I know its a confusing concept if you haven't worked for a company, but just because a company (Oracle, Microsoft etc) makes a lot of revenue, doesn't mean that a manager in the company should decide that they should go over budget and hire some extra staff due to some random on the internet thinks they should lose money doing extra work almost nobody asks for.
What are you talking about?!? What extra staff?!? What “over budget?!?”
It was as easy as telling Word to take every instance of “5 ft.” and replace it with “1,5 m” once and hitting enter. Then once to convert 10 ft to 3m; once for 15 ft to 4,5 m; once for 20 ft to 6 m; 25 ft to 7,5 m…. They probably got the entire PHB converted in under 10 minutes. If they paid that person $100/hr, it cost them less than $20 to do it. They likely converted the entire core 3 in under half an hour, and likely by a free intern.
idk what to say, except the Forum Loudmouth Club needs to do less posting and more reading, having a few random thoughts and scribbling them down takes zero effort. Starting a large project, going from the beginning to the end, resolving every issue along the way, including all the ones that you never realized existing, is what managers have to do, and they understand the effort it takes, the real world cost, not pretend forum money cost, and with that experience as an adult they make a decision on whether in the grand scheme of things, including the opportunity cost of not doing something else, whether it is worth the effort. Clearly in this case it is not.
idk what to say, except the Forum Loudmouth Club needs to do less posting and more reading, having a few random thoughts and scribbling them down takes zero effort. Starting a large project, going from the beginning to the end, resolving every issue along the way, including all the ones that you never realized existing, is what managers have to do, and they understand the effort it takes, the real world cost, not pretend forum money cost, and with that experience as an adult they make a decision on whether in the grand scheme of things, including the opportunity cost of not doing something else, whether it is worth the effort. Clearly in this case it is not.
Clearly you don’t understand that Wizards of the Coast has already spent that money, and already published the rules in metric. What part of that do you not understand? The work was done and paid for half a decade ago. What part of that is not computing for you?
If you are referring to DDB’s expense to implement, I already addressed that:
…They should either support both, or at least come up with a better excuse.
Claiming they can’t because “it’s RAW, but not in English,” is their current excuse. Saying it would be too costly and time consuming would be a better excuse. They aren’t saying that. They could pay it lip service and add it to their “to-do list” somewhere behind Spell Points. That would at least not be the same lousy excuse they are currently using. Heck, it would even qualify for an upgrade from “excuse” to “reason.”
And, by the way, I own my own business as an IC. Try talking down to me a little less when you know little to nothing about me.
Claiming they can’t because “it’s RAW, but not in English,” is their current excuse
The reason presented by D&D Beyond (via the staff member Stormknight) is that D&D Beyond offers the English localised rules. Nowhere in the world can you purchase the English localised rules with metric, nowhere. There is no ISBN in existence for any D&D book in English that uses metric. As such, D&D Beyond cannot offer the English rules with metric because no such rules have been printed, and per D&D Beyonds agreement with Wizards of the Coast, we offer the rules as printed. This extends down to the fact we preserve typos and errors until Wizards errata's them because that is how the rules exist as printed.
D&D Beyond cannot make unilateral changes to the rules, both in terms of mechanics and presentation. The decision to offer English localised rules that use metric must come from Wizards of the Coast. The fact that metric rules exist in other languages is irrelevant; they don't exist in English and D&D Beyond offers the English localised rules.
We should have listened to Shakespeare and killed all the lawyers. They you could just present the “English localized RAW.” That nitpicky bit about “English localized” is 🐴💩
Except you don't offer the rules as printed, because pagination is not reproduced, yet is referenced within the site, and therefore must be an important factor. Keep picking and choosing your arguments, it's super fun.
Sadly, it is little more than precise wording of a contract that prevents DDB from complying with the request for metric. It's a LAW bit, likely citing that they cannot alter anything (written in about 40 lines of legal-ese that makes one's brain bleed) It's not a trumped up excuse, it's not an attack on the folks asking for it and it's not a conspiracy. The one valid thing Sposta has said is that we should have killed all the lawyers, because THAT is why it can't happen. Nit-picky, stickler clauses that tied DDB's hands from doing something that would apparently make a difference to some. I am Canadian, so we are used to seeing both measurements, from the world in general and our Southern neighbors who still haven't caught up.
That said, I believe there is an outstanding question regarding this. Has DDB approached WotC about this possibility? The contract, as it were, could be reworded to allow approved conversion of measurements based on WotC approval. If they agreed to it, DDB could, as Sposta also pointed out, start working on a toggle, from Imperial to Metric. Again, it would obviously need to be a discussion, agreement then starting to work on it, but it would begin with asking.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
You all aware this debate over the relative ease providing D&D in metric in English has completely distracted this thread from the question the OP has asked ... twice, in this thread?
I appreciate Stormknight's mention that DDB has in fact supported an Italian language PHB. However that translation is not part of the new WotC managed localizations of the rules discussed in the cited press release.
So again, this would be the third time the question is asked, can anyone in DDB answer whether DDB will be supporting the non-English localizations of D&D.
My largely unqualified guess is no, because that localization support, if done responsible, would require DDB to invest in language resources to provide adequate customer service for those users of localized language products who may not be able to discuss a customer service matter in English. They may, but that's the understanding I've developed the handful of times it's been brought up here where the localization announcement was made. I'd actually be happy and impressed if they did do so, and it'd give me personally an ability to keep some of my languages current and maybe even take steps to acquiring a new one (speaking of hat tip to the Michael Galvis article where he pointed out some Spanish language gaming streams, cool stuff) and we are sort of on the cusp of such language resources not even necessarily being human resources, but it just doesn't seem to be a resource build out that fits D&D Beyond's present scale.
To go back to the original question, the FAQs have this to say on the matter of multi-lingual support:
We will follow Wizards of the Coast's lead on this. If they support multiple languages in the future, we will do so as well.
So it seems possible, but who knows how long it might take...
Thanks Gruntler, that's encouraging. Though I'm a bit confused, if I'm reading the linked FAQ right, it was updated 7 days ago ... D&D localized language products going more directly under WotC's control was accounced back in June of this year ... I imagine they may still be in development (and also possibly in shipping limbo since I'm pretty sure WotC wants books in store first ... these books, not the prior licensed translations some languages had available through other publishers) , but even so the "if" should be a "when."
What are you talking about?!? What extra staff?!? What “over budget?!?”
It was as easy as telling Word to take every instance of “5 ft.” and replace it with “1,5 m” once and hitting enter. Then once to convert 10 ft to 3m; once for 15 ft to 4,5 m; once for 20 ft to 6 m; 25 ft to 7,5 m…. They probably got the entire PHB converted in under 10 minutes. If they paid that person $100/hr, it cost them less than $20 to do it. They likely converted the entire core 3 in under half an hour, and likely by a free intern.
And again, THEY ALREADY DID IT YEARS AGO.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
idk what to say, except the Forum Loudmouth Club needs to do less posting and more reading, having a few random thoughts and scribbling them down takes zero effort. Starting a large project, going from the beginning to the end, resolving every issue along the way, including all the ones that you never realized existing, is what managers have to do, and they understand the effort it takes, the real world cost, not pretend forum money cost, and with that experience as an adult they make a decision on whether in the grand scheme of things, including the opportunity cost of not doing something else, whether it is worth the effort. Clearly in this case it is not.
Clearly you don’t understand that Wizards of the Coast has already spent that money, and already published the rules in metric. What part of that do you not understand? The work was done and paid for half a decade ago. What part of that is not computing for you?
If you are referring to DDB’s expense to implement, I already addressed that:
Claiming they can’t because “it’s RAW, but not in English,” is their current excuse. Saying it would be too costly and time consuming would be a better excuse. They aren’t saying that. They could pay it lip service and add it to their “to-do list” somewhere behind Spell Points. That would at least not be the same lousy excuse they are currently using. Heck, it would even qualify for an upgrade from “excuse” to “reason.”
And, by the way, I own my own business as an IC. Try talking down to me a little less when you know little to nothing about me.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The reason presented by D&D Beyond (via the staff member Stormknight) is that D&D Beyond offers the English localised rules. Nowhere in the world can you purchase the English localised rules with metric, nowhere. There is no ISBN in existence for any D&D book in English that uses metric. As such, D&D Beyond cannot offer the English rules with metric because no such rules have been printed, and per D&D Beyonds agreement with Wizards of the Coast, we offer the rules as printed. This extends down to the fact we preserve typos and errors until Wizards errata's them because that is how the rules exist as printed.
D&D Beyond cannot make unilateral changes to the rules, both in terms of mechanics and presentation. The decision to offer English localised rules that use metric must come from Wizards of the Coast. The fact that metric rules exist in other languages is irrelevant; they don't exist in English and D&D Beyond offers the English localised rules.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
We should have listened to Shakespeare and killed all the lawyers. They you could just present the “
English localizedRAW.” That nitpicky bit about “English localized” is 🐴💩Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Except you don't offer the rules as printed, because pagination is not reproduced, yet is referenced within the site, and therefore must be an important factor. Keep picking and choosing your arguments, it's super fun.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
Sadly, it is little more than precise wording of a contract that prevents DDB from complying with the request for metric. It's a LAW bit, likely citing that they cannot alter anything (written in about 40 lines of legal-ese that makes one's brain bleed) It's not a trumped up excuse, it's not an attack on the folks asking for it and it's not a conspiracy. The one valid thing Sposta has said is that we should have killed all the lawyers, because THAT is why it can't happen. Nit-picky, stickler clauses that tied DDB's hands from doing something that would apparently make a difference to some. I am Canadian, so we are used to seeing both measurements, from the world in general and our Southern neighbors who still haven't caught up.
That said, I believe there is an outstanding question regarding this. Has DDB approached WotC about this possibility? The contract, as it were, could be reworded to allow approved conversion of measurements based on WotC approval. If they agreed to it, DDB could, as Sposta also pointed out, start working on a toggle, from Imperial to Metric. Again, it would obviously need to be a discussion, agreement then starting to work on it, but it would begin with asking.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
You all aware this debate over the relative ease providing D&D in metric in English has completely distracted this thread from the question the OP has asked ... twice, in this thread?
I appreciate Stormknight's mention that DDB has in fact supported an Italian language PHB. However that translation is not part of the new WotC managed localizations of the rules discussed in the cited press release.
So again, this would be the third time the question is asked, can anyone in DDB answer whether DDB will be supporting the non-English localizations of D&D.
My largely unqualified guess is no, because that localization support, if done responsible, would require DDB to invest in language resources to provide adequate customer service for those users of localized language products who may not be able to discuss a customer service matter in English. They may, but that's the understanding I've developed the handful of times it's been brought up here where the localization announcement was made. I'd actually be happy and impressed if they did do so, and it'd give me personally an ability to keep some of my languages current and maybe even take steps to acquiring a new one (speaking of hat tip to the Michael Galvis article where he pointed out some Spanish language gaming streams, cool stuff) and we are sort of on the cusp of such language resources not even necessarily being human resources, but it just doesn't seem to be a resource build out that fits D&D Beyond's present scale.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
To go back to the original question, the FAQs have this to say on the matter of multi-lingual support:
So it seems possible, but who knows how long it might take...
Thanks Gruntler, that's encouraging. Though I'm a bit confused, if I'm reading the linked FAQ right, it was updated 7 days ago ... D&D localized language products going more directly under WotC's control was accounced back in June of this year ... I imagine they may still be in development (and also possibly in shipping limbo since I'm pretty sure WotC wants books in store first ... these books, not the prior licensed translations some languages had available through other publishers) , but even so the "if" should be a "when."
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.