I have no problem with the book's existence. I TOTALLY agree that it's awesome for new players/DMs as they can get all the info they want consolidated in a single source. I also understand if you use physical books how it might be useful to be able to pull 1 instead of searching various sources for race info.
However, as someone who's bought all the source materials that are being combined AND using primarily D&D beyond instead of books. I fall into a category of 90% of this book being info I already own.
Tasha's doesn't adjust all the races that this book does, it's a complete overhaul of a few races. The problem is 90% of the book is all reprint for me. So, I'm paying for 100% of the price for 10% of the info.
Just seems strange to release a product that so darn good for newer players while ripping off your biggest supporters who own all the books. I'd LOVE to have the 10% of this book that actually changes things. I'm just not going to pay for what I feel should be errata.
I mean the biggest draw for me is the improved monster stat lines. The fact that they have changed and tweaked to make match the CR rating rather then me having to tweak myself is a draw. I won’t be buying the full set but will be buying MMM
But as a child of Warhammer this seems such a soft option compared to a game which, over the 22 years I played it, saw 5 major editions released, each requiring players to buy a new rule book, new army sourcebooks and, usually, new models they had to buy. Warhammer 40K has been slightly more backwards compatible edition to edition but, until recently, still required buying books and new miniatures edition to edition. Each new edition of warhammer I loved through required a massive financial investment to make my empire army “legal” and balanced.
Comparing that to wizards who after 7.5 years have repackaged 2 books into 1 and over the next 3 will be making changes to 3 - 4 more it seems positively cheap to play DND. Games progress and change, rules evolve based on the many hours of real play they undergo, the good news is it seems most gaming companies, GW included, have identified it is better to do this in a slow backwards compatible way rather then the scorched earth approach of the 90’s/2000’s.
But as a child of Warhammer this seems such a soft option compared to a game which, over the 22 years I played it, saw 5 major editions released, each requiring players to buy a new rule book, new army sourcebooks and, usually, new models they had to buy. Warhammer 40K has been slightly more backwards compatible edition to edition but, until recently, still required buying books and new miniatures edition to edition. Each new edition of warhammer I loved through required a massive financial investment to make my empire army “legal” and balanced.
You have to change your models? That seems like a steep ask - they're not cheap. At least with books, it's probably going to be less than £100 to continue getting having compatibility for new stuff. Models are going to be hundreds if not thousands by themselves (when considering both buying them and the money equivalent of the hours you put in). At least with D&D I can carry over pretty much all the generic models - and let's face it, the non generic ones were obtained with the knowledge that they will only be useful for an adventure or two.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I guess I don't understand how it's ripping people off. No one is forcing anyone to buy it, so while it may well be a low value purchase for those who already own the originals...it's not ripping you off. I guess it could be made clearer that it's a redo? Then again, I don't think you'd be here airing grievances if you didn't already understand that, so I doubt that's the specific problem.
It's only a rip-off because this kind of material used to be errata. They aren't forcing me to pay 100% for 10% new material no, but they used to give updates to published material for free as errata to the books. Compilation books such as MMM are typically a cost saving for new players. While us old players got errata released usually as PDFs.
D&D Beyond offered a unique way of getting your books to be "always up to date" and was even a selling point at one time when they said "You'll always have the most up to date version of the information"
We also have precedent to exactly that as the Warforged race was 1st put out in "Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron" then updated for free when "Eberron Rising from the Last War" came out.
Ok so that feels a little bad to me, you get the same rules but still need to buy Mordekeinans or Volos to get the Lore information about Elves etc, you will be paying twice for the same thing. Hopefully something they correct in future.
That's because MMM is designed to be fully setting agnostic. The way WotC seems to be moving isn't that you need Volo's or Mordenkeinan's for lore, but rather that you need the Greyhawk book to know how elves are in Greyhawk, and the Ebberon book to know how elves are in Ebbereon, with the statblocks the same for every setting and contained in one book.
But as a child of Warhammer this seems such a soft option compared to a game which, over the 22 years I played it, saw 5 major editions released, each requiring players to buy a new rule book, new army sourcebooks and, usually, new models they had to buy. Warhammer 40K has been slightly more backwards compatible edition to edition but, until recently, still required buying books and new miniatures edition to edition. Each new edition of warhammer I loved through required a massive financial investment to make my empire army “legal” and balanced.
You have to change your models? That seems like a steep ask - they're not cheap. At least with books, it's probably going to be less than £100 to continue getting having compatibility for new stuff. Models are going to be hundreds if not thousands by themselves (when considering both buying them and the money equivalent of the hours you put in). At least with D&D I can carry over pretty much all the generic models - and let's face it, the non generic ones were obtained with the knowledge that they will only be useful for an adventure or two.
Usually it’s that you need to either buy more or they release new units.
The big one was one version where they “re balanced” a load of units so the elite units that you previously only needed one or 2 models of suddenly you had to get a minimum of 5 or 10 for them to be viable.
Let us not forget that Games Workshop is kinda the gold standard for "How To Treat Your Customers to Ensure They Hate You, Your Game, Your Product/Service, and Everything You've Ever Said as Much as Possible, as Quickly as Possible." Like, GW is kinda legendary for being so godawful to their customers - both the end users and the FLGSes that run events - that a lot of FLGSes just don't sell Warhammer products anymore.
If at any point you're asking yourself "is this comparable to something GW has done?", even asking the question is a sign you need to stop, back up, and reexamine.
I guess I don't understand how it's ripping people off. No one is forcing anyone to buy it, so while it may well be a low value purchase for those who already own the originals...it's not ripping you off. I guess it could be made clearer that it's a redo? Then again, I don't think you'd be here airing grievances if you didn't already understand that, so I doubt that's the specific problem.
We also have precedent to exactly that as the Warforged race was 1st put out in "Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron" then updated for free when "Eberron Rising from the Last War" came out.
Eh?
Those books are really weird edge cases. We got a living playtest document that we bought, is no longer purchasable, and when the real book came they initially tried to take certain things away. Then Badeye went and homebrewed some of the races himself to appease the masses.
I guess I don't understand how it's ripping people off. No one is forcing anyone to buy it, so while it may well be a low value purchase for those who already own the originals...it's not ripping you off. I guess it could be made clearer that it's a redo? Then again, I don't think you'd be here airing grievances if you didn't already understand that, so I doubt that's the specific problem.
We also have precedent to exactly that as the Warforged race was 1st put out in "Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron" then updated for free when "Eberron Rising from the Last War" came out.
Eh?
Those books are really weird edge cases. We got a living playtest document that we bought, is no longer purchasable, and when the real book came they initially tried to take certain things away. Then Badeye went and homebrewed some of the races himself to appease the masses.
Something like the Bladesinger is a better example. The original version and the Tasha version differ meaningfully, and the latter version replaced the former automatically and free of charge.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Let us not forget that Games Workshop is kinda the gold standard for "How To Treat Your Customers to Ensure They Hate You, Your Game, Your Product/Service, and Everything You've Ever Said as Much as Possible, as Quickly as Possible." Like, GW is kinda legendary for being so godawful to their customers - both the end users and the FLGSes that run events - that a lot of FLGSes just don't sell Warhammer products anymore.
If at any point you're asking yourself "is this comparable to something GW has done?", even asking the question is a sign you need to stop, back up, and reexamine.
And yet GW is the gold standard from a commercial point of view, year on year increase in profits that belies the economic trend, share price increasing year on year. My point was the WOTC has not remotely approached these levels, the MMM is not just errata, it gathers all the playable races that are not in the PHB together, and it updates and makes tweaks, some significant, to a number of monsters.
All this I imagine for approx £35 price point once it is released on its own and yet many seem to think that Wizards should just give all those changes away for free. The races are not free, neither are the first edition of the monsters. If you have all the races and are happy running the monsters as is then great carry on. You don’t have to buy the book as many have said, those of us who either like the idea of having 2 physical sources for all races, or want to see the changes made to the monsters will buy it.
Let us not forget that Games Workshop is kinda the gold standard for "How To Treat Your Customers to Ensure They Hate You, Your Game, Your Product/Service, and Everything You've Ever Said as Much as Possible, as Quickly as Possible." Like, GW is kinda legendary for being so godawful to their customers - both the end users and the FLGSes that run events - that a lot of FLGSes just don't sell Warhammer products anymore.
If at any point you're asking yourself "is this comparable to something GW has done?", even asking the question is a sign you need to stop, back up, and reexamine.
And yet GW is the gold standard from a commercial point of view, year on year increase in profits that belies the economic trend, share price increasing year on year. My point was the WOTC has not remotely approached these levels, the MMM is not just errata, it gathers all the playable races that are not in the PHB together, and it updates and makes tweaks, some significant, to a number of monsters.
All this I imagine for approx £35 price point once it is released on its own and yet many seem to think that Wizards should just give all those changes away for free. The races are not free, neither are the first edition of the monsters. If you have all the races and are happy running the monsters as is then great carry on. You don’t have to buy the book as many have said, those of us who either like the idea of having 2 physical sources for all races, or want to see the changes made to the monsters will buy it.
I'm sorry, what?
Wizards hasn't approached those levels?
Wizards is the first billion dollar tabletop entity. In 2020, Magic sold 580 MILLION worth of product. It does this by releasing card set after card which invalidates prior sets in league and tournament formats and makes prior purchases worthless.
Games Workshop could only hope to get on Wizards level of predatory gaming practices, since their stock is down 40 dollars year over year and Wizards isn't.
I won't compare WotC to GW an occasional oversight, which I actually believe this is, doesn't mean WotC is doing anything wrong in general. HOWEVER, it's important to point out oversights because in many cases they simply miss edge cases.
Heck, my particular edge case is only really empowered by how GOOD D&D beyond has been! Back in the days when I collected books, I would have loved to have a single book to pull from.
I won't be buying MMM in this case because it's not cost effective. I am personally frustrated because the racial overhauls aren't being released as errata for the books they are in. I don't need the Tasha's stuff as D&D beyond already includes it. But Kobolds, Yuan-ti and a few other races got complete overhauls from Volo's.
Also, my less personal issue with it NOT being errata is that you've now fractured your player base. There are 2 legally valid versions of all the races you've re-designed instead of 1. I don't know about you; but creating more discord between players and DMs on what is allowed and isn't or what they have materials for and don't, is a mistake.
There are 2 legally valid versions of all the races you've re-designed instead of 1.
There are already umpty-seven different legally valid versions of elves, so I don't see the problem
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
There are 2 legally valid versions of all the races you've re-designed instead of 1.
There are already umpty-seven different legally valid versions of elves, so I don't see the problem
Those are subraces, not different versions of the base elf. These aren't subraces of the race they are redesigns of the base race. In the past such things have always been errata. It's why they changed Orcs across the board when they released both Exandria and Eberron. That version of Orc became the standard and Volo's got an errata.
Now they are doing the same thing again with a new book, but aren't making an errata.
Also, my less personal issue with it NOT being errata is that you've now fractured your player base. There are 2 legally valid versions of all the races you've re-designed instead of 1. I don't know about you; but creating more discord between players and DMs on what is allowed and isn't or what they have materials for and don't, is a mistake.
This seems like making a mountain out of a molehill. Games have always allowed some things and disallowed others, and groups will have access to whatever they have access to. In the end it's just content. Being an updated version of existing content doesn't change that. There are other instances of players having a choice between two versions of something as well - two versions of the ranger class, two kinds of humans, two kinds of eladrin, Tasha's floating ASI version of races vs the regular ones, lineages letting you choose whether your character still retains some previous racial qualities or not, ... None of that is problematic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It is so refreshing to see someone upset and bothered the other way on this issue. Not to make light of your concerns, kn1ght, but back when M3 was released and people were threatening legal Armageddon whilst also screeching "literally no one could ever possibly be upset at DDB just LEAVING THE OLD BOOKS ALONE!", it was pointed out that no, people very much could be upset at having to pay for errata.
Here's proof we were right, and they were wrong. Mmm...delicious vindication.
There are 2 legally valid versions of all the races you've re-designed instead of 1.
There are already umpty-seven different legally valid versions of elves, so I don't see the problem
Those are subraces, not different versions of the base elf. These aren't subraces of the race they are redesigns of the base race. In the past such things have always been errata. It's why they changed Orcs across the board when they released both Exandria and Eberron. That version of Orc became the standard and Volo's got an errata.
Now they are doing the same thing again with a new book, but aren't making an errata.
This site doesn't allow gifs, so I can't Inigo Montoya your use of the word "errata", but...
You haven't answered the question though. What, exactly, is the crisis you think will happen at a table if there are two different versions of a race?
Player: here's my character DM: (looks at it) Oh, I use version A of that race, not version B. Make sure you switch it over on DDB Player: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!1!!1!!11!11!1 (flips table)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Never claimed any crisis, adding hyperbole was not me. I clearly stated the problem was mine and most likely and oversight on a fringe case by WotC. I know that D&D beyond has thought of it because even they don't know what WotC's stance on the new info will be yet.
I'm only pointing it out in case they didn't notice; or intend to make it a habitual occurrence. if they keep doing this in the future, I think it will be bad for the consumer and will then be an obviously money-oriented move.
EDIT: I also pointed out such things HAVE been errata in the past.
It is so refreshing to see someone upset and bothered the other way on this issue. Not to make light of your concerns, kn1ght, but back when M3 was released and people were threatening legal Armageddon whilst also screeching "literally no one could ever possibly be upset at DDB just LEAVING THE OLD BOOKS ALONE!", it was pointed out that no, people very much could be upset at having to pay for errata.
Here's proof we were right, and they were wrong. Mmm...delicious vindication.
Anyways. Carry on.
I never understood the worry, I always thought that they'd just add a checkbox to character creation like that did with Tasha's. Click the checkbox if you want to use the old rules. Problem solved... (Obviously use the old rules with the checkbox as the new ones are the new official ones)
EDIT: Also sorry for the double post, as you can see by my post count, I am kind of new to posting on forums and I wanted address 2 separate posts and have no idea how to do it in a single post.
Talking about how D&D Beyond handles it, not how WotC consider it. Separate companies, separate priorities.
For example on how D&D Beyond's priorities might differ:
- What are the contractually obligated to do? - Does D&D beyond consider it errata even if WotC doesn't? - Will taking WotC's stance break the promise of always the most up to date info? - Would taking the hit on sales from not selling the book to the fringe cases like me offset the possible bad feelings/PR of not treating it like errata? - Will treating it like errata make current subscribers upset?
I think the final one was answered by the community if the change is forced.
I'm not, despite my distaste for this particular instance screaming from the rooftops that "ALL MUST BURN!!!" or anything. I've already stated I'm not buying MMM because it makes no sense for me.
I just don't want this to be the precedent going forward for a product I love, as I won't pay for a product twice even if I get 10% new info or a new physical layout. I think I've been pretty clear and well-reasoned.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I mean the biggest draw for me is the improved monster stat lines. The fact that they have changed and tweaked to make match the CR rating rather then me having to tweak myself is a draw. I won’t be buying the full set but will be buying MMM
But as a child of Warhammer this seems such a soft option compared to a game which, over the 22 years I played it, saw 5 major editions released, each requiring players to buy a new rule book, new army sourcebooks and, usually, new models they had to buy. Warhammer 40K has been slightly more backwards compatible edition to edition but, until recently, still required buying books and new miniatures edition to edition. Each new edition of warhammer I loved through required a massive financial investment to make my empire army “legal” and balanced.
Comparing that to wizards who after 7.5 years have repackaged 2 books into 1 and over the next 3 will be making changes to 3 - 4 more it seems positively cheap to play DND. Games progress and change, rules evolve based on the many hours of real play they undergo, the good news is it seems most gaming companies, GW included, have identified it is better to do this in a slow backwards compatible way rather then the scorched earth approach of the 90’s/2000’s.
You have to change your models? That seems like a steep ask - they're not cheap. At least with books, it's probably going to be less than £100 to continue getting having compatibility for new stuff. Models are going to be hundreds if not thousands by themselves (when considering both buying them and the money equivalent of the hours you put in). At least with D&D I can carry over pretty much all the generic models - and let's face it, the non generic ones were obtained with the knowledge that they will only be useful for an adventure or two.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It's only a rip-off because this kind of material used to be errata. They aren't forcing me to pay 100% for 10% new material no, but they used to give updates to published material for free as errata to the books. Compilation books such as MMM are typically a cost saving for new players. While us old players got errata released usually as PDFs.
D&D Beyond offered a unique way of getting your books to be "always up to date" and was even a selling point at one time when they said "You'll always have the most up to date version of the information"
We also have precedent to exactly that as the Warforged race was 1st put out in "Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron" then updated for free when "Eberron Rising from the Last War" came out.
That's because MMM is designed to be fully setting agnostic. The way WotC seems to be moving isn't that you need Volo's or Mordenkeinan's for lore, but rather that you need the Greyhawk book to know how elves are in Greyhawk, and the Ebberon book to know how elves are in Ebbereon, with the statblocks the same for every setting and contained in one book.
Usually it’s that you need to either buy more or they release new units.
The big one was one version where they “re balanced” a load of units so the elite units that you previously only needed one or 2 models of suddenly you had to get a minimum of 5 or 10 for them to be viable.
Let us not forget that Games Workshop is kinda the gold standard for "How To Treat Your Customers to Ensure They Hate You, Your Game, Your Product/Service, and Everything You've Ever Said as Much as Possible, as Quickly as Possible." Like, GW is kinda legendary for being so godawful to their customers - both the end users and the FLGSes that run events - that a lot of FLGSes just don't sell Warhammer products anymore.
If at any point you're asking yourself "is this comparable to something GW has done?", even asking the question is a sign you need to stop, back up, and reexamine.
Please do not contact or message me.
Eh?
Those books are really weird edge cases. We got a living playtest document that we bought, is no longer purchasable, and when the real book came they initially tried to take certain things away. Then Badeye went and homebrewed some of the races himself to appease the masses.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/news-announcements/53261-wayfinders-guide-to-eberron-pre-update-content
Something like the Bladesinger is a better example. The original version and the Tasha version differ meaningfully, and the latter version replaced the former automatically and free of charge.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
And yet GW is the gold standard from a commercial point of view, year on year increase in profits that belies the economic trend, share price increasing year on year. My point was the WOTC has not remotely approached these levels, the MMM is not just errata, it gathers all the playable races that are not in the PHB together, and it updates and makes tweaks, some significant, to a number of monsters.
All this I imagine for approx £35 price point once it is released on its own and yet many seem to think that Wizards should just give all those changes away for free. The races are not free, neither are the first edition of the monsters. If you have all the races and are happy running the monsters as is then great carry on. You don’t have to buy the book as many have said, those of us who either like the idea of having 2 physical sources for all races, or want to see the changes made to the monsters will buy it.
I'm sorry, what?
Wizards hasn't approached those levels?
Wizards is the first billion dollar tabletop entity. In 2020, Magic sold 580 MILLION worth of product. It does this by releasing card set after card which invalidates prior sets in league and tournament formats and makes prior purchases worthless.
Games Workshop could only hope to get on Wizards level of predatory gaming practices, since their stock is down 40 dollars year over year and Wizards isn't.
I won't compare WotC to GW an occasional oversight, which I actually believe this is, doesn't mean WotC is doing anything wrong in general. HOWEVER, it's important to point out oversights because in many cases they simply miss edge cases.
Heck, my particular edge case is only really empowered by how GOOD D&D beyond has been! Back in the days when I collected books, I would have loved to have a single book to pull from.
I won't be buying MMM in this case because it's not cost effective. I am personally frustrated because the racial overhauls aren't being released as errata for the books they are in. I don't need the Tasha's stuff as D&D beyond already includes it. But Kobolds, Yuan-ti and a few other races got complete overhauls from Volo's.
Also, my less personal issue with it NOT being errata is that you've now fractured your player base. There are 2 legally valid versions of all the races you've re-designed instead of 1. I don't know about you; but creating more discord between players and DMs on what is allowed and isn't or what they have materials for and don't, is a mistake.
There are already umpty-seven different legally valid versions of elves, so I don't see the problem
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Those are subraces, not different versions of the base elf. These aren't subraces of the race they are redesigns of the base race. In the past such things have always been errata. It's why they changed Orcs across the board when they released both Exandria and Eberron. That version of Orc became the standard and Volo's got an errata.
Now they are doing the same thing again with a new book, but aren't making an errata.
This seems like making a mountain out of a molehill. Games have always allowed some things and disallowed others, and groups will have access to whatever they have access to. In the end it's just content. Being an updated version of existing content doesn't change that. There are other instances of players having a choice between two versions of something as well - two versions of the ranger class, two kinds of humans, two kinds of eladrin, Tasha's floating ASI version of races vs the regular ones, lineages letting you choose whether your character still retains some previous racial qualities or not, ... None of that is problematic.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Man.
It is so refreshing to see someone upset and bothered the other way on this issue. Not to make light of your concerns, kn1ght, but back when M3 was released and people were threatening legal Armageddon whilst also screeching "literally no one could ever possibly be upset at DDB just LEAVING THE OLD BOOKS ALONE!", it was pointed out that no, people very much could be upset at having to pay for errata.
Here's proof we were right, and they were wrong. Mmm...delicious vindication.
Anyways. Carry on.
Please do not contact or message me.
This site doesn't allow gifs, so I can't Inigo Montoya your use of the word "errata", but...
You haven't answered the question though. What, exactly, is the crisis you think will happen at a table if there are two different versions of a race?
Player: here's my character
DM: (looks at it) Oh, I use version A of that race, not version B. Make sure you switch it over on DDB
Player: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!1!!1!!11!11!1 (flips table)
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Never claimed any crisis, adding hyperbole was not me. I clearly stated the problem was mine and most likely and oversight on a fringe case by WotC. I know that D&D beyond has thought of it because even they don't know what WotC's stance on the new info will be yet.
I'm only pointing it out in case they didn't notice; or intend to make it a habitual occurrence. if they keep doing this in the future, I think it will be bad for the consumer and will then be an obviously money-oriented move.
EDIT: I also pointed out such things HAVE been errata in the past.
I never understood the worry, I always thought that they'd just add a checkbox to character creation like that did with Tasha's. Click the checkbox if you want to use the old rules. Problem solved... (Obviously use the old rules with the checkbox as the new ones are the new official ones)
EDIT: Also sorry for the double post, as you can see by my post count, I am kind of new to posting on forums and I wanted address 2 separate posts and have no idea how to do it in a single post.
WotC's stance is pretty clear. It's new info, it's not errata. It will be treated as separate content.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Talking about how D&D Beyond handles it, not how WotC consider it. Separate companies, separate priorities.
For example on how D&D Beyond's priorities might differ:
- What are the contractually obligated to do?
- Does D&D beyond consider it errata even if WotC doesn't?
- Will taking WotC's stance break the promise of always the most up to date info?
- Would taking the hit on sales from not selling the book to the fringe cases like me offset the possible bad feelings/PR of not treating it like errata?
- Will treating it like errata make current subscribers upset?
I think the final one was answered by the community if the change is forced.
I'm not, despite my distaste for this particular instance screaming from the rooftops that "ALL MUST BURN!!!" or anything. I've already stated I'm not buying MMM because it makes no sense for me.
I just don't want this to be the precedent going forward for a product I love, as I won't pay for a product twice even if I get 10% new info or a new physical layout. I think I've been pretty clear and well-reasoned.