Really not a fan of how its messed up the monster search tool.
I don't own Monsters of the Multiverse. So could I just...not be presented with any of its statblocks? It's just a waste of space to see statblocks get repeated.
I know I could probably just filter by source. But I shouldn't have to.
Really not a fan of how its messed up the monster search tool.
I don't own Monsters of the Multiverse. So could I just...not be presented with any of its statblocks? It's just a waste of space to see statblocks get repeated.
I know I could probably just filter by source. But I shouldn't have to.
You could just filter by book if you don't want to see the new statblocks.
But yeah, it is really weird that D&D Beyond shows users content that they don't have. It's always been a thing, and it's probably gotten even more annoying for users who don't have M3 like you. Definitely should be a thing that they change ASAP.
Really not a fan of how its messed up the monster search tool.
I don't own Monsters of the Multiverse. So could I just...not be presented with any of its statblocks? It's just a waste of space to see statblocks get repeated.
I know I could probably just filter by source. But I shouldn't have to.
You could just filter by book if you don't want to see the new statblocks.
But yeah, it is really weird that D&D Beyond shows users content that they don't have. It's always been a thing, and it's probably gotten even more annoying for users who don't have M3 like you. Definitely should be a thing that they change ASAP.
I suspect that it's an attempt to get people to buy that content.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
First, good game publishers never change existing material in major ways.
Define "Major". Define "good game publishers".
This isn't new to D&D 5e. Other TTRPGs and similar mediums of entertainment (Video Games, Board Games) get similar rule changes, too.
In a video game, if there's a bug, people generally expect the designers to fix it. The unbalanced nature of many of the races that got revised in this book is a "bug" that's being fixed by WotC through this book. Bug fixes that help balance the game are generally a good thing. Trying to make the game more balanced is not a bad thing.
The material in MotM warranted either 5.5e or 6e.
Good thing that one is coming in two years and this book was designed specifically to get people ready for the changes that will be happening to the Core Rulebooks in 2024.
1st this is not a video game. In the case of a video game the current build of the game enforces the rules (including changes) unilaterally, and prior content not disrupted. In this case, perfectly good material was obfuscated and replaced with updated versions, sans many omissions. Rebalancing is great for new characters and games going forward, but substantially complicates things for characters/campaigns previously created. Since I tend to run long story campaigns, a player joining one of my tables can prefer to use the updates - which unbalances the entire game. Do I go back and revise all the older characters? Do we just quit and start over? The impact here is major, and that is why good publishers do not do this.
"Good thing that one is coming in two years..." oh lovely ends justifies the means argument there... Feel free to defend WOTC if you wish, that's your right. But it will forever be a major negative mark as far as I am concerned.
On one hand, maybe I'll just stay out of this thread, due mostly to my misunderstaning of what folk are up in arms about.
On the other hand, I'm curious. I have all the D&D Beyond content, up to and including, 3M.
What's the hiccup? What's the concern at each table? What exactly is affected by or changed at your gaming table as a result of what WotC has done (or is seemingly on the path of doing?)
1st this is not a video game. In the case of a video game the current build of the game enforces the rules (including changes) unilaterally, and prior content not disrupted. In this case, perfectly good material was obfuscated and replaced with updated versions, sans many omissions. Rebalancing is great for new characters and games going forward, but substantially complicates things for characters/campaigns previously created. Since I tend to run long story campaigns, a player joining one of my tables can prefer to use the updates - which unbalances the entire game. Do I go back and revise all the older characters? Do we just quit and start over? The impact here is major, and that is why good publishers do not do this.
I never said it was a video game, I just used them (and board games like Monopoly) as a direct parallel to refute your argument. You said that good game publishers never change anything major about their game. I gave examples from similar mediums to refute that. D&D has had rule revisions for decades. This isn't anything new.
"Good thing that one is coming in two years..." oh lovely ends justifies the means argument there... Feel free to defend WOTC if you wish, that's your right. But it will forever be a major negative mark as far as I am concerned.
. . . This is the weirdest use of "Ends justifies the means" that I've ever seen. I have literally never seen anyone try to apply that phrase to a refutation of a post about a TTRPG before.
And . . . I was just explaining to you that there is another edition coming (kind of, more like a rule update to the 2014 versions of the core rulebooks) to explain why this "feels like a new edition". WotC explained in their marketing of this book that it was going to have changes to the races and monsters similar to what the 2024 Core Rulebooks will have.
There's a new edition coming and WotC explained that this book is a stepping-stone to that edition. The fact that this book's changes feel like they warranted a new edition (to you) is wholly intentional. They explained that. What part of that are you complaining about? The fact that an update to the rules are coming at all? The fact that this book was released before those 2024 Core Rulebooks? The fact that you didn't happen to see the marketing that explained that this book's changes were in preparation for 5.5e?
Really not a fan of how its messed up the monster search tool.
I don't own Monsters of the Multiverse. So could I just...not be presented with any of its statblocks? It's just a waste of space to see statblocks get repeated.
I know I could probably just filter by source. But I shouldn't have to.
You could just filter by book if you don't want to see the new statblocks.
But yeah, it is really weird that D&D Beyond shows users content that they don't have. It's always been a thing, and it's probably gotten even more annoying for users who don't have M3 like you. Definitely should be a thing that they change ASAP.
I suspect that it's an attempt to get people to buy that content.
Yeah, but for me, it's just irritating. It might work if I decided to go all out for DDB, but as I've mentioned in previous discussions that's a very steep ask due to costs. As a result, it's just this irritating thing that degrades my experience on DDB...and that makes me even less likely to buy new stuff here.
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.
As a related side note, the fact that they have ceased selling MToF and VGtM; and may well pull the existing versions off of DnD Beyond someday from previous purchasers illustrates a key constraint of electronic book. Also, of note: super lengthy contract forms often found with app purchases and online stores for virtual products can be used to circumvent conventional legal avenues of remedy. Both further enshrine power in the hands of the corporate-powers-that-be, in this case, WotC.
People have been pointing out that issue with cloud-based services since before DDB was even a thing. It's weird how so many people here seem to have just now noticed.
LOL. Of course it's been a thing. Doesn't mean it isn't worth indicating when it's happening via a website that many of us happen to use for our gaming follies, errr, jollies..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Really not a fan of how its messed up the monster search tool.
I don't own Monsters of the Multiverse. So could I just...not be presented with any of its statblocks? It's just a waste of space to see statblocks get repeated.
I know I could probably just filter by source. But I shouldn't have to.
You can actually filter by "legacy" under advanced filters, but unfortunately I don't think that is saved across sessions.
You could just filter by book if you don't want to see the new statblocks.
But yeah, it is really weird that D&D Beyond shows users content that they don't have. It's always been a thing, and it's probably gotten even more annoying for users who don't have M3 like you. Definitely should be a thing that they change ASAP.
I suspect that it's an attempt to get people to buy that content.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
1st this is not a video game. In the case of a video game the current build of the game enforces the rules (including changes) unilaterally, and prior content not disrupted. In this case, perfectly good material was obfuscated and replaced with updated versions, sans many omissions. Rebalancing is great for new characters and games going forward, but substantially complicates things for characters/campaigns previously created. Since I tend to run long story campaigns, a player joining one of my tables can prefer to use the updates - which unbalances the entire game. Do I go back and revise all the older characters? Do we just quit and start over? The impact here is major, and that is why good publishers do not do this.
"Good thing that one is coming in two years..." oh lovely ends justifies the means argument there... Feel free to defend WOTC if you wish, that's your right. But it will forever be a major negative mark as far as I am concerned.
On one hand, maybe I'll just stay out of this thread, due mostly to my misunderstaning of what folk are up in arms about.
On the other hand, I'm curious. I have all the D&D Beyond content, up to and including, 3M.
What's the hiccup? What's the concern at each table? What exactly is affected by or changed at your gaming table as a result of what WotC has done (or is seemingly on the path of doing?)
Thanks
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
I never said it was a video game, I just used them (and board games like Monopoly) as a direct parallel to refute your argument. You said that good game publishers never change anything major about their game. I gave examples from similar mediums to refute that. D&D has had rule revisions for decades. This isn't anything new.
. . . This is the weirdest use of "Ends justifies the means" that I've ever seen. I have literally never seen anyone try to apply that phrase to a refutation of a post about a TTRPG before.
And . . . I was just explaining to you that there is another edition coming (kind of, more like a rule update to the 2014 versions of the core rulebooks) to explain why this "feels like a new edition". WotC explained in their marketing of this book that it was going to have changes to the races and monsters similar to what the 2024 Core Rulebooks will have.
There's a new edition coming and WotC explained that this book is a stepping-stone to that edition. The fact that this book's changes feel like they warranted a new edition (to you) is wholly intentional. They explained that. What part of that are you complaining about? The fact that an update to the rules are coming at all? The fact that this book was released before those 2024 Core Rulebooks? The fact that you didn't happen to see the marketing that explained that this book's changes were in preparation for 5.5e?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Yeah, but for me, it's just irritating. It might work if I decided to go all out for DDB, but as I've mentioned in previous discussions that's a very steep ask due to costs. As a result, it's just this irritating thing that degrades my experience on DDB...and that makes me even less likely to buy new stuff here.
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.
LOL. Of course it's been a thing. Doesn't mean it isn't worth indicating when it's happening via a website that many of us happen to use for our gaming follies, errr, jollies..