Never claimed any crisis, adding hyperbole was not me.
We must have different definitions of hyperbole then. 'Fracturing your player base' and "creating more discord between players and DMs" sure sounds like it would be a crisis to me.
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.
But again, I don't see where the fractures or discord would come from, regardless of how you're defining those terms. DMs will decide what's allowed in their games and what isn't, same as it ever was
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)
Talking about how D&D Beyond handles it, not how WotC consider it. Separate companies, separate priorities.
Same thing though. DDB will treat it as separate content. You'll need to buy it separately to unlock it, the original books will not be updated to reflect the new one as it's not errata. This has been confirmed, it's a done deal. The exact implementation is not known yet, but that's really a cosmetic thing. Doesn't matter if it's sliders or buttons or separate entries, old and new versions will be distinct from each other and owning one will not entitle you to access to the other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I do not see how having more options would fracture the player base, let alone a single group. I give my players the option to choose whatever race they want, including UA versions of published races. If my players want to use something that was prepublished/pre-errata (whether it is race, class, spell, or whatever), they can use that too. Each of my players can individually choose to keep old static racial ASIs (if applicable) or use Tasha's ASI system. If Beyond got their act together and implemented all the optional rules, I would even allow my players to individually choose whether they want to use spell points or spell slots for their characters. There is nothing wrong with mixing and matching.
And as a GM, having multiple versions of the same monster is even more awesome, since I like to have more variety to choose from. I could do some minor homebrewing to switch some weapons and armor around, but having them already done for you is nice and just plain easier.
2 valid versions of the same race = playing 2 separate versions of the same race = 2 different players with the same race on paper but not the same in game abilities or options = fractured
This isn't me being hostile or judgmental, its simply fact.
Also, if you've never played in a group where one player is jealous over what another can do or argued with the DM of which official rules is or is not allowed, I envy you. I've been playing D&D for more than 30 years and I'm sad to say I see it all the time. Heck recently we had someone quit because of a TPK they caused over 40g. Maturity level varies greatly among players and DMs as do game styles and types. Anything that can cause discord I try to avoid and having 2 legal versions of the same race is bound to cause some in my experience. So, this isn't hyperbole from my PoV, but I can understand how you might think so.
2 valid versions of the same race = playing 2 separate versions of the same race = 2 different players with the same race on paper but not the same in game abilities or options = fractured
I do not see how that is a fractured player base. While you can define fractured however you want, I do not think many people will use your definition. That is like saying two players playing different humans results in a fractured player base. Both human options are legitimate options, and players can choose whether they want to focus on having more ASIs or early access to a feat.
Also, if you've never played in a group where one player is jealous over what another can do or argued with the DM of which official rules is or is not allowed, I envy you. I've been playing D&D for more than 30 years and I'm sad to say I see it all the time. Heck recently we had someone quit because of a TPK they caused over 40g. Maturity level varies greatly among players and DMs as do game styles and types. Anything that can cause discord I try to avoid and having 2 legal versions of the same race is bound to cause some in my experience. So, this isn't hyperbole from my PoV, but I can understand how you might think so.
I am the GM and I set the rules. What I say goes. At my table, anything published and semi-published by Wizards is allowed. My players honestly do not really care what other players are playing. They care in the sense of creating synergy as a team, but they are not going to tell each other they cannot be an elf or wizard because they themselves want to be an elf or wizard.
Jealousy is not an issue in my group, and cooperation and having fun is more important than who gets the most kills or who can deal the most damage.
2 valid versions of the same race = playing 2 separate versions of the same race = 2 different players with the same race on paper but not the same in game abilities or options = fractured
I do not see how that is a fractured player base. While you can define fractured however you want, I do not think many people will use your definition. That is like saying two players playing different humans results in a fractured player base. Both human options are legitimate options, and players can choose whether they want to focus on having more ASIs or early access to a feat.
You don't see how it's fracturing because it isn't fracturing. It's no different than variant races. Its actually almost the exact same thing. And any DM that wants to limit the option to just one or the other, or not use MMM, or whatever, can do that. "Fracturing the player base" is not at all what this is.
I've been on both sides of the coin; I've played and I've DM'd. I wouldn't see this as fracturing a playerbase either, because once you get around the table and one player plays a race with old stats, and someone plays with the new, you can talk about whether or not they want the same benefits or not. Explain in a session 0 that you're okay with whatever they chose, but that they'll have to stick by it, and also explain what is different exactly. You - as a DM - can navigate through these rough waters, but you do need to talk about it. And if the player with the old stats wants to keep playing that, than they shouldn't make a big deal about it when the player with the new stats can do cooler stuff, or has different abilities. It's the way of the game.
As a player, I'm not going to buy the entire book, probably only the races. I have all the hard cover stuff at home, so I'd only really need the races to keep my character sheets on DDB up to date, and (I am privileged enough) I have a masters subscription on DDB, so everything I have, my players that I DM also have access too. And because of that, they also chip in on my subscription, but that's because they are really nice and not because I tell them too. I just wanted to know if it would be updated, or if I needed to buy them again, and because I want to keep everything up to date, I'll buy them again.
As people mentioned before, nobody is forcing anyone to buy the new book. You can decide if you want to keep playing with the older stats, which are still valid. I don't see this as something that fractures the player base at all.
2 valid versions of the same race = playing 2 separate versions of the same race = 2 different players with the same race on paper but not the same in game abilities or options = fractured
This isn't me being hostile or judgmental, its simply fact.
Also, if you've never played in a group where one player is jealous over what another can do or argued with the DM of which official rules is or is not allowed, I envy you. I've been playing D&D for more than 30 years and I'm sad to say I see it all the time. Heck recently we had someone quit because of a TPK they caused over 40g. Maturity level varies greatly among players and DMs as do game styles and types. Anything that can cause discord I try to avoid and having 2 legal versions of the same race is bound to cause some in my experience. So, this isn't hyperbole from my PoV, but I can understand how you might think so.
considering that some of us DM's have been running floating ASI's for many many years, where you place your ASI's is not going to fracture the player base, I mean, a player who decides to stick to the Original way is just deciding to place there floating ASI's in those stats.
I mean, it's D&D. The player base is already fractured, and the DM base, and the entire hobby. That's fine.
Every single table plays different rules and variations and custom homebrews and whatever. I dare you to find two tables of two different groups of people who play the same rules or the same interpretations or the same allowed races or the same stuff. It simply does not exist.
Do you play standard resurrection rules? Congrats, you don't play like Critical Role.
Spells don't use components? We're in Adventure Zone baby.
Every single table is fractured, and that's fine.
Also, if you've never played in a group where one player is jealous over what another can do or argued with the DM of which official rules is or is not allowed, I envy you. I've been playing D&D for more than 30 years and I'm sad to say I see it all the time. Heck recently we had someone quit because of a TPK they caused over 40g. Maturity level varies greatly among players and DMs as do game styles and types. Anything that can cause discord I try to avoid and having 2 legal versions of the same race is bound to cause some in my experience. So, this isn't hyperbole from my PoV, but I can understand how you might think so.
I've played at these tables before, and I've DM'd at these tables before. This isn't a D&D problem, it's a communication problem.
I mean, it's D&D. The player base is already fractured, and the DM base, and the entire hobby. That's fine.
Every single table plays different rules and variations and custom homebrews and whatever. I dare you to find two tables of two different groups of people who play the same rules or the same interpretations or the same allowed races or the same stuff. It simply does not exist.
Do you play standard resurrection rules? Congrats, you don't play like Critical Role.
Spells don't use components? We're in Adventure Zone baby.
Every single table is fractured, and that's fine.
Also, if you've never played in a group where one player is jealous over what another can do or argued with the DM of which official rules is or is not allowed, I envy you. I've been playing D&D for more than 30 years and I'm sad to say I see it all the time. Heck recently we had someone quit because of a TPK they caused over 40g. Maturity level varies greatly among players and DMs as do game styles and types. Anything that can cause discord I try to avoid and having 2 legal versions of the same race is bound to cause some in my experience. So, this isn't hyperbole from my PoV, but I can understand how you might think so.
I've played at these tables before, and I've DM'd at these tables before. This isn't a D&D problem, it's a communication problem.
Agree I have played TTRPG's for 30 years DnD has no problem I can think of that is unique in some way compared to other systems, yes there are rules specific things but in general all TTRPG's can have the same issues to some extent.
I got the book on the app, but for some reason, the races don't pop up at all. I'm not exactly sure what is wrong. I am wanting to make a kobold, and that is the whole reason I got the book. But I can't and I don't know why.
I got the book on the app, but for some reason, the races don't pop up at all. I'm not exactly sure what is wrong. I am wanting to make a kobold, and that is the whole reason I got the book. But I can't and I don't know why.
I got the book on the app, but for some reason, the races don't pop up at all. I'm not exactly sure what is wrong. I am wanting to make a kobold, and that is the whole reason I got the book. But I can't and I don't know why.
Is the "extended rules" toggle on in the character builder?
The other question to ask is when. By some reports,.it can take days for a purchase on the app to go through and be recognised by DDB.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We must have different definitions of hyperbole then. 'Fracturing your player base' and "creating more discord between players and DMs" sure sounds like it would be a crisis to me.
But again, I don't see where the fractures or discord would come from, regardless of how you're defining those terms. DMs will decide what's allowed in their games and what isn't, same as it ever was
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)
Same thing though. DDB will treat it as separate content. You'll need to buy it separately to unlock it, the original books will not be updated to reflect the new one as it's not errata. This has been confirmed, it's a done deal. The exact implementation is not known yet, but that's really a cosmetic thing. Doesn't matter if it's sliders or buttons or separate entries, old and new versions will be distinct from each other and owning one will not entitle you to access to the other.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I do not see how having more options would fracture the player base, let alone a single group. I give my players the option to choose whatever race they want, including UA versions of published races. If my players want to use something that was prepublished/pre-errata (whether it is race, class, spell, or whatever), they can use that too. Each of my players can individually choose to keep old static racial ASIs (if applicable) or use Tasha's ASI system. If Beyond got their act together and implemented all the optional rules, I would even allow my players to individually choose whether they want to use spell points or spell slots for their characters. There is nothing wrong with mixing and matching.
And as a GM, having multiple versions of the same monster is even more awesome, since I like to have more variety to choose from. I could do some minor homebrewing to switch some weapons and armor around, but having them already done for you is nice and just plain easier.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Fracturing the player base is just fact:
2 valid versions of the same race = playing 2 separate versions of the same race = 2 different players with the same race on paper but not the same in game abilities or options = fractured
This isn't me being hostile or judgmental, its simply fact.
Also, if you've never played in a group where one player is jealous over what another can do or argued with the DM of which official rules is or is not allowed, I envy you. I've been playing D&D for more than 30 years and I'm sad to say I see it all the time. Heck recently we had someone quit because of a TPK they caused over 40g. Maturity level varies greatly among players and DMs as do game styles and types. Anything that can cause discord I try to avoid and having 2 legal versions of the same race is bound to cause some in my experience. So, this isn't hyperbole from my PoV, but I can understand how you might think so.
I do not see how that is a fractured player base. While you can define fractured however you want, I do not think many people will use your definition. That is like saying two players playing different humans results in a fractured player base. Both human options are legitimate options, and players can choose whether they want to focus on having more ASIs or early access to a feat.
I am the GM and I set the rules. What I say goes. At my table, anything published and semi-published by Wizards is allowed. My players honestly do not really care what other players are playing. They care in the sense of creating synergy as a team, but they are not going to tell each other they cannot be an elf or wizard because they themselves want to be an elf or wizard.
Jealousy is not an issue in my group, and cooperation and having fun is more important than who gets the most kills or who can deal the most damage.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
You don't see how it's fracturing because it isn't fracturing. It's no different than variant races. Its actually almost the exact same thing. And any DM that wants to limit the option to just one or the other, or not use MMM, or whatever, can do that. "Fracturing the player base" is not at all what this is.
I've been on both sides of the coin; I've played and I've DM'd. I wouldn't see this as fracturing a playerbase either, because once you get around the table and one player plays a race with old stats, and someone plays with the new, you can talk about whether or not they want the same benefits or not. Explain in a session 0 that you're okay with whatever they chose, but that they'll have to stick by it, and also explain what is different exactly. You - as a DM - can navigate through these rough waters, but you do need to talk about it. And if the player with the old stats wants to keep playing that, than they shouldn't make a big deal about it when the player with the new stats can do cooler stuff, or has different abilities. It's the way of the game.
As a player, I'm not going to buy the entire book, probably only the races. I have all the hard cover stuff at home, so I'd only really need the races to keep my character sheets on DDB up to date, and (I am privileged enough) I have a masters subscription on DDB, so everything I have, my players that I DM also have access too. And because of that, they also chip in on my subscription, but that's because they are really nice and not because I tell them too. I just wanted to know if it would be updated, or if I needed to buy them again, and because I want to keep everything up to date, I'll buy them again.
As people mentioned before, nobody is forcing anyone to buy the new book. You can decide if you want to keep playing with the older stats, which are still valid. I don't see this as something that fractures the player base at all.
considering that some of us DM's have been running floating ASI's for many many years, where you place your ASI's is not going to fracture the player base, I mean, a player who decides to stick to the Original way is just deciding to place there floating ASI's in those stats.
I mean, it's D&D. The player base is already fractured, and the DM base, and the entire hobby. That's fine.
Every single table plays different rules and variations and custom homebrews and whatever. I dare you to find two tables of two different groups of people who play the same rules or the same interpretations or the same allowed races or the same stuff. It simply does not exist.
Do you play standard resurrection rules? Congrats, you don't play like Critical Role.
Spells don't use components? We're in Adventure Zone baby.
Every single table is fractured, and that's fine.
I've played at these tables before, and I've DM'd at these tables before. This isn't a D&D problem, it's a communication problem.
Agree I have played TTRPG's for 30 years DnD has no problem I can think of that is unique in some way compared to other systems, yes there are rules specific things but in general all TTRPG's can have the same issues to some extent.
I got the book on the app, but for some reason, the races don't pop up at all. I'm not exactly sure what is wrong. I am wanting to make a kobold, and that is the whole reason I got the book. But I can't and I don't know why.
Go here: https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses
And make sure your entitlements data is synced. If it says it isn't, click the button there to sync it.
pronouns: he/she/they
Is the "extended rules" toggle on in the character builder?
The other question to ask is when. By some reports,.it can take days for a purchase on the app to go through and be recognised by DDB.
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.