It should be noted, when Wizards retired their 4e digital tools, they went above and beyond to minimize the damage to players. When they ended tech support for the system, they shut down new subscriptions - but allowed old users to maintain their subscription or renew their subscription, so no one would lose access to existing characters or have to make drastic changes to their present campaigns. They then left the system in this state for a few years, even providing some limited tech support if users emailed them about problems.
It was only once Microsoft Silverlight (which the 4e tools were based on) announced it would be shuttering that Wizards finally said they would be killing the tools - and they gave players several months notice to save any content they wanted, archive characters, and transition campaigns to different systems. I cannot imagine there were many of us left using the 4e tools at that point, but Wizards still did everything they could to accommodate us as things wound down.
It should also be noted, Beyond has something the 4e tools never had - the site itself is part of Wizards’ long-term plan. Wizards has made it clear they want D&D Beyond to be the primary website for all official D&D content, announcements, etc., supplanting even their main D&D website as your primary source of all official Wizards announcements. Migrating your business over to a singular website gives some long-term security to that website - after all, you do not want your primary user-facing experience to be obsolete or insecure. This creates a greater incentive to keep things on D&D Beyond functional than there ever was for the 4e tools, which were always housed on a secondary site.
I tend to think Wizards will be careful since their self own last year when they tried to lockdown content, but Hasbro not so much. Laying off the most successful creative team they've had in years, maybe ever, comes to mind as a recent indication of how much they care about the quality of their content. And companies often "own goal" such as what happened to HBO recently when they pulled a bunch of successful shows from their streaming service.
I wouldn't look to actions regarding streaming to predict future behaviour in other markets. Streaming has a messed up incentive system for its market which leads to the perverse nature of popular shows being less likely to be renewed.
As for the layoffs, again, there are a lot of dynamics we're not privy to. While it might make me nervous, I'd hesitate to call it an own goal just yet. I'd also point out that while 5e is extremely popular (as far as TTRPGs go), the quality of it is not the main driver behind that. 5e is certainly a good game, but it seems that the runaway success is more down to other factors. As I said, complex dynamics that we're not informed enough to predict.
As I said, 5e on DDB will go one day. Just...not yet.
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.
That's a tough call. There would have to be something compelling for millions to re-buy existing mechanics, spells, magic items, monster stats, etc. via books and existing digital products.
Though I suspect, pure conjecture, should they launch a new version, it would be for VTT only, and its contents, mechanics, monsters, etc. would be free, and in instead a subscription service + microtransactions.
Most products are purchased by Dungeon Masters, players don't buy nearly as much as Dungeon Masters, because they don't need to, Dungeon Master's need to.
To get players to commit financially, with VTT, you could make micro purchases i.e. instead of a boring, magical, wooden staff, for $X dollars you can have it sparkle and light up, or instead of boring animation of arms raised when you casted a spell, for $X you can see that spell in full effect, or buy other effects for that spell... .
I still own 3.5 books and 2e books, and I have the option to run pencil and paper campaigns if I want, but as far as 5e content goes, I mostly own digital materials so I can use them with D&D beyond. I have spent a lot of money on digital content and I like being able to play with my group remotely, or even together using the digital resources. It is great!
But what happens when 6e comes out?
I am hoping that the future involves allowing people to play other editions on the site/app rather than screwing over anyone who has bought into what they are doing here, but Hasbro's recent actions aren't encouraging.
Thoughts?
I don’t think hasbro or WotC would do something to upset the playerbase, so it looks like whats to come from this update to the game is a maybe, better edited and more organized set of rules that most like, or a set of new books that most people might think are not worth the change.
Edit: that might include both physical and digital media, Im in the middle and just see whats what.
I confident the current state of whats here will remain for about a year, but after that, meh guess is whatever the reaction to the new stuff is, might well decide what happens next?
The real problem will be the security of the platform. If you can't move the format to the most up to date security features they'll end it because it becomes a liability as the easiest egress point.
I agree. However, the easy, if not entirely most profitable way to have access you old books is to convert them to PDFs, something that WotC has been very reluctant to do beyond SRD materials. You can't even buy Volo's Guide as a PDF, even though it's already sunset as "Legacy Content." That's just dumb.
The real problem will be the security of the platform. If you can't move the format to the most up to date security features they'll end it because it becomes a liability as the easiest egress point.
I agree. However, the easy, if not entirely most profitable way to have access you old books is to convert them to PDFs, something that WotC has been very reluctant to do beyond SRD materials. You can't even buy Volo's Guide as a PDF, even though it's already sunset as "Legacy Content." That's just dumb.
They don't release any current edition products in pdf, but you can get things from prior editions. In the event of a true edition change which breaks backwards compatibility, I would not be surprised by them doing the same for 5e books.
One of the issues with Volo's is that it would still compete with MotM. I think we'll have to wait until 5e is dropped before we see whether they'll do PDFs.
I know I've been reluctant to commit to digital because of reasons that would disappear if they also issued PDFs. It'd.be interesting to see whether they'd actually make more money releasing it in PDF or not.
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.
I'd suspect that all the digital releases will remain unchanged (outside of corrections and maybe the addition of things like maps.) It's pretty clear that people want access to content from older editions. They might as well keep everything in tact until D&D Beyond stops existing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing 5e. I grew up playing AD&D and games from Palladium Books.
I still own 3.5 books and 2e books, and I have the option to run pencil and paper campaigns if I want, but as far as 5e content goes, I mostly own digital materials so I can use them with D&D beyond. I have spent a lot of money on digital content and I like being able to play with my group remotely, or even together using the digital resources. It is great!
But what happens when 6e comes out?
I am hoping that the future involves allowing people to play other editions on the site/app rather than screwing over anyone who has bought into what they are doing here, but Hasbro's recent actions aren't encouraging.
Thoughts?
Sorry to revive this thread, responding to the comment in the quote section above has been on my bucket list since the day the of my inception. More seriously, I am worried that our purchases here on D&D Beyond may no longer become usable after 5.5e.
However, that's just a fear and likely won't be a reality. After all, 1D&D really isn't a full edition, and I"d be shocked if Wotzy placed this much emphasis on backwards compatibility just so that they could remove DDB copies of books that 5.5e's compatible with.
Ultimately, it seems much more realistic that we'll lose access to these books only after 6e. But that's just something I'm worried about, and as long as we communicate to Wizards that we don't want to ever lose access to the 5e stuff we've bought here, then they might not end up removing it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
That's pretty good, but I'd follow thread to Github because, though the script efficiently automates the downloading and compiling of content from a website into a format that resembles a PDF, which is highly convenient for users needing offline access, and it's technically adept, using jQuery for straightforward DOM manipulation and AJAX operations, it could be improved in areas like error handling and asynchronous request management. However, its functionality comes with significant legal and ethical implications, as it facilitates the automated downloading of potentially copyrighted content without explicit permission, raising concerns about its legality and the ethicality of its use.
This Agreement is a legally binding contract between you and Wizards and applies to D&D Beyond, the Software (defined below), and all related Services (defined below) regardless of how (e.g., different platform, medium, online, offline) you access or use them (all these collectively are referred to as the “Services”).
Defined Terms
“Software” means the proprietary website and software application known as D&D Beyond, and any patches, updates, and upgrades to the application, and all related content and documentation made available to you by Wizards under this Agreement including, but not limited to, all software code, titles, themes, objects, characters, names, dialogue, catch phrases, locations, stories, artwork, animation, concepts, sounds, audio-visual effects, methods of operation, and musical compositions that are related to the application, and any copies of any of the foregoing. Software specifically includes all Virtual Items for which you have paid the associated fee or otherwise acquired a license under Section 2.
LICENSE GRANT.
Subject to your compliance with the Terms, Wizards grants you a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable, non-sublicensable license to use and/or download and install a copy of the Software on a compatible device that you own or control and to run such copy of the Software solely for your personal entertainment and non-commercial purposes. You may not copy the Software, except for making a reasonable number of copies for backup or archival purposes. Wizards reserves all rights in and to the Software not expressly granted to you under this Agreement.
When 6e comes out later this year (yes, I know what the marketing people at wotc are calling it), 5e content is not going away. Players will still be able to access their EXISTING investment in source material that will be handled as "legacy", just like Volo's was. But the practical effects of trying to integrate 6e and 5e into the same game will hasten the end of the utility of 5e source material.
Imagine a situation where a DM, let's say one new to the hobby, wants to fire up a game, say, after the 6e DMG and PHB have been released (which is apparently Nov 2024 for the DMG). That DM will ONLY have access to purchase the electronic copies of the 6e DMG and PHB on this site. This new DM can likely hunt around and find hard copies of the 5e source material, but no company is going to allow its old material to compete with its new hotness in potential sales.
So now we have a new DM building his world around 6e material. Say this DM then attracts players with 5e legacy PC's, but also new players who also only have access to the 6e material? Imagine what happens when the DM is using 6e material, some player is using a 5e build Paladin, and another player is using a 6e build Paladin, which will be MORE powerful than the 5e build, and has features that trigger at different levels than the 5e version. The 5e player has a choice: Either buy 6e material, in order to upgrade his Paladin so that can function in the 6e game, or find a DM and other players that are sticking with the 5e game. I know what most people are going to do.
Or, we look at this situation: The DM is sticking with his legacy 5e material. He is not interested in buying the 6e material. But he tries to add players who are new to the game, and have no access to 5e material. Does wotc allow that DM the ability to share his legacy material with other players? Or do those new players even WANT to play with that legacy 5e DM? I have had players walk away when I tell them "No, I refuse to allow anything post Xanathar's nor Hexblade dips because the stuff is OP". Many a player always goes with the new hotness, especially when it is more powerful than the old product.
There are certain players on this site who want the 2024 rules to fail. I think we can all guess the reasons why--and it has nothing to do with the mechanical changes. They will repeatedly post the same nonsensical arguments, get their arguments disproven, then start over on a new thread, spewing their anti-2024 falsehoods with the hope they can trick people into thinking their points might be valid before someone once again points out that they are wrong.
Two of the biggest falsehoods are as follows:
1. That this is 6e, not 5e. This is categorically wrong--but we can see why they do it. Edition changes have historically been traumatic for the community, so if you can get folks to falsely think this is a new edition, that will make folks a bit worried. Worried people are more prone to overaction and believing lies--which is exactly what these posters want.
The reality? This is still very much 5e. All the core mechanics are staying the same--how you run combat, what skill checks do, what conditions there are, what damage types there are, how attacks, saves, etc. work. Nothing is fundamentally changing. Sure, some spells might be getting adjusted some and some classes might be getting rebalanced--but the core operating procedures are exactly the same. That is why it is a revision, not a true new edition.
2. That the editions will not be compatible. Once again, fearmongering to try and make it look like the community will be fracturing. Once again, incorrect (or, for those who have been told with evidence they are incorrect--an outright lie).
Many of us have been playing or DMing hybrid games since the playtest started--some of our players wanted to test out the new content while others did not. The totality of posts from folks playing these hybrid games on this forum have stated that the systems have worked fine. Sure, there might be some differences, but, guess what? Having differences in character power level happens within the same version of the rules as well. 2014 vs 2024 characters fall within the realm of acceptable power disparities that players have grown used to over the past 50 years (and, it should be noted, there are plenty of cases where the 2014 version is more powerful--so the "you'll be underpowered" argument is even further untrue).
And, for those who have not been playing with the 2024 rules? Guess what, most of you have been playing a hybrid system for years without even noticing. The 2024 rules really started rolling out back in Strixhaven, with a lot of the new features from 2024 long-implemented into the game. If you have been playing the game with any of the recent books, you have already been playing in a hybrid game without noticing--the new PHB is not going to be all that different, so there really is no need to fear.
All told, I expect the overwhelming majority of players will be able to figure this out--Wizards has put a whole lot of effort into ensuring compatibility exists and players can use whichever version of the rules they and their DM agree to--be it 2024, 2014, or a hybrid. There really is no reason to fear--which is why the anti-Wizards crowd is really struggling to find a narrative that works for their fearmongering... so they just keep playing the same cards over and over again, knowing they are bad, but knowing folks can sometimes fall for their bluffs.
Tough one. The underwriting, from End User Agreement to Terms of Use to Content Policy to Limited Liscense to....so much underwriting, even a good attorney would be equally confused.
WA Senate Bill 6801 proposes that every consumer contract in Washington State must be written in plain language to enhance clarity and understanding for consumers.
Hopefully that will pass soon enough so we can get clarity. For now do whatever until told otherwise 😆 🤣
I do not think fracturing the community is a bad thing. If making the name of a playtest to be OneD&D is enough to isolate anti-Wizard people into their own little corner, that is better for the rest of the community. We do not need their toxicity and misinformation.
If someone is so stuck in their ways on how to play D&D, do not know how to accomodate others, and are so deep into anti-Wizard conspiracy, it is probably best to avoid those kinds of people. The rule additions and adjustments in the UA is peanuts compared to the average homebrew and third party content, so if they are incapable of wrapping their head around UA, they are are not going to wrap their head around you. If toxic people cannot find others to play with, that is their issue. No D&D is better than bad D&D.
So now we have a new DM building his world around 6e material. Say this DM then attracts players with 5e legacy PC's, but also new players who also only have access to the 6e material? Imagine what happens when the DM is using 6e material, some player is using a 5e build Paladin, and another player is using a 6e build Paladin, which will be MORE powerful than the 5e build, and has features that trigger at different levels than the 5e version. The 5e player has a choice: Either buy 6e material, in order to upgrade his Paladin so that can function in the 6e game, or find a DM and other players that are sticking with the 5e game. I know what most people are going to do.
Or, we look at this situation: The DM is sticking with his legacy 5e material. He is not interested in buying the 6e material. But he tries to add players who are new to the game, and have no access to 5e material. Does wotc allow that DM the ability to share his legacy material with other players? Or do those new players even WANT to play with that legacy 5e DM?
Both of these supposed problems are solved by... content sharing. Which is used in most every game on DDB, because nobody expects everyone to own all the books themselves. The purist shares their books with the players, who can now build characters with the unrevised classes. (And yes, you'll be able to share the old books, because otherwise every single existing campaign at release time breaks.) The other person shares the revised books with their game, and everyone can build their characters with the revised classes.
Seriously, who brings preexisting characters to a new campaign, anyway? I'm not saying it doesn't happen anywhere, but it ain't normal.
I have had players walk away when I tell them "No, I refuse to allow anything post Xanathar's nor Hexblade dips because the stuff is OP".
Huh. Weird.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It should be noted, when Wizards retired their 4e digital tools, they went above and beyond to minimize the damage to players. When they ended tech support for the system, they shut down new subscriptions - but allowed old users to maintain their subscription or renew their subscription, so no one would lose access to existing characters or have to make drastic changes to their present campaigns. They then left the system in this state for a few years, even providing some limited tech support if users emailed them about problems.
It was only once Microsoft Silverlight (which the 4e tools were based on) announced it would be shuttering that Wizards finally said they would be killing the tools - and they gave players several months notice to save any content they wanted, archive characters, and transition campaigns to different systems. I cannot imagine there were many of us left using the 4e tools at that point, but Wizards still did everything they could to accommodate us as things wound down.
It should also be noted, Beyond has something the 4e tools never had - the site itself is part of Wizards’ long-term plan. Wizards has made it clear they want D&D Beyond to be the primary website for all official D&D content, announcements, etc., supplanting even their main D&D website as your primary source of all official Wizards announcements. Migrating your business over to a singular website gives some long-term security to that website - after all, you do not want your primary user-facing experience to be obsolete or insecure. This creates a greater incentive to keep things on D&D Beyond functional than there ever was for the 4e tools, which were always housed on a secondary site.
I tend to think Wizards will be careful since their self own last year when they tried to lockdown content, but Hasbro not so much. Laying off the most successful creative team they've had in years, maybe ever, comes to mind as a recent indication of how much they care about the quality of their content. And companies often "own goal" such as what happened to HBO recently when they pulled a bunch of successful shows from their streaming service.
Hasbro layoffs: https://www.geekwire.com/2023/hasbro-laying-off-wizards-of-the-coast-staff-is-baffling-and-could-lead-to-a-brain-drain/
I wouldn't look to actions regarding streaming to predict future behaviour in other markets. Streaming has a messed up incentive system for its market which leads to the perverse nature of popular shows being less likely to be renewed.
As for the layoffs, again, there are a lot of dynamics we're not privy to. While it might make me nervous, I'd hesitate to call it an own goal just yet. I'd also point out that while 5e is extremely popular (as far as TTRPGs go), the quality of it is not the main driver behind that. 5e is certainly a good game, but it seems that the runaway success is more down to other factors. As I said, complex dynamics that we're not informed enough to predict.
As I said, 5e on DDB will go one day. Just...not yet.
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.
That's a tough call. There would have to be something compelling for millions to re-buy existing mechanics, spells, magic items, monster stats, etc. via books and existing digital products.
Though I suspect, pure conjecture, should they launch a new version, it would be for VTT only, and its contents, mechanics, monsters, etc. would be free, and in instead a subscription service + microtransactions.
Most products are purchased by Dungeon Masters, players don't buy nearly as much as Dungeon Masters, because they don't need to, Dungeon Master's need to.
To get players to commit financially, with VTT, you could make micro purchases i.e. instead of a boring, magical, wooden staff, for $X dollars you can have it sparkle and light up, or instead of boring animation of arms raised when you casted a spell, for $X you can see that spell in full effect, or buy other effects for that spell... .
That's my guess.
I don’t think hasbro or WotC would do something to upset the playerbase, so it looks like whats to come from this update to the game is a maybe, better edited and more organized set of rules that most like, or a set of new books that most people might think are not worth the change.
Edit: that might include both physical and digital media, Im in the middle and just see whats what.
I confident the current state of whats here will remain for about a year, but after that, meh guess is whatever the reaction to the new stuff is, might well decide what happens next?
I agree. However, the easy, if not entirely most profitable way to have access you old books is to convert them to PDFs, something that WotC has been very reluctant to do beyond SRD materials. You can't even buy Volo's Guide as a PDF, even though it's already sunset as "Legacy Content." That's just dumb.
They don't release any current edition products in pdf, but you can get things from prior editions. In the event of a true edition change which breaks backwards compatibility, I would not be surprised by them doing the same for 5e books.
One of the issues with Volo's is that it would still compete with MotM. I think we'll have to wait until 5e is dropped before we see whether they'll do PDFs.
I know I've been reluctant to commit to digital because of reasons that would disappear if they also issued PDFs. It'd.be interesting to see whether they'd actually make more money releasing it in PDF or not.
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.
Currently the best method I've found for converting DnDBeyond digital content to PDF
Free Content: [Basic Rules],
[Phandelver],[Frozen Sick],[Acquisitions Inc.],[Vecna Dossier],[Radiant Citadel], [Spelljammer],[Dragonlance], [Prisoner 13],[Minecraft],[Star Forge], [Baldur’s Gate], [Lightning Keep], [Stormwreck Isle], [Pinebrook], [Caverns of Tsojcanth], [The Lost Horn], [Elemental Evil].Free Dice: [Frostmaiden],
[Flourishing], [Sanguine],[Themberchaud], [Baldur's Gate 3], [Lego].Ummm, no.
I'd suspect that all the digital releases will remain unchanged (outside of corrections and maybe the addition of things like maps.) It's pretty clear that people want access to content from older editions. They might as well keep everything in tact until D&D Beyond stops existing.
Currently playing 5e. I grew up playing AD&D and games from Palladium Books.
I have the same worry with the updates.
"Big sword, bigger brain"
-BigBrainGoblin
Sorry to revive this thread, responding to the comment in the quote section above has been on my bucket list since the day the of my inception. More seriously, I am worried that our purchases here on D&D Beyond may no longer become usable after 5.5e.
However, that's just a fear and likely won't be a reality. After all, 1D&D really isn't a full edition, and I"d be shocked if Wotzy placed this much emphasis on backwards compatibility just so that they could remove DDB copies of books that 5.5e's compatible with.
Ultimately, it seems much more realistic that we'll lose access to these books only after 6e. But that's just something I'm worried about, and as long as we communicate to Wizards that we don't want to ever lose access to the 5e stuff we've bought here, then they might not end up removing it.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.That's pretty good, but I'd follow thread to Github because, though the script efficiently automates the downloading and compiling of content from a website into a format that resembles a PDF, which is highly convenient for users needing offline access, and it's technically adept, using jQuery for straightforward DOM manipulation and AJAX operations, it could be improved in areas like error handling and asynchronous request management. However, its functionality comes with significant legal and ethical implications, as it facilitates the automated downloading of potentially copyrighted content without explicit permission, raising concerns about its legality and the ethicality of its use.
For use of downloading purchased content on DnDBeyond there should be no cause for concern.
From the DnDBeyond Terms of Service:
Free Content: [Basic Rules],
[Phandelver],[Frozen Sick],[Acquisitions Inc.],[Vecna Dossier],[Radiant Citadel], [Spelljammer],[Dragonlance], [Prisoner 13],[Minecraft],[Star Forge], [Baldur’s Gate], [Lightning Keep], [Stormwreck Isle], [Pinebrook], [Caverns of Tsojcanth], [The Lost Horn], [Elemental Evil].Free Dice: [Frostmaiden],
[Flourishing], [Sanguine],[Themberchaud], [Baldur's Gate 3], [Lego].When 6e comes out later this year (yes, I know what the marketing people at wotc are calling it), 5e content is not going away. Players will still be able to access their EXISTING investment in source material that will be handled as "legacy", just like Volo's was. But the practical effects of trying to integrate 6e and 5e into the same game will hasten the end of the utility of 5e source material.
Imagine a situation where a DM, let's say one new to the hobby, wants to fire up a game, say, after the 6e DMG and PHB have been released (which is apparently Nov 2024 for the DMG). That DM will ONLY have access to purchase the electronic copies of the 6e DMG and PHB on this site. This new DM can likely hunt around and find hard copies of the 5e source material, but no company is going to allow its old material to compete with its new hotness in potential sales.
So now we have a new DM building his world around 6e material. Say this DM then attracts players with 5e legacy PC's, but also new players who also only have access to the 6e material? Imagine what happens when the DM is using 6e material, some player is using a 5e build Paladin, and another player is using a 6e build Paladin, which will be MORE powerful than the 5e build, and has features that trigger at different levels than the 5e version. The 5e player has a choice: Either buy 6e material, in order to upgrade his Paladin so that can function in the 6e game, or find a DM and other players that are sticking with the 5e game. I know what most people are going to do.
Or, we look at this situation: The DM is sticking with his legacy 5e material. He is not interested in buying the 6e material. But he tries to add players who are new to the game, and have no access to 5e material. Does wotc allow that DM the ability to share his legacy material with other players? Or do those new players even WANT to play with that legacy 5e DM? I have had players walk away when I tell them "No, I refuse to allow anything post Xanathar's nor Hexblade dips because the stuff is OP". Many a player always goes with the new hotness, especially when it is more powerful than the old product.
Tough one. The underwriting, from End User Agreement to Terms of Use to Content Policy to Limited Liscense to....so much underwriting, even a good attorney would be equally confused.
WA Senate Bill 6801 proposes that every consumer contract in Washington State must be written in plain language to enhance clarity and understanding for consumers.
Hopefully that will pass soon enough so we can get clarity. For now do whatever until told otherwise 😆 🤣
I do not think fracturing the community is a bad thing. If making the name of a playtest to be OneD&D is enough to isolate anti-Wizard people into their own little corner, that is better for the rest of the community. We do not need their toxicity and misinformation.
If someone is so stuck in their ways on how to play D&D, do not know how to accomodate others, and are so deep into anti-Wizard conspiracy, it is probably best to avoid those kinds of people. The rule additions and adjustments in the UA is peanuts compared to the average homebrew and third party content, so if they are incapable of wrapping their head around UA, they are are not going to wrap their head around you. If toxic people cannot find others to play with, that is their issue. No D&D is better than bad D&D.
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 >
Both of these supposed problems are solved by... content sharing. Which is used in most every game on DDB, because nobody expects everyone to own all the books themselves. The purist shares their books with the players, who can now build characters with the unrevised classes. (And yes, you'll be able to share the old books, because otherwise every single existing campaign at release time breaks.) The other person shares the revised books with their game, and everyone can build their characters with the revised classes.
Seriously, who brings preexisting characters to a new campaign, anyway? I'm not saying it doesn't happen anywhere, but it ain't normal.
Huh. Weird.