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.
There is nothing "unreasonable" about sticking to the current version of the game until a campaign that has been going for months if not years using that version is through. It might be argued it is unreasonable of Beyond to expect players to swap out rules for others in the middle of a game.
Neither is there anything "unreasonable" about people wishing to continue to play 5E as is and do so indefinitely. Or another earlier edition. Tell me: Are all those Japanese hobbyists who love the retro gaming experience also being "unreasonable"? Why? Because they don't belong to a class of people who hold on to the profoundly silly belief that the new thing is always the best thing?
EDIT: A message board is but a fraction of the player base. But we are talking strictly about those who use D&D Beyond. And we are talking about the thread on D&D Beyond that concerns the news about how they intend to handle this. Scores of users who have been here for years now complaining about how their current campaigns will need to be finished elsewhere or are going to be dragged to a halt with all the extra work it is going to entail for them. Many cancelling their subscriptions. But you and a mere handful of others defending this decision just here on the General Discussion boards telling yourselves this ain't no big deal represent the majority? It's the OGL debacle all over again. With you lot just gaslighting people. You have a tendency to talk about how critics of Wizards of the Coast are just a "vocal minority." The reality is that is you and others whose almost every post on these forums serves to defend their almost every decision—even when they accept they were making a mistake and change course—no matter how indefensible.
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.
Can you at least agree that switching to the new rules is going to take time. DM's need to read & learn the new rules, rebalance encounters and get familiar with updated characters, while players also have to learn the new rules, rebuild their character sheets and potentially change their playstyles.
Can you then not understand why people don't want to do that in the middle of a campaign (and short notice too). Even if the DM liked the new rules and wanted to switch, is it not reasonable to wait until the end of the campaign, or even a break in a campaign. Otherwise they've got to find time to make the switchover whilst also prepping their ongoing sessions (and probably fitting it in around work, family life, other socialising etc).
This why I am not switching yet. I followed some of the early OneDnD playtests and was happy overall. I knew I didn't have the time to make the switch in the near future however so I have not followed anything about the finalised rules. I'm now being told that I have to switch in two weeks time, or stop using the site, despite reassurances from DDB that both rules would be supported.
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.
If you're not willing to rely on previews from the folks they gave preview copies to for that very reason, then simply wait and review the changes then. This is a hobby, not an operating system patch, you're allowed to keep using the current toolset in the meantime.
Can you at least agree that switching to the new rules is going to take time. DM's need to read & learn the new rules, rebalance encounters and get familiar with updated characters, while players also have to learn the new rules, rebuild their character sheets and potentially change their playstyles.
Updated tooltips on spells and items is not going to stop you from sticking with the old rules. Anything that you want to use the 2014 version of, just open your 2014 book in a different tab. IT's not like there's a VTT or rules engine of some kind that's going to throw error messages all over the place if you try to do things a 2014 way.
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.
If you're not willing to rely on previews from the folks they gave preview copies to for that very reason, then simply wait and review the changes then. This is a hobby, not an operating system patch, you're allowed to keep using the current toolset in the meantime.
Can you at least agree that switching to the new rules is going to take time. DM's need to read & learn the new rules, rebalance encounters and get familiar with updated characters, while players also have to learn the new rules, rebuild their character sheets and potentially change their playstyles.
Updated tooltips on spells and items is not going to stop you from sticking with the old rules. Anything that you want to use the 2014 version of, just open your 2014 book in a different tab. IT's not like there's a VTT or rules engine of some kind that's going to throw error messages all over the place if you try to do things a 2014 way.
You took one point out of my post in which a number had been made. And misconstrued it. The point is elsewhere you insulted people who wanted to continue to play the current version of the game. Or any version of the game older than the newest one.
The main point—which was in response to your accusing those who want to finish up campaigns using the current ruleset of being "unreasonable"—was:
There is nothing "unreasonable" about sticking to the current version of the game until a campaign that has been going for months if not years using that version is through. It might be argued it is unreasonable of Beyond to expect players to swap out rules for others in the middle of a game.
Why didn't you respond to this? You can't even sustain the every excuse you make for how Beyond is handling this. And then you expect us to believe you are being reasonable.
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.
If you're not willing to rely on previews from the folks they gave preview copies to for that very reason, then simply wait and review the changes then. This is a hobby, not an operating system patch, you're allowed to keep using the current toolset in the meantime.
Can you at least agree that switching to the new rules is going to take time. DM's need to read & learn the new rules, rebalance encounters and get familiar with updated characters, while players also have to learn the new rules, rebuild their character sheets and potentially change their playstyles.
Updated tooltips on spells and items is not going to stop you from sticking with the old rules. Anything that you want to use the 2014 version of, just open your 2014 book in a different tab. IT's not like there's a VTT or rules engine of some kind that's going to throw error messages all over the place if you try to do things a 2014 way.
OK, so it *is* reasonable not to switch straightaway, but not reasonable to expect DDB to support the rules that they told us would be available and usable?
I will point out again that I have paid for DDB, the Official *Toolkit* of D&D, I.e. the character builder, not the compendium.
You took one point out of my post in which a number had been made. And misconstrued it. The point is elsewhere you insulted people who wanted to continue to play the current version of the game. Or any version of the game older than the newest one.
1) I haven't insulted anyone; my "cobwebs" comment was directed at the decade-old outdated ruleset, not anyone posting. You meanwhile have been repeatedly throwing out things like "head in the sand", "semblance of sense" etc that are aimed squarely at people who disagree with you rather than with the game, then accusing them of attacking you when it's the other way around.
2) I focused on that point because I already addressed the others. The message board represents a fraction of BOTH the overall playerbase AND the site's userbase, so you switching from one to the other doesn't change my point. And the folks who want their games to be completely immune from changes to the tooltips is still an unreasonable stance to me, when (a) errata does the same thing, and (b) they haven't even evaluated the changes to spells yet to determine how much work it would actually be.
OK, so it *is* reasonable not to switch straightaway, but not reasonable to expect DDB to support the rules that they told us would be available and usable?
I will point out again that I have paid for DDB, the Official *Toolkit* of D&D, I.e. the character builder, not the compendium.
Yes, if they had taken your books away I'd agree with you that was unreasonable. They haven't done that.
As for the character builder - changing the tooltip under a spell won't stop that spell from being put into your character, so just do that and then get the spell text from your 2014 book.
You took one point out of my post in which a number had been made. And misconstrued it. The point is elsewhere you insulted people who wanted to continue to play the current version of the game. Or any version of the game older than the newest one.
1) I haven't insulted anyone; my "cobwebs" comment was directed at the decade-old outdated ruleset, not anyone posting. You meanwhile have been repeatedly throwing out things like "head in the sand", "semblance of sense" etc that are aimed squarely at people who disagree with you rather than with the game, then accusing them of attacking you when it's the other way around.
2) I focused on that point because I already addressed the others. The message board represents a fraction of BOTH the overall playerbase AND the site's userbase, so you switching from one to the other doesn't change my point. And the folks who want their games to be completely immune from changes to the tooltips is still an unreasonable stance to me, when (a) errata does the same thing, and (b) they haven't even evaluated the changes to spells yet to determine how much work it would actually be.
OK, so it *is* reasonable not to switch straightaway, but not reasonable to expect DDB to support the rules that they told us would be available and usable?
I will point out again that I have paid for DDB, the Official *Toolkit* of D&D, I.e. the character builder, not the compendium.
Yes, if they had taken your books away I'd agree with you that was unreasonable. They haven't done that.
As for the character builder - changing the tooltip under a spell won't stop that spell from being put into your character, so just do that and then get the spell text from your 2014 book.
You described someone who wants to continue to play the current version of the game as "clinging to cobwebs." What you call "outdated" many are perfectly happy with. Your subjective view is not objective reality. And how many times have you been asked your thoughts on Japanese hobbyists who choose to play older versions of D&D or CoC or other games and systems and have just acted as if you were never asked this? Not once have you said anything in response to that specific point because you know your whole "outdated" line of argument is not an argument. Insults? Suggesting people "can't read English," are "unintelligent," and must be "bigots" is standard procedure among some of you who spend their days here defending Wizards' every decision. Don't lecture me about insulting others when it's routine for you to like such comments.
It's kinda crazy how some people think this is a non-issue. It makes sense if you're wanting the new rules, but being forced to use the new stuff when you paid for the old stuff and you don't want to switch is scummy no matter how you look at it.
You described someone who wants to continue to play the current version of the game as "clinging to cobwebs." What you call "outdated" many are perfectly happy with.
Right, none of those adjectives were referring to any person or group of people. If you want to take my views on the 10-year-old ruleset of a hobby game personally, that's on you, not me.
And how many times have you been asked your thoughts on Japanese hobbyists who choose to play older versions of D&D or CoC or other games and systems and have just acted as if you were never asked this? Not once have you said anything in response to that specific point because you know your whole "outdated" line of argument is not an argument.
I literally did respond to that specific point when I said "you can still do that." 2024 tooltips in a 5e character builder don't stop anyone from playing 2014 5e, or 4th edition, or 3rd edition, or CoC or anything else. The books are what you need to play a TTRPG, not tooltips.
You described someone who wants to continue to play the current version of the game as "clinging to cobwebs." What you call "outdated" many are perfectly happy with.
Right, none of those adjectives were referring to any person or group of people. If you want to take my views on the 10-year-old ruleset of a hobby game personally, that's on you, not me.
And how many times have you been asked your thoughts on Japanese hobbyists who choose to play older versions of D&D or CoC or other games and systems and have just acted as if you were never asked this? Not once have you said anything in response to that specific point because you know your whole "outdated" line of argument is not an argument.
I literally did respond to that specific point when I said "you can still do that." 2024 tooltips in a 5e character builder don't stop anyone from playing 2014 5e, or 4th edition, or 3rd edition, or CoC or anything else. The books are what you need to play a TTRPG, not tooltips.
That you need to misrepresent my points says everything. Yes. You said people can play older versions of games. But you also implied these people were choosing to play "inferior" games by doing so. Once again: Your subjective view is not objective reality. You have spent how many years getting thrown into fits when people have insulted 5E? You take it personally. You take it personally when people say anything bad about Wizards of the Coast! The last part of your response is completely missing my point. Because I am not even talking about Beyond when I make that point. I am simply talking about how for millions the retro gaming experience is preferable. You needn't agree with them. I suppose you believe Classic Traveller isn't the best version of that game? That you believe the latest edition of Warhammer must be the best version? You said something silly about people playing older versions of games and can't own up to just how silly it was. So instead you just pretend I am saying things I am not saying. So you can "argue" against those instead.
You have spent how many years getting thrown into fits when people have insulted 5E? You take it personally. You take it personally when people say anything bad about Wizards of the Coast!
Incorrect. I don't care about other people's opinions of anything, least of all 5e or Wizards of the Coast.
I suppose you believe Classic Traveller isn't the best version of that game? That you believe the latest edition of Warhammer must be the best version?
I neither believe nor care anything about those games. This is a D&D forum.
You have spent how many years getting thrown into fits when people have insulted 5E? You take it personally. You take it personally when people say anything bad about Wizards of the Coast!
Incorrect. I don't care about other people's opinions of anything, least of all 5e or Wizards of the Coast.
I suppose you believe Classic Traveller isn't the best version of that game? That you believe the latest edition of Warhammer must be the best version?
I neither believe nor care anything about those games. This is a D&D forum.
You are allowed to think that a game you have touted as the greatest game in the universe until five minutes ago is so deeply flawed everyone must upgrade. Mindless consumerism does that to people. You've posted post after post on these forums displaying how difficult it is for you to handle criticism of Wizards of the Coast. You are in fact engaging in that just now as you rush to defend their decision in this regard despite its having shown a total disregard for people in the middle of campaigns they hope to have started and finish using one ruleset. You were also among those defending decisions made eighteen months ago even though they would later drop those decisions due to community backlash. The least you could do is be honest. And again you miss the point: Retro gaming is a thing. Many like to play older versions of games. Why would someone who watched Stranger Things play the newest version of D&D and not B/X or BECMI or something similar to get that experience? I can't count on two hands the reasons I prefer editions of the game that I believe actually look and feel like D&D infinitely more than anything we have seen from Wizards since even the release of 3rd. Edition or prefer games that I think do D&D better than D&D but I couldn't care less if people want to play using the 2024 rules. Or the 2014 ones. It's incredible how when Wizards give players more choices choices is everything. How you will even argue for days in a thread with others for complaining about their being options. Now you want to limit players' choices by cheering and applauding when Beyond make it nigh unmanageable to keep playing using 2014 rules here on Beyond. But just as long you get what you want. No need to try spending even a moment in others' shoes.
"Mindless" - see, you can't make a single point without injecting a personal attack. Your approach doesn't exactly lend itself to sympathy.
I'll defend whatever decisions I feel like defending. And "Retro gaming is a thing" does not mean the official toolset needs to support everything that came before. If I want to play my old NES games, sure some of them might be purchasable on Switch, but I know I need to go find an emulator for the ones that aren't.
Maybe they'll figure out some kind of toggle that keeps the legacy versions from clogging up search results or the character builder when I'm reading through/picking spells. If they do great. But for the vast, vast majority of the spells I'm going to be using the updated versions, so their plan to not support them doesn't affect me.
"Mindless" - see, you can't make a single point without injecting a personal attack. Your approach doesn't exactly lend itself to sympathy.
I'll defend whatever decisions I feel like defending. And "Retro gaming is a thing" does not mean the official toolset needs to support everything that came before. If I want to play my old NES games, sure some of them might be purchasable on Switch, but I know I need to go find an emulator for the ones that aren't.
Maybe they'll figure out some kind of toggle that keeps the legacy versions from clogging up search results or the character builder when I'm reading through/picking spells. If they do great. But for the vast, vast majority of the spells I'm going to be using the updated versions, so their plan to not support them doesn't affect me.
If it's not mindless consumerism how is it exactly that a 5E you sang the praises of until just recently is all of a sudden such a bad game in need of replacing and urgently? And again, you routinely like comments in which the poster has questioned someone's English ability or even intelligence. You can stop pretending you find insults oh-so-unacceptable when it is so obvious you are okay with them when they are directed at those with whom you disagree. I'm old enough to remember when being a hypocrite was deemed to be an awful thing. Pity we now live in a time when it's acceptable just as long as it's expedient. Also again, I am not talking about Beyond or any online toolkit when I mention retro gaming. This is in response to your insisting "new is better." You might prefer the newer version of something. Insisting it is better when better is subjective is puerile. It's like how the little rich kid at school tells others he has the best thing because his is the newest thing.
If Beyond did that it would be much better for the site than having scores of homebrew versions of the same spells and same items clogging up their databases. At the Checkout buyers were told buying a book guaranteed access to that book's content using their toolkit. They can uphold that promise by putting in the work to ensure that content is still a part of the toolkit. Not expect players to do their work for them.
"for the vast, vast majority of the spells I'm going to be using the updated versions, so their plan to not support them doesn't affect me."
Congrats. You're using the new system.
A LOT of people aren't going to use the new system and paid for the old system. Naturally, someone going to use it doesn't see the issue as a big deal.
I'm in 3 different groups that use dndbeyond and only 1 of them wants to try the new rules on release. 1 of the other two are going to start Eve of Ruin in less than a week and are wanting to use the 2014 rules. That's a long-stake campaign where 5 people plus the dm are wanting to use the old rules and old spells for the campaign, then do Chains of Asmodeus with the new rules after to get a feel for the change by switching to the 2024 rules, and, I'm not even kidding, one of the players is specifically wanting to play a Conjuration Wizard in both to see the major differences, but now can't fully use his character sheet when it gets implemented. Do you see how frustrating that is? Sure, anecdotal, whatever, but still, that's frustrating as hell.
"for the vast, vast majority of the spells I'm going to be using the updated versions, so their plan to not support them doesn't affect me."
Congrats. You're using the new system.
A LOT of people aren't going to use the new system and paid for the old system. Naturally, someone going to use it doesn't see the issue as a big deal.
I'm in 3 different groups that use dndbeyond and only 1 of them wants to try the new rules on release. 1 of the other two are going to start Eve of Ruin in less than a week and are wanting to use the 2014 rules. That's a long-stake campaign where 5 people plus the dm are wanting to use the old rules and old spells for the campaign, then do Chains of Asmodeus with the new rules after to get a feel for the change by switching to the 2024 rules, and, I'm not even kidding, one of the players is specifically wanting to play a Conjuration Wizard in both to see the major differences, but now can't fully use his character sheet when it gets implemented. Do you see how frustrating that is? Sure, anecdotal, whatever, but still, that's frustrating as hell.
Someone should remind these people that "It doesn't affect me so I don't care" is only the source of most of the world's problems ...
If it's not mindless consumerism how is it exactly that a 5E you sang the praises of until just recently is all of a sudden such a bad game in need of replacing and urgently? And again, you routinely like comments in which the poster has questioned someone's English ability or even intelligence. You can stop pretending you find insults oh-so-unacceptable when it is so obvious you are okay with them when they are directed at those with whom you disagree. I'm old enough to remember when being a hypocrite was deemed to be an awful thing. Pity we now live in a time when it's acceptable just as long as it's expedient. Also again, I am not talking about Beyond or any online toolkit when I mention retro gaming. This is in response to your insisting "new is better." You might prefer the newer version of something. Insisting it is better when better is subjective is puerile. It's like how the little rich kid at school tells others he has the best thing because his is the newest thing.
If Beyond did that it would be much better for the site than having scores of homebrew versions of the same spells and same items clogging up their databases. At the Checkout buyers were told buying a book guaranteed access to that book's content using their toolkit. They can uphold that promise by putting in the work to ensure that content is still a part of the toolkit. Not expect players to do their work for them.
1) My upvoting someone else's comment means I agree with the overarching point it's making, not necessarily every single word choice they chose to make within it.
2) I've been in support of the rules revision since before the playtest even started. My support for 5e doesn't mean I don't think it was deeply flawed and badly in need of said revision after 10 years.
3) I think the new thing is better because... I think it's better... not merely because it's new. I've read the new spells, the new species, the new classes and feats etc, and overwhelmingly, I do find them to be superior to what we had before.
1) My upvoting someone else's comment means I agree with the overarching point it's making, not necessarily every single word choice they chose to make within it.
2) I've been in support of the rules revision since before the playtest even started. My support for 5e doesn't mean I don't think it was deeply flawed and badly in need of said revision after 10 years.
3) I think the new thing is better because... I think it's better... not merely because it's new. I've read the new spells, the new species, the new classes and feats etc, and overwhelmingly, I do find them to be superior to what we had before.
1. If you truly opposed people's insulting others you would be kept busy on these forums where someone you routinely agree with does just that almost every day. Commenting on their doing it. You aren't weasling your way out of what is blatant hypocrisy. What was my "insult" exactly? To bring up mindless consumerism? Like that isn't a problem in society? And like how people just need to have the latest version of this or that isn't a prime example of it? Particularly when they spent half their waking hours during the lifecycle of the previous version acting like it was the greatest thing in the world?
2. Enjoy the new ruleset. And hope it sees the love and support the current ruleset has. I suspect it won't.
3. You can consider them to be better. We all have opinions. I think ShadowDark does D&D better than D&D. It's all good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There is nothing "unreasonable" about sticking to the current version of the game until a campaign that has been going for months if not years using that version is through. It might be argued it is unreasonable of Beyond to expect players to swap out rules for others in the middle of a game.
Neither is there anything "unreasonable" about people wishing to continue to play 5E as is and do so indefinitely. Or another earlier edition. Tell me: Are all those Japanese hobbyists who love the retro gaming experience also being "unreasonable"? Why? Because they don't belong to a class of people who hold on to the profoundly silly belief that the new thing is always the best thing?
EDIT: A message board is but a fraction of the player base. But we are talking strictly about those who use D&D Beyond. And we are talking about the thread on D&D Beyond that concerns the news about how they intend to handle this. Scores of users who have been here for years now complaining about how their current campaigns will need to be finished elsewhere or are going to be dragged to a halt with all the extra work it is going to entail for them. Many cancelling their subscriptions. But you and a mere handful of others defending this decision just here on the General Discussion boards telling yourselves this ain't no big deal represent the majority? It's the OGL debacle all over again. With you lot just gaslighting people. You have a tendency to talk about how critics of Wizards of the Coast are just a "vocal minority." The reality is that is you and others whose almost every post on these forums serves to defend their almost every decision—even when they accept they were making a mistake and change course—no matter how indefensible.
Can you at least agree that switching to the new rules is going to take time. DM's need to read & learn the new rules, rebalance encounters and get familiar with updated characters, while players also have to learn the new rules, rebuild their character sheets and potentially change their playstyles.
Can you then not understand why people don't want to do that in the middle of a campaign (and short notice too). Even if the DM liked the new rules and wanted to switch, is it not reasonable to wait until the end of the campaign, or even a break in a campaign. Otherwise they've got to find time to make the switchover whilst also prepping their ongoing sessions (and probably fitting it in around work, family life, other socialising etc).
This why I am not switching yet. I followed some of the early OneDnD playtests and was happy overall. I knew I didn't have the time to make the switch in the near future however so I have not followed anything about the finalised rules. I'm now being told that I have to switch in two weeks time, or stop using the site, despite reassurances from DDB that both rules would be supported.
Could not disagree with you more
You can still do both.
If you're not willing to rely on previews from the folks they gave preview copies to for that very reason, then simply wait and review the changes then. This is a hobby, not an operating system patch, you're allowed to keep using the current toolset in the meantime.
Updated tooltips on spells and items is not going to stop you from sticking with the old rules. Anything that you want to use the 2014 version of, just open your 2014 book in a different tab. IT's not like there's a VTT or rules engine of some kind that's going to throw error messages all over the place if you try to do things a 2014 way.
You took one point out of my post in which a number had been made. And misconstrued it. The point is elsewhere you insulted people who wanted to continue to play the current version of the game. Or any version of the game older than the newest one.
The main point—which was in response to your accusing those who want to finish up campaigns using the current ruleset of being "unreasonable"—was:
There is nothing "unreasonable" about sticking to the current version of the game until a campaign that has been going for months if not years using that version is through. It might be argued it is unreasonable of Beyond to expect players to swap out rules for others in the middle of a game.
Why didn't you respond to this? You can't even sustain the every excuse you make for how Beyond is handling this. And then you expect us to believe you are being reasonable.
OK, so it *is* reasonable not to switch straightaway, but not reasonable to expect DDB to support the rules that they told us would be available and usable?
I will point out again that I have paid for DDB, the Official *Toolkit* of D&D, I.e. the character builder, not the compendium.
1) I haven't insulted anyone; my "cobwebs" comment was directed at the decade-old outdated ruleset, not anyone posting. You meanwhile have been repeatedly throwing out things like "head in the sand", "semblance of sense" etc that are aimed squarely at people who disagree with you rather than with the game, then accusing them of attacking you when it's the other way around.
2) I focused on that point because I already addressed the others. The message board represents a fraction of BOTH the overall playerbase AND the site's userbase, so you switching from one to the other doesn't change my point. And the folks who want their games to be completely immune from changes to the tooltips is still an unreasonable stance to me, when (a) errata does the same thing, and (b) they haven't even evaluated the changes to spells yet to determine how much work it would actually be.
Yes, if they had taken your books away I'd agree with you that was unreasonable. They haven't done that.
As for the character builder - changing the tooltip under a spell won't stop that spell from being put into your character, so just do that and then get the spell text from your 2014 book.
You described someone who wants to continue to play the current version of the game as "clinging to cobwebs." What you call "outdated" many are perfectly happy with. Your subjective view is not objective reality. And how many times have you been asked your thoughts on Japanese hobbyists who choose to play older versions of D&D or CoC or other games and systems and have just acted as if you were never asked this? Not once have you said anything in response to that specific point because you know your whole "outdated" line of argument is not an argument. Insults? Suggesting people "can't read English," are "unintelligent," and must be "bigots" is standard procedure among some of you who spend their days here defending Wizards' every decision. Don't lecture me about insulting others when it's routine for you to like such comments.
It's kinda crazy how some people think this is a non-issue. It makes sense if you're wanting the new rules, but being forced to use the new stuff when you paid for the old stuff and you don't want to switch is scummy no matter how you look at it.
Right, none of those adjectives were referring to any person or group of people. If you want to take my views on the 10-year-old ruleset of a hobby game personally, that's on you, not me.
I literally did respond to that specific point when I said "you can still do that." 2024 tooltips in a 5e character builder don't stop anyone from playing 2014 5e, or 4th edition, or 3rd edition, or CoC or anything else. The books are what you need to play a TTRPG, not tooltips.
That you need to misrepresent my points says everything. Yes. You said people can play older versions of games. But you also implied these people were choosing to play "inferior" games by doing so. Once again: Your subjective view is not objective reality. You have spent how many years getting thrown into fits when people have insulted 5E? You take it personally. You take it personally when people say anything bad about Wizards of the Coast! The last part of your response is completely missing my point. Because I am not even talking about Beyond when I make that point. I am simply talking about how for millions the retro gaming experience is preferable. You needn't agree with them. I suppose you believe Classic Traveller isn't the best version of that game? That you believe the latest edition of Warhammer must be the best version? You said something silly about people playing older versions of games and can't own up to just how silly it was. So instead you just pretend I am saying things I am not saying. So you can "argue" against those instead.
I'm not "implying" it, I'm openly stating it. My opinion is that 2014 5e and prior editions are indeed inferior designs. I'm allowed to think that.
Incorrect. I don't care about other people's opinions of anything, least of all 5e or Wizards of the Coast.
I neither believe nor care anything about those games. This is a D&D forum.
You are allowed to think that a game you have touted as the greatest game in the universe until five minutes ago is so deeply flawed everyone must upgrade. Mindless consumerism does that to people. You've posted post after post on these forums displaying how difficult it is for you to handle criticism of Wizards of the Coast. You are in fact engaging in that just now as you rush to defend their decision in this regard despite its having shown a total disregard for people in the middle of campaigns they hope to have started and finish using one ruleset. You were also among those defending decisions made eighteen months ago even though they would later drop those decisions due to community backlash. The least you could do is be honest. And again you miss the point: Retro gaming is a thing. Many like to play older versions of games. Why would someone who watched Stranger Things play the newest version of D&D and not B/X or BECMI or something similar to get that experience? I can't count on two hands the reasons I prefer editions of the game that I believe actually look and feel like D&D infinitely more than anything we have seen from Wizards since even the release of 3rd. Edition or prefer games that I think do D&D better than D&D but I couldn't care less if people want to play using the 2024 rules. Or the 2014 ones. It's incredible how when Wizards give players more choices choices is everything. How you will even argue for days in a thread with others for complaining about their being options. Now you want to limit players' choices by cheering and applauding when Beyond make it nigh unmanageable to keep playing using 2014 rules here on Beyond. But just as long you get what you want. No need to try spending even a moment in others' shoes.
"Mindless" - see, you can't make a single point without injecting a personal attack. Your approach doesn't exactly lend itself to sympathy.
I'll defend whatever decisions I feel like defending. And "Retro gaming is a thing" does not mean the official toolset needs to support everything that came before. If I want to play my old NES games, sure some of them might be purchasable on Switch, but I know I need to go find an emulator for the ones that aren't.
Maybe they'll figure out some kind of toggle that keeps the legacy versions from clogging up search results or the character builder when I'm reading through/picking spells. If they do great. But for the vast, vast majority of the spells I'm going to be using the updated versions, so their plan to not support them doesn't affect me.
If it's not mindless consumerism how is it exactly that a 5E you sang the praises of until just recently is all of a sudden such a bad game in need of replacing and urgently? And again, you routinely like comments in which the poster has questioned someone's English ability or even intelligence. You can stop pretending you find insults oh-so-unacceptable when it is so obvious you are okay with them when they are directed at those with whom you disagree. I'm old enough to remember when being a hypocrite was deemed to be an awful thing. Pity we now live in a time when it's acceptable just as long as it's expedient. Also again, I am not talking about Beyond or any online toolkit when I mention retro gaming. This is in response to your insisting "new is better." You might prefer the newer version of something. Insisting it is better when better is subjective is puerile. It's like how the little rich kid at school tells others he has the best thing because his is the newest thing.
If Beyond did that it would be much better for the site than having scores of homebrew versions of the same spells and same items clogging up their databases. At the Checkout buyers were told buying a book guaranteed access to that book's content using their toolkit. They can uphold that promise by putting in the work to ensure that content is still a part of the toolkit. Not expect players to do their work for them.
you’re paying for me to own this shit? Thought I owned it. apparently not. Guess I’ll go to the other system that’s free.
You actually said it best in this comment.
"for the vast, vast majority of the spells I'm going to be using the updated versions, so their plan to not support them doesn't affect me."
Congrats. You're using the new system.
A LOT of people aren't going to use the new system and paid for the old system. Naturally, someone going to use it doesn't see the issue as a big deal.
I'm in 3 different groups that use dndbeyond and only 1 of them wants to try the new rules on release. 1 of the other two are going to start Eve of Ruin in less than a week and are wanting to use the 2014 rules. That's a long-stake campaign where 5 people plus the dm are wanting to use the old rules and old spells for the campaign, then do Chains of Asmodeus with the new rules after to get a feel for the change by switching to the 2024 rules, and, I'm not even kidding, one of the players is specifically wanting to play a Conjuration Wizard in both to see the major differences, but now can't fully use his character sheet when it gets implemented. Do you see how frustrating that is? Sure, anecdotal, whatever, but still, that's frustrating as hell.
Someone should remind these people that "It doesn't affect me so I don't care" is only the source of most of the world's problems ...
1) My upvoting someone else's comment means I agree with the overarching point it's making, not necessarily every single word choice they chose to make within it.
2) I've been in support of the rules revision since before the playtest even started. My support for 5e doesn't mean I don't think it was deeply flawed and badly in need of said revision after 10 years.
3) I think the new thing is better because... I think it's better... not merely because it's new. I've read the new spells, the new species, the new classes and feats etc, and overwhelmingly, I do find them to be superior to what we had before.
1. If you truly opposed people's insulting others you would be kept busy on these forums where someone you routinely agree with does just that almost every day. Commenting on their doing it. You aren't weasling your way out of what is blatant hypocrisy. What was my "insult" exactly? To bring up mindless consumerism? Like that isn't a problem in society? And like how people just need to have the latest version of this or that isn't a prime example of it? Particularly when they spent half their waking hours during the lifecycle of the previous version acting like it was the greatest thing in the world?
2. Enjoy the new ruleset. And hope it sees the love and support the current ruleset has. I suspect it won't.
3. You can consider them to be better. We all have opinions. I think ShadowDark does D&D better than D&D. It's all good.