Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Actually, that's precisely the difference, though you're both right, and in being right, wrong about the reality.
You do have a license to everything you own and everything you've claimed. In perpetuity (as long as the site remains). Everything you have a license for, you can share.
You do NOT have a license to Drops. It's part of your subscription, and ending your subscription ends your access. Since you don't have a license for it, you can't share it.
You can call pedantry, but that's generally what legal licensing is. Precise dividing lines that people don't understand.
The terms under which the drops are licensed is entirely up to WotC. If they wanted to enable sharing, they could.
(And you absolutely have a license to drops if you're a subscriber. It's just a different license from the digital books.)
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndbeyond/comments/1tbibyv/comment/olhrvza/
This is the problem though. Over the last two years, and even more so over the last 6 months, the D&D Beyond team, and to some extend the WOTC D&D Franchise team have shown that they aren't taking those routes. Yes, Hasbro breathing down their neck for a while made them take missteps, but they've listened, they've actively become more communicative, they've done a lot of things to be better.
But D&DTube especially, has risen on the back of drama and outrage, and now that they're making steps in the right direction, this massive and misdirected outrage is not going to help improve the situation, or encourage them that those good steps that they've taken were the right ones.
Clearly most people here have never raised a child. If they're generally doing the right thing, you don't slam down on them for a tiny and likely innocent misstep. You can redirect it, and they are listening to reasonable arguments (see my post above), but most of this thread is just a pile on without cause.
I can't speak for others, but my concern with drops is that it is part of a greater trend towards platform-exclusive and/or subscription-based content. If drops are not considered official wotc releases, then I have no issue with them, but who knows if that will last?
I get that and the concern is valid. The thing is, they emphasized that this content wouldnt be available at all if we want only what gets printed in books. they have said that before with similar digital only releases. So I guess we have to decide, more content lieke the stuff dragon magazine used to provide but only digital? Skip that stuff and only rely on what makes it into the books?
Yeah but most of the digital only stuff was still shareable without the extra trouble of the dm manually adding them to a player’s sheet or making a homebrew version or they were a preview of what’s coming in a future book like the Astarion one that came with Heroes of Faerun. If someone at WotC came out and said “these are a preview of a future release” then we’d have far fewer issues
Yeah, but we also would have fewer issues (if sensationalized, made-up issues can be called issues in the first place) if players stopped complaining over getting additional content for no additional price. Frankly, that option seems far more reasonable than what you are proposing - your option limits the amount of usable content generated for use in games, thus punishing players who are sensible enough to realize this is a non-issue.
But it isn’t usable if fewer people have access to it
This may surprise you, but something available to people with subscriptions and people with DMs who are not too lazy to copy is more useful than something that does not exist.
Now, could it be more useful than it currently is? Sure - and Wizards is looking into that. But the obvious fact (that you continue to ignore because it is fatal to your arguments) remains that this is more useful, even with limitations, than the nothing substantive we were getting before.
It's absolutely still useable. For players who have a subscription it's useable straight out of the gate. Even if making homebrew versions of the player facing options weren't so easy as to be almost trivial, allowing players who do have subscriptions to use it is still possible. It's up to the group/DM to decide if they think that is somehow unfair or unbalanced or should be disallowed (just as it is with any content).
It is unfair if the biggest selling point of a service for years is being able to share your library of player facing content with anyone in your group, regardless of whether or not they have a paid subscription only to suddenly put an asterisk next to certain ones. If you and the people at your table are fine with it, more power to you, but don’t be dismissive about other people’s concerns about this and what it means for future releases especially since they’ve hinted at doing this with subclasses and species/races.
I think when you are trying to complain that free content that, while needs to be worked around (yes you pay for your sub, no the price did not increase ergo "free"), makes a part of this site "bad" or that it is "unfair" is when you start to lose a lot of people on your side.
Me disagreeing with your idea that these extras, a reason to buy a sub, should be free is "dismissing you" is very hyberbolic. Would it be nice if I did not need to homebrew this stuff sure! Can I still share it with my players, yes. Is it basically free homebrew that I do not need to make myself, also yes.
It not being shareable does not discount the good side of this move. Honestly all the "I can't share it" does is make me as a support go "While this is nice, maybe just don't bother making more, it will just be a headache." And then everyone loses.
I would agree if they were retroactively applying the asterisk to existing content. But they are not. They are producing new content for the purpose of being offered as a subscription perk, with no indication this is going to alter the paradigm of how book content will be handled. Using one paradigm to date is not an irrevocable bond that they must use that paradigm if they branch out into other offerings. If you don’t like it and don’t wish to engage, that’s your prerogative, but this simply is not some kind of dastardly double dealing, it’s them simply expanding their offerings to include new products with different terms.
As I've said before, all of the things that you could share before you can still share. If you buy future releases, you can still share those the same as you always could. Drops are an extra benefit to subscriptions. My point wasn't to be dismissive of your concerns, it was to point out that saying "But it isn’t usable if fewer people have access to it" is not true. Whether it is usable for you and your group is up to you and your group. Drops being a subscriber perk does not in anyway make them unusable.
They’re accessible if you do a bunch of work around instead of just letting the players do it themselves like every other piece of player facing opposition on this platform
Smh; the character sheets here have spoiled people if the suggestion one should ever have to do any pen and paper equivalent work of their own for a character is considered so hideously objectionable.
"A bunch of work" ? It's faster and less effort to homebrew a copy in a few clicks than it is to write out the feature on the paper. And it will be faster and easier to track the changes. And you only need to do it once so all players in all future campaigns you will ever be in, as player or DM, can add it without having to make it. If pen and paper they'd all need to write it out.
Your math ain't mathing there, bud.
3-4 seconds per option once only, is much less work than 20-30 seconds per option per sheet.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
People, they've heard us. They may not implement something right away, & a response in-thread is absurd to expect, but they've heard us.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
the hero tier is less then a cost of 1 rulebook a year, and you are going to be getting access to a bunch of content. At the end of the day, they have to make money. They need to give a reason for people to pay for a subscription. out of my two playgroups of 9 players total, none of them pay a monthly subscription. I am the only one that has the GM tier. Right now there is no reason for them to subscribe.
If they cannot build subscribers the site will shut down. its a business, not a charity.