In the [News] Updating the D&D Beyond Toolset for the 2024 Core Rulebooks thread there are posts with about 100 likes that are opposed to this decision. But the usual suspects will continue to act as if Wizards are "right" and it is only a "vocal minority" who would say otherwise.
Okay, I may be missing something important here, but if I bought 2014 books but haven't bought PHB 2024 - will I even have access to all the spells on my character sheet? They say I will see the updated spells - will I see them if I haven't bought the new book? Usually when I try to access material in a book or supplement I haven't bought, it sends me to marketplace and tells me I need to buy the thing first.
Also, to people saying "what's the big deal" - WotC specifically said that you can easily run 2024 rules and keep using some 2014 elements, but NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Because 2024 elements will reference rules which didn't exist in 2014 or worked in a different way.
So if I try to use 2024 spells in my 2014 campaign, I'll be constantly running into rules conflicts and gaps. So overwriting all spells means our character sheets are going to be UNUSABLE without extensive homebrewing.
I'm running three long campaigns, currently around level 13-14. We're not switching to 2024 this close to the finish line, and we're not going to homebrew the entire cleric's spell list just to finish up the campaign. What we WILL do is cancel our subscriptions, because it makes no sense to keep paying for a tool we can't use anymore without sinking days of work into it first.
this is my exact concern
they're basically like "sorry guys, you gotta change the mechanics of your entire campaign now if you want to keep using our site, sorrynotsorry"
I cancelled my subscription immediately
From the News and Announcement forum on this topic:
Your character has Healing Word prepared and you want to cast the spell. When you click on the spell on your character sheet, you will see the new version of Healing Word. However, you can still find the old version of Healing Word in your copy of the Basic Rules and the 2014 Player’s Handbook in the compendium.
So you will see the updated PHB spells if you don’t have the 2024 PHB. And it shouldn’t break anything if you are running a 2014 campaign after the release. There really shouldn’t be conflicts that cause significant issues from what I can tell.
Come on, how can you tell there won't be significant issues? Look at the 2014 paladin equipped with 2024 spells. Or try to guess how new versions of all the 2024 spells referencing new hiding/stealth/invisibility rules will work with a character class abilities built with 2014 rules. And that's just two examples.
Ok, they can ignore the divine smite spell because for 2014 it was a class feature and the other smite spells will work on a BA when they hit a target, which doesn’t keep them from stacking with their DS feature. Or am I wrong?
Not sure on the stealth/invisibility thing but nothing jumps out at me but I haven’t seen that many spells that touch on those. But if you have a concrete example let me know.
The entire purpose, and I do really mean the ENTIRETY of my purpose, for using DND beyond is to not have to spend millions of hours "home brewing" things into the system. They do this, I lose all faith in this website, I stop spending money on this website, and I'll probably move over to roll 20 because they have never and will never do something this ridiculously stupid.
I feel like whenever there's backlash to WotC people get annoyed at the idea of people being annoyed and skip right over asking whether or not business practices are reasonable.
Obviously we do consider the practice reasonable. Me opening every post with "I think it's reasonable that digital toolsets favor the latest version of over 200 spells and magic items rather than cluttering up search results by duplicating them all with Legacy tags" goes without saying.
If this nontroversy leads to them deciding the clutter is worth it, I'll live with it, but this approach makes sense from where I'm sitting. There are far more spells and magic items than there are feats and classes, and several spells that were altered like Conjure Animals were changed because they don't want people using the old versions, just like they wouldn't want a pre-errata version to still be in their toolset.
In the [News] Updating the D&D Beyond Toolset for the 2024 Core Rulebooks thread there are posts with about 100 likes that are opposed to this decision. But the usual suspects will continue to act as if Wizards are "right" and it is only a "vocal minority" who would say otherwise.
Any message board is a fraction of the overall playerbase. Pointing that out is not an attack.
Obviously we do consider the practice reasonable. Me opening every post with "I think it's reasonable that digital toolsets favor the latest version of over 200 spells and magic items rather than cluttering up search results by duplicating them all with Legacy tags" goes without saying.
If this nontroversy leads to them deciding the clutter is worth it, I'll live with it, but this approach makes sense from where I'm sitting. There are far more spells and magic items than there are feats and classes, and several spells that were altered like Conjure Animals were changed because they don't want people using the old versions, just like they wouldn't want a pre-errata version to still be in their toolset.
It may be a "nontroversy" in your own mind and in those of the usual suspects who defend every single decision the company makes but when posts critical of this decision are getting 100 likes in the [News] Updating the D&D Beyond Toolset for the 2024 Core Rulebooks thread anyone with any semblance of sense can plainly see you have your head buried in the sand.
You were asked if you would do what you expect of others and you had to move the goalposts to say Well I might only dislike one or two spells and homebrewing that is nothing. No. Some people want to finish campaigns using the 2014 ruleset. You expect them to homebrew every spell and item that has been changed. You would be in fits if you were expected to do that.
Any message board is a fraction of the overall playerbase. Pointing that out is not an attack.
Do you need to be reminded that you are on those message boards? How when the OGL debacle was in full swing you and others here acted as if your dominating the General Discussion boards magically meant the "majority" of people in the hobby here and beyond agreed with you?
Broader sentiment regarding that beyond these forums was overwhelmingly negative. And remains so. The very same might be said for this decision. But keep your head in the sand.
Do you need to be reminded that you are on those message boards? How when the OGL debacle was in full swing you and others here acted as if your dominating the General Discussion boards magically meant the "majority" of people in the hobby here and beyond agreed with you?
Broader sentiment regarding that beyond these forums was overwhelmingly negative. And remains so. The very same might be said for this decision. But keep your head in the sand.
I didn't "dominate" anything, and wouldn't care if I did. I don't need Appeal To Popularity to point out the simple fact that there are hundreds more spells in the game than feats and classes. Them deciding to Legacy the latter and not the former is justifiable, no matter how many upvotes you gesture at that believe otherwise.
It may be a "nontroversy" in your own mind and in those of the usual suspects who defend every single decision the company makes but when posts critical of this decision are getting 100 likes in the [News] Updating the D&D Beyond Toolset for the 2024 Core Rulebooks thread anyone with any semblance of sense can plainly see you have your head buried in the sand.
You were asked if you would do what you expect of others and you had to move the goalposts to say Well I might only dislike one or two spells and homebrewing that is nothing. No. Some people want to finish campaigns using the 2014 ruleset. You expect them to homebrew every spell and item that has been changed. You would be in fits if you were expected to do that.
I'm expecting no such thing, they should only homebrew the changes they dislike. Anything more than that is unnecessary effort. I believe that for most people, that's going to be a much, much smaller quantity than you seem to think.
And there's no need for oblique insults like "anyone with any semblance of sense." That's flaming.
How many users of this site have to say it has now become useless because spells, etc. on their groups' character sheets are all going to automatically update to the new ruleset when they aren't planning on switching right away before people defending how Beyond is handling this get it?
It's not rocket science why many are complaining. The usual suspects are muddying the waters to make it sound as if there is nothing to complain about.
How many users of this site have to say it has now become useless because spells, etc. on their groups' character sheets are all going to automatically update to the new ruleset when they aren't planning on switching right away before people defending how Beyond is handling this get it?
It's not rocket science why many are complaining. The usual suspects are muddying the waters to make it sound as if there is nothing to complain about.
So if those spells had been errataed instead with the exact same changes and the toolset was automatically updated accordingly, just like they've done many times in the past, would you consider that indefensible too?
I'm expecting no such thing, they should only homebrew the changes they dislike. Anything more than that is unnecessary effort. I believe that for most people, that's going to be a much, much smaller quantity than you seem to think.
And there's no need for oblique insults like "anyone with any semblance of sense." That's flaming.
You are STILL doing it. Some players want to continue using the 2014 ruleset. Not just not use the changes they "don't like." They don't want to use ANY changes.
Are you just pretending not to get it? Or deliberately misconstruing people's main complaint over and over so you can sustain your non-argument against their complaints?
Flaming? You suggested anyone wanting to play an older version of a game is just "clinging to cobwebs." Insulting millions of people who enjoy the retro experience of playing older games. There are entire shops in Japan that cater to these people. Full of old video games and old TTRPGs. You might like the latest thing. Belong to that class of people who erroneously believe new is always better. Not everyone has to agree with you.
So if those spells had been errataed instead with the exact same changes and the toolset was automatically updated accordingly, just like they've done many times in the past, would you consider that indefensible too?
You are STILL doing it. Some players want to continue using the 2014 ruleset. Not just not use the changes they "don't like." They don't want to use ANY changes.
Then those players should play exclusively with paper books. Digital tools always carry a risk of updates making older tooltips/descriptions inaccessible.
Then those players should play exclusively with paper books. Digital tools always carry a risk of updates making older tooltips/descriptions inaccessible.
Instead of keeping your head in the sand go read what a number of DMs currently running games here and wishing to finish those games are saying. You telling them "Just use your physical books" is basically clarifying for them how utterly useless and a waste of money Beyond is about to become for them.
And I guess my next question is would you do that? Just use your physical books? Or is this yet another case of your expecting others to do things you would be in fits about were it you?
Noted you ignored my response to your previously having insulted retro gamers. Much like you ignored the initial response to it elsewhere. For someone with an anime or manga avatar I would have figured you would be familiar with many Japanese people's love of the old: older versions of video games, classic anime and manga, and even old TTRPGs.
What is happening is analogous with someone coming into your home and telling you they are going to take a pen to a book you own and make changes but never mind because they are going to give you a chance to copy things in them you might want by hand.
And I guess my next question is would you do that? Just use your physical books? Or is this yet another case of your expecting others to do things you would be in fits about were it you?
If it were me, as you keep asking, I would take the rational step of actually looking at the new material and seeing what changed in the spells, then basing my decision of whether this site is the right toolset for me on what those changes are. You can either wait until you have the new books, ask someone who got an early copy at GenCon, or check content creators like Joefudge who have gone through them all already.
If that answer is too nuanced for you, I don't have any other to offer.
My groups don't have physical copies of the books we use. We would have to still go to DND Beyond to look at the old versions of things. If this change goes through each DM will have to decide what version of spells they want to use and we will look to see what other digital tools are available to host our character sheets. If it's less effort to rebuild the characters somewhere else than to homebrew a bunch of spells that's what will happen.
If wotc wants to make going digital only risky in this way. Then players will have to decide if the risk is worth it. Many will decide it's not and will make other choices. Those choices will inevitably mean less money for wotc.
If it were me, as you keep asking, I would take the rational step of actually looking at the new material and seeing what changed in the spells, then basing my decision of whether this site is the right toolset for me on what those changes are. You can either wait until you have the new books, ask someone who got an early copy at GenCon, or check content creators like Joefudge who have gone through them all already.
If that answer is too nuanced for you, I don't have any other to offer.
You are doing it again. Inserting your own convenient personal touches to the question. I am SPECIFICALLY talking about people who want to finish current campaigns using the current ruleset. Were you in their shoes would you be perfectly happy doing what you expect them to do? Is putting yourself in others' shoes an entirely foreign concept to you?
And that's the third time you have ignored my response to the insults you have thrown at those who prefer older games and systems. Visit a good hobby shop in Tokyo on a good day. You will see that older editions of Traveller and Call of Cthulhu and D&D are bought and sold. Some people want the retro experience. As I said elsewhere: anyone coming to D&D from Stranger Things is going to better capture that experience playing an earlier edition or a game like one. There is no need to insult such people like you have in an effort to convince others the latest is always "the best."
You are doing it again. Inserting your own convenient personal touches to the question. I am SPECIFICALLY talking about people who want to finish current campaigns using the current ruleset. Were you in their shoes would you be perfectly happy doing what you expect them to do? Is putting yourself in others' shoes an entirely foreign concept to you?
I don't consider an inability/unwillingness to even evaluate the new material before making a decision to be reasonable. So no, I can't and won't put myself in the shoes of people that insist on an unreasonable stance.
And I guess my next question is would you do that? Just use your physical books? Or is this yet another case of your expecting others to do things you would be in fits about were it you?
If it were me, as you keep asking, I would take the rational step of actually looking at the new material and seeing what changed in the spells, then basing my decision of whether this site is the right toolset for me on what those changes are.
How do I do that when the switchover is Sept 3rd, and the book release is Sept 17th? I shouldn't have to rely on 3rd party articles and videos to know what I'm being forced to use.
In the [News] Updating the D&D Beyond Toolset for the 2024 Core Rulebooks thread there are posts with about 100 likes that are opposed to this decision. But the usual suspects will continue to act as if Wizards are "right" and it is only a "vocal minority" who would say otherwise.
Ok, they can ignore the divine smite spell because for 2014 it was a class feature and the other smite spells will work on a BA when they hit a target, which doesn’t keep them from stacking with their DS feature. Or am I wrong?
Not sure on the stealth/invisibility thing but nothing jumps out at me but I haven’t seen that many spells that touch on those. But if you have a concrete example let me know.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The entire purpose, and I do really mean the ENTIRETY of my purpose, for using DND beyond is to not have to spend millions of hours "home brewing" things into the system. They do this, I lose all faith in this website, I stop spending money on this website, and I'll probably move over to roll 20 because they have never and will never do something this ridiculously stupid.
>:--)
I have never spent money. I just get everything here that's free for the time being.
The one who wants to hug quite literally everyone, for no reason whatsoever. Get him to an Asylum.
Just some guy who likes memes and DND!
Some may know me as a particularly goofy vermin if you play a Sonic game where you commit blasts of robo...2...
(online Monday-Friday from 8:00 to 3:00) (Most of the time.)
First ACTUAL RP character as a SHEET!!! He's a foxfolk.
Hewwo! ^w^ You wanna see a surprise? :3
Obviously we do consider the practice reasonable. Me opening every post with "I think it's reasonable that digital toolsets favor the latest version of over 200 spells and magic items rather than cluttering up search results by duplicating them all with Legacy tags" goes without saying.
If this nontroversy leads to them deciding the clutter is worth it, I'll live with it, but this approach makes sense from where I'm sitting. There are far more spells and magic items than there are feats and classes, and several spells that were altered like Conjure Animals were changed because they don't want people using the old versions, just like they wouldn't want a pre-errata version to still be in their toolset.
Any message board is a fraction of the overall playerbase. Pointing that out is not an attack.
It may be a "nontroversy" in your own mind and in those of the usual suspects who defend every single decision the company makes but when posts critical of this decision are getting 100 likes in the [News] Updating the D&D Beyond Toolset for the 2024 Core Rulebooks thread anyone with any semblance of sense can plainly see you have your head buried in the sand.
You were asked if you would do what you expect of others and you had to move the goalposts to say Well I might only dislike one or two spells and homebrewing that is nothing. No. Some people want to finish campaigns using the 2014 ruleset. You expect them to homebrew every spell and item that has been changed. You would be in fits if you were expected to do that.
Do you need to be reminded that you are on those message boards? How when the OGL debacle was in full swing you and others here acted as if your dominating the General Discussion boards magically meant the "majority" of people in the hobby here and beyond agreed with you?
Broader sentiment regarding that beyond these forums was overwhelmingly negative. And remains so. The very same might be said for this decision. But keep your head in the sand.
I didn't "dominate" anything, and wouldn't care if I did. I don't need Appeal To Popularity to point out the simple fact that there are hundreds more spells in the game than feats and classes. Them deciding to Legacy the latter and not the former is justifiable, no matter how many upvotes you gesture at that believe otherwise.
I'm expecting no such thing, they should only homebrew the changes they dislike. Anything more than that is unnecessary effort. I believe that for most people, that's going to be a much, much smaller quantity than you seem to think.
And there's no need for oblique insults like "anyone with any semblance of sense." That's flaming.
How many users of this site have to say it has now become useless because spells, etc. on their groups' character sheets are all going to automatically update to the new ruleset when they aren't planning on switching right away before people defending how Beyond is handling this get it?
It's not rocket science why many are complaining. The usual suspects are muddying the waters to make it sound as if there is nothing to complain about.
So if those spells had been errataed instead with the exact same changes and the toolset was automatically updated accordingly, just like they've done many times in the past, would you consider that indefensible too?
You are STILL doing it. Some players want to continue using the 2014 ruleset. Not just not use the changes they "don't like." They don't want to use ANY changes.
Are you just pretending not to get it? Or deliberately misconstruing people's main complaint over and over so you can sustain your non-argument against their complaints?
Flaming? You suggested anyone wanting to play an older version of a game is just "clinging to cobwebs." Insulting millions of people who enjoy the retro experience of playing older games. There are entire shops in Japan that cater to these people. Full of old video games and old TTRPGs. You might like the latest thing. Belong to that class of people who erroneously believe new is always better. Not everyone has to agree with you.
It's not errata. Stop muddying the waters.
Then those players should play exclusively with paper books. Digital tools always carry a risk of updates making older tooltips/descriptions inaccessible.
"The old tooltip for {spell} is no longer accessible" has happened before. I don't recall seeing pitchforks then.
Instead of keeping your head in the sand go read what a number of DMs currently running games here and wishing to finish those games are saying. You telling them "Just use your physical books" is basically clarifying for them how utterly useless and a waste of money Beyond is about to become for them.
And I guess my next question is would you do that? Just use your physical books? Or is this yet another case of your expecting others to do things you would be in fits about were it you?
Noted you ignored my response to your previously having insulted retro gamers. Much like you ignored the initial response to it elsewhere. For someone with an anime or manga avatar I would have figured you would be familiar with many Japanese people's love of the old: older versions of video games, classic anime and manga, and even old TTRPGs.
What is happening is analogous with someone coming into your home and telling you they are going to take a pen to a book you own and make changes but never mind because they are going to give you a chance to copy things in them you might want by hand.
If it were me, as you keep asking, I would take the rational step of actually looking at the new material and seeing what changed in the spells, then basing my decision of whether this site is the right toolset for me on what those changes are. You can either wait until you have the new books, ask someone who got an early copy at GenCon, or check content creators like Joefudge who have gone through them all already.
If that answer is too nuanced for you, I don't have any other to offer.
My groups don't have physical copies of the books we use. We would have to still go to DND Beyond to look at the old versions of things. If this change goes through each DM will have to decide what version of spells they want to use and we will look to see what other digital tools are available to host our character sheets. If it's less effort to rebuild the characters somewhere else than to homebrew a bunch of spells that's what will happen.
If wotc wants to make going digital only risky in this way. Then players will have to decide if the risk is worth it. Many will decide it's not and will make other choices. Those choices will inevitably mean less money for wotc.
You are doing it again. Inserting your own convenient personal touches to the question. I am SPECIFICALLY talking about people who want to finish current campaigns using the current ruleset. Were you in their shoes would you be perfectly happy doing what you expect them to do? Is putting yourself in others' shoes an entirely foreign concept to you?
And that's the third time you have ignored my response to the insults you have thrown at those who prefer older games and systems. Visit a good hobby shop in Tokyo on a good day. You will see that older editions of Traveller and Call of Cthulhu and D&D are bought and sold. Some people want the retro experience. As I said elsewhere: anyone coming to D&D from Stranger Things is going to better capture that experience playing an earlier edition or a game like one. There is no need to insult such people like you have in an effort to convince others the latest is always "the best."
I don't consider an inability/unwillingness to even evaluate the new material before making a decision to be reasonable. So no, I can't and won't put myself in the shoes of people that insist on an unreasonable stance.
How do I do that when the switchover is Sept 3rd, and the book release is Sept 17th? I shouldn't have to rely on 3rd party articles and videos to know what I'm being forced to use.