Hi! 
i was looking over the buyers thread, and this item threw me: 

—

Our group wants to spread the purchases around:  Another way to share costs is for different members of the group to purchase different content, and for someone in the group to get a Master Tier subscription.  (Sue buys the PHB, Aaron buys the MM, Betty buys Volo's, etc.)  This way the costs are shared, but if the group breaks up for one reason or another, everyone still has some content available to them.  This may also a good option if you are part of multiple groups.

—

So if one of us has a master subscription- the whole group can share content? I assumed only the subscription holder could.🤔

That's correct; content sharing enabled in a campaign shares everything owned by everyone with everyone else.

The DM doesn't have to be the one to enable content sharing either, any player can do it.

yep, make friends with one person with a master tier and friends with another person that owns a bunch of sources.  or multiple friends that own a few different sources each.

then you got a fully stocked campaign

Beautiful. 

Thank you! 

one last question- the site I saw said sharing went across 5 campaigns — is that 5 at ALL, or five at a time?

 At a time. So you can turn off content sharing from older campaigns and turn it on for newer ones, so long as your Master Tier sub hasn't enabled sharing in more than 5 at a time.

Five concurrent (existing at the same time) campaigns; and a campaign is 12 people.  

I don't know if customer relations has this as a selling point in DDB's house, but really the Master Tier is an awesome benefit for gaming clubs of a formal or informal structure.

There's only two complaints I hear about in re content sharing and both come to campaign managers wanting greater granular control: 1.) DMs would like to toggle deeper into the book rather than keeping whole books on or off.  For example, I don't like Artificers ... it's not a strong dislike it's just I don't really know how to keep one entertained as a DM.  I would love to be able to turn off the Artificer class in Tasha's and keep the rest "on."  2.) Everybodies' homebrew is shared and shows up in things like characters makers and what not.  Say you're running a game set in the third party Humblewood and you spent not an insignificant amount of free time home brewing all the character options of Humblewood into your game.  But you also spent an not insignificant amount of time adding homebrew from quasi-Planescape (Heroes of the Infinite Planes) "Gatecrasher" Rogues to dream based races/lineages/legacies from an issue of MCDM's Arcadia.  All that stuff shows up in your players' character options if homebrew is enabled.  Sure, I can tag titles with [Humblewood] so players can find what I'm allowing/encouraging, but the ability to go/nogo specific homebrew in a campaign would be a boon to DMs.  

I think those two complaints are far outweighed by the benefit of content sharing and much prefer having to take a couple of minutes to review sheets to make sure they're than I would be having lend physical books or spend time building characters with other players in my account, loaning out physical books hoping the player knew which ones to ask for and moreso hoping I get them back, etc.

Quote from MidnightPlat >>

Five concurrent (existing at the same time) campaigns; and a campaign is 12 people.  

I don't know if customer relations has this as a selling point in DDB's house, but really the Master Tier is an awesome benefit for gaming clubs of a formal or informal structure.

There's only two complaints I hear about in re content sharing and both come to campaign managers wanting greater granular control: 1.) DMs would like to toggle deeper into the book rather than keeping whole books on or off.  For example, I don't like Artificers ... it's not a strong dislike it's just I don't really know how to keep one entertained as a DM.  I would love to be able to turn off the Artificer class in Tasha's and keep the rest "on."  2.) Everybodies' homebrew is shared and shows up in things like characters makers and what not.  Say you're running a game set in the third party Humblewood and you spent not an insignificant amount of free time home brewing all the character options of Humblewood into your game.  But you also spent an not insignificant amount of time adding homebrew from quasi-Planescape (Heroes of the Infinite Planes) "Gatecrasher" Rogues to dream based races/lineages/legacies from an issue of MCDM's Arcadia.  All that stuff shows up in your players' character options if homebrew is enabled.  Sure, I can tag titles with [Humblewood] so players can find what I'm allowing/encouraging, but the ability to go/nogo specific homebrew in a campaign would be a boon to DMs.  

I think those two complaints are far outweighed by the benefit of content sharing and much prefer having to take a couple of minutes to review sheets to make sure they're than I would be having lend physical books or spend time building characters with other players in my account, loaning out physical books hoping the player knew which ones to ask for and moreso hoping I get them back, etc.

I feel like it's easy enough to cover what is available to players and not available through talk at session 0, rather than filtering it from DnD Beyond.  The real purpose of being able to turn off content sharing, for me at least, is to protect players from spoilers from adventure books.