Looks like we have been staying at roughly the same percentage all day, with those that don't like the errata making up a relatively small number of the player base.
Looks like we have been staying at roughly the same percentage all day, with those that don't like the errata making up a relatively small number of the player base.
To quote a dismissive comment from someone in one of the other threads on this subject, who did not like the changes, “a few squeaky wheels”.
I'd say a rough fifth isn't completely insignificant in a poll like this, but is definitely the minority view. However, I do wonder whether the fifth of folks activated to agitate against the changes really know what they're complaining about. As I mentioned in the bigger thread on the matter, Bell of Lost Souls did a really bad job of discussing the changes, let alone make any gesture toward actually representing the player community's reception of these changes outside of the author's pot stirring.
It's clear to me a lot of the posters don't seem to realize or be aware of what survived the editorial cuts and are simply reactionary posting to injuries they feel "their D&D has suffered", evidence of actual injuries aside from one poster and incompetent starfighter pilots disregard for one way of playing D&D aside.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I'd say a rough fifth isn't completely insignificant in a poll like this, but is definitely the minority view. However, I do wonder whether the fifth of folks activated to agitate against the changes really know what they're complaining about. As I mentioned in the bigger thread on the matter, Bell of Lost Souls did a really bad job of discussing the changes, let alone make any gesture toward actually representing the player community's reception of these changes outside of the author's pot stirring.
It's clear to me a lot of the posters don't seem to realize or be aware of what survived the editorial cuts and are simply reactionary posting to injuries they feel "their D&D has suffered", evidence of actual injuries aside from one poster and incompetent starfighter pilots disregard for one way of playing D&D aside.
Honestly the only part's I don't like are the drow and the gnolls and it's not even that their not all evil it ( at least for the drow) makes sense, it's just seems like a really big recton to do then sweep it along with the rest, I mean if i'm understanding their part right, this means the drow were never normal elves who joined the dark gods and when lost were pushed into the underdark, they were always there. They've gone from a mostly evil society to one that's mostly good, cause the new text mentions only a few cites have fallen to Loth, which doesn't make much sense since all but one of the drow gods are evil so it doesn't matter if the others aren't under Loth, I don't know sort of just seems to make Eilistraee and Dritz pointless now, there's so many good drow that they really shouldn't have to struggle now.
Please of course if I'm miss reading anything here anyone please respond.
You're misreading things, which is honestly to be expected when you look at an extremely short statement about something fairly complex. Lolth worship is not a thing in realms (IOW, settings) where Lolth is not canonically present - basically, Lolth hasn't corrupted drow cities outside the Forgotten Realms worlds of Oerth and Toril. There are drow in Eberron, there are drow in Exandria, there are even references to drow in Krynn (Dragonlance) although those were later contradicted. There's no Lolth in those settings though. In the Realms drow were not dark elves at first, they became drow when they lost Corellon Larethian's grace - nothing was retconned about this. Lolth's involvement in that is a long story, and nothing about that was retconned either. In other settings drow had other origins, so the whole "used to be regular elves before falling to darkness" schtick can't apply to them. Basically the errata says "some of this info we presented for Drow in general was really info for Drow from the Forgotten Realms and isn't true for Drow from other settings, so we're removing the FR-specific stuff from the general info". That's it. There's no real retcon, unless we're talking handlebar 'staches or grayscale settings for skin colour (which, retcon-wise, are silly things to argue about). Drow history wasn't changed.
True it was just handled very clumsily. And it deserved better.
With respect, it's an erratum that changes nothing of substance. There's no "deserves" to it, other than maybe not making more of it than it is. I get that people can be emotionally attached, but this is really inconsequential.
I think we should still be empathic to those peoples emotions. As this could be read as their feelings don't matter.
Honestly the only part's I don't like are the drow and the gnolls and it's not even that their not all evil it ( at least for the drow) makes sense, it's just seems like a really big recton to do then sweep it along with the rest, I mean if i'm understanding their part right, this means the drow were never normal elves who joined the dark gods and when lost were pushed into the underdark, they were always there. They've gone from a mostly evil society to one that's mostly good, cause the new text mentions only a few cites have fallen to Loth, which doesn't make much sense since all but one of the drow gods are evil so it doesn't matter if the others aren't under Loth, I don't know sort of just seems to make Eilistraee and Dritz pointless now, there's so many good drow that they really shouldn't have to struggle now.
Please of course if I'm miss reading anything here anyone please respond.
You're misreading things, which is honestly to be expected when you look at an extremely short statement about something fairly complex. Lolth worship is not a thing in realms (IOW, settings) where Lolth is not canonically present - basically, Lolth hasn't corrupted drow cities outside the Forgotten Realms worlds of Oerth and Toril. There are drow in Eberron, there are drow in Exandria, there are even references to drow in Krynn (Dragonlance) although those were later contradicted. There's no Lolth in those settings though. In the Realms drow were not dark elves at first, they became drow when they lost Corellon Larethian's grace - nothing was retconned about this. Lolth's involvement in that is a long story, and nothing about that was retconned either. In other settings drow had other origins, so the whole "used to be regular elves before falling to darkness" schtick can't apply to them. Basically the errata says "some of this info we presented for Drow in general was really info for Drow from the Forgotten Realms and isn't true for Drow from other settings, so we're removing the FR-specific stuff from the general info". That's it. There's no real retcon, unless we're talking handlebar 'staches or grayscale settings for skin colour (which, retcon-wise, are silly things to argue about). Drow history wasn't changed.
True it was just handled very clumsily. And it deserved better.
With respect, it's an erratum that changes nothing of substance. There's no "deserves" to it, other than maybe not making more of it than it is. I get that people can be emotionally attached, but this is really inconsequential.
I think we should still be empathic to those peoples emotions. As this could be read as their feelings don't matter.
To clarify: the "this" I'm saying is inconsequential is the erratum and the extent to which it actually changes anything, not the fact that people can be emotionally attached.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Honestly the only part's I don't like are the drow and the gnolls and it's not even that their not all evil it ( at least for the drow) makes sense, it's just seems like a really big recton to do then sweep it along with the rest, I mean if i'm understanding their part right, this means the drow were never normal elves who joined the dark gods and when lost were pushed into the underdark, they were always there. They've gone from a mostly evil society to one that's mostly good, cause the new text mentions only a few cites have fallen to Loth, which doesn't make much sense since all but one of the drow gods are evil so it doesn't matter if the others aren't under Loth, I don't know sort of just seems to make Eilistraee and Dritz pointless now, there's so many good drow that they really shouldn't have to struggle now.
Please of course if I'm miss reading anything here anyone please respond.
You're misreading things, which is honestly to be expected when you look at an extremely short statement about something fairly complex. Lolth worship is not a thing in realms (IOW, settings) where Lolth is not canonically present - basically, Lolth hasn't corrupted drow cities outside the Forgotten Realms worlds of Oerth and Toril. There are drow in Eberron, there are drow in Exandria, there are even references to drow in Krynn (Dragonlance) although those were later contradicted. There's no Lolth in those settings though. In the Realms drow were not dark elves at first, they became drow when they lost Corellon Larethian's grace - nothing was retconned about this. Lolth's involvement in that is a long story, and nothing about that was retconned either. In other settings drow had other origins, so the whole "used to be regular elves before falling to darkness" schtick can't apply to them. Basically the errata says "some of this info we presented for Drow in general was really info for Drow from the Forgotten Realms and isn't true for Drow from other settings, so we're removing the FR-specific stuff from the general info". That's it. There's no real retcon, unless we're talking handlebar 'staches or grayscale settings for skin colour (which, retcon-wise, are silly things to argue about). Drow history wasn't changed.
True it was just handled very clumsily. And it deserved better.
With respect, it's an erratum that changes nothing of substance. There's no "deserves" to it, other than maybe not making more of it than it is. I get that people can be emotionally attached, but this is really inconsequential.
I think we should still be empathic to those peoples emotions. As this could be read as their feelings don't matter.
To clarify: the "this" I'm saying is inconsequential is the erratum and the extent to which it actually changes anything, not the fact that people can be emotionally attached.
I figured, I just wanted to catch it before anything got out of hand, and sorry it couldn't get things to stop being bold.
I am happy enough with the latest errata, although I think blatant removal is less good then, say, a disclaimer in the text or passages providing alternatives to the norms
I am happy enough with the latest errata, although I think blatant removal is less good then, say, a disclaimer in the text or passages providing alternatives to the norms
That makes sense. I personally think that the drow originated in the Feywild (maybe in the Feydark) and then spread to the Material Plane just like other elves did, then the drow branches on Oerth and Toril were later corrupted by Lolth. I think this is in line with what WOTC is saying rn, but I’m not an expert on the lore, especially older lore.
Honestly the only part's I don't like are the drow and the gnolls and it's not even that their not all evil it ( at least for the drow) makes sense, it's just seems like a really big recton to do then sweep it along with the rest, I mean if i'm understanding their part right, this means the drow were never normal elves who joined the dark gods and when lost were pushed into the underdark, they were always there. They've gone from a mostly evil society to one that's mostly good, cause the new text mentions only a few cites have fallen to Loth, which doesn't make much sense since all but one of the drow gods are evil so it doesn't matter if the others aren't under Loth, I don't know sort of just seems to make Eilistraee and Dritz pointless now, there's so many good drow that they really shouldn't have to struggle now.
Please of course if I'm miss reading anything here anyone please respond.
You're misreading things, which is honestly to be expected when you look at an extremely short statement about something fairly complex. Lolth worship is not a thing in realms (IOW, settings) where Lolth is not canonically present - basically, Lolth hasn't corrupted drow cities outside the Forgotten Realms worlds of Oerth and Toril. There are drow in Eberron, there are drow in Exandria, there are even references to drow in Krynn (Dragonlance) although those were later contradicted. There's no Lolth in those settings though. In the Realms drow were not dark elves at first, they became drow when they lost Corellon Larethian's grace - nothing was retconned about this. Lolth's involvement in that is a long story, and nothing about that was retconned either. In other settings drow had other origins, so the whole "used to be regular elves before falling to darkness" schtick can't apply to them. Basically the errata says "some of this info we presented for Drow in general was really info for Drow from the Forgotten Realms and isn't true for Drow from other settings, so we're removing the FR-specific stuff from the general info". That's it. There's no real retcon, unless we're talking handlebar 'staches or grayscale settings for skin colour (which, retcon-wise, are silly things to argue about). Drow history wasn't changed.
True it was just handled very clumsily. And it deserved better.
With respect, it's an erratum that changes nothing of substance. There's no "deserves" to it, other than maybe not making more of it than it is. I get that people can be emotionally attached, but this is really inconsequential.
I think we should still be empathic to those peoples emotions. As this could be read as their feelings don't matter.
To clarify: the "this" I'm saying is inconsequential is the erratum and the extent to which it actually changes anything, not the fact that people can be emotionally attached.
I figured, I just wanted to catch it before anything got out of hand, and sorry it couldn't get things to stop being bold.
My point was that just publishing the errata like this was not the most optimal way to go about doing it. For a number of reasons. My feelings are not hurt by it, I do agree with the sentiment and reasoning behind it though.
Honestly the only part's I don't like are the drow and the gnolls and it's not even that their not all evil it ( at least for the drow) makes sense, it's just seems like a really big recton to do then sweep it along with the rest, I mean if i'm understanding their part right, this means the drow were never normal elves who joined the dark gods and when lost were pushed into the underdark, they were always there. They've gone from a mostly evil society to one that's mostly good, cause the new text mentions only a few cites have fallen to Loth, which doesn't make much sense since all but one of the drow gods are evil so it doesn't matter if the others aren't under Loth, I don't know sort of just seems to make Eilistraee and Dritz pointless now, there's so many good drow that they really shouldn't have to struggle now.
Please of course if I'm miss reading anything here anyone please respond.
You're misreading things, which is honestly to be expected when you look at an extremely short statement about something fairly complex. Lolth worship is not a thing in realms (IOW, settings) where Lolth is not canonically present - basically, Lolth hasn't corrupted drow cities outside the Forgotten Realms worlds of Oerth and Toril. There are drow in Eberron, there are drow in Exandria, there are even references to drow in Krynn (Dragonlance) although those were later contradicted. There's no Lolth in those settings though. In the Realms drow were not dark elves at first, they became drow when they lost Corellon Larethian's grace - nothing was retconned about this. Lolth's involvement in that is a long story, and nothing about that was retconned either. In other settings drow had other origins, so the whole "used to be regular elves before falling to darkness" schtick can't apply to them. Basically the errata says "some of this info we presented for Drow in general was really info for Drow from the Forgotten Realms and isn't true for Drow from other settings, so we're removing the FR-specific stuff from the general info". That's it. There's no real retcon, unless we're talking handlebar 'staches or grayscale settings for skin colour (which, retcon-wise, are silly things to argue about). Drow history wasn't changed.
True it was just handled very clumsily. And it deserved better.
With respect, it's an erratum that changes nothing of substance. There's no "deserves" to it, other than maybe not making more of it than it is. I get that people can be emotionally attached, but this is really inconsequential.
I think we should still be empathic to those peoples emotions. As this could be read as their feelings don't matter.
To give what I suppose is the 'woke' perspective, let me lay this out.
Before: Drow are evil
Now: Sometimes, drow are evil. But they don't have to be.
The people who want evil drow lost nothing. Their drow can still go around eating kittens and dumping spiders down chimneys and whatever else. But they're mad because other people can now play games where drow aren't evil.
I'm angry because something was taken from me: valid grievance
I'm angry because someone else got something: not a valid grievance
When Billy has a lollipop and he starts crying because Johnny got a lollipop, you don't comfort Billy and validate his sense of injustice. You sit down with him and explain what's wrong with his perspective and try to instill in him some empathy for others and what justice really looks like.
It's like the paradox of tolerance - if the tolerant are willing to tolerate the intolerant, the intolerant will eventually destroy them. There has to be a measure of intolerance for intolerance. In the same vein, we can't treat all grievances the same. So while I'm not going to say anyone's feelings don't matter, I think true empathy in a case like this is an attempt to reframe the offended party's view for their own benefit. Because the source of the offense is not coming from a place of logic and understanding. Realize that you've literally lost nothing and there's no longer anything to be upset about.
Well thank that's good to know, it does makes sense that other realms would sense, though my issue with the number of Loth drow still seems to be there, ( the bit of text that numbered the drow falling to loth as a few cities) other realms are fine but this wording seems to mean that the dynamic of the forgotten realms has also change, but you did say that there has been no retcon and you seem to have read further than me so ill take this as just a wording thing.
This entire "controversy" is extremely stupid. They're about to release a new sourcebook "Monsters of the Multiverse" that literally just updates 30 player races and goes over 250 monsters. It's a multiverse folks. One size does not fit all.
Every single change is because they're going to UPDATE it to fit the multiverse. They're going to add excerpts about the worlds of origin and the cultures in those world. Cultists of Lolth are the majority of Drow in certain world. Lolth doesn't even exist in other worlds.
People jump on these dumb as hell bandwagons making ridiculous assumptions. "They took out the part that says Mindflayers are inhuman monsters! That must mean they're trying to make Mindflayers good!"
(All of this is pretty much confirmed in the recent Sage Advice blog as well)
This entire "controversy" is extremely stupid. They're about to release a new sourcebook "Monsters of the Multiverse" that literally just updates 30 player races and goes over 250 monsters. It's a multiverse folks. One size does not fit all.
Every single change is because they're going to UPDATE it to fit the multiverse. They're going to add excerpts about the worlds of origin and the cultures in those world. Cultists of Lolth are the majority of Drow in certain world. Lolth doesn't even exist in other worlds.
People jump on these dumb as hell bandwagons making ridiculous assumptions. "They took out the part that says Mindflayers are inhuman monsters! That must mean they're trying to make Mindflayers good!"
(All of this is pretty much confirmed in the recent Sage Advice blog as well)
OOww I forgot about the new Mordinkain book, that's going to be so nice, I know what's going to be my group next present.
The reason people are upset is not changes to the established lore of settings, people are upset because a product they paid money for was altered without any consent or consideration. I understand the site's policy and privilege to alter the books is technically legal but that does not make it right. At the end of the day text material was removed from a book after money had changed hands, apparently it was legal and allowed based on the regulations in place. This does not mean that the change has the moral high ground, it means the regulations and legislation in place is insufficient to protect the wellbeing of the customer and need to be ammended.
The reason people are upset is not changes to the established lore of settings, people are upset because a product they paid money for was altered without any consent or consideration. I understand the site's policy and privilege to alter the books is technically legal but that does not make it right. At the end of the day text material was removed from a book after money had changed hands, apparently it was legal and allowed based on the regulations in place. This does not mean that the change has the moral high ground, it means the regulations and legislation in place is insufficient to protect the wellbeing of the customer and need to be ammended.
Were these people also upset by any other errata released over the past several years? This isnt the first thing to be changed and it wont be the last.
The reason people are upset is not changes to the established lore of settings, people are upset because a product they paid money for was altered without any consent or consideration. I understand the site's policy and privilege to alter the books is technically legal but that does not make it right. At the end of the day text material was removed from a book after money had changed hands, apparently it was legal and allowed based on the regulations in place. This does not mean that the change has the moral high ground, it means the regulations and legislation in place is insufficient to protect the wellbeing of the customer and need to be ammended.
D&D Beyond has never attempted to hide the fact that they will update any given document to the latest revision from Wizards. Some people/players see it as a strength, not a weakness - you don't need to whitewash and hand-write in your expensive hardback book to have the latest rules, or try to keep track of a big sheaf of annotated loose-leaf papers. Your books are always current, for better or worse. There's been 'better' as much as 'worse' - nobody complained when errata added the spear to the list of weapons usable with Polearm Master or gave tritons Darkvision, both of which were changes you would've also had to skip if your book was locked forever the moment you purchased it.
Bell of Lost Souls dramatically overstated the impact of the errata in an attempt to stir up outrage and generate clicks, because Bell of Lost Souls is a junk website. Take literally everything it says with a grain of salt.
The reason people are upset is not changes to the established lore of settings, people are upset because a product they paid money for was altered without any consent or consideration. I understand the site's policy and privilege to alter the books is technically legal but that does not make it right. At the end of the day text material was removed from a book after money had changed hands, apparently it was legal and allowed based on the regulations in place. This does not mean that the change has the moral high ground, it means the regulations and legislation in place is insufficient to protect the wellbeing of the customer and need to be ammended.
Wait until these people realize what software and smart phone companies are doing to them, at a much higher frequency to boot. Oh wait, when they sign up with digital providers, they agree to a EULA that states, among other things, they are aware the product being provided is imminently mutable. There is no expectation that their product is fixed in its current iteration. For crying out loud, it’s not even true that printed material remains unchanged between editions.
If this is what is upsetting you, you have never read a EULA and you simply don’t understand your part in the customer/service provider relationship.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Looks like we have been staying at roughly the same percentage all day, with those that don't like the errata making up a relatively small number of the player base.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
To quote a dismissive comment from someone in one of the other threads on this subject, who did not like the changes, “a few squeaky wheels”.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I'd say a rough fifth isn't completely insignificant in a poll like this, but is definitely the minority view. However, I do wonder whether the fifth of folks activated to agitate against the changes really know what they're complaining about. As I mentioned in the bigger thread on the matter, Bell of Lost Souls did a really bad job of discussing the changes, let alone make any gesture toward actually representing the player community's reception of these changes outside of the author's pot stirring.
It's clear to me a lot of the posters don't seem to realize or be aware of what survived the editorial cuts and are simply reactionary posting to injuries they feel "their D&D has suffered", evidence of actual injuries aside from one poster and incompetent starfighter pilots disregard for one way of playing D&D aside.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
No need to mince words. They misrepresented the errata.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I completely agree with you on all of this.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think we should still be empathic to those peoples emotions. As this could be read as their feelings don't matter.
PR style responses are considered hostile intent.
To clarify: the "this" I'm saying is inconsequential is the erratum and the extent to which it actually changes anything, not the fact that people can be emotionally attached.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I figured, I just wanted to catch it before anything got out of hand, and sorry it couldn't get things to stop being bold.
PR style responses are considered hostile intent.
I am happy enough with the latest errata, although I think blatant removal is less good then, say, a disclaimer in the text or passages providing alternatives to the norms
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
That makes sense. I personally think that the drow originated in the Feywild (maybe in the Feydark) and then spread to the Material Plane just like other elves did, then the drow branches on Oerth and Toril were later corrupted by Lolth. I think this is in line with what WOTC is saying rn, but I’m not an expert on the lore, especially older lore.
Not a whole lot of change over night. I guess at this point, those that are likely to vote in the poll have done so.
20% is not a insignificant number, but not a number that really lives up to the sensationalist hype in my opinion.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
My point was that just publishing the errata like this was not the most optimal way to go about doing it. For a number of reasons. My feelings are not hurt by it, I do agree with the sentiment and reasoning behind it though.
To give what I suppose is the 'woke' perspective, let me lay this out.
Before: Drow are evil
Now: Sometimes, drow are evil. But they don't have to be.
The people who want evil drow lost nothing. Their drow can still go around eating kittens and dumping spiders down chimneys and whatever else. But they're mad because other people can now play games where drow aren't evil.
I'm angry because something was taken from me: valid grievance
I'm angry because someone else got something: not a valid grievance
When Billy has a lollipop and he starts crying because Johnny got a lollipop, you don't comfort Billy and validate his sense of injustice. You sit down with him and explain what's wrong with his perspective and try to instill in him some empathy for others and what justice really looks like.
It's like the paradox of tolerance - if the tolerant are willing to tolerate the intolerant, the intolerant will eventually destroy them. There has to be a measure of intolerance for intolerance. In the same vein, we can't treat all grievances the same. So while I'm not going to say anyone's feelings don't matter, I think true empathy in a case like this is an attempt to reframe the offended party's view for their own benefit. Because the source of the offense is not coming from a place of logic and understanding. Realize that you've literally lost nothing and there's no longer anything to be upset about.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Well thank that's good to know, it does makes sense that other realms would sense, though my issue with the number of Loth drow still seems to be there, ( the bit of text that numbered the drow falling to loth as a few cities) other realms are fine but this wording seems to mean that the dynamic of the forgotten realms has also change, but you did say that there has been no retcon and you seem to have read further than me so ill take this as just a wording thing.
This entire "controversy" is extremely stupid. They're about to release a new sourcebook "Monsters of the Multiverse" that literally just updates 30 player races and goes over 250 monsters. It's a multiverse folks. One size does not fit all.
Every single change is because they're going to UPDATE it to fit the multiverse. They're going to add excerpts about the worlds of origin and the cultures in those world. Cultists of Lolth are the majority of Drow in certain world. Lolth doesn't even exist in other worlds.
People jump on these dumb as hell bandwagons making ridiculous assumptions. "They took out the part that says Mindflayers are inhuman monsters! That must mean they're trying to make Mindflayers good!"
(All of this is pretty much confirmed in the recent Sage Advice blog as well)
OOww I forgot about the new Mordinkain book, that's going to be so nice, I know what's going to be my group next present.
The reason people are upset is not changes to the established lore of settings, people are upset because a product they paid money for was altered without any consent or consideration. I understand the site's policy and privilege to alter the books is technically legal but that does not make it right. At the end of the day text material was removed from a book after money had changed hands, apparently it was legal and allowed based on the regulations in place. This does not mean that the change has the moral high ground, it means the regulations and legislation in place is insufficient to protect the wellbeing of the customer and need to be ammended.
Were these people also upset by any other errata released over the past several years? This isnt the first thing to be changed and it wont be the last.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
D&D Beyond has never attempted to hide the fact that they will update any given document to the latest revision from Wizards. Some people/players see it as a strength, not a weakness - you don't need to whitewash and hand-write in your expensive hardback book to have the latest rules, or try to keep track of a big sheaf of annotated loose-leaf papers. Your books are always current, for better or worse. There's been 'better' as much as 'worse' - nobody complained when errata added the spear to the list of weapons usable with Polearm Master or gave tritons Darkvision, both of which were changes you would've also had to skip if your book was locked forever the moment you purchased it.
Bell of Lost Souls dramatically overstated the impact of the errata in an attempt to stir up outrage and generate clicks, because Bell of Lost Souls is a junk website. Take literally everything it says with a grain of salt.
Please do not contact or message me.
Wait until these people realize what software and smart phone companies are doing to them, at a much higher frequency to boot. Oh wait, when they sign up with digital providers, they agree to a EULA that states, among other things, they are aware the product being provided is imminently mutable. There is no expectation that their product is fixed in its current iteration. For crying out loud, it’s not even true that printed material remains unchanged between editions.
If this is what is upsetting you, you have never read a EULA and you simply don’t understand your part in the customer/service provider relationship.