Youse folks recently changed things so that an item can only be attuned while it is equipped, and that the system immediately unattunes an item as soon as it is stowed. I assume you made these changes to appease folks who would remove an item without unattuning it and then not be able to attune something else without having to go back. I can respect that endeavor. However the system should specifically not work that way.
This is in fact in direct contradiction to the RAW of D&D. Y’all folks keep saying that you’re contractually obligated to present D&D as faithfully as possible to RAW. It used to work correctly, but then you unnecessarily changed things to work in a manner exactly opposite from anything remotely resembling RAW.
This magic weapon warns you of danger. While the weapon is on your person, you have advantage on initiative rolls. In addition, you and any of your companions within 30 feet of you can’t be surprised, except when incapacitated by something other than nonmagical sleep. The weapon magically awakens you and your companions within range if any of you are sleeping naturally when combat begins.
So all my PC should need to gain the benefit of this is to have it attuned, and have it on them. Not equipped. But in order for this to work correctly on DDB, I must leave it equipped even when using a completely different Two-Handed weapon.
While holding this shield, you have resistance to damage from ranged weapon attacks.
Curse. This shield is cursed. Attuning to it curses you until you are targeted by the remove curse spell or similar magic. Removing the shield fails to end the curse on you. Whenever a ranged weapon attack is made against a target within 10 feet of you, the curse causes you to become the target instead.
A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.
That Attunement, and it’s related Curse should still be in effect even if the shield is not being “worn,” but that is impossible to represent on DDB. The only way to leave the Attunement is to leave the shield equipped which means that the character’s AC is off unless it is specifically overridden on the character sheet. In other words, something that actually used to work correctly now requires a janky workaround to simulate.
I might not be complaining about this if it didn’t used to work correctly. But this used to work correctly until you intentionally changed things from working correctly, to no longer working correctly.
Your representatives frequently site DDB’s efforts to most accurately represent RAW as the reason for other things work the way they do and why we have to accept that functionality. Please change this functionality back to more accurately represent RAW. Otherwise, next time that reasoning is given as an explanation for why other things work the way they do it will hold very little credibility.
There are two things to address; the changed functionality and the representation of RAW.
The functionality changed not to appease people, but because remaining attuned to an unequipped item was poor UX. That previous behaviour could cause attunement slots to become 'locked'; you wouldn't be able to find what item was taking up your attunement slot so would have to equip each item, see if it has an unattune option, and then use the to free up the slot. This was less than ideal.
As for RAW, it's important to note that 'equiping' isn't a rules concept, it's a UX concept. D&D doesn't have the notion of equipping items, but the character sheet needs some way to let the user say "yes, I would like to see the relevant traits and modifiers applied to my character sheet". Equipping doesn't mean wielding, or on your person, or in hand, it just means 'enable this item on my sheet'. For example, you might have an item on your sheet that's not on your characters person, say in a cart or in a keep or a bag of holding.
Hopefully this clarifies the functionality a bit more
I understand that “equipping” is not a rules concept, but a UX thing, that’s why I put it in quotation marks.
However Wielding and Wearing are RAW concepts. Currently, the concepts of Wielding and Wearing are completely integrated with “equipped.” There needs to be some way to different between something that is “Attuned but not actively Wielded/Worn” vs. “Attuned and actively Wielded/Worn.” So one of two things seems to be required, either:
Some way to separate “equipped” from Wielding and Wearing so something can be “equipped” without being Wielded/Worn; or
Attunement needs to not be universally linked to “equipped” so something can be Attuned without being “equipped.”
Basically, the UX has a flaw in its design because there needs to be various degrees of “apply these relevant traits and modifiers to my character sheet.” Going back to the example of the Shield of Missile Attraction, there needs to be some way to apply the Curse while the item is attuned, the Magic bonus while it is “held” and the actual AC bonus granted by the shield while it is being worn/wielded. The simple “equipped/unequipped” system is insufficient to represent RAW. Even if the modifiers for held and worn/wielded are grouped together, the modifiers from Attunement should not be.
And, as an observation, since the word “equipped” implies “actively being wielded/worn,” if that is not what it is meant to represent, perhaps a change in terminology might be appropriate so as to be less confusing from a UX perspective.
As for RAW, it's important to note that 'equiping' isn't a rules concept, it's a UX concept. D&D doesn't have the notion of equipping items, but the character sheet needs some way to let the user say "yes, I would like to see the relevant traits and modifiers applied to my character sheet". Equipping doesn't mean wielding, or on your person, or in hand, it just means 'enable this item on my sheet'. For example, you might have an item on your sheet that's not on your characters person, say in a cart or in a keep or a bag of holding.
Like, the point that I think got missed is that something can be attuned, and be in the bag of holding.
As for RAW, it's important to note that 'equiping' isn't a rules concept, it's a UX concept. D&D doesn't have the notion of equipping items, but the character sheet needs some way to let the user say "yes, I would like to see the relevant traits and modifiers applied to my character sheet". Equipping doesn't mean wielding, or on your person, or in hand, it just means 'enable this item on my sheet'. For example, you might have an item on your sheet that's not on your characters person, say in a cart or in a keep or a bag of holding.
Like, the point that I think got missed is that something can be attuned, and be in the bag of holding.
Your feedback didn't get 'filed straight into the shredder', this is something that the team is aware of. I just forgot to put a tag on it, which I have since resolved
As for RAW, it's important to note that 'equiping' isn't a rules concept, it's a UX concept. D&D doesn't have the notion of equipping items, but the character sheet needs some way to let the user say "yes, I would like to see the relevant traits and modifiers applied to my character sheet". Equipping doesn't mean wielding, or on your person, or in hand, it just means 'enable this item on my sheet'. For example, you might have an item on your sheet that's not on your characters person, say in a cart or in a keep or a bag of holding.
Like, the point that I think got missed is that something can be attuned, and be in the bag of holding.
Your feedback didn't get 'filed straight into the shredder', this is something that the team is aware of. I just forgot to put a tag on it, which I have since resolved
The functionality changed not to appease people, but because remaining attuned to an unequipped item was poor UX. That previous behaviour could cause attunement slots to become 'locked'; you wouldn't be able to find what item was taking up your attunement slot so would have to equip each item, see if it has an unattune option, and then use the to free up the slot. This was less than ideal.
Wouldn’t it have been simpler to disable the “remove” button on items while they are attuned? That way things could still be attuned while not “equipped,” and it would have prevented the “slot locking” glitch from occurring. Maybe it wouldn’t have been simpler (I’m no expert), but it seems that would have at least been more accurate and solved the problem. Just an idea.
Hey DDB,
Youse folks recently changed things so that an item can only be attuned while it is equipped, and that the system immediately unattunes an item as soon as it is stowed. I assume you made these changes to appease folks who would remove an item without unattuning it and then not be able to attune something else without having to go back. I can respect that endeavor. However the system should specifically not work that way.
This is in fact in direct contradiction to the RAW of D&D. Y’all folks keep saying that you’re contractually obligated to present D&D as faithfully as possible to RAW. It used to work correctly, but then you unnecessarily changed things to work in a manner exactly opposite from anything remotely resembling RAW.
For example, Weapon of Warning specifically states:
So all my PC should need to gain the benefit of this is to have it attuned, and have it on them. Not equipped. But in order for this to work correctly on DDB, I must leave it equipped even when using a completely different Two-Handed weapon.
As another example Shield of Missile Attraction specifically states:
That Attunement, and it’s related Curse should still be in effect even if the shield is not being “worn,” but that is impossible to represent on DDB. The only way to leave the Attunement is to leave the shield equipped which means that the character’s AC is off unless it is specifically overridden on the character sheet. In other words, something that actually used to work correctly now requires a janky workaround to simulate.
I might not be complaining about this if it didn’t used to work correctly. But this used to work correctly until you intentionally changed things from working correctly, to no longer working correctly.
Your representatives frequently site DDB’s efforts to most accurately represent RAW as the reason for other things work the way they do and why we have to accept that functionality. Please change this functionality back to more accurately represent RAW. Otherwise, next time that reasoning is given as an explanation for why other things work the way they do it will hold very little credibility.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
There are two things to address; the changed functionality and the representation of RAW.
The functionality changed not to appease people, but because remaining attuned to an unequipped item was poor UX. That previous behaviour could cause attunement slots to become 'locked'; you wouldn't be able to find what item was taking up your attunement slot so would have to equip each item, see if it has an unattune option, and then use the to free up the slot. This was less than ideal.
As for RAW, it's important to note that 'equiping' isn't a rules concept, it's a UX concept. D&D doesn't have the notion of equipping items, but the character sheet needs some way to let the user say "yes, I would like to see the relevant traits and modifiers applied to my character sheet". Equipping doesn't mean wielding, or on your person, or in hand, it just means 'enable this item on my sheet'. For example, you might have an item on your sheet that's not on your characters person, say in a cart or in a keep or a bag of holding.
Hopefully this clarifies the functionality a bit more
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I understand that “equipping” is not a rules concept, but a UX thing, that’s why I put it in quotation marks.
However Wielding and Wearing are RAW concepts. Currently, the concepts of Wielding and Wearing are completely integrated with “equipped.” There needs to be some way to different between something that is “Attuned but not actively Wielded/Worn” vs. “Attuned and actively Wielded/Worn.” So one of two things seems to be required, either:
Basically, the UX has a flaw in its design because there needs to be various degrees of “apply these relevant traits and modifiers to my character sheet.” Going back to the example of the Shield of Missile Attraction, there needs to be some way to apply the Curse while the item is attuned, the Magic bonus while it is “held” and the actual AC bonus granted by the shield while it is being worn/wielded. The simple “equipped/unequipped” system is insufficient to represent RAW. Even if the modifiers for held and worn/wielded are grouped together, the modifiers from Attunement should not be.
And, as an observation, since the word “equipped” implies “actively being wielded/worn,” if that is not what it is meant to represent, perhaps a change in terminology might be appropriate so as to be less confusing from a UX perspective.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Not even a “feedback” tag. Guess this one got filed straight into the shredder.Like, the point that I think got missed is that something can be attuned, and be in the bag of holding.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Your feedback didn't get 'filed straight into the shredder', this is something that the team is aware of. I just forgot to put a tag on it, which I have since resolved
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
My sincerest apologies then.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Wouldn’t it have been simpler to disable the “remove” button on items while they are attuned? That way things could still be attuned while not “equipped,” and it would have prevented the “slot locking” glitch from occurring. Maybe it wouldn’t have been simpler (I’m no expert), but it seems that would have at least been more accurate and solved the problem. Just an idea.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Hey, I just wanted to apologize again and thank you for putting up with me. I do appreciate it.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Don't worry about it, it's passionate feedback like this that helps make D&D Beyond the best toolkit it can be!
Find my D&D Beyond articles here