So you think every FLGS has the responsibility to announce when Wizards decides they are no longer going to sell content?
If the store exclusively sells official D&D5e products and nothing else? Sure, it wouldn't be a bad idea. Also, lets not forget that WotC owns this site. It may not be official until next week, but that is just a formality.
So you think every FLGS has the responsibility to announce when Wizards decides they are no longer going to sell content?
If you ask the FLGS to order something they don't have in stock, they should tell you "it's no longer available". If it's currently in stock and you want to buy it, the FLGS will sell it to you. The thing is, electronic resources never run out of stock, so the only way for Wizards to expire old products is by removing it from sale.
So based on GreyDragon's posts from Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds, it looks like in this regard DDB was treated like WotC's other digital partners in that they weren't informed or cleared to publicize the delisting of Volo's and Mord's until very recently.
It's a WotC thing, not a DDB thing. I don't know if you can expect "better" (whatever that might be) once DDB is fully owned by WotC. I do see a missed opportunity for "get them before they're gone" sales purchases had they made the announcement timed with the last sale, but again DDB doesn't appear to be in control of the message timing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
So you think every FLGS has the responsibility to announce when Wizards decides they are no longer going to sell content?
You're moving the goalposts.
A FLGS(what a terrible goddamn acronym), a game/hobby shop typically sells dozens of products from dozens of companies. Roll20 and FantasyGrounds do too, but D&D Beyond doesn't.
It's a WotC thing, not a DDB thing. I don't know if you can expect "better" (whatever that might be) once DDB is fully owned by WotC. I do see a missed opportunity for "get them before they're gone" sales purchases had they made the announcement timed with the last sale, but again DDB doesn't appear to be in control of the message timing.
Well, I did see a popup about that.
My suspicion is that WotC is bad at digital (which is probably why they decided to buy DDB in the first place), didn't initially realize the problem they were opening up with MMM (because it's not a problem in traditional publishing), spent some time running around like chickens with their heads cut off, and eventually came up with this solution.
It's possible that it will be 'better' once DDB is fully owned, because Wizards will have people on staff who can tell them "this plan is going to wreak havoc on the digital marketplace" and at least get people thinking about the problem ahead of time (of course, that depends on the people coming up with the business plan actually listening, which is... not guaranteed).
Now that it's been confirmed I guess it's time to walk the steps of those before me and say "I ain't buying any more of their shit". Man **** this move. First WotC decided on making MMM in the first place, then THIS smoothbrain move in discontinuing VGM and MToF, then DDB kept it hidden from their customers, and now they aren't even announcing it days before it happens. Unapologetic bullshit all around.
It's possible that it will be 'better' once DDB is fully owned, because Wizards will have people on staff who can tell them "this plan is going to wreak havoc on the digital marketplace" and at least get people thinking about the problem ahead of time (of course, that depends on the people coming up with the business plan actually listening, which is... not guaranteed).
Well, I'm guessing those Microsoft Exec hires Hasbro installed in WotC were done so for a reason. I think DDB's integration into WotC's product development flow, if that happens, has a lot of potential for "better" D&D consumer experience, but I'm still thinking we won't really be seeing that till 2024. But next Tuesday's possible too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I think this is the first time I've actually genuinely considered boycotting a product... Not because they're delisting old products that have been effectively replaced... But because those alleged "replacements" aren't replacements. They force the horrible optional "custom" ASI rules from Tasha's with no mention of a default value (but for some reason suggesting what stats to give your classes is fine), and leave out the common lore. I don't want to need to read every book on the forgotten realms in order to have an idea about how covens work or what loot they might have. They even direct you to Volo's in The Wild Beyond the Witchlight; a campaign that explicitly starts in whatever setting you choose, and fully endorses the custom lineage stuff, essentially republishing it for those without Tasha's.
"But that's setting specific." So? It's a place to start that shares a lot with most other settings. I buy these books to make things easier for me. Why should I spend money to make things more ambiguous? Who took over and decided to throw out rule zero and instead say that the rules tell you what you are allowed to do rather than be suggestions or limitations? Tasha's already came around to clarify "those ability score improvements are just suggestions." Why are they removing the suggestions? They gave us back creature alignment suggestions (albeit with the redundant "typically"). Maybe they'll give us back the suggested racial ASIs as well if we complain enough...
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
If you purchased them before they were discontinued, you will still have access to them.
The only thing difference between then and now is that you cannot buy them anymore now.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
I very much doubt that, it's just that the existence of digital editions has resulted in the process looking a bit different -- the traditional method is that you just let something go out of print. As for the contents, the monster writeups have been replaced (5e appears to be doing a soft version update), the lore has no specific home at the moment but might wind up in a worldbook at some point.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
I think you're asking about whether it's canon or not.
The short answer is that it's reasonable to say that it no longer is canon.
Obviously in a game like D&D, the meaning of canon is...nebulous, but it is no longer available to buy digitally and it's reasonable to assume that it has.been taken out of print electronically. In theory, we could see a setting book that republishes that lore in the settings it applies...but doubtful. They'd have no real reason not to redo the statblocks again... and then you have a rather large proportion of people for whom MotM becomes redundant.
It's evident that WotC doesn't see itself as providing in depth lore anymore.
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.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
I think you're asking about whether it's canon or not.
The short answer is that it's reasonable to say that it no longer is canon.
Obviously in a game like D&D, the meaning of canon is...nebulous, but it is no longer available to buy digitally and it's reasonable to assume that it has.been taken out of print electronically. In theory, we could see a setting book that republishes that lore in the settings it applies...but doubtful. They'd have no real reason not to redo the statblocks again... and then you have a rather large proportion of people for whom MotM becomes redundant.
It's evident that WotC doesn't see itself as providing in depth lore anymore.
The fact the books have been phased out does not mean the fluff is no longer canon, there was nothing drastically new there and much of it has been part of DnD lore through many versions. I think what you are better saying is that WotC no longer sees it as canon in every game universe, it is however canon in Forgotten Realms.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
I think you're asking about whether it's canon or not.
The short answer is that it's reasonable to say that it no longer is canon.
Obviously in a game like D&D, the meaning of canon is...nebulous, but it is no longer available to buy digitally and it's reasonable to assume that it has.been taken out of print electronically. In theory, we could see a setting book that republishes that lore in the settings it applies...but doubtful. They'd have no real reason not to redo the statblocks again... and then you have a rather large proportion of people for whom MotM becomes redundant.
It's evident that WotC doesn't see itself as providing in depth lore anymore.
The fact the books have been phased out does not mean the fluff is no longer canon, there was nothing drastically new there and much of it has been part of DnD lore through many versions. I think what you are better saying is that WotC no longer sees it as canon in every game universe, it is however canon in Forgotten Realms.
You can't have as canon information to a creative game that is no longer available. Since that lore is no longer in print, it is not canon. You can use it if you have it, such is the nature of a game that is so open to homebrew etc, but it isn't canon. If they wanted to keep it as canon, they'd have kept it in print and rebrand it so it's clear that it's for FR. As things are now, they could bring it back, but I doubt it would be commercially viable.
As has been previously said many times, what is true for previous editions is not necessarily true for this one. You're welcome to use previous edition's lore in building up your lore, but again, not canon to 5e.
Until they reaffirm it, it's not canon.
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.
You can't have as canon information to a creative game that is no longer available. Since that lore is no longer in print, it is not canon. You can use it if you have it, such is the nature of a game that is so open to homebrew etc, but it isn't canon. If they wanted to keep it as canon, they'd have kept it in print and rebrand it so it's clear that it's for FR. As things are now, they could bring it back, but I doubt it would be commercially viable.
As has been previously said many times, what is true for previous editions is not necessarily true for this one. You're welcome to use previous edition's lore in building up your lore, but again, not canon to 5e.
Until they reaffirm it, it's not canon.
Most of the lore is still in print. The Monster Manual is still current. PHB. Fizbans (new lore so there is that). All the adventures. They've flagged the direction but they haven't killed most of what's there.
You can't have as canon information to a creative game that is no longer available. Since that lore is no longer in print, it is not canon. You can use it if you have it, such is the nature of a game that is so open to homebrew etc, but it isn't canon. If they wanted to keep it as canon, they'd have kept it in print and rebrand it so it's clear that it's for FR. As things are now, they could bring it back, but I doubt it would be commercially viable.
As has been previously said many times, what is true for previous editions is not necessarily true for this one. You're welcome to use previous edition's lore in building up your lore, but again, not canon to 5e.
Until they reaffirm it, it's not canon.
Most of the lore is still in print. The Monster Manual is still current. PHB. Fizbans (new lore so there is that). All the adventures. They've flagged the direction but they haven't killed most of what's there.
The discussion wasn't about MM, PHB, FToD etc. It was about MToF and VGtM. As fir those books...two of them are being revisited as we speak. Regardless, the deeper lore has already been taken out.
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.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
I think you're asking about whether it's canon or not.
The short answer is that it's reasonable to say that it no longer is canon.
Obviously in a game like D&D, the meaning of canon is...nebulous, but it is no longer available to buy digitally and it's reasonable to assume that it has.been taken out of print electronically. In theory, we could see a setting book that republishes that lore in the settings it applies...but doubtful. They'd have no real reason not to redo the statblocks again... and then you have a rather large proportion of people for whom MotM becomes redundant.
It's evident that WotC doesn't see itself as providing in depth lore anymore.
The fact the books have been phased out does not mean the fluff is no longer canon, there was nothing drastically new there and much of it has been part of DnD lore through many versions. I think what you are better saying is that WotC no longer sees it as canon in every game universe, it is however canon in Forgotten Realms.
You can't have as canon information to a creative game that is no longer available. Since that lore is no longer in print, it is not canon. You can use it if you have it, such is the nature of a game that is so open to homebrew etc, but it isn't canon. If they wanted to keep it as canon, they'd have kept it in print and rebrand it so it's clear that it's for FR. As things are now, they could bring it back, but I doubt it would be commercially viable.
As has been previously said many times, what is true for previous editions is not necessarily true for this one. You're welcome to use previous edition's lore in building up your lore, but again, not canon to 5e.
Until they reaffirm it, it's not canon.
The fact the information is still available to those who have bought it indicates it is still canon. If it was not they would have made it unavailable to everyone, in addition WOTC have themselves said that players and DMs can buy the physical books and still use the information within. I think an argument about Canon is pointless here, the history is there, the blood war, split of the elves etc is all accepted lore. Just because they are shifting to a setting specific approach doesn’t change that. But also, it is entirely up to the DM no player can ever insist that this part of DND lore must be in the game, the DM can rewrite and change everything. So yes some of the source material in these books is absolutely canon in my games and nothing will change that.
The fact the information is still available to those who have bought it indicates it is still canon.
Information from AD&D is still available to those who have bought it. In practice it depends on what 'canon' means to you. To a publisher, it means "new publications are required to remain consistent with this" and I'm not sure that was true even before these books were dropped.
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
I think you're asking about whether it's canon or not.
The short answer is that it's reasonable to say that it no longer is canon.
Obviously in a game like D&D, the meaning of canon is...nebulous, but it is no longer available to buy digitally and it's reasonable to assume that it has.been taken out of print electronically. In theory, we could see a setting book that republishes that lore in the settings it applies...but doubtful. They'd have no real reason not to redo the statblocks again... and then you have a rather large proportion of people for whom MotM becomes redundant.
It's evident that WotC doesn't see itself as providing in depth lore anymore.
The fact the books have been phased out does not mean the fluff is no longer canon, there was nothing drastically new there and much of it has been part of DnD lore through many versions. I think what you are better saying is that WotC no longer sees it as canon in every game universe, it is however canon in Forgotten Realms.
You can't have as canon information to a creative game that is no longer available. Since that lore is no longer in print, it is not canon. You can use it if you have it, such is the nature of a game that is so open to homebrew etc, but it isn't canon. If they wanted to keep it as canon, they'd have kept it in print and rebrand it so it's clear that it's for FR. As things are now, they could bring it back, but I doubt it would be commercially viable.
As has been previously said many times, what is true for previous editions is not necessarily true for this one. You're welcome to use previous edition's lore in building up your lore, but again, not canon to 5e.
Until they reaffirm it, it's not canon.
So the thing is they are canon SPECIFICALLY for Forgotten Realms/Faerun.
I think it was a really bad PR decision on why they were doing it because when 5th launched, the official setting was Forgotten Realms/Faerun. All the original modules took place there. 5th has exploded in popularity and now we're getting all these settings reintroduced into 5th, but the problem then became there was setting specific information included in the stat blocks of creatures that could appear everywhere else. You can't really talk about the Red Wizards of Thay in Dragonlance, for instance.
Again, bad form because from a player perspective you were then asking them to purchase a lot of the same types of content without some of the fluff(and honestly it really is minor what they took out), but at the same time they also updated quite a few monster blocks to be more in line with what 5th is going to.
I made the thread right, I'm obviously upset about the lack of communication(in general with D&D Beyond, but that's honestly the norm now), but I think at the end it was more about how it truly was communicated.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So you think every FLGS has the responsibility to announce when Wizards decides they are no longer going to sell content?
If the store exclusively sells official D&D5e products and nothing else? Sure, it wouldn't be a bad idea. Also, lets not forget that WotC owns this site. It may not be official until next week, but that is just a formality.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
If you ask the FLGS to order something they don't have in stock, they should tell you "it's no longer available". If it's currently in stock and you want to buy it, the FLGS will sell it to you. The thing is, electronic resources never run out of stock, so the only way for Wizards to expire old products is by removing it from sale.
So based on GreyDragon's posts from Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds, it looks like in this regard DDB was treated like WotC's other digital partners in that they weren't informed or cleared to publicize the delisting of Volo's and Mord's until very recently.
It's a WotC thing, not a DDB thing. I don't know if you can expect "better" (whatever that might be) once DDB is fully owned by WotC. I do see a missed opportunity for "get them before they're gone" sales purchases had they made the announcement timed with the last sale, but again DDB doesn't appear to be in control of the message timing.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
You're moving the goalposts.
A FLGS(what a terrible goddamn acronym), a game/hobby shop typically sells dozens of products from dozens of companies. Roll20 and FantasyGrounds do too, but D&D Beyond doesn't.
Well, I did see a popup about that.
My suspicion is that WotC is bad at digital (which is probably why they decided to buy DDB in the first place), didn't initially realize the problem they were opening up with MMM (because it's not a problem in traditional publishing), spent some time running around like chickens with their heads cut off, and eventually came up with this solution.
It's possible that it will be 'better' once DDB is fully owned, because Wizards will have people on staff who can tell them "this plan is going to wreak havoc on the digital marketplace" and at least get people thinking about the problem ahead of time (of course, that depends on the people coming up with the business plan actually listening, which is... not guaranteed).
Now that it's been confirmed I guess it's time to walk the steps of those before me and say "I ain't buying any more of their shit". Man **** this move. First WotC decided on making MMM in the first place, then THIS smoothbrain move in discontinuing VGM and MToF, then DDB kept it hidden from their customers, and now they aren't even announcing it days before it happens. Unapologetic bullshit all around.
Er ek geng, þat er í þeim skóm er ek valda.
UwU
Well, I'm guessing those Microsoft Exec hires Hasbro installed in WotC were done so for a reason. I think DDB's integration into WotC's product development flow, if that happens, has a lot of potential for "better" D&D consumer experience, but I'm still thinking we won't really be seeing that till 2024. But next Tuesday's possible too.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I think this is the first time I've actually genuinely considered boycotting a product... Not because they're delisting old products that have been effectively replaced... But because those alleged "replacements" aren't replacements. They force the horrible optional "custom" ASI rules from Tasha's with no mention of a default value (but for some reason suggesting what stats to give your classes is fine), and leave out the common lore. I don't want to need to read every book on the forgotten realms in order to have an idea about how covens work or what loot they might have. They even direct you to Volo's in The Wild Beyond the Witchlight; a campaign that explicitly starts in whatever setting you choose, and fully endorses the custom lineage stuff, essentially republishing it for those without Tasha's.
"But that's setting specific." So? It's a place to start that shares a lot with most other settings. I buy these books to make things easier for me. Why should I spend money to make things more ambiguous? Who took over and decided to throw out rule zero and instead say that the rules tell you what you are allowed to do rather than be suggestions or limitations? Tasha's already came around to clarify "those ability score improvements are just suggestions." Why are they removing the suggestions? They gave us back creature alignment suggestions (albeit with the redundant "typically"). Maybe they'll give us back the suggested racial ASIs as well if we complain enough...
So...I guess my question is: What is happening to all the information in those two books? Are they just being deleted from the game OR are they going into these newer books? This is really confusing. I've never seen reference books be discontinued before.
If you purchased them before they were discontinued, you will still have access to them.
The only thing difference between then and now is that you cannot buy them anymore now.
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 >
I very much doubt that, it's just that the existence of digital editions has resulted in the process looking a bit different -- the traditional method is that you just let something go out of print. As for the contents, the monster writeups have been replaced (5e appears to be doing a soft version update), the lore has no specific home at the moment but might wind up in a worldbook at some point.
I think you're asking about whether it's canon or not.
The short answer is that it's reasonable to say that it no longer is canon.
Obviously in a game like D&D, the meaning of canon is...nebulous, but it is no longer available to buy digitally and it's reasonable to assume that it has.been taken out of print electronically. In theory, we could see a setting book that republishes that lore in the settings it applies...but doubtful. They'd have no real reason not to redo the statblocks again... and then you have a rather large proportion of people for whom MotM becomes redundant.
It's evident that WotC doesn't see itself as providing in depth lore anymore.
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.
The fact the books have been phased out does not mean the fluff is no longer canon, there was nothing drastically new there and much of it has been part of DnD lore through many versions. I think what you are better saying is that WotC no longer sees it as canon in every game universe, it is however canon in Forgotten Realms.
You can't have as canon information to a creative game that is no longer available. Since that lore is no longer in print, it is not canon. You can use it if you have it, such is the nature of a game that is so open to homebrew etc, but it isn't canon. If they wanted to keep it as canon, they'd have kept it in print and rebrand it so it's clear that it's for FR. As things are now, they could bring it back, but I doubt it would be commercially viable.
As has been previously said many times, what is true for previous editions is not necessarily true for this one. You're welcome to use previous edition's lore in building up your lore, but again, not canon to 5e.
Until they reaffirm it, it's not canon.
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.
Most of the lore is still in print. The Monster Manual is still current. PHB. Fizbans (new lore so there is that). All the adventures. They've flagged the direction but they haven't killed most of what's there.
The discussion wasn't about MM, PHB, FToD etc. It was about MToF and VGtM. As fir those books...two of them are being revisited as we speak. Regardless, the deeper lore has already been taken out.
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.
The fact the information is still available to those who have bought it indicates it is still canon. If it was not they would have made it unavailable to everyone, in addition WOTC have themselves said that players and DMs can buy the physical books and still use the information within. I think an argument about Canon is pointless here, the history is there, the blood war, split of the elves etc is all accepted lore. Just because they are shifting to a setting specific approach doesn’t change that. But also, it is entirely up to the DM no player can ever insist that this part of DND lore must be in the game, the DM can rewrite and change everything. So yes some of the source material in these books is absolutely canon in my games and nothing will change that.
Information from AD&D is still available to those who have bought it. In practice it depends on what 'canon' means to you. To a publisher, it means "new publications are required to remain consistent with this" and I'm not sure that was true even before these books were dropped.
So the thing is they are canon SPECIFICALLY for Forgotten Realms/Faerun.
I think it was a really bad PR decision on why they were doing it because when 5th launched, the official setting was Forgotten Realms/Faerun. All the original modules took place there. 5th has exploded in popularity and now we're getting all these settings reintroduced into 5th, but the problem then became there was setting specific information included in the stat blocks of creatures that could appear everywhere else. You can't really talk about the Red Wizards of Thay in Dragonlance, for instance.
Again, bad form because from a player perspective you were then asking them to purchase a lot of the same types of content without some of the fluff(and honestly it really is minor what they took out), but at the same time they also updated quite a few monster blocks to be more in line with what 5th is going to.
I made the thread right, I'm obviously upset about the lack of communication(in general with D&D Beyond, but that's honestly the norm now), but I think at the end it was more about how it truly was communicated.