think it would even be particularly hard if they were starting from scratch (or, that "Homebrew Overhaul" they've apparently been talking about for years). But to do it now might be a little more difficult, depending on other factors.
Add the Mystic UA to DnDBeyond, or allow people to add Homebrew classes, not just subclasses.
I know this is constantly requested, but I really don't think it's plausible for them to implement homebrewing entire classes.
The core features of each class are quite varied; each requires specific code for them to implement the mechanics, and allow you to simply tap a checkbox and do the thing cleanly. Bardic Inspiration dice for bards. Pact spell slots, invocations and pact items for warlocks. Smites for paladins. Sorcery points and metamagic. Rage. Etc.
Unless you're just going to copy features from existing classes, there's no simple yet clean way for you to homebrew one with its own unique feature(s) and have it just work on your character sheet. You'd either be limited to basically just writing up a description of the class with no actual mechanics available on your sheet (at which point, why bother using DDB for it?) or you'd have to essentially code the mechanics yourself alongside the description (and good luck with that working right and in a timely manner.)
Combine that with THEN allowing subclasses for the new class, likely with modifications and alternate uses of the class's unique new features, and it becomes such a complex undertaking that, IMO it isn't even remotely worth the investment. (The difficulty alone is probably why no UA classes will ever be implemented unless they become official; I'm honestly kinda surprised Blood Hunter made the cut.)
Everything I highlighted in pink is currently possible to implement for subclasses with the current Homebrew tools. The only exception is that we cannot get homebrewed invocations and pact boons to list with the standard ones, but they were created using the same Options system available in the homebrewer. And if we can make subraces, then we could make subclasses too, it should be no more complicated. All in all, it really shouldn’t be that complicated to allow us to make full classes with the same restrictions that we have when making subclasses, races or anything else we can make here on DDB.
I disagree. I've made a subclass for wizards, since they have the least amount of skills on level up and lowest proficiencies, for the UA mystic. It won't let me share it because it adds skills at incorrect levels and it thinks that some of the text is non english cuz i copy pasted from the UA pdf, but other than that, every part of it is doable.
With the tools that you have currently, you can make basically an entire class as a subclass. All they would be changing is the level at which you select it. Put in options for casting as a full, half, or third caster. Another option for dice based skills, like bardic inspiration or battle maneuvers. Invocations and Pact Items are already doable with the current tools. Pact spell slots are doable if you are make a blood hunter subclass, so the code exists for it already. Sorcery points and rages per day are already doable with the current tools. Smites are literally just an action.
Adding in the ability to do complete classes would EASY. For a team of people, a month should be more than enough time to add that functionality and test it. There's no excuse for it to not be available after almost 6 years.
I think my main point has been missed....
If all you want is a class that reuses features of existing classes, yes, that should be (somewhat) easy, but that's not going to add enough for most people to bother. ("So, you mixed Pact Magic and Smites into a new class rather than multiclassing or homebrewing a subclass. Ok, I guess?") The main differentiator of (official) classes is that each has at least one unique class feature that NONE of the other classes have.
So, yes, if you want to make, say, a new "Songminster" class that copies the concept of Bardic Inspiration, even if renamed, that's one thing.
If you want to literally create new class features, which is what most would expect with a new button labeled "Create a Class," that's something else entirely.
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? 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? 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? A new class, in concept, should be able to have practically ANY new feature you want, and I'm fairly certain 99% of the new features people will envision will not have appropriate code already in the system to display or implement the mechanics.
Hence, I only see three options:
(1) A watered-down "class creator" that just allows rearranging existing class features (at which point, multiclassing with homebrew subclasses already exists)
(2) A "full" class creator where the user has to essentially code all the mechanics of the class features himself in his class description (!)
(3) A "full" class creator where you submit a description of your new class features to DDB and wait for them to code it in-between everything else they're doing
The first option might thrill some players, but wouldn't have enough impact for DDB to consider over just pointing to/updating the subclass creator. The second option would be a pain to design, implement and maintain; would be too complicated for most users; and would likely be an error-prone security nightmare. The last just wouldn't work, for what I assume are obvious reasons.
If anyone can think of a fourth option for implementing a class creator, I'd be curious to hear it, but I just don't see a full class creator being feasible without an unreasonable amount of time and effort on the part of the users AND the site coders. (And adding to that, I'd like to gently point out that that despite all the work spent on it since BEFORE the book's release, we still have a sizable bug report list on new features from TCoE....)
OK this is a bit of a chaotic idea, but I must ask.
Homebrew Sourcebooks.
I.e. a Homebrew 'book' where we can craft lore and a setting and link existing homebrew in our collection or creations to tie into it. So if someone digs the setting we've been making, people can 'Add' the sourcebook to their collection, and get the related homebrew added automatically, instead of having to individuallytrack down each NPC, Subclass, Magic Item, Encounter, Monster, Feat, Spell, Etc, Etc.
Plus, it'd serve a way to be even more creative for those of us who like doing homebrew for the sake of lore or worldbuilding.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how difficult would this be?
Add the Mystic UA to DnDBeyond, or allow people to add Homebrew classes, not just subclasses.
I know this is constantly requested, but I really don't think it's plausible for them to implement homebrewing entire classes.
The core features of each class are quite varied; each requires specific code for them to implement the mechanics, and allow you to simply tap a checkbox and do the thing cleanly. Bardic Inspiration dice for bards. Pact spell slots, invocations and pact items for warlocks. Smites for paladins. Sorcery points and metamagic. Rage. Etc.
Unless you're just going to copy features from existing classes, there's no simple yet clean way for you to homebrew one with its own unique feature(s) and have it just work on your character sheet. You'd either be limited to basically just writing up a description of the class with no actual mechanics available on your sheet (at which point, why bother using DDB for it?) or you'd have to essentially code the mechanics yourself alongside the description (and good luck with that working right and in a timely manner.)
Combine that with THEN allowing subclasses for the new class, likely with modifications and alternate uses of the class's unique new features, and it becomes such a complex undertaking that, IMO it isn't even remotely worth the investment. (The difficulty alone is probably why no UA classes will ever be implemented unless they become official; I'm honestly kinda surprised Blood Hunter made the cut.)
Everything I highlighted in pink is currently possible to implement for subclasses with the current Homebrew tools. The only exception is that we cannot get homebrewed invocations and pact boons to list with the standard ones, but they were created using the same Options system available in the homebrewer. And if we can make subraces, then we could make subclasses too, it should be no more complicated. All in all, it really shouldn’t be that complicated to allow us to make full classes with the same restrictions that we have when making subclasses, races or anything else we can make here on DDB.
I disagree. I've made a subclass for wizards, since they have the least amount of skills on level up and lowest proficiencies, for the UA mystic. It won't let me share it because it adds skills at incorrect levels and it thinks that some of the text is non english cuz i copy pasted from the UA pdf, but other than that, every part of it is doable.
With the tools that you have currently, you can make basically an entire class as a subclass. All they would be changing is the level at which you select it. Put in options for casting as a full, half, or third caster. Another option for dice based skills, like bardic inspiration or battle maneuvers. Invocations and Pact Items are already doable with the current tools. Pact spell slots are doable if you are make a blood hunter subclass, so the code exists for it already. Sorcery points and rages per day are already doable with the current tools. Smites are literally just an action.
Adding in the ability to do complete classes would EASY. For a team of people, a month should be more than enough time to add that functionality and test it. There's no excuse for it to not be available after almost 6 years.
I think my main point has been missed....
If all you want is a class that reuses features of existing classes, yes, that should be (somewhat) easy, but that's not going to add enough for most people to bother. ("So, you mixed Pact Magic and Smites into a new class rather than multiclassing or homebrewing a subclass. Ok, I guess?") The main differentiator of (official) classes is that each has at least one unique class feature that NONE of the other classes have.
So, yes, if you want to make, say, a new "Songminster" class that copies the concept of Bardic Inspiration, even if renamed, that's one thing.
If you want to literally create new class features, which is what most would expect with a new button labeled "Create a Class," that's something else entirely.
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? 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? 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? A new class, in concept, should be able to have practically ANY new feature you want, and I'm fairly certain 99% of the new features people will envision will not have appropriate code already in the system to display or implement the mechanics.
Hence, I only see three options:
(1) A watered-down "class creator" that just allows rearranging existing class features (at which point, multiclassing with homebrew subclasses already exists)
(2) A "full" class creator where the user has to essentially code all the mechanics of the class features himself in his class description (!)
(3) A "full" class creator where you submit a description of your new class features to DDB and wait for them to code it in-between everything else they're doing
The first option might thrill some players, but wouldn't have enough impact for DDB to consider over just pointing to/updating the subclass creator. The second option would be a pain to design, implement and maintain; would be too complicated for most users; and would likely be an error-prone security nightmare. The last just wouldn't work, for what I assume are obvious reasons.
If anyone can think of a fourth option for implementing a class creator, I'd be curious to hear it, but I just don't see a full class creator being feasible without an unreasonable amount of time and effort on the part of the users AND the site coders. (And adding to that, I'd like to gently point out that that despite all the work spent on it since BEFORE the book's release, we still have a sizable bug report list on new features from TCoE....)
Remember, DnD is a pen and paper game. You have a sheet that is just a description of what your character can do. You just need a tracker of some sort for things with limited uses. Your custom class abilities that you mentioned would be very easy to code. For the first one, it's simply a tracker, like you'd use for the number of charges left on an item. For the spell dancing thing, you can already add specific spells and limit the number of times they can be cast. Shouldn't be that difficult to make it a pool of castings, like you get with spell slots. For the final ability, you could make a magic item that would change your stats. Equip it and your stats change. They could very easily make that a new category tied to the class itself. Then add it to barbarians for their rage and casters for spells like Tenser's Transformation.
You're acting like it would be heavy coding to make anything unique, but the core of any of the abilities of the current classes is just a number of uses tracker of some sort.
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.
has anyone suggested the ability to favorite monsters, items, spells, etc, to make it easier to come back to later?
Everything I highlighted in pink is currently possible to implement for subclasses with the current Homebrew tools. The only exception is that we cannot get homebrewed invocations and pact boons to list with the standard ones, but they were created using the same Options system available in the homebrewer. And if we can make subraces, then we could make subclasses too, it should be no more complicated. All in all, it really shouldn’t be that complicated to allow us to make full classes with the same restrictions that we have when making subclasses, races or anything else we can make here on DDB.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Aren’t those pregens already available? If so, adding them to a campaign is already possible.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Character Archives/Folders
I've mentioned this before, but not in here. As a subscriber at the top tier, I pay for the ability to create unlimited characters. I hate deleting or destroying old characters, after a campaign whether on paper or digitally. It would be nice to have folders to be able to organize retired characters, or concept creations into. Or at very least an archive folder. Come on, DDB... This is an easy add and would really be appreciated by everyone I think!
I disagree. I've made a subclass for wizards, since they have the least amount of skills on level up and lowest proficiencies, for the UA mystic. It won't let me share it because it adds skills at incorrect levels and it thinks that some of the text is non english cuz i copy pasted from the UA pdf, but other than that, every part of it is doable.
With the tools that you have currently, you can make basically an entire class as a subclass. All they would be changing is the level at which you select it. Put in options for casting as a full, half, or third caster. Another option for dice based skills, like bardic inspiration or battle maneuvers. Invocations and Pact Items are already doable with the current tools. Pact spell slots are doable if you are make a blood hunter subclass, so the code exists for it already. Sorcery points and rages per day are already doable with the current tools. Smites are literally just an action.
Adding in the ability to do complete classes would EASY. For a team of people, a month should be more than enough time to add that functionality and test it. There's no excuse for it to not be available after almost 6 years.
So I went to the link and created an account, but cannot find anything about voting. There is a request section, but no button or anything relating to submitting a new one. I just want dark gifts to be added to DND Beyond. It was promised in 2021 and its been two years.
I'm new here, so maybe it is and I'm missing it, but here's my experience: I view my campaign, then I select "create unassigned premade character"--the starter set pre-generated characters do not come up as options.
You mean the pregens from Dragons of Stormwreck Isle? Did you purchase that adventure from this website? It isn’t free content.
Hunh. It looks like only the High Elf Wis, the Hill Dwarf Cleric, and the Lightfoot Halfling Rogue have been implemented, but not the Wood Elf Fighter nor the Human Paladin.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The high elf wizard, Hill dwarf cleric, and light foot handling rogue are actually from LMOP. The wizard at least has a different background than the DOSI one.
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
Oh bother. That explains it. I own the box set of DoSI, but not the digital version. (Rookie mistake on my part.)
So, if I bought the digital version, those pregenerated PCs should show up? Or are they absent even for people who own the digital version of DoSI?
I guess not. I haven’t bought it, but I have access to it through content sharing, and even in that campaign I cannot access the DoSI pregens. I thought they had been implemented, my bad. They should be fairly easy to recreate though.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I have an idea for a good quality of life feature for classes that prepare spells, such as Cleric and Wizard
The ability to create preset lists of prepared spells and switch between them. For instance, the spells a Wizard may prepare for the day are generally dependent on what they expect to be doing that day. What they may prepare for a day of exploring/investigating/rp'ing in a city will be different from when they are heading into a deep dungeon dive. It would be handy to have the ability to create and label preset lists of prepared spells like "city" or "sea voyage" that would allow players to not have to go through their spell list each time and select and unselect which spells they want to prepare manually.
These lists could also certainly be tweaked on a case by case basis when the player wants to alter or fine tune their general list of "combat" spells when needed, but being able to create a few personalized default lists for general use would make things easier.
Regarding the part I've highlighted in red - I would guess the difficulty lies in the fact that Subclasses, Monsters, Feats, Spells, etc. are all standalone things. Whereas each Class has to have at least one Subclass, and therefore they're need to tack Subclass creation onto the end of Class creation (as a mandatory part of Class creation), while also still allowing Subclass creation to be standalone.
It shouldn't be impossible, and I don't think it would even be particularly hard if they were starting from scratch (or, that "Homebrew Overhaul" they've apparently been talking about for years). But to do it now might be a little more difficult, depending on other factors.
I think my main point has been missed....
If all you want is a class that reuses features of existing classes, yes, that should be (somewhat) easy, but that's not going to add enough for most people to bother. ("So, you mixed Pact Magic and Smites into a new class rather than multiclassing or homebrewing a subclass. Ok, I guess?") The main differentiator of (official) classes is that each has at least one unique class feature that NONE of the other classes have.
So, yes, if you want to make, say, a new "Songminster" class that copies the concept of Bardic Inspiration, even if renamed, that's one thing.
If you want to literally create new class features, which is what most would expect with a new button labeled "Create a Class," that's something else entirely.
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? 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? 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? A new class, in concept, should be able to have practically ANY new feature you want, and I'm fairly certain 99% of the new features people will envision will not have appropriate code already in the system to display or implement the mechanics.
Hence, I only see three options:
(1) A watered-down "class creator" that just allows rearranging existing class features (at which point, multiclassing with homebrew subclasses already exists)
(2) A "full" class creator where the user has to essentially code all the mechanics of the class features himself in his class description (!)
(3) A "full" class creator where you submit a description of your new class features to DDB and wait for them to code it in-between everything else they're doing
The first option might thrill some players, but wouldn't have enough impact for DDB to consider over just pointing to/updating the subclass creator. The second option would be a pain to design, implement and maintain; would be too complicated for most users; and would likely be an error-prone security nightmare. The last just wouldn't work, for what I assume are obvious reasons.
If anyone can think of a fourth option for implementing a class creator, I'd be curious to hear it, but I just don't see a full class creator being feasible without an unreasonable amount of time and effort on the part of the users AND the site coders. (And adding to that, I'd like to gently point out that that despite all the work spent on it since BEFORE the book's release, we still have a sizable bug report list on new features from TCoE....)
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
OK this is a bit of a chaotic idea, but I must ask.
Homebrew Sourcebooks.
I.e. a Homebrew 'book' where we can craft lore and a setting and link existing homebrew in our collection or creations to tie into it. So if someone digs the setting we've been making, people can 'Add' the sourcebook to their collection, and get the related homebrew added automatically, instead of having to individuallytrack down each NPC, Subclass, Magic Item, Encounter, Monster, Feat, Spell, Etc, Etc.
Plus, it'd serve a way to be even more creative for those of us who like doing homebrew for the sake of lore or worldbuilding.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how difficult would this be?
Remember, DnD is a pen and paper game. You have a sheet that is just a description of what your character can do. You just need a tracker of some sort for things with limited uses. Your custom class abilities that you mentioned would be very easy to code. For the first one, it's simply a tracker, like you'd use for the number of charges left on an item. For the spell dancing thing, you can already add specific spells and limit the number of times they can be cast. Shouldn't be that difficult to make it a pool of castings, like you get with spell slots. For the final ability, you could make a magic item that would change your stats. Equip it and your stats change. They could very easily make that a new category tied to the class itself. Then add it to barbarians for their rage and casters for spells like Tenser's Transformation.
You're acting like it would be heavy coding to make anything unique, but the core of any of the abilities of the current classes is just a number of uses tracker of some sort.
If there is an option to make a class, I would really love that, and thank you in advance :).
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.
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.
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf