Wasn't the target the 1st quarter before and it moved back to the second quarter?
I definitely recall them saying they were aiming for Q1 during one of the dev updates last year. I would go and check, but they don't seem to have any of the dev updates before April on their Twitch channel anymore.
Being in the same boat and having purchased somewhere between $0 and $360.70 of product, I don't see why it matters whether a person buys a single $1.99 feature, a full bundle, or nothing but a subscription for unlimited character slots. In fact, those who spend a grand total of $0 on this product still produce value in usage metrics and propagating its use with others, building up the community as a whole.
Either way, there is frustration about getting an updated character sheet that people can use in a better way than what we currently have available.
So you're complaining about a free product that you haven't paid for, got it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
This is pretty much what they wanted to avoid. It' the typical situation of "damned if you do, damned if you don't".
People that think they did not give any temporal indication consider it lack of communication and demand it, people who have seen the Q1 aim complain it was not respected (even though, as Grimmic points out, it was an aim, not a sure target/date).
EDIT: Personally I am really looking forward to it, and I understand there are people who see the current sheet as immensely flawed. But the current sheet works for what the published content is an everything that can be homebrewed within what I consider to be sensible limitations (no full classes i.e.). There are still areas that can be vastly improved, no doubt about it, but it is by no means unusable as I've seen claimed left and right every so often.
Being in the same boat and having purchased somewhere between $0 and $360.70 of product, I don't see why it matters whether a person buys a single $1.99 feature, a full bundle, or nothing but a subscription for unlimited character slots. In fact, those who spend a grand total of $0 on this product still produce value in usage metrics and propagating its use with others, building up the community as a whole.
Either way, there is frustration about getting an updated character sheet that people can use in a better way than what we currently have available.
So you're complaining about a free product that you haven't paid for, got it.
No, I'm complaining about product that I've paid money for. I'm just not discounting the opinions of others based solely on their monetary contributions without weighing their other contributions.
EDIT: I guess, a better question for you might be: at what price point do you consider complaints to start becoming valid?
You bought a product, and you received said product. Any additional improvements are a bonus. You aren't investing in D&D Beyond.
That said you do have a say in the future of the product, both financially and feature wise, but so do a few tens, maybe hundred thousands of other users. You can't see that because you don't have the view of the product and its users as well as their comments to the company on all platforms. Like they said in the developer videos, they hear a lot of loud voices saying some things, but they wait until they can gather opinions from a wider segment of their customers before making decisions.
Want to actually influence their decisions directly? Go buy enough controlling shares of Amazon to get on the board of directors and take an unusually large interest in the operation of a subsidiary of their subsidiary to influence them, otherwise be like the rest of us and give constructive criticism and commentary without demanding things be done how you like.
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
So far I have found no problem whatsoever in using the digital sheet to game. Could you please point me to the things you consider make the current digital sheet "an absolute joke"?
Should you be referring to the PDF export, then I'm right there with you, but they admitted immediately that it was put in as an afterthought very close to launch, and that the revamp will make it way better.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Ok my next completely baseless speculation is that it will be out before a Thursday cuz Crit Roll...
Actually, during a developer update they said it'd probably be released on a Friday to give the Critical Role cast time to get used to it before their next show, if I'm remembering correctly.
I really think the key piece of information from this month's developer update was that all the early screenshots we saw were just mock-ups of what the new sheet might look like, not a functional version. Thus, I think many people (myself included) naturally assumed they were a lot further along in the development of the revamp than they actually were. I'm as excited as anyone for the new sheet because I think it's going to be so much better than the current version, but perhaps a lot of this pain and anguish could've been avoided if they were a little more clear about the fact the early screenshots were just mock-ups and they hadn't actually started implementing things yet.
...perhaps a lot of this pain and anguish could've been avoided if they were a little more clear about the fact the early screenshots were just mock-ups and they hadn't actually started implementing things yet.
I think the takeaway here is improved communication.
Ok my next completely baseless speculation is that it will be out before a Thursday cuz Crit Roll...
I really think the key piece of information from this month's developer update was that all the early screenshots we saw were just mock-ups of what the new sheet might look like, not a functional version. Thus, I think many people (myself included) naturally assumed they were a lot further along in the development of the revamp than they actually were. I'm as excited as anyone for the new sheet because I think it's going to be so much better than the current version, but perhaps a lot of this pain and anguish could've been avoided if they were a little more clear about the fact the early screenshots were just mock-ups and they hadn't actually started implementing things yet.
I share the same sentiment. When they said that, it was a big "Ohhhh" moment for me. If they had been more clear about that from the start, I imagine most of the folks complaining here would have been a lot more forgiving (though not all, since we're human, and humans love to complain)
Yeah. It was pretty clear at the time that it was a mockup. They stated it when they showed the shots.
AD
The first time? Sure. Subsequent times when Adam was interacting with the character sheet? Not so much. The impression I had gotten was that they had arrived at the overall design pretty quickly, and were then going through and implementing everything. It sounds like the design phase was significantly longer than I was aware of, and that development started much much later. I'm absolutely willing to admit that my viewpoint was skewed by my excitement for the new sheet, and that I missed the fact they hadn't actually started development in earnest until fairly recently.
TL;DR - I'm very excited for the new sheet, more and clearer communication from the devs is great, especially in relation to what's been actively worked on vs. what's in their short-term roadmap.
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
So far I have found no problem whatsoever in using the digital sheet to game. Could you please point me to the things you consider make the current digital sheet "an absolute joke"?
Should you be referring to the PDF export, then I'm right there with you, but they admitted immediately that it was put in as an afterthought very close to launch, and that the revamp will make it way better.
My current GM REQUIRES inventory management and weight calculations for variant encumbrance. My character is also the group treasurer and my group requires that I keep my personal wealth sperate so that any purchases I make at will with out asking must come from personal unless I am paying for taverns and food. The current sheet does not let me separate equipment at different physical locations (on my mule, at our mining camp, at our hotel, in my back of holding, on my person (counting for my personal encumbrance) nor does it let me separate my gold from my parties gold much less does it have a handle jewels or separate other valuables. My GM has me track what is on my mule and camp/hotel separately so he can steel from our camp/hotel when we are not there and if our mule is eat (which happens often) then he was immediate access to determine what gear we lost with it. I also have to be able to confirm my current weight at all times to see if my speed is reduced by 10 or not. My GM also requires that I have this pre-separated so it can be handed over on requests immediately so that it doesn't slow down the game when it happens and their is never a need to debate what is or is not, because it is written down.
I know many players don't track equipment or encumbrance and do things on a whim but telling me and my group we have to do the same as someone else who doesn't have this issue, is not the right answer. D&D allows for a great variety of play so D&D Beyond should allow for diverse playstyles to support its diverse player base. We have a play style that we like and agree to and D&D Beyond does not in its current state have a means to allow me to do it. As a result I have to do over half of my "paperwork" on paper, So I am using The "More Purple More Better" character sheet which does support everything I need. My GM, myself, and my party want to switch to B&D Beyond and are currently trying and failing to track in both. When we can go all digital though it will be awesome and if anyone doesn't show up the rest of the party can still have access to everything as opposed to when I don't show up now and the party can't buy anything because I have all the party gold and jewels tracked on a piece of paper at my house....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
Therefore the lack of communication or timeline becomes frustrating when the current product does not work for my chosen use.
How much of the current product have you bought?
Being in the same boat and having purchased somewhere between $0 and $360.70 of product, I don't see why it matters whether a person buys a single $1.99 feature, a full bundle, or nothing but a subscription for unlimited character slots. In fact, those who spend a grand total of $0 on this product still produce value in usage metrics and propagating its use with others, building up the community as a whole.
Either way, there is frustration about getting an updated character sheet that people can use in a better way than what we currently have available.
That said I went all in and got the master bundle and updated with MTOF as did our GM and we still can't use it in our games due to lack of offline functionality and personal/party inventory management with related adapting encumbrance calculation abilities. I don't know if it will be "fixed" in this update release or not but based on some feed back I got, those are problems that many other people are having and that they are looking at as priorities so if not now, then a future update. So I have no doubt they will get there. They just are not there yet and in my group alone I know we have spent well over $1,000 on this product based on hope of what it will become even though we have tested it and can't use it now. So we are putting our faith in D&D Beyond that they will … eventually … live up to our expectations.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
Which is fine. But everyone is here right now because they aimed for the end of this month. If its going to take longer again... I just want an update sooner rather than later so I can stop checking "did they announce? it is it out yet?" and step away until their new prediction date. I have faith in their abilities and patience to wait, but its like putting something in the oven, you start baby sitting it when your think its close to done giving it your full attention. If I knew it was not going to release for 2 more months... I sit back and relax a bit. Even though, I believe that might be the case, I still can't step far away because I am anxious about it and that little voice in the back of my head that says. "you could be wrong, you have been wrong before, better check it again" keeps pulling back over every day to check. Hopeful, but not surprised when I find we still have no update or release date.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
So far I have found no problem whatsoever in using the digital sheet to game. Could you please point me to the things you consider make the current digital sheet "an absolute joke"?
Should you be referring to the PDF export, then I'm right there with you, but they admitted immediately that it was put in as an afterthought very close to launch, and that the revamp will make it way better.
My current GM REQUIRES inventory management and weight calculations for variant encumbrance. My character is also the group treasurer and my group requires that I keep my personal wealth sperate so that any purchases I make at will with out asking must come from personal unless I am paying for taverns and food. The current sheet does not let me separate equipment at different physical locations (on my mule, at our mining camp, at our hotel, in my back of holding, on my person (counting for my personal encumbrance) nor does it let me separate my gold from my parties gold much less does it have a handle jewels or separate other valuables. My GM has me track what is on my mule and camp/hotel separately so he can steel from our camp/hotel when we are not there and if our mule is eat (which happens often) then he was immediate access to determine what gear we lost with it. I also have to be able to confirm my current weight at all times to see if my speed is reduced by 10 or not. My GM also requires that I have this pre-separated so it can be handed over on requests immediately so that it doesn't slow down the game when it happens and their is never a need to debate what is or is not, because it is written down.
I know many players don't track equipment or encumbrance and do things on a whim but telling me and my group we have to do the same as someone else who doesn't have this issue, is not the right answer. D&D allows for a great variety of play so D&D Beyond should allow for diverse playstyles to support its diverse player base. We have a play style that we like and agree to and D&D Beyond does not in its current state have a means to allow me to do it. As a result I have to do over half of my "paperwork" on paper, So I am using The "More Purple More Better" character sheet which does support everything I need. My GM, myself, and my party want to switch to B&D Beyond and are currently trying and failing to track in both. When we can go all digital though it will be awesome and if anyone doesn't show up the rest of the party can still have access to everything as opposed to when I don't show up now and the party can't buy anything because I have all the party gold and jewels tracked on a piece of paper at my house....
I do not think anyone is suggesting that everyone should be playing exactly the same, I surely am not saying that.
DDB in its current form sticks pretty closely to the rules in the source material concerning characters, with some shortcomings but they are working on it. Now, from wanting the character sheet to be more comprehensive and saying it "an absolute joke", there is quite some difference imho.
Again, for most groups the digital sheet can work as-is. Every group will ALWAYS have something that what one or another sheet does not offer, that is a simple fact based on coding being a more rigid medium than a piece of paper.
I deeply respect (and am a little sorry) your difficulties deriving from how strict your master is, bit that most certainly is not DDB's fault.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
So far I have found no problem whatsoever in using the digital sheet to game. Could you please point me to the things you consider make the current digital sheet "an absolute joke"?
Should you be referring to the PDF export, then I'm right there with you, but they admitted immediately that it was put in as an afterthought very close to launch, and that the revamp will make it way better.
My current GM REQUIRES inventory management and weight calculations for variant encumbrance. My character is also the group treasurer and my group requires that I keep my personal wealth sperate so that any purchases I make at will with out asking must come from personal unless I am paying for taverns and food. The current sheet does not let me separate equipment at different physical locations (on my mule, at our mining camp, at our hotel, in my back of holding, on my person (counting for my personal encumbrance) nor does it let me separate my gold from my parties gold much less does it have a handle jewels or separate other valuables. My GM has me track what is on my mule and camp/hotel separately so he can steel from our camp/hotel when we are not there and if our mule is eat (which happens often) then he was immediate access to determine what gear we lost with it. I also have to be able to confirm my current weight at all times to see if my speed is reduced by 10 or not. My GM also requires that I have this pre-separated so it can be handed over on requests immediately so that it doesn't slow down the game when it happens and their is never a need to debate what is or is not, because it is written down.
I know many players don't track equipment or encumbrance and do things on a whim but telling me and my group we have to do the same as someone else who doesn't have this issue, is not the right answer. D&D allows for a great variety of play so D&D Beyond should allow for diverse playstyles to support its diverse player base. We have a play style that we like and agree to and D&D Beyond does not in its current state have a means to allow me to do it. As a result I have to do over half of my "paperwork" on paper, So I am using The "More Purple More Better" character sheet which does support everything I need. My GM, myself, and my party want to switch to B&D Beyond and are currently trying and failing to track in both. When we can go all digital though it will be awesome and if anyone doesn't show up the rest of the party can still have access to everything as opposed to when I don't show up now and the party can't buy anything because I have all the party gold and jewels tracked on a piece of paper at my house....
I do not think anyone is suggesting that everyone should be playing exactly the same, I surely am not saying that.
DDB in its current form sticks pretty closely to the rules in the source material concerning characters, with some shortcomings but they are working on it. Now, from wanting the character sheet to be more comprehensive and saying it "an absolute joke", there is quite some difference imho.
Again, for most groups the digital sheet can work as-is. Every group will ALWAYS have something that what one or another sheet does not offer, that is a simple fact based on coding being a more rigid medium than a piece of paper.
I deeply respect (and am a little sorry) your difficulties deriving from how strict your master is, bit that most certainly is not DDB's fault.
Please let me clarify that I don't think your telling me or my group how to play but other have on this thread, it was a subject that came up so that statement was to head those comments off.
DDB sticks "pretty closely to the rules" but that does not mean it fully supports the rules. It is completely in the rules to use variant encumbrance and a bag of holding and their is no way to indicate what is and is not part of personal weight. So yes it has some short coming and they have said they are working on it. I never said it was an "absolute joke" though, just that we play within the rules and sheet is not currently functional to replace pen and paper but If I have to use pen and paper... I just going to use pen and paper. It is a work in progress, we all know that and I do look forward to their stated upgrades and have faith that they will get to a point where I don't have to use pen an paper.
So your not telling me to play but your comparing my group to "most groups"? its as if you expect me to play as most groups do and when we don't we are doing something wrong...I understand that's not what you "meant" but let me say that while you are directly saying your not telling me how to play, when your comparing my group and how we play using the justification of "most groups don't have this issue" you are indirectly implying we are "playing wrong" even if you don't realize it or mean to. This exactly the kind of comment that lead to our previous discussion on different styles of play not being in line with most and so being "wrong". let me be honest, I don't know or care what "most groups" are doing. We are NOT having difficulties. We like this style of play. We are playing with in the rules. We have asked DDB to consider options that would let us play in our style and DDB said roughly, "sure, your not the only ones asking for this but they may not be at the top of our list so please be patient and know we do intend to implement this at some point". So we are not the only group that plays this way within the rules. Their are other features that we don't use that others have requested that are also within the rules suck as passive investigation. I have not issues with DDB putting options on their list to accommodate their style of play. I also, do not belittle their style of play by implying if they just played like "most groups" then the sheet would be fine or patronize them by issuing condolences on how horrible their GM must be to make them play with such difficulties and/or limitation... which are simple a style choice with the rules. You may not realize you just did that or have intended to do so, but take another look at your post now after me explaining what I see and try to honestly tell me its not there... as you said I mean no disrespect and believe/hope that was not your intent but its exactly why I bolded that original statement because people do it without even realizing they are and I need to point it out every time I post because I get the same thing over and over again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
So far I have found no problem whatsoever in using the digital sheet to game. Could you please point me to the things you consider make the current digital sheet "an absolute joke"?
Should you be referring to the PDF export, then I'm right there with you, but they admitted immediately that it was put in as an afterthought very close to launch, and that the revamp will make it way better.
Yarp! Talking about the export to PDF. May be ok for someone starting out through tier 1, but after that it's lacking severely.
Right now I still use Forged Anvil printed sheets which have the absolute bestformat bar none. I really hope they go with something resembling that on the export. The spell page has descriptions of the spells as well as the page and what book to find it in. It also has passive investigation on the front page, a very robust equipment page showing what you are carrying and where you carry it on top of calculating weight down to the tenth of a pound. It's just awesome and put together using excel by a dude that received $0 compensation. He set the bar pretty high, but I expect DNDB to kick that up a notch or two, especially with how much I've spent here already lol.
I definitely recall them saying they were aiming for Q1 during one of the dev updates last year. I would go and check, but they don't seem to have any of the dev updates before April on their Twitch channel anymore.
EDIT: They definitely did. Stormknight acknowledges this in an old thread: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/d-d-beyond-feedback/13495-general-feedback#c3
And the keyword here is "aiming".
I guess it took a bit longer than they expected.
I'm not stupid. I'm just unlucky when I'm thinking.
So you're complaining about a free product that you haven't paid for, got it.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
This is pretty much what they wanted to avoid. It' the typical situation of "damned if you do, damned if you don't".
People that think they did not give any temporal indication consider it lack of communication and demand it, people who have seen the Q1 aim complain it was not respected (even though, as Grimmic points out, it was an aim, not a sure target/date).
EDIT: Personally I am really looking forward to it, and I understand there are people who see the current sheet as immensely flawed. But the current sheet works for what the published content is an everything that can be homebrewed within what I consider to be sensible limitations (no full classes i.e.). There are still areas that can be vastly improved, no doubt about it, but it is by no means unusable as I've seen claimed left and right every so often.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
No, I'm complaining about product that I've paid money for. I'm just not discounting the opinions of others based solely on their monetary contributions without weighing their other contributions.
EDIT: I guess, a better question for you might be: at what price point do you consider complaints to start becoming valid?
You bought a product, and you received said product. Any additional improvements are a bonus. You aren't investing in D&D Beyond.
That said you do have a say in the future of the product, both financially and feature wise, but so do a few tens, maybe hundred thousands of other users. You can't see that because you don't have the view of the product and its users as well as their comments to the company on all platforms. Like they said in the developer videos, they hear a lot of loud voices saying some things, but they wait until they can gather opinions from a wider segment of their customers before making decisions.
Want to actually influence their decisions directly? Go buy enough controlling shares of Amazon to get on the board of directors and take an unusually large interest in the operation of a subsidiary of their subsidiary to influence them, otherwise be like the rest of us and give constructive criticism and commentary without demanding things be done how you like.
I'm eagerly anticipating the new release, but I use an alternative right now that is so much better than the current sheet it's ridiculous. My hope is that they have taken a look at the alternatives out there and are taking their time making sure they pack as much or even more functionality than the competition (which is free btw) to really be the best they can. We can all agree that the current one is an absolute joke, but that's not the fault of D&D Beyond as it's based on the design of WOTC. I'd rather them take their time to get it right than release something early that isn't up to the standard that we as paying customers deserve.
So far I have found no problem whatsoever in using the digital sheet to game. Could you please point me to the things you consider make the current digital sheet "an absolute joke"?
Should you be referring to the PDF export, then I'm right there with you, but they admitted immediately that it was put in as an afterthought very close to launch, and that the revamp will make it way better.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Actually, during a developer update they said it'd probably be released on a Friday to give the Critical Role cast time to get used to it before their next show, if I'm remembering correctly.
I really think the key piece of information from this month's developer update was that all the early screenshots we saw were just mock-ups of what the new sheet might look like, not a functional version. Thus, I think many people (myself included) naturally assumed they were a lot further along in the development of the revamp than they actually were. I'm as excited as anyone for the new sheet because I think it's going to be so much better than the current version, but perhaps a lot of this pain and anguish could've been avoided if they were a little more clear about the fact the early screenshots were just mock-ups and they hadn't actually started implementing things yet.
I think the takeaway here is improved communication.
I share the same sentiment. When they said that, it was a big "Ohhhh" moment for me. If they had been more clear about that from the start, I imagine most of the folks complaining here would have been a lot more forgiving (though not all, since we're human, and humans love to complain)
I actually do remember that first preview being described as an early concept.
Yeah. It was pretty clear at the time that it was a mockup. They stated it when they showed the shots.
AD
The first time? Sure. Subsequent times when Adam was interacting with the character sheet? Not so much. The impression I had gotten was that they had arrived at the overall design pretty quickly, and were then going through and implementing everything. It sounds like the design phase was significantly longer than I was aware of, and that development started much much later. I'm absolutely willing to admit that my viewpoint was skewed by my excitement for the new sheet, and that I missed the fact they hadn't actually started development in earnest until fairly recently.
TL;DR - I'm very excited for the new sheet, more and clearer communication from the devs is great, especially in relation to what's been actively worked on vs. what's in their short-term roadmap.
My current GM REQUIRES inventory management and weight calculations for variant encumbrance. My character is also the group treasurer and my group requires that I keep my personal wealth sperate so that any purchases I make at will with out asking must come from personal unless I am paying for taverns and food. The current sheet does not let me separate equipment at different physical locations (on my mule, at our mining camp, at our hotel, in my back of holding, on my person (counting for my personal encumbrance) nor does it let me separate my gold from my parties gold much less does it have a handle jewels or separate other valuables. My GM has me track what is on my mule and camp/hotel separately so he can steel from our camp/hotel when we are not there and if our mule is eat (which happens often) then he was immediate access to determine what gear we lost with it. I also have to be able to confirm my current weight at all times to see if my speed is reduced by 10 or not. My GM also requires that I have this pre-separated so it can be handed over on requests immediately so that it doesn't slow down the game when it happens and their is never a need to debate what is or is not, because it is written down.
I know many players don't track equipment or encumbrance and do things on a whim but telling me and my group we have to do the same as someone else who doesn't have this issue, is not the right answer. D&D allows for a great variety of play so D&D Beyond should allow for diverse playstyles to support its diverse player base. We have a play style that we like and agree to and D&D Beyond does not in its current state have a means to allow me to do it. As a result I have to do over half of my "paperwork" on paper, So I am using The "More Purple More Better" character sheet which does support everything I need. My GM, myself, and my party want to switch to B&D Beyond and are currently trying and failing to track in both. When we can go all digital though it will be awesome and if anyone doesn't show up the rest of the party can still have access to everything as opposed to when I don't show up now and the party can't buy anything because I have all the party gold and jewels tracked on a piece of paper at my house....
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
That said I went all in and got the master bundle and updated with MTOF as did our GM and we still can't use it in our games due to lack of offline functionality and personal/party inventory management with related adapting encumbrance calculation abilities. I don't know if it will be "fixed" in this update release or not but based on some feed back I got, those are problems that many other people are having and that they are looking at as priorities so if not now, then a future update. So I have no doubt they will get there. They just are not there yet and in my group alone I know we have spent well over $1,000 on this product based on hope of what it will become even though we have tested it and can't use it now. So we are putting our faith in D&D Beyond that they will … eventually … live up to our expectations.
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
Which is fine. But everyone is here right now because they aimed for the end of this month. If its going to take longer again... I just want an update sooner rather than later so I can stop checking "did they announce? it is it out yet?" and step away until their new prediction date. I have faith in their abilities and patience to wait, but its like putting something in the oven, you start baby sitting it when your think its close to done giving it your full attention. If I knew it was not going to release for 2 more months... I sit back and relax a bit. Even though, I believe that might be the case, I still can't step far away because I am anxious about it and that little voice in the back of my head that says. "you could be wrong, you have been wrong before, better check it again" keeps pulling back over every day to check. Hopeful, but not surprised when I find we still have no update or release date.
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
I do not think anyone is suggesting that everyone should be playing exactly the same, I surely am not saying that.
DDB in its current form sticks pretty closely to the rules in the source material concerning characters, with some shortcomings but they are working on it. Now, from wanting the character sheet to be more comprehensive and saying it "an absolute joke", there is quite some difference imho.
Again, for most groups the digital sheet can work as-is. Every group will ALWAYS have something that what one or another sheet does not offer, that is a simple fact based on coding being a more rigid medium than a piece of paper.
I deeply respect (and am a little sorry) your difficulties deriving from how strict your master is, bit that most certainly is not DDB's fault.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Please let me clarify that I don't think your telling me or my group how to play but other have on this thread, it was a subject that came up so that statement was to head those comments off.
DDB sticks "pretty closely to the rules" but that does not mean it fully supports the rules. It is completely in the rules to use variant encumbrance and a bag of holding and their is no way to indicate what is and is not part of personal weight. So yes it has some short coming and they have said they are working on it. I never said it was an "absolute joke" though, just that we play within the rules and sheet is not currently functional to replace pen and paper but If I have to use pen and paper... I just going to use pen and paper. It is a work in progress, we all know that and I do look forward to their stated upgrades and have faith that they will get to a point where I don't have to use pen an paper.
So your not telling me to play but your comparing my group to "most groups"? its as if you expect me to play as most groups do and when we don't we are doing something wrong...I understand that's not what you "meant" but let me say that while you are directly saying your not telling me how to play, when your comparing my group and how we play using the justification of "most groups don't have this issue" you are indirectly implying we are "playing wrong" even if you don't realize it or mean to. This exactly the kind of comment that lead to our previous discussion on different styles of play not being in line with most and so being "wrong". let me be honest, I don't know or care what "most groups" are doing. We are NOT having difficulties. We like this style of play. We are playing with in the rules. We have asked DDB to consider options that would let us play in our style and DDB said roughly, "sure, your not the only ones asking for this but they may not be at the top of our list so please be patient and know we do intend to implement this at some point". So we are not the only group that plays this way within the rules. Their are other features that we don't use that others have requested that are also within the rules suck as passive investigation. I have not issues with DDB putting options on their list to accommodate their style of play. I also, do not belittle their style of play by implying if they just played like "most groups" then the sheet would be fine or patronize them by issuing condolences on how horrible their GM must be to make them play with such difficulties and/or limitation... which are simple a style choice with the rules. You may not realize you just did that or have intended to do so, but take another look at your post now after me explaining what I see and try to honestly tell me its not there... as you said I mean no disrespect and believe/hope that was not your intent but its exactly why I bolded that original statement because people do it without even realizing they are and I need to point it out every time I post because I get the same thing over and over again.
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
Yarp! Talking about the export to PDF. May be ok for someone starting out through tier 1, but after that it's lacking severely.
Right now I still use Forged Anvil printed sheets which have the absolute best format bar none. I really hope they go with something resembling that on the export. The spell page has descriptions of the spells as well as the page and what book to find it in. It also has passive investigation on the front page, a very robust equipment page showing what you are carrying and where you carry it on top of calculating weight down to the tenth of a pound. It's just awesome and put together using excel by a dude that received $0 compensation. He set the bar pretty high, but I expect DNDB to kick that up a notch or two, especially with how much I've spent here already lol.