I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
when you arrive at that point, you are better off creating your own system instead. i realise the more i change 5e, the more i need to create whole new things. the more i need to create whole new things... the more i realise that 5e isn't worth continuing playing. d&d is one thing, but if you have to change over 50% of the system, then why use that system to begin with ? if you need to change classes in almost their entirety, then why are you even playing 5e ? just create your own system and at that point using beyond is pointless since you are not even using the system anymore. Fantasy ground alows you to create for yourself ad your campaign, and thus it would be better to use either Roll20 or Fantasy Ground which both allows you to create your own system.
just saying people... if you need homebrews that much, then maybe just maybe... your not playing the right system for your needs. for my part, i refuse to go below 75% of the system, if i go below that i will start thinking of another system. there is one thing i really hope though... the ability to homebrew the characters class features. ithere is tons of stuff i like about the current classes but i would like to just update them for better gameplay. i don't want to redo them all so yes, if we're talking about just exchanging core features for another choice option, then i'm all for it. if its to redo all classes your own way, then i think you should change the system instead of using 5e.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Feature Problem Solving Request : - Unassigning a character still keeps the character in that players total amount of character until someone actually claims the said character. exemple, a friend of mine had a character that it no longer wants, so he unclaimed it because he wants to keep it just in case something happens. but he has a maximum of 6 characters and even though that character has been unassigned, he still see it and it is still counted in his maximum 6 characters. and thus cannnot recreate another character. i had to claim his characters for him to leave that character gone, now i have also unclaimed the character, but now it is stuck in my character list.
is it possible to just leave a character in a campaign until someone claims it so that it isn't in anyones character list ? feels to me like this feature is useless since the goal was to remove a character from a players list from the get go, but now they are just stuck in characters list.
The purpose of the feature isn't to remove a character from a players list, but to allow other users to claim the character, allowing pre-made characters to be distributed within a campaign. If an unassigned character was removed from the last owners list, then that'd allow people to circumvent the six character limit on a free campaign. You would just need to make a character, add them to a campaign you've made, then unassign them. You can now soft-archive up to 99 (or maybe more because that limit is per user within a campaign) within your campaign.
Ultimately the feature is working as intended; people can share characters and the system always tracks a character against a user for determining character limits.
unfortunately, it isn't at all what was said by the devs back then when they introduced the feature, they said that within a campaign, up to 12 players could have a total of 99 characters. which isn't true considering that the players cannot create more then 6 each, so what was the purpose of that feature if not to allow one to create more in that space ? i understand that within a players account a maximum of 6 charcater is a thing, but in a campaign... they have already a use of my stuff, i share for them, i pay to get more... they don't want to because they have their reasons, reasons that beyond isn't helping, but i'm not getting into that.
i'm not asking for them to have unlimited character on their account... i'm just saying that if we want to fill those 99 characters. which within the same campaign, each players have up to 3 or 4 characters each. now they are left without a slot to create characters for play by post or things like that. i thought within a campaign we were allowed to make characters "that wouldn'T count toward the charcater limit." which is exactly what was said to be back when they introduced the thing. i understand full well why they put a limit on free accounts. 6 is a great number for sure... but in a campaign that someone pays for... that limit shouldn't be !
if you are asking me though, i think the dev couldn't remove the limit, after all characters have to be part of an account. and i think the feature wasn't executed as well as they hoped because of that limitation. but since nobody seemed to notice it, i think the dev decided to look the other way and just concentrate on something else instead. its obvious a character has to be part of a player account. the characters are definitely not in the campaign. so i think its stupid to have the unassign feature just a pass it to someone else feature. for now i'm doing just that anyway... they unassign it, then if they want to get a free slot they are contacting me and i claim the character and then unassign it again.
if anything, it is still already bypassing the system. so why not go all the way. but i understand if the chacters by the way the system works, i understand it has to be on a player account somewhere to be seen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
when you arrive at that point, you are better off creating your own system instead. i realise the more i change 5e, the more i need to create whole new things. the more i need to create whole new things... the more i realise that 5e isn't worth continuing playing. d&d is one thing, but if you have to change over 50% of the system, then why use that system to begin with ? if you need to change classes in almost their entirety, then why are you even playing 5e ? just create your own system and at that point using beyond is pointless since you are not even using the system anymore. Fantasy ground alows you to create for yourself ad your campaign, and thus it would be better to use either Roll20 or Fantasy Ground which both allows you to create your own system.
just saying people... if you need homebrews that much, then maybe just maybe... your not playing the right system for your needs. for my part, i refuse to go below 75% of the system, if i go below that i will start thinking of another system. there is one thing i really hope though... the ability to homebrew the characters class features. ithere is tons of stuff i like about the current classes but i would like to just update them for better gameplay. i don't want to redo them all so yes, if we're talking about just exchanging core features for another choice option, then i'm all for it. if its to redo all classes your own way, then i think you should change the system instead of using 5e.
EDIT: So, I responded somehow without reading the middle of your last paragraph. Apologies! No idea why/how that happened. Having done so; we are actually on mostly the same page of our wants. If that also allowed them to implement it better, faster, with fewer issues etc., what you propose would indeed serve my needs very nicely. If you are implementing it though, then I see no real reason given their current design, that they couldn't just make their current sub class system work but for the major classes, since they are already there, and, would give the greatest flexibility in what you could build.
That is an interesting take......but no. I am not looking at revamping 50% of the system. I want to tweak less than 10% of the system. Are they key tweaks, designed very specifically to replicate specific feels? Yes. Are they endlessly huge changes that I should just create a new system, from scratch, design said system to work with my VTT of choice, and just nuke the 90% of material I want to keep? That doesn't really make much sense.
Indeed, if I want to change the spell progression system of the say druid, to be in line with wizard, note that the wizard is already a system mechanic in the 5E system. My real question here, is, why do you care what I want to do in my game, for my players? Obviously they like the feel of my games, or I wouldn't still be a DM. I would imagine more choices can only be better. If it's a matter that you just don't want them to "waste" their time in lieu of other things, I imagine, there are changes I probably wouldn't personally care about, that you want. I am, however, not going to go out of my way to advocate: "Your wants are without value, get out of my game, and go make your own. Also, I don't want your money to help support this company whose forum I am on, who is specifically asking for things paying customers want, because I don't see the value for what you are asking." I am not quite sure where you are coming from with this.
In point of fact, I have designed my own system, and you know what I love about 5E? How very robust the bounded system really is, and how popular the mechanics really are. There are weaknesses at the top end, but there are always going to be trade offs depending on what you want to get done in the design. All in all, though, it also got me to get on the "request" page, under support, to add my voice to the things I want. Something that stands out to me is that it isn't at the top of the list of things people want, but it does have a significant request rate, which is interesting.
I noticed that a lot of interesting magical items like the sword of zariel, moonblade, etc, have minor and major properties (actually, the theros book is full of them lol), but one issue with dndbeyond is that the items aren't actually integrated properly into character sheets. (I can't select minor and major properties within the items to apply to my character based on items equipped). Is there any way that these items can be integrated properly, so that i can make the most out of unique magic items in the sourcebooks of the site? Thanks.
I noticed that a lot of interesting magical items like the sword of zariel, moonblade, etc, have minor and major properties (actually, the theros book is full of them lol), but one issue with dndbeyond is that the items aren't actually integrated properly into character sheets. (I can't select minor and major properties within the items to apply to my character based on items equipped). Is there any way that these items can be integrated properly, so that i can make the most out of unique magic items in the sourcebooks of the site? Thanks.
At this point, the best you can do is note those properties in the notes section for the item once you add it to a sheet. That or make homebrew copies of those items and make the changes there.
Can we get a feature to archive characters? I have a bunch I don't want to delete, but I don't use regularly so it would be nice to put them in a folder
Can we get a feature to archive characters? I have a bunch I don't want to delete, but I don't use regularly so it would be nice to put them in a folder
If you archive them, they still take up space in DDB's servers and they still have to maintain them. So they still count towards your limit. You can, however, print to PDF, save it yourself and delete the character. Then, rebuild it if you want it again.
I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
when you arrive at that point, you are better off creating your own system instead. i realise the more i change 5e, the more i need to create whole new things. the more i need to create whole new things... the more i realise that 5e isn't worth continuing playing. d&d is one thing, but if you have to change over 50% of the system, then why use that system to begin with ? if you need to change classes in almost their entirety, then why are you even playing 5e ? just create your own system and at that point using beyond is pointless since you are not even using the system anymore. Fantasy ground alows you to create for yourself ad your campaign, and thus it would be better to use either Roll20 or Fantasy Ground which both allows you to create your own system.
just saying people... if you need homebrews that much, then maybe just maybe... your not playing the right system for your needs. for my part, i refuse to go below 75% of the system, if i go below that i will start thinking of another system. there is one thing i really hope though... the ability to homebrew the characters class features. ithere is tons of stuff i like about the current classes but i would like to just update them for better gameplay. i don't want to redo them all so yes, if we're talking about just exchanging core features for another choice option, then i'm all for it. if its to redo all classes your own way, then i think you should change the system instead of using 5e.
EDIT: So, I responded somehow without reading the middle of your last paragraph. Apologies! No idea why/how that happened. Having done so; we are actually on mostly the same page of our wants. If that also allowed them to implement it better, faster, with fewer issues etc., what you propose would indeed serve my needs very nicely. If you are implementing it though, then I see no real reason given their current design, that they couldn't just make their current sub class system work but for the major classes, since they are already there, and, would give the greatest flexibility in what you could build.
That is an interesting take......but no. I am not looking at revamping 50% of the system. I want to tweak less than 10% of the system. Are they key tweaks, designed very specifically to replicate specific feels? Yes. Are they endlessly huge changes that I should just create a new system, from scratch, design said system to work with my VTT of choice, and just nuke the 90% of material I want to keep? That doesn't really make much sense.
Indeed, if I want to change the spell progression system of the say druid, to be in line with wizard, note that the wizard is already a system mechanic in the 5E system. My real question here, is, why do you care what I want to do in my game, for my players? Obviously they like the feel of my games, or I wouldn't still be a DM. I would imagine more choices can only be better. If it's a matter that you just don't want them to "waste" their time in lieu of other things, I imagine, there are changes I probably wouldn't personally care about, that you want. I am, however, not going to go out of my way to advocate: "Your wants are without value, get out of my game, and go make your own. Also, I don't want your money to help support this company whose forum I am on, who is specifically asking for things paying customers want, because I don't see the value for what you are asking." I am not quite sure where you are coming from with this.
In point of fact, I have designed my own system, and you know what I love about 5E? How very robust the bounded system really is, and how popular the mechanics really are. There are weaknesses at the top end, but there are always going to be trade offs depending on what you want to get done in the design. All in all, though, it also got me to get on the "request" page, under support, to add my voice to the things I want. Something that stands out to me is that it isn't at the top of the list of things people want, but it does have a significant request rate, which is interesting.
never said anything about your playstyle. you play how you want. the only thing i said, is that i find it whack to want to change much of the classes or create classes that just overshot the new ones. all classes i ever wanted to create fell short class wise, they all ended up being great archetypes of the core classes though. what i figured is that everyone who wants to homebrew full on classes, just want 3E classes to be back. but the biggest problem 3E had class wise, was that the core classes were literally useless compared to what other prestige classes were doing. the goal of 5E was to keep the core classes separate, and anythign else that comes out of classes would go into archetypes, which are literally what prestige classes should of been from the get go. my friend wanted me to redo the whole shaman class... i said what you wanna be ? shaman is pretty broad. she said barbarian. and thus i set myself up to create a shaman barbarian style class. so yeah, my shaman is now a barbarian sub class that enable the barbarian to cast spells. and looking at the actual 3E shaman, i can literally cram every core feature of that class in an archetype. literally no need to make a full class out of it. the same hapenned by my friend who wanted to create his own artificer, overwatch ana style. again after much deliberation, we end up with just a wizard with archetype feature that just solves the thing.
my only concern with people wanting to create full on classes, is that they just don't want to wait leveling up. they just wanna do 3E style full on multiclass every levels and gains everything right from the get go. i don't think full on classes are a necessity. look at matt mercer blood hunter class... everything in that class could easily fit into a fighter sub class... in fact i think his sub class is literally sub par compared to the core classes. i preffe the actual 5E approach of having talent trees instead of just having classes stack upon themselves.
all that said... no there is not a big demand... forums have always only represented about 10% of the voices total. full on classes is not as much on demand as people think they are. but there is one type of person who wants those at all cost though... those who buy a lot of stuff on DMsGuild and there are so much "new" classes over there and people just want to redo those here so they can play them here. the people on dmsguild do not care about balance, they do not care about anything else then the money they will do from that new class. best exemple of the brawler who literally is just a monk archetype yet they made it full class with video game mechanics and yet everyone jumps on that class.
overall... reality is, not that much people are into full on homebrew classes... and forum barely represent anything per say when it comes to community. there are other features that were voted upon that were asked much more then full on classes. the voting feature they implemented is literal proof that not so much people want homebrew classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
when you arrive at that point, you are better off creating your own system instead. i realise the more i change 5e, the more i need to create whole new things. the more i need to create whole new things... the more i realise that 5e isn't worth continuing playing. d&d is one thing, but if you have to change over 50% of the system, then why use that system to begin with ? if you need to change classes in almost their entirety, then why are you even playing 5e ? just create your own system and at that point using beyond is pointless since you are not even using the system anymore. Fantasy ground alows you to create for yourself ad your campaign, and thus it would be better to use either Roll20 or Fantasy Ground which both allows you to create your own system.
just saying people... if you need homebrews that much, then maybe just maybe... your not playing the right system for your needs. for my part, i refuse to go below 75% of the system, if i go below that i will start thinking of another system. there is one thing i really hope though... the ability to homebrew the characters class features. ithere is tons of stuff i like about the current classes but i would like to just update them for better gameplay. i don't want to redo them all so yes, if we're talking about just exchanging core features for another choice option, then i'm all for it. if its to redo all classes your own way, then i think you should change the system instead of using 5e.
EDIT: So, I responded somehow without reading the middle of your last paragraph. Apologies! No idea why/how that happened. Having done so; we are actually on mostly the same page of our wants. If that also allowed them to implement it better, faster, with fewer issues etc., what you propose would indeed serve my needs very nicely. If you are implementing it though, then I see no real reason given their current design, that they couldn't just make their current sub class system work but for the major classes, since they are already there, and, would give the greatest flexibility in what you could build.
That is an interesting take......but no. I am not looking at revamping 50% of the system. I want to tweak less than 10% of the system. Are they key tweaks, designed very specifically to replicate specific feels? Yes. Are they endlessly huge changes that I should just create a new system, from scratch, design said system to work with my VTT of choice, and just nuke the 90% of material I want to keep? That doesn't really make much sense.
Indeed, if I want to change the spell progression system of the say druid, to be in line with wizard, note that the wizard is already a system mechanic in the 5E system. My real question here, is, why do you care what I want to do in my game, for my players? Obviously they like the feel of my games, or I wouldn't still be a DM. I would imagine more choices can only be better. If it's a matter that you just don't want them to "waste" their time in lieu of other things, I imagine, there are changes I probably wouldn't personally care about, that you want. I am, however, not going to go out of my way to advocate: "Your wants are without value, get out of my game, and go make your own. Also, I don't want your money to help support this company whose forum I am on, who is specifically asking for things paying customers want, because I don't see the value for what you are asking." I am not quite sure where you are coming from with this.
In point of fact, I have designed my own system, and you know what I love about 5E? How very robust the bounded system really is, and how popular the mechanics really are. There are weaknesses at the top end, but there are always going to be trade offs depending on what you want to get done in the design. All in all, though, it also got me to get on the "request" page, under support, to add my voice to the things I want. Something that stands out to me is that it isn't at the top of the list of things people want, but it does have a significant request rate, which is interesting.
never said anything about your playstyle. you play how you want. the only thing i said, is that i find it whack to want to change much of the classes or create classes that just overshot the new ones. all classes i ever wanted to create fell short class wise, they all ended up being great archetypes of the core classes though. what i figured is that everyone who wants to homebrew full on classes, just want 3E classes to be back. but the biggest problem 3E had class wise, was that the core classes were literally useless compared to what other prestige classes were doing. the goal of 5E was to keep the core classes separate, and anythign else that comes out of classes would go into archetypes, which are literally what prestige classes should of been from the get go. my friend wanted me to redo the whole shaman class... i said what you wanna be ? shaman is pretty broad. she said barbarian. and thus i set myself up to create a shaman barbarian style class. so yeah, my shaman is now a barbarian sub class that enable the barbarian to cast spells. and looking at the actual 3E shaman, i can literally cram every core feature of that class in an archetype. literally no need to make a full class out of it. the same hapenned by my friend who wanted to create his own artificer, overwatch ana style. again after much deliberation, we end up with just a wizard with archetype feature that just solves the thing.
my only concern with people wanting to create full on classes, is that they just don't want to wait leveling up. they just wanna do 3E style full on multiclass every levels and gains everything right from the get go. i don't think full on classes are a necessity. look at matt mercer blood hunter class... everything in that class could easily fit into a fighter sub class... in fact i think his sub class is literally sub par compared to the core classes. i preffe the actual 5E approach of having talent trees instead of just having classes stack upon themselves.
all that said... no there is not a big demand... forums have always only represented about 10% of the voices total. full on classes is not as much on demand as people think they are. but there is one type of person who wants those at all cost though... those who buy a lot of stuff on DMsGuild and there are so much "new" classes over there and people just want to redo those here so they can play them here. the people on dmsguild do not care about balance, they do not care about anything else then the money they will do from that new class. best exemple of the brawler who literally is just a monk archetype yet they made it full class with video game mechanics and yet everyone jumps on that class.
overall... reality is, not that much people are into full on homebrew classes... and forum barely represent anything per say when it comes to community. there are other features that were voted upon that were asked much more then full on classes. the voting feature they implemented is literal proof that not so much people want homebrew classes.
Hi! I am not sure how most of this applies to much of what I said, but, how do you decide what constitutes a "big demand"? Looking at the vote a feature, they are not mutually exclusive, and while it is true that there are half of the people who wanted this feature, compared to the highest voted, that is nowhere near the bottom. If you are simply saying that 100,000 voted, and only a 100 people voted that they wanted that, than, sure. That would mean very few people requested it. I feel sure that is not the case, though I do accept that it is nowhere near 100k of 100k who want it either. Easy peesey. That said, even if it only was 100 people out of 100k people voting wanted, why argue against it? It will just get drowned out by sheer weight of votes and never see the light of day regardless.
So, it kinda mostly sounds like you are trying to convince yourself/other people to "drop it" because you personally don't want it. If it really isn't wanted, it won't exist, since "almost no one wants it". If it is wanted, then telling me that my opinion is invalid isn't going to prevent it.
As for wanting early leveling or whatever, I just want to create a slightly different feel, see my above posts that in my campaign all character classes learn magic through study, so basically the way wizards learn and prepare their magic. There are pros and cons to this approach, but, I don't think anyone is going to claim this change is to create min/maxed characters, and I don't use DMS guild classes at all, so I have no opinion on them, for good or ill.
I think based on your previous message, that we are probably more in alignment than you are currently perceiving, and while I really just want to change out some base class feature (tweak them), I don't see any reason why they can't, at the same time, implement a base class creation system. Though, if they were only able to implement that, that would suit me fine, ultimately.
If your overall concern is balance, I have to ask again, why do you care>? There is a TON of stuff in the homebrew sections that I wouldn't allow in my games already. I dunno that base class creation is really gonna change much. There are OP backgrounds, OP subclasses, OP races, and OP magic items. Haven't looked too hard at the monster creator, either as it isn't something I need. Heck, I have zero interest in D&D Beyond putting together a VTT, as I already have one I really like, and the likelihood that they will be able to make a more streamlined AND more powerful one is very, very unlikely. But you know what? I am not on here telling people they shouldn't want it, and trying to convince them to stop asking for it. Heck, one of the things not even marked as "planned" is rollable DMG content, and I could totes see a use for that. I would have a use for that. That said, I want to edit the base class features more than any of those other features, except maybe more robust API features. But that's fine. It will get implemented as fast as makes sense in regards to difficulty, and demand.
In short, I don't really get your resistance to this feature, if you don't like what someone did, don't use it. And base class homebrew isn't going to make or break the power gamers. Just don't allow their nonsense in your games. Easy Peesey.
I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
when you arrive at that point, you are better off creating your own system instead. i realise the more i change 5e, the more i need to create whole new things. the more i need to create whole new things... the more i realise that 5e isn't worth continuing playing. d&d is one thing, but if you have to change over 50% of the system, then why use that system to begin with ? if you need to change classes in almost their entirety, then why are you even playing 5e ? just create your own system and at that point using beyond is pointless since you are not even using the system anymore. Fantasy ground alows you to create for yourself ad your campaign, and thus it would be better to use either Roll20 or Fantasy Ground which both allows you to create your own system.
just saying people... if you need homebrews that much, then maybe just maybe... your not playing the right system for your needs. for my part, i refuse to go below 75% of the system, if i go below that i will start thinking of another system. there is one thing i really hope though... the ability to homebrew the characters class features. ithere is tons of stuff i like about the current classes but i would like to just update them for better gameplay. i don't want to redo them all so yes, if we're talking about just exchanging core features for another choice option, then i'm all for it. if its to redo all classes your own way, then i think you should change the system instead of using 5e.
EDIT: So, I responded somehow without reading the middle of your last paragraph. Apologies! No idea why/how that happened. Having done so; we are actually on mostly the same page of our wants. If that also allowed them to implement it better, faster, with fewer issues etc., what you propose would indeed serve my needs very nicely. If you are implementing it though, then I see no real reason given their current design, that they couldn't just make their current sub class system work but for the major classes, since they are already there, and, would give the greatest flexibility in what you could build.
That is an interesting take......but no. I am not looking at revamping 50% of the system. I want to tweak less than 10% of the system. Are they key tweaks, designed very specifically to replicate specific feels? Yes. Are they endlessly huge changes that I should just create a new system, from scratch, design said system to work with my VTT of choice, and just nuke the 90% of material I want to keep? That doesn't really make much sense.
Indeed, if I want to change the spell progression system of the say druid, to be in line with wizard, note that the wizard is already a system mechanic in the 5E system. My real question here, is, why do you care what I want to do in my game, for my players? Obviously they like the feel of my games, or I wouldn't still be a DM. I would imagine more choices can only be better. If it's a matter that you just don't want them to "waste" their time in lieu of other things, I imagine, there are changes I probably wouldn't personally care about, that you want. I am, however, not going to go out of my way to advocate: "Your wants are without value, get out of my game, and go make your own. Also, I don't want your money to help support this company whose forum I am on, who is specifically asking for things paying customers want, because I don't see the value for what you are asking." I am not quite sure where you are coming from with this.
In point of fact, I have designed my own system, and you know what I love about 5E? How very robust the bounded system really is, and how popular the mechanics really are. There are weaknesses at the top end, but there are always going to be trade offs depending on what you want to get done in the design. All in all, though, it also got me to get on the "request" page, under support, to add my voice to the things I want. Something that stands out to me is that it isn't at the top of the list of things people want, but it does have a significant request rate, which is interesting.
never said anything about your playstyle. you play how you want. the only thing i said, is that i find it whack to want to change much of the classes or create classes that just overshot the new ones. all classes i ever wanted to create fell short class wise, they all ended up being great archetypes of the core classes though. what i figured is that everyone who wants to homebrew full on classes, just want 3E classes to be back. but the biggest problem 3E had class wise, was that the core classes were literally useless compared to what other prestige classes were doing. the goal of 5E was to keep the core classes separate, and anythign else that comes out of classes would go into archetypes, which are literally what prestige classes should of been from the get go. my friend wanted me to redo the whole shaman class... i said what you wanna be ? shaman is pretty broad. she said barbarian. and thus i set myself up to create a shaman barbarian style class. so yeah, my shaman is now a barbarian sub class that enable the barbarian to cast spells. and looking at the actual 3E shaman, i can literally cram every core feature of that class in an archetype. literally no need to make a full class out of it. the same hapenned by my friend who wanted to create his own artificer, overwatch ana style. again after much deliberation, we end up with just a wizard with archetype feature that just solves the thing.
my only concern with people wanting to create full on classes, is that they just don't want to wait leveling up. they just wanna do 3E style full on multiclass every levels and gains everything right from the get go. i don't think full on classes are a necessity. look at matt mercer blood hunter class... everything in that class could easily fit into a fighter sub class... in fact i think his sub class is literally sub par compared to the core classes. i preffe the actual 5E approach of having talent trees instead of just having classes stack upon themselves.
all that said... no there is not a big demand... forums have always only represented about 10% of the voices total. full on classes is not as much on demand as people think they are. but there is one type of person who wants those at all cost though... those who buy a lot of stuff on DMsGuild and there are so much "new" classes over there and people just want to redo those here so they can play them here. the people on dmsguild do not care about balance, they do not care about anything else then the money they will do from that new class. best exemple of the brawler who literally is just a monk archetype yet they made it full class with video game mechanics and yet everyone jumps on that class.
overall... reality is, not that much people are into full on homebrew classes... and forum barely represent anything per say when it comes to community. there are other features that were voted upon that were asked much more then full on classes. the voting feature they implemented is literal proof that not so much people want homebrew classes.
Also... the beyond crew, at some point, don't remember when but i think it was in one of the dev update a year or two ago, said the demand for that was very low, contrary to what forum people are trying to claim. i would believe they have the ressources to know if a feature is actually in demand or not.
i'll also add something about forums... the forum i was admin at, had over 500,000 users but only about 10,000 accounts were active at all. so yeah when we were seeing things like, voting... about only 10$ of the votes ever came from the forum, the remaining 90% came from out of nowhere we had no way to know where they came from... so yeah forums aren'T as active as you think they are. they seem active, but if you ask the beyond team, i'm pretty sure they'll tell you that the active accounts versus the actual registered accounts numbers, are pretty low.Hi! I am not sure how most of this applies to much of what I said, but, how do you decide what constitutes a "big demand"? Looking at the vote a feature, they are not mutually exclusive, and while it is true that there are half of the people who wanted this feature, compared to the highest voted, that is nowhere near the bottom. If you are simply saying that 100,000 voted, and only a 100 people voted that they wanted that, than, sure. That would mean very few people requested it. I feel sure that is not the case, though I do accept that it is nowhere near 100k of 100k who want it either. Easy peesey. That said, even if it only was 100 people out of 100k people voting wanted, why argue against it? It will just get drowned out by sheer weight of votes and never see the light of day regardless.
So, it kinda mostly sounds like you are trying to convince yourself/other people to "drop it" because you personally don't want it. If it really isn't wanted, it won't exist, since "almost no one wants it". If it is wanted, then telling me that my opinion is invalid isn't going to prevent it.
As for wanting early leveling or whatever, I just want to create a slightly different feel, see my above posts that in my campaign all character classes learn magic through study, so basically the way wizards learn and prepare their magic. There are pros and cons to this approach, but, I don't think anyone is going to claim this change is to create min/maxed characters, and I don't use DMS guild classes at all, so I have no opinion on them, for good or ill.
I think based on your previous message, that we are probably more in alignment than you are currently perceiving, and while I really just want to change out some base class feature (tweak them), I don't see any reason why they can't, at the same time, implement a base class creation system. Though, if they were only able to implement that, that would suit me fine, ultimately.
If your overall concern is balance, I have to ask again, why do you care>? There is a TON of stuff in the homebrew sections that I wouldn't allow in my games already. I dunno that base class creation is really gonna change much. There are OP backgrounds, OP subclasses, OP races, and OP magic items. Haven't looked too hard at the monster creator, either as it isn't something I need. Heck, I have zero interest in D&D Beyond putting together a VTT, as I already have one I really like, and the likelihood that they will be able to make a more streamlined AND more powerful one is very, very unlikely. But you know what? I am not on here telling people they shouldn't want it, and trying to convince them to stop asking for it. Heck, one of the things not even marked as "planned" is rollable DMG content, and I could totes see a use for that. I would have a use for that. That said, I want to edit the base class features more than any of those other features, except maybe more robust API features. But that's fine. It will get implemented as fast as makes sense in regards to difficulty, and demand.
In short, I don't really get your resistance to this feature, if you don't like what someone did, don't use it. And base class homebrew isn't going to make or break the power gamers. Just don't allow their nonsense in your games. Easy Peesey.
i'm not resistant to this feature, like at all, i use whats on beyond, if it gets done i will use it. but unlike you and a lot of other people who i have seen by their post trying to convince others to vote for it in order for it to pick up pace. i'm not actively asking for it, nor am i actively denying it. bt i do like to respond to people in spades when they try to pick an idea that was discussed over and over everywhere including in the dev updates by the beyond team and them telling people that its not gonna come anytime soon and that while they don't say no to it, it probably will never be high on their to do list.
all i'm saying... you are fighting a losing battle there.
proof that i will use it if it gets done in the next 5 months... my next campaign will have a player not able to use beyoind because he will make a new class that i really like how he does. he's literally passed a complete year now working on it. it seems awesome, but he will be forced to go back and it would be really great if we could put his build on the site.
but you won't see me try to convince beyond team to make that feature because i need it, cause i really don't. we will just use other ways to do it. plus the fact that the dev team said it themselves... full homebrew class will eventualy be a thing... but its way down on their list.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
just saying, after looking at the feature request voting and all... the feature itself is like top 7. and its been in planning stage for the last 2 years. in the top 3, homebrew mundane equipment like "create your own armor" or "create your own weapon" is like top 3 and is not even in the planning stage. also badeye said back then that they talked about it a lot... roughly said, if you expect to do all the wild things out there, then the answer is no... but if you intend to use other core class features and modifiers of other base class, then you could get by and do your homebrew class. but his answer on the subject of creating literally your own class and hoping it works as intended on beyond.... its way too wild to start considering what everyone will want in the class.
in a way you already see this with magic items and sub classes, a lot of the items do not work on beyond and a lot of classes are just text and mechanics aren't working. that's why i seem to dislike the idea, its not because i dislike it, its because i understand what you guys are asking the dev, and i know by experience and by whats already ont he site that what you are asking will definitely not work the way you have in mind. this is something that would require a complete overhaul of the website and how it manages its characters. that's what i think.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Feature Problem Solving Request : - Unassigning a character still keeps the character in that players total amount of character until someone actually claims the said character. exemple, a friend of mine had a character that it no longer wants, so he unclaimed it because he wants to keep it just in case something happens. but he has a maximum of 6 characters and even though that character has been unassigned, he still see it and it is still counted in his maximum 6 characters. and thus cannnot recreate another character. i had to claim his characters for him to leave that character gone, now i have also unclaimed the character, but now it is stuck in my character list.
is it possible to just leave a character in a campaign until someone claims it so that it isn't in anyones character list ? feels to me like this feature is useless since the goal was to remove a character from a players list from the get go, but now they are just stuck in characters list.
The purpose of the feature isn't to remove a character from a players list, but to allow other users to claim the character, allowing pre-made characters to be distributed within a campaign. If an unassigned character was removed from the last owners list, then that'd allow people to circumvent the six character limit on a free campaign. You would just need to make a character, add them to a campaign you've made, then unassign them. You can now soft-archive up to 99 (or maybe more because that limit is per user within a campaign) within your campaign.
Ultimately the feature is working as intended; people can share characters and the system always tracks a character against a user for determining character limits.
unfortunately, it isn't at all what was said by the devs back then when they introduced the feature, they said that within a campaign, up to 12 players could have a total of 99 characters. which isn't true considering that the players cannot create more then 6 each, so what was the purpose of that feature if not to allow one to create more in that space ? i understand that within a players account a maximum of 6 charcater is a thing, but in a campaign... they have already a use of my stuff, i share for them, i pay to get more... they don't want to because they have their reasons, reasons that beyond isn't helping, but i'm not getting into that.
i'm not asking for them to have unlimited character on their account... i'm just saying that if we want to fill those 99 characters. which within the same campaign, each players have up to 3 or 4 characters each. now they are left without a slot to create characters for play by post or things like that. i thought within a campaign we were allowed to make characters "that wouldn'T count toward the charcater limit." which is exactly what was said to be back when they introduced the thing. i understand full well why they put a limit on free accounts. 6 is a great number for sure... but in a campaign that someone pays for... that limit shouldn't be !
if you are asking me though, i think the dev couldn't remove the limit, after all characters have to be part of an account. and i think the feature wasn't executed as well as they hoped because of that limitation. but since nobody seemed to notice it, i think the dev decided to look the other way and just concentrate on something else instead. its obvious a character has to be part of a player account. the characters are definitely not in the campaign. so i think its stupid to have the unassign feature just a pass it to someone else feature. for now i'm doing just that anyway... they unassign it, then if they want to get a free slot they are contacting me and i claim the character and then unassign it again.
if anything, it is still already bypassing the system. so why not go all the way. but i understand if the chacters by the way the system works, i understand it has to be on a player account somewhere to be seen.
I'm afraid you're incorrect, the function of unassigning characters has always been to allow players and DM within a campaign to make characters for each other, and not for freeing up space. As for the 12 players with 99 characters each, that's possible with a hero tier subscription and was made possible with the update from 12 characters per campaign to 12 players per campaign, the goal being to allow players to get more value from content sharing.
Characters within campaigns have always counted towards character limits on associated accounts and that's always been the intent. Remember that campaigns don't require any form of subscription or content purchase; you can set up a campaign with a free account and invite just free accounts to use it.
just saying, after looking at the feature request voting and all... the feature itself is like top 7. and its been in planning stage for the last 2 years. in the top 3, homebrew mundane equipment like "create your own armor" or "create your own weapon" is like top 3 and is not even in the planning stage. also badeye said back then that they talked about it a lot... roughly said, if you expect to do all the wild things out there, then the answer is no... but if you intend to use other core class features and modifiers of other base class, then you could get by and do your homebrew class. but his answer on the subject of creating literally your own class and hoping it works as intended on beyond.... its way too wild to start considering what everyone will want in the class.
in a way you already see this with magic items and sub classes, a lot of the items do not work on beyond and a lot of classes are just text and mechanics aren't working. that's why i seem to dislike the idea, its not because i dislike it, its because i understand what you guys are asking the dev, and i know by experience and by whats already ont he site that what you are asking will definitely not work the way you have in mind. this is something that would require a complete overhaul of the website and how it manages its characters. that's what i think.
Your meaning has mostly not carried well over most of your posts, but sure. That said, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I responded to your posts quoting me, and I added my voice to the "this is something I would like to see" to the thread where D&D Beyond team has specifically asked for it. As for your illustrious history, you are correct. I do not have have it. I have been earnestly using D&D Beyond for 3 maybe months? And, only posting in the last few weeks. So, yes. I lack your history. That said, if your intent is to share your knowledge of history, and inform me of the facts of what has come before, you were using the wrong phrasing to get across exactly what you mean. Your most used direction has been to convince the person asking for it why they don't need it.....If we are both using it as advertised, to let our players make their characters for our various campaigns, than, in point of fact, both of us need it, and for the same reasons: to tweak the base classes in the way we need to run our campaign. Yes, I can get by without. I can also get by without giving D&D Beyond any money whatsoever. I don't need them at all, if that was the attitude they actually presented. They are providing a value added service, if they didn't, I would take my very limited resources elsewhere. If they are able to continue adding to that value, so that I would continue using them, even when my circumstances change, to my mind it's best to let them know what those value added things may be.
In any case, I dunno how these exchanges have left you, but I feel no rancor about any of our back and forths. I simply disagree with most of the arguments 'against' it that you have presented. But, if you really are mostly just trying to share: "Hey, this is an often requested feature, and the team has said they would only be able to implement it to use class feature that already exist to tweak things, it is in the planning stage, and has been for two years because it is a complicated thing to add with no way of knowing when it will be added". Then awesome, thank you for letting me know =)
i love discusion and never have i considered this anything else. thats where i stand... but as i said... i don't need it, if its there i'll be using it, if it never comes then i will just not do anything about it. all i was saying. but i also like to answer the said question by quoting and saying what was said about it. that's all i was doing, not trying to convince you of anything. but just saying, even if you do ask about it... chances are it won't happen. in its current state it just won't happen. its an aweful answer, i know... but just like many a feature that was asked for the last 3 years, its either in planning stage which means anything from "we just discussed it in our office and nothing has been done yet." to ""its about to come out but its not official yet." anything in between is your guess as much as mine. but yeah... tons of features are in the planning stage and have been for at least 2 or 3 years now. so who knows.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
i love discusion and never have i considered this anything else. thats where i stand... but as i said... i don't need it, if its there i'll be using it, if it never comes then i will just not do anything about it. all i was saying. but i also like to answer the said question by quoting and saying what was said about it. that's all i was doing, not trying to convince you of anything. but just saying, even if you do ask about it... chances are it won't happen. in its current state it just won't happen. its an aweful answer, i know... but just like many a feature that was asked for the last 3 years, its either in planning stage which means anything from "we just discussed it in our office and nothing has been done yet." to ""its about to come out but its not official yet." anything in between is your guess as much as mine. but yeah... tons of features are in the planning stage and have been for at least 2 or 3 years now. so who knows.
Thanks! I added my vote to that site previously, which is where I was getting my own data. That first link though I really appreciate, as I have not looked there at all, and wasn't aware that was a thing.
Can we get a feature to archive characters? I have a bunch I don't want to delete, but I don't use regularly so it would be nice to put them in a folder
If you archive them, they still take up space in DDB's servers and they still have to maintain them. So they still count towards your limit. You can, however, print to PDF, save it yourself and delete the character. Then, rebuild it if you want it again.
Yeah, I don’t have a limit to how many I can make so that’s not really an issue to me. I just want to keep them on D&D Beyond for when I do use them, but in a different spot. I know I can export them to PDF and if that was the feature I wanted I’d have done it already.
Can we get a feature to archive characters? I have a bunch I don't want to delete, but I don't use regularly so it would be nice to put them in a folder
If you archive them, they still take up space in DDB's servers and they still have to maintain them. So they still count towards your limit. You can, however, print to PDF, save it yourself and delete the character. Then, rebuild it if you want it again.
Yeah, I don’t have a limit to how many I can make so that’s not really an issue to me. I just want to keep them on D&D Beyond for when I do use them, but in a different spot. I know I can export them to PDF and if that was the feature I wanted I’d have done it already.
Then my only other suggestion is you fork Beyond Help and fix the foldering issues.
I have come full circle, and now really miss the ability to use the Home Brew feature to make whole classes. I have a lot of house rules, and it would be so much easier to implement if I didn't have to go separately track the changes to some of the classes. For example, every caster is treated as hermetic study, trained in various temples in their use of magic. It is a pain to keep track of "learned" spells, as everyone essentially uses the wizards spell system for learning spells. It would be really nice to just take the Druid class, change that one major feature, and update my other changes to the class at the same time. Instead of having to go back, and edit it after the fact.
when you arrive at that point, you are better off creating your own system instead.
i realise the more i change 5e, the more i need to create whole new things. the more i need to create whole new things... the more i realise that 5e isn't worth continuing playing.
d&d is one thing, but if you have to change over 50% of the system, then why use that system to begin with ?
if you need to change classes in almost their entirety, then why are you even playing 5e ? just create your own system and at that point using beyond is pointless since you are not even using the system anymore. Fantasy ground alows you to create for yourself ad your campaign, and thus it would be better to use either Roll20 or Fantasy Ground which both allows you to create your own system.
just saying people... if you need homebrews that much, then maybe just maybe... your not playing the right system for your needs.
for my part, i refuse to go below 75% of the system, if i go below that i will start thinking of another system. there is one thing i really hope though... the ability to homebrew the characters class features. ithere is tons of stuff i like about the current classes but i would like to just update them for better gameplay. i don't want to redo them all so yes, if we're talking about just exchanging core features for another choice option, then i'm all for it. if its to redo all classes your own way, then i think you should change the system instead of using 5e.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
unfortunately, it isn't at all what was said by the devs back then when they introduced the feature, they said that within a campaign, up to 12 players could have a total of 99 characters. which isn't true considering that the players cannot create more then 6 each, so what was the purpose of that feature if not to allow one to create more in that space ? i understand that within a players account a maximum of 6 charcater is a thing, but in a campaign... they have already a use of my stuff, i share for them, i pay to get more... they don't want to because they have their reasons, reasons that beyond isn't helping, but i'm not getting into that.
i'm not asking for them to have unlimited character on their account... i'm just saying that if we want to fill those 99 characters. which within the same campaign, each players have up to 3 or 4 characters each. now they are left without a slot to create characters for play by post or things like that. i thought within a campaign we were allowed to make characters "that wouldn'T count toward the charcater limit." which is exactly what was said to be back when they introduced the thing. i understand full well why they put a limit on free accounts. 6 is a great number for sure... but in a campaign that someone pays for... that limit shouldn't be !
if you are asking me though, i think the dev couldn't remove the limit, after all characters have to be part of an account. and i think the feature wasn't executed as well as they hoped because of that limitation. but since nobody seemed to notice it, i think the dev decided to look the other way and just concentrate on something else instead. its obvious a character has to be part of a player account. the characters are definitely not in the campaign. so i think its stupid to have the unassign feature just a pass it to someone else feature. for now i'm doing just that anyway... they unassign it, then if they want to get a free slot they are contacting me and i claim the character and then unassign it again.
if anything, it is still already bypassing the system.
so why not go all the way. but i understand if the chacters by the way the system works, i understand it has to be on a player account somewhere to be seen.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
EDIT: So, I responded somehow without reading the middle of your last paragraph. Apologies! No idea why/how that happened. Having done so; we are actually on mostly the same page of our wants. If that also allowed them to implement it better, faster, with fewer issues etc., what you propose would indeed serve my needs very nicely. If you are implementing it though, then I see no real reason given their current design, that they couldn't just make their current sub class system work but for the major classes, since they are already there, and, would give the greatest flexibility in what you could build.
That is an interesting take......but no. I am not looking at revamping 50% of the system. I want to tweak less than 10% of the system. Are they key tweaks, designed very specifically to replicate specific feels? Yes. Are they endlessly huge changes that I should just create a new system, from scratch, design said system to work with my VTT of choice, and just nuke the 90% of material I want to keep? That doesn't really make much sense.
Indeed, if I want to change the spell progression system of the say druid, to be in line with wizard, note that the wizard is already a system mechanic in the 5E system. My real question here, is, why do you care what I want to do in my game, for my players? Obviously they like the feel of my games, or I wouldn't still be a DM. I would imagine more choices can only be better. If it's a matter that you just don't want them to "waste" their time in lieu of other things, I imagine, there are changes I probably wouldn't personally care about, that you want. I am, however, not going to go out of my way to advocate: "Your wants are without value, get out of my game, and go make your own. Also, I don't want your money to help support this company whose forum I am on, who is specifically asking for things paying customers want, because I don't see the value for what you are asking." I am not quite sure where you are coming from with this.
In point of fact, I have designed my own system, and you know what I love about 5E? How very robust the bounded system really is, and how popular the mechanics really are. There are weaknesses at the top end, but there are always going to be trade offs depending on what you want to get done in the design. All in all, though, it also got me to get on the "request" page, under support, to add my voice to the things I want. Something that stands out to me is that it isn't at the top of the list of things people want, but it does have a significant request rate, which is interesting.
I noticed that a lot of interesting magical items like the sword of zariel, moonblade, etc, have minor and major properties (actually, the theros book is full of them lol), but one issue with dndbeyond is that the items aren't actually integrated properly into character sheets. (I can't select minor and major properties within the items to apply to my character based on items equipped). Is there any way that these items can be integrated properly, so that i can make the most out of unique magic items in the sourcebooks of the site? Thanks.
At this point, the best you can do is note those properties in the notes section for the item once you add it to a sheet. That or make homebrew copies of those items and make the changes there.
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
Can we get a feature to archive characters? I have a bunch I don't want to delete, but I don't use regularly so it would be nice to put them in a folder
If you archive them, they still take up space in DDB's servers and they still have to maintain them. So they still count towards your limit. You can, however, print to PDF, save it yourself and delete the character. Then, rebuild it if you want it again.
Check out all my important links here.
May we live in Less Interesting Times
never said anything about your playstyle. you play how you want. the only thing i said, is that i find it whack to want to change much of the classes or create classes that just overshot the new ones. all classes i ever wanted to create fell short class wise, they all ended up being great archetypes of the core classes though. what i figured is that everyone who wants to homebrew full on classes, just want 3E classes to be back. but the biggest problem 3E had class wise, was that the core classes were literally useless compared to what other prestige classes were doing. the goal of 5E was to keep the core classes separate, and anythign else that comes out of classes would go into archetypes, which are literally what prestige classes should of been from the get go. my friend wanted me to redo the whole shaman class... i said what you wanna be ? shaman is pretty broad. she said barbarian. and thus i set myself up to create a shaman barbarian style class. so yeah, my shaman is now a barbarian sub class that enable the barbarian to cast spells. and looking at the actual 3E shaman, i can literally cram every core feature of that class in an archetype. literally no need to make a full class out of it. the same hapenned by my friend who wanted to create his own artificer, overwatch ana style. again after much deliberation, we end up with just a wizard with archetype feature that just solves the thing.
my only concern with people wanting to create full on classes, is that they just don't want to wait leveling up. they just wanna do 3E style full on multiclass every levels and gains everything right from the get go. i don't think full on classes are a necessity. look at matt mercer blood hunter class... everything in that class could easily fit into a fighter sub class... in fact i think his sub class is literally sub par compared to the core classes. i preffe the actual 5E approach of having talent trees instead of just having classes stack upon themselves.
all that said... no there is not a big demand... forums have always only represented about 10% of the voices total. full on classes is not as much on demand as people think they are. but there is one type of person who wants those at all cost though... those who buy a lot of stuff on DMsGuild and there are so much "new" classes over there and people just want to redo those here so they can play them here. the people on dmsguild do not care about balance, they do not care about anything else then the money they will do from that new class. best exemple of the brawler who literally is just a monk archetype yet they made it full class with video game mechanics and yet everyone jumps on that class.
overall... reality is, not that much people are into full on homebrew classes... and forum barely represent anything per say when it comes to community.
there are other features that were voted upon that were asked much more then full on classes. the voting feature they implemented is literal proof that not so much people want homebrew classes.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Hi! I am not sure how most of this applies to much of what I said, but, how do you decide what constitutes a "big demand"? Looking at the vote a feature, they are not mutually exclusive, and while it is true that there are half of the people who wanted this feature, compared to the highest voted, that is nowhere near the bottom. If you are simply saying that 100,000 voted, and only a 100 people voted that they wanted that, than, sure. That would mean very few people requested it. I feel sure that is not the case, though I do accept that it is nowhere near 100k of 100k who want it either. Easy peesey. That said, even if it only was 100 people out of 100k people voting wanted, why argue against it? It will just get drowned out by sheer weight of votes and never see the light of day regardless.
So, it kinda mostly sounds like you are trying to convince yourself/other people to "drop it" because you personally don't want it. If it really isn't wanted, it won't exist, since "almost no one wants it". If it is wanted, then telling me that my opinion is invalid isn't going to prevent it.
As for wanting early leveling or whatever, I just want to create a slightly different feel, see my above posts that in my campaign all character classes learn magic through study, so basically the way wizards learn and prepare their magic. There are pros and cons to this approach, but, I don't think anyone is going to claim this change is to create min/maxed characters, and I don't use DMS guild classes at all, so I have no opinion on them, for good or ill.
I think based on your previous message, that we are probably more in alignment than you are currently perceiving, and while I really just want to change out some base class feature (tweak them), I don't see any reason why they can't, at the same time, implement a base class creation system. Though, if they were only able to implement that, that would suit me fine, ultimately.
If your overall concern is balance, I have to ask again, why do you care>? There is a TON of stuff in the homebrew sections that I wouldn't allow in my games already. I dunno that base class creation is really gonna change much. There are OP backgrounds, OP subclasses, OP races, and OP magic items. Haven't looked too hard at the monster creator, either as it isn't something I need. Heck, I have zero interest in D&D Beyond putting together a VTT, as I already have one I really like, and the likelihood that they will be able to make a more streamlined AND more powerful one is very, very unlikely. But you know what? I am not on here telling people they shouldn't want it, and trying to convince them to stop asking for it. Heck, one of the things not even marked as "planned" is rollable DMG content, and I could totes see a use for that. I would have a use for that. That said, I want to edit the base class features more than any of those other features, except maybe more robust API features. But that's fine. It will get implemented as fast as makes sense in regards to difficulty, and demand.
In short, I don't really get your resistance to this feature, if you don't like what someone did, don't use it. And base class homebrew isn't going to make or break the power gamers. Just don't allow their nonsense in your games. Easy Peesey.
i'm not resistant to this feature, like at all, i use whats on beyond, if it gets done i will use it.
but unlike you and a lot of other people who i have seen by their post trying to convince others to vote for it in order for it to pick up pace. i'm not actively asking for it, nor am i actively denying it. bt i do like to respond to people in spades when they try to pick an idea that was discussed over and over everywhere including in the dev updates by the beyond team and them telling people that its not gonna come anytime soon and that while they don't say no to it, it probably will never be high on their to do list.
all i'm saying...
you are fighting a losing battle there.
proof that i will use it if it gets done in the next 5 months...
my next campaign will have a player not able to use beyoind because he will make a new class that i really like how he does. he's literally passed a complete year now working on it. it seems awesome, but he will be forced to go back and it would be really great if we could put his build on the site.
but you won't see me try to convince beyond team to make that feature because i need it, cause i really don't. we will just use other ways to do it. plus the fact that the dev team said it themselves... full homebrew class will eventualy be a thing... but its way down on their list.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
just saying, after looking at the feature request voting and all... the feature itself is like top 7. and its been in planning stage for the last 2 years.
in the top 3, homebrew mundane equipment like "create your own armor" or "create your own weapon" is like top 3 and is not even in the planning stage. also badeye said back then that they talked about it a lot... roughly said, if you expect to do all the wild things out there, then the answer is no... but if you intend to use other core class features and modifiers of other base class, then you could get by and do your homebrew class. but his answer on the subject of creating literally your own class and hoping it works as intended on beyond.... its way too wild to start considering what everyone will want in the class.
in a way you already see this with magic items and sub classes, a lot of the items do not work on beyond and a lot of classes are just text and mechanics aren't working.
that's why i seem to dislike the idea, its not because i dislike it, its because i understand what you guys are asking the dev, and i know by experience and by whats already ont he site that what you are asking will definitely not work the way you have in mind. this is something that would require a complete overhaul of the website and how it manages its characters. that's what i think.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I'm afraid you're incorrect, the function of unassigning characters has always been to allow players and DM within a campaign to make characters for each other, and not for freeing up space. As for the 12 players with 99 characters each, that's possible with a hero tier subscription and was made possible with the update from 12 characters per campaign to 12 players per campaign, the goal being to allow players to get more value from content sharing.
Characters within campaigns have always counted towards character limits on associated accounts and that's always been the intent. Remember that campaigns don't require any form of subscription or content purchase; you can set up a campaign with a free account and invite just free accounts to use it.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Your meaning has mostly not carried well over most of your posts, but sure. That said, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I responded to your posts quoting me, and I added my voice to the "this is something I would like to see" to the thread where D&D Beyond team has specifically asked for it. As for your illustrious history, you are correct. I do not have have it. I have been earnestly using D&D Beyond for 3 maybe months? And, only posting in the last few weeks. So, yes. I lack your history. That said, if your intent is to share your knowledge of history, and inform me of the facts of what has come before, you were using the wrong phrasing to get across exactly what you mean. Your most used direction has been to convince the person asking for it why they don't need it.....If we are both using it as advertised, to let our players make their characters for our various campaigns, than, in point of fact, both of us need it, and for the same reasons: to tweak the base classes in the way we need to run our campaign. Yes, I can get by without. I can also get by without giving D&D Beyond any money whatsoever. I don't need them at all, if that was the attitude they actually presented. They are providing a value added service, if they didn't, I would take my very limited resources elsewhere. If they are able to continue adding to that value, so that I would continue using them, even when my circumstances change, to my mind it's best to let them know what those value added things may be.
In any case, I dunno how these exchanges have left you, but I feel no rancor about any of our back and forths. I simply disagree with most of the arguments 'against' it that you have presented. But, if you really are mostly just trying to share: "Hey, this is an often requested feature, and the team has said they would only be able to implement it to use class feature that already exist to tweak things, it is in the planning stage, and has been for two years because it is a complicated thing to add with no way of knowing when it will be added". Then awesome, thank you for letting me know =)
i love discusion and never have i considered this anything else.
thats where i stand...
but as i said... i don't need it, if its there i'll be using it, if it never comes then i will just not do anything about it.
all i was saying. but i also like to answer the said question by quoting and saying what was said about it.
that's all i was doing, not trying to convince you of anything. but just saying, even if you do ask about it... chances are it won't happen.
in its current state it just won't happen. its an aweful answer, i know... but just like many a feature that was asked for the last 3 years, its either in planning stage which means anything from "we just discussed it in our office and nothing has been done yet." to ""its about to come out but its not official yet." anything in between is your guess as much as mine. but yeah... tons of features are in the planning stage and have been for at least 2 or 3 years now. so who knows.
if you wanna know where they are at...
heres the actual trello of releases.
https://trello.com/b/vIKxuEs8/dd-beyond-upcoming-features
and heres the actual voting for features you want the most.
https://dndbeyond.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/topics/115000209847-Feature-Requests?sort_by=votes
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Thanks! I added my vote to that site previously, which is where I was getting my own data. That first link though I really appreciate, as I have not looked there at all, and wasn't aware that was a thing.
Yeah, I don’t have a limit to how many I can make so that’s not really an issue to me. I just want to keep them on D&D Beyond for when I do use them, but in a different spot. I know I can export them to PDF and if that was the feature I wanted I’d have done it already.
my character recently adopted a big rat and I need would love to be able to track his stats and equipment
You can create a monster statblock for it using the homebrewer and add it to your character sheet under “Extras.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Then my only other suggestion is you fork Beyond Help and fix the foldering issues.
Check out all my important links here.
May we live in Less Interesting Times