Please make all content shareable with a Master Tier subscription.

Quote from bthec18 >>

Value isn’t based solely on price but what you get for the price.  If these drops were just maps and cosmetic stuff you wouldn’t have nearly as many people upset because that would still be inline with what you’d usually get two weeks ago, in fact the maps would be a bonus for most people.  But since we now have spell, feats, backgrounds, and as the recent Reddit AMA suggested subclasses and species behind monthly paywall unless the DM does extra work then you’re getting less than what you pay for 

 Aren't you getting more value because you're getting character options without an increase in subscription price?

Worst case scenario you're a DM, never a player, and these character options don't give you any value. But they can't possibly decrease the value of the subscription because nothing is be taken away and the price isn't being increased.

As I've said before, I totally understand the frustration people may have with the content not being automatically shared. I also get why it's not—the whole point is to add value to subscriptions without it just being another burden on the DM to cover costs. But claiming it subtracts value from the subscription doesn't make any sense

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

Quote from bthec18 >>

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

 
You can assert that you’re not getting something you think you deserve, but by any objective standard nothing that you actually had before this was introduced has been lost or changed, so outside of the wholly qualitative realm of your personal opinion, there is no way to accurately describe the change as one that decreases value. Something that was not present before has been added, and it has not removed, displaced, or reduced the utility of anything the tier had the month before.

Quote from bthec18 >>

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

 
One of the primary reasons to play a Life Domain cleric is Blessed Healer.  That nifty little ability allows you to share healing between yourself and an ally - whenever you heal the ally, you also get some hit points.  It helps reduce the overall burden on the party and better manage resources, making it quite the handy effect.

The DM gives the cleric an item that does not require attunement and allows the cleric to cast Heroism without spending resources.  This sounds really great, but the cleric throws a hissy fit.  Why? Temporary hit points do not “restore” hit points, so the item does not interact with Blessed Healer.  The cleric complains that Blessed Healer is devalued - never mind the fact it functions exactly as it always has. Never mind the DM only gave something to the player and did not take anything from the player. Never mind the player can still share in the exact same healing they always could share in by doing what they had always done previously.

If that cleric came on the D&D Beyond forums and posted an AITA thread, I guarantee most folks would say “absolutely you are the problem. Your DM did something nice for you, and you are crying about getting more without getting any less.”

Yet, when Wizards does the effective equivalent, suddenly they, in the shoes of the allegorical DM, are the bad guy, and the cleric nonsensically complaining that his no-additional-cost content “devalues” an ability that has not changed is the hero.  

Quote from bthec18 >>

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

 That’s part of why they’re doing this, is to make master tier more of a draw. To give other reasons to subscribe. You can still share everything you could before, and now you get more stuff as well. It adds new features for the same price. 

If that were the case then the various work arounds wouldn’t work 

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Quote from bthec18 >>

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

 
One of the primary reasons to play a Life Domain cleric is Blessed Healer.  That nifty little ability allows you to share healing between yourself and an ally - whenever you heal the ally, you also get some hit points.  It helps reduce the overall burden on the party and better manage resources, making it quite the handy effect.

The DM gives the cleric an item that does not require attunement and allows the cleric to cast Heroism without spending resources.  This sounds really great, but the cleric throws a hissy fit.  Why? Temporary hit points do not “restore” hit points, so the item does not interact with Blessed Healer.  The cleric complains that Blessed Healer is devalued - never mind the fact it functions exactly as it always has. Never mind the DM only gave something to the player and did not take anything from the player. Never mind the player can still share in the exact same healing they always could share in by doing what they had always done previously.

If that cleric came on the D&D Beyond forums and posted an AITA thread, I guarantee most folks would say “absolutely you are the problem. Your DM did something nice for you, and you are crying about getting more without getting any less.”

Yet, when Wizards does the effective equivalent, suddenly they, in the shoes of the allegorical DM, are the bad guy, and the cleric nonsensically complaining that his no-additional-cost content “devalues” an ability that has not changed is the hero.  

 Unless we’re paying the DM every month and are incapable of giving that item to another player without doing a side quest, this isn’t a good allegory 

Quote from bthec18 >>

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Quote from bthec18 >>

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

 
One of the primary reasons to play a Life Domain cleric is Blessed Healer.  That nifty little ability allows you to share healing between yourself and an ally - whenever you heal the ally, you also get some hit points.  It helps reduce the overall burden on the party and better manage resources, making it quite the handy effect.

The DM gives the cleric an item that does not require attunement and allows the cleric to cast Heroism without spending resources.  This sounds really great, but the cleric throws a hissy fit.  Why? Temporary hit points do not “restore” hit points, so the item does not interact with Blessed Healer.  The cleric complains that Blessed Healer is devalued - never mind the fact it functions exactly as it always has. Never mind the DM only gave something to the player and did not take anything from the player. Never mind the player can still share in the exact same healing they always could share in by doing what they had always done previously.

If that cleric came on the D&D Beyond forums and posted an AITA thread, I guarantee most folks would say “absolutely you are the problem. Your DM did something nice for you, and you are crying about getting more without getting any less.”

Yet, when Wizards does the effective equivalent, suddenly they, in the shoes of the allegorical DM, are the bad guy, and the cleric nonsensically complaining that his no-additional-cost content “devalues” an ability that has not changed is the hero.  

 Unless we’re paying the DM every month and are incapable of giving that item to another player without doing a side quest, this isn’t a good allegory 

 
The hypothetical is not actually about money or other methods of delivery. It merely was responding to the simple matter of “does giving someone something extra that is parallel to other content devalue the original content.”

As such, neither payment nor other delivery methods are relevant to the hypothetical. Accordingly, your dismissal of the hypothetical is without merit as it fails to respond to the substance being addressed.

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Quote from bthec18 >>

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Quote from bthec18 >>

It does lower the value if the main reason you got the subscription is to share content with the other people in your group(s).  Which, again, is the primary draw of the master tier 

 
One of the primary reasons to play a Life Domain cleric is Blessed Healer.  That nifty little ability allows you to share healing between yourself and an ally - whenever you heal the ally, you also get some hit points.  It helps reduce the overall burden on the party and better manage resources, making it quite the handy effect.

The DM gives the cleric an item that does not require attunement and allows the cleric to cast Heroism without spending resources.  This sounds really great, but the cleric throws a hissy fit.  Why? Temporary hit points do not “restore” hit points, so the item does not interact with Blessed Healer.  The cleric complains that Blessed Healer is devalued - never mind the fact it functions exactly as it always has. Never mind the DM only gave something to the player and did not take anything from the player. Never mind the player can still share in the exact same healing they always could share in by doing what they had always done previously.

If that cleric came on the D&D Beyond forums and posted an AITA thread, I guarantee most folks would say “absolutely you are the problem. Your DM did something nice for you, and you are crying about getting more without getting any less.”

Yet, when Wizards does the effective equivalent, suddenly they, in the shoes of the allegorical DM, are the bad guy, and the cleric nonsensically complaining that his no-additional-cost content “devalues” an ability that has not changed is the hero.  

 Unless we’re paying the DM every month and are incapable of giving that item to another player without doing a side quest, this isn’t a good allegory 

 
The hypothetical is not actually about money or other methods of delivery. It merely was responding to the simple matter of “does giving someone something extra that is parallel to other content devalue the original content.”

As such, neither payment nor other delivery methods are relevant to the hypothetical. Accordingly, your dismissal of the hypothetical is without merit as it fails to respond to the substance being addressed.

 Ignoring the real world events that inspired your hypothetical discredited it, not me

except your point is built on this falsehood

"The relevant feature of a master tier subscription is paying to share purchased content. Given that subscriber drops are not purchased, not being able to share them doesn't interact with that feature."

All other free content is sharable. The relevant feature is that OWNED content is sharable, not purchased content.

Quote from bthec18 >>

It devalues it because it’s biggest draw is the ability to share player options with people who don’t pay a monthly fee and adding options that can’t be shared unless you perform some workaround kills the incentive to subscribe 

 

I own all the books with player facing content, except the LotR book, I own most of the DM only content as well. I have a Master Tier Sub, and have had one since Before Hasbro purchased this site. (although I'm not sure it was called that back then, I don't think the sub back then was called Master tier.) 

I'm a DM who gains enjoyment and value from seeing my players do well, which is why I allow for all content on D&D beyond and share it to the players. My incentive is the sessions when the party defeats the custom final boss using every trick in all the books to do something amazing. Best feeling as a DM is that happy relieved sounds of player victory. 

Am I disapointed that master tier can not share these new feats and spells, yes, obivuosly,  but do I feel like it diminishes anything about what I have and do with my Master Tier sub, no not at all. 

I informed my players about these, and let them know there are ways to share these if they want them, and I am sure my Rogue player has already figured out a busted build with a few things in it. However for now everyone is happy with what they have. Players happy, I'm happy, still getting my value from Master Tier. 

What I would love to see, and I'm not sure they could design the website to do this. But when they add drops if say in 3~6 months they become sharable for Master Tier subs that would maintain the FOMO of drops while still giving Master Tier more than it had, making it even better than it is now. 

Quote from Bedirthan >>

except your point is built on this falsehood

"The relevant feature of a master tier subscription is paying to share purchased content. Given that subscriber drops are not purchased, not being able to share them doesn't interact with that feature."

All other free content is sharable. The relevant feature is that OWNED content is sharable, not purchased content.

 I mean, I loath the truism "You don't own anything digitally", for these content drops that kinda the case. You have access to them as long as you have a subscription, you don't own them. They're not purchased or claimed, they're active subscription perks. It's more akin to how you can't re-share shared content.

And even if you did "own" the drop content, that wouldn't change the substance of my point that the content being sharable cannot possibly deduct value because it's a perk of the subscription itself, granted without any increase in cost. It's purely additive value, not at all logically subtractive simply because it's not shareable. The only way you can subtract value from the subscription would be to either remove options or increase the price.

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Bedirthan >>

except your point is built on this falsehood

"The relevant feature of a master tier subscription is paying to share purchased content. Given that subscriber drops are not purchased, not being able to share them doesn't interact with that feature."

All other free content is sharable. The relevant feature is that OWNED content is sharable, not purchased content.

 I mean, I loath the truism "You don't own anything digitally", for these content drops that kinda the case. You have access to them as long as you have a subscription, you don't own them. They're not purchased or claimed, they're active subscription perks. It's more akin to how you can't re-share shared content.

And even if you did "own" the drop content, that wouldn't change the substance of my point that the content being sharable cannot possibly deduct value because it's a perk of the subscription itself, granted without any increase in cost. It's purely additive value, not at all logically subtractive simply because it's not shareable. The only way you can subtract value from the subscription would be to either remove options or increase the price.

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Bedirthan >>

except your point is built on this falsehood

"The relevant feature of a master tier subscription is paying to share purchased content. Given that subscriber drops are not purchased, not being able to share them doesn't interact with that feature."

All other free content is sharable. The relevant feature is that OWNED content is sharable, not purchased content.

 I mean, I loath the truism "You don't own anything digitally", for these content drops that kinda the case. You have access to them as long as you have a subscription, you don't own them. They're not purchased or claimed, they're active subscription perks. It's more akin to how you can't re-share shared content.

And even if you did "own" the drop content, that wouldn't change the substance of my point that the content being sharable cannot possibly deduct value because it's a perk of the subscription itself, granted without any increase in cost. It's purely additive value, not at all logically subtractive simply because it's not shareable. The only way you can subtract value from the subscription would be to either remove options or increase the price.

 But the distinction between owned and licensed isn't any different from Drops, any book and any freely claimed content either

There's no difference. The pedantry here doesn't matter. 

Ok there's a lot of posts happening quickly and I can't keep up but I am seriously struggling to understand what the opposition to drops still is?

If you're a player who has a Hero sub, you get a lot of extras for free. If the DM doesn't have any sub and wants to see them then you can share them via a number of ways. Easiest is a screenshot, or you can make a homebrew copy since homebrew is automatically shared no sub needed. Either way, very easy for the DM to still be able to see and approve. This is no different than if a player had a book like Xanathars or Tasha's or whatever - ask the DM if you can play, give them details, they approve or decline. So all normal standard fare here. Nothing to argue over unless you also disapprove of players having books the DM doesn't - in which case you're weird and shouldn't be a DM and probably need some form of therapy (control issues red flag).

If you're a DM with a hero or master sub you can let your players know and can share info via screenshot or make homebrew copies or just go in and add it to their sheet. Either way this is a way to share the content without the players needing any subs. Also, it has been mentioned they are looking into possibly  making the player options shareable via Content Sharing to bypass that minor inconvenience. 

People have been asking for subs that unlock content since day 1. People have been asking for their subs, particularly Hero subs, to give them more than the monthly perks have been giving them. WotC have listened and are coming up with a way to do precisely this.

• It's free extra content. A sub to obtain and a minor inconvenience to make it permanently available no subs needed forevermore.
• It's shareable with your whole party no subs needed with a minor inconvenience.
• The minor inconvenience to sharing could end up bypass-able by getting a higher sub.
• Fans have been asking for this and WotC are finally agreeing.

And yet people are arguing and upset? Why? No matter how much I try to read these arguments there is no reason that specifically details these points and explains why they're bad. Paywalls? Non-issue, same as any book or whatever. Not-Shareable Via Master Tier? Non-issue, they are indeed very easily shared with everyone in your campaign and you don't need a sub to do that either. Some waffle-y attempts at making up some WotC nefarious intent or "classist" divide? Non-issue - it's obtainable for a 1-month hero tier and can be shared with everyone in the campaign easily and this is all something fans have asked for since the beginning. 

Can somebody 'explain like I'm 5' why WotC giving these free extra bonuses that are usable by the whole party, in response to fans requesting this, is somehow a bad thing?

"Oh no, it's $3 and 2-3 mins of inconvenience for my entire party to have extra player options, oh no, this is terrible" --- like, seriously, what?

It's like somebody complaining to the chef that the food tastes too good. I don't understand.

Here is the list of features for Master tier from the subscribe pages as of April 15th according to the Wayback machine:

Share purchased content with friends
Two weeks of early access to new books
Use homebrew monsters on Maps VTT
Upload custom maps with Maps VTT

And here it is now:

Two week early access to core rulebooks
Create unlimited characters
Create unlimited encounters
Add publicly shared homebrew content
Exclusive subscriber perks every month
Share unlocked content with other players
Use homebrew monsters on Maps VTT
Upload custom maps with Maps VTT

Nothing has been removed, only added. Saying that the Master Tier has less value because they've decided to add extra content for subscribers is patently ridiculous. They have expanded subscriber perks. That's it.

Can somebody 'explain like I'm 5' why WotC giving these free extra bonuses that are usable by the whole party, in response to fans requesting this, is somehow a bad thing?

People who've wrapped their entire self worth up in D&D but also have a pathological belief that WOTC is a comic book villian, have decided that this is proof that they're going to take away our ability to own anything, and force every player to pay a subscription.

Surely the workarounds mentioned here for accessing drops content as a non-subscriber are in violation of the ToS of dndbeyond?

Quote from Frachese >>

Surely the workarounds mentioned here for accessing drops content as a non-subscriber are in violation of the ToS of dndbeyond?

 
You are free to make homebrew of any content you have access to for personal use in your campaign.

This has been actively suggested many times by moderators and devs over the years and IIRC even by Adam Bradford who was one of the founders of this site.

Quote from Frachese >>

Surely the workarounds mentioned here for accessing drops content as a non-subscriber are in violation of the ToS of dndbeyond?

Nope. It's the system set up as designed. You cannot share these kind of Homebrew copies with the public you can only use them in your own campaigns. They have a filter setup to make sure that's the way it happens. It's meant to work that way. Kind of weird for an evil with cash grabby Corporation isn't it? It's almost like they want to encourage people to subscribe but still have options for people who can't or don't want to.

As a subscriber, I am a fan of the Drops.