It seems to be a highly requested option at this time.
My problem with it is that I would never want to join a campaign to have the DM say I can no longer look at my SCAG or a specific adventure I purchased prior to joining the campaign. It would limit access to those sources for a campaign I'm running or other campaigns I've joined.
I guess an alternative is to just limit what the Master tier subscriber shares with others.
I agree that this could be an issue. I don't think that anyone should be limited in viewing what they have purchased. However, if I own the legendary bundle and the players do not, then limiting them in seeing what content I own wouldn't be a concern I don't think.
But also limits should be based on a per campaign basis, right? What you limit in one campaign isn't what you would limit in another.
In the end it is pretty similar to telling people not to peek at their books or not use this race or that class, I do see the concern about the freely available information though, I have had groups that would take advantage of that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
the only goal here is not to have players looks at adventures while you are playing them. i too would want that to be a thing. also some people are not gonna use UA. so when that becomes availlable. one might want to disable it. a simple sharing content list would solve all issues and wouldn't be too much of a problem to add to this thing. unless everything is hard coded into the website which is something i highly doubt.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
the only goal here is not to have players looks at adventures while you are playing them. i too would want that to be a thing. also some people are not gonna use UA. so when that becomes availlable. one might want to disable it. a simple sharing content list would solve all issues and wouldn't be too much of a problem to add to this thing. unless everything is hard coded into the website which is something i highly doubt.
I agree about the adventure, but more and more I am concerned about the idea that we need to block content from the builder. How does one stop a player from using UA material they downloaded from the internet? We need to keep the communication open and not rely on a tool to "be the bad guy" If a player wants an option that is in the builder, then they should be discussing it with the DM no matter what option it is.
That being said, I could absolutely see the desire, especially for new players, to be able to turn on and off all the optional rules (such as feats or locking players into fixed HP), to simplify building while teaching, but I hope that, for the most part, it will never be a necessity because of disagreements between players and DMs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
Again, the only reason for one to allow everything is for sake of min maxing. for most people this is not an option. i have seen people create worlds where your sole race you cna get are humans and the creator have created variants. the idea here is not to stop players from building what they want. but for the DM to be able to recreate his homeworld the way he wants. because after all... players are joining HIS table. his tables his rules.
i for exemple hates mystics. to me psionics powers were always way too strong and 5e is not making it any better considering the psionics of this edition are even stronger then the ones from older editions. the one thing i surely want is to be able to say no to mystics. if i leave everything availlable. a player can just say i got the option so reguardless of what you say i'll be makign one. and to that effect it becomes not just your table. it becomes their table their rules and then things gets chaotic. the best way to not have these is to simply not allow content sharing from the things you dont want in your campaign. that is better then removing a player because you have left the option in !
i for one when i join a campaign, always ask the DM what he wants. because i do know DMs who do not allow monster races because she hates them to a crisp. that's one exemple out of many we've seen over the years. back in 3e... many people didn't want the book of nine swords to be a thing, yet it was. after toying with it i understood full well why people didn't want it. my friends crusader was literally the healer, the tank and the DPS all into one character. the others were literally watching him kill stuff while healing them every hits. the mechanics were broken.
again this might not seem like a big issue for now, but in the future it will be. and if a DM doesn't allow you what you desire then maybe that table is not for you. as a player you should never force a DM into playing what you desire if they dont want it at the table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Again, the only reason for one to allow everything is for sake of min maxing. for most people this is not an option. i have seen people create worlds where your sole race you cna get are humans and the creator have created variants. the idea here is not to stop players from building what they want. but for the DM to be able to recreate his homeworld the way he wants. because after all... players are joining HIS table. his tables his rules.
i for exemple hates mystics. to me psionics powers were always way too strong and 5e is not making it any better considering the psionics of this edition are even stronger then the ones from older editions. the one thing i surely want is to be able to say no to mystics. if i leave everything availlable. a player can just say i got the option so reguardless of what you say i'll be makign one. and to that effect it becomes not just your table. it becomes their table their rules and then things gets chaotic. the best way to not have these is to simply not allow content sharing from the things you dont want in your campaign. that is better then removing a player because you have left the option in !
i for one when i join a campaign, always ask the DM what he wants. because i do know DMs who do not allow monster races because she hates them to a crisp. that's one exemple out of many we've seen over the years. back in 3e... many people didn't want the book of nine swords to be a thing, yet it was. after toying with it i understood full well why people didn't want it. my friends crusader was literally the healer, the tank and the DPS all into one character. the others were literally watching him kill stuff while healing them every hits. the mechanics were broken.
again this might not seem like a big issue for now, but in the future it will be. and if a DM doesn't allow you what you desire then maybe that table is not for you. as a player you should never force a DM into playing what you desire if they dont want it at the table.
I think you are misunderstanding me. I agree with you that the DM and the players should agree on what should be played. What I disagree with is that D&D Beyond needs to filter that content for you. When you hand a player your PHB to make a character, do you rip out the sections of material they aren't allowed to use? No, you simply tell them what they are and aren't allowed to use. The same with D&D Beyond, you just tell them "Hey, I am not allowing Tabaxi or UA in this campaign" and you are done. With your example above you say "Hey, I don't want to allow the book of 9 swords, I think the content is broken" Another good way to solve power combos in 5e is to use the PHB+1 rule from AL. All of this info should be communicated in session zero to give the players a chance to make their characters well and, if too restrictive, give them a chance to bow out of the game before starting.
It seems to be a highly requested option at this time.
My problem with it is that I would never want to join a campaign to have the DM say I can no longer look at my SCAG or a specific adventure I purchased prior to joining the campaign. It would limit access to those sources for a campaign I'm running or other campaigns I've joined.
I guess an alternative is to just limit what the Master tier subscriber shares with others.
Its not so much that I don't want the player's to see SCAG as that I don't want some specific SCAG options appearing for them when they make a character under my campaign. As an example, the Volo's material includes the Monstrous races, which the book itself says weren't balanced in any way. Some of them are way underpowered (Orc) and some are way overpowered (Yuan Ti), in my opinion. I'd like to disable those races as choices for character creation under the campaign.
There are compelling arguments for sharing / not sharing everything with players in campaign.
At the end of the day it's not debate club, and no one has changed my mind. I want the option to share these things to my players, and hope a tool will be added where I can block resources to players in my campaign.
The MM (and to a lesser extent the DMG) are arguably not as big of deal, but the very idea of every player at the table having access to a digital copy of Storm King's Thunder (for free!) while the group is playing through STK is just plain silly.
There are compelling arguments for sharing / not sharing everything with players in campaign.
At the end of the day it's not debate club, and no one has changed my mind. I want the option to share these things to my players, and hope a tool will be added where I can block resources to players in my campaign.
The MM (and to a lesser extent the DMG) are arguably not as big of deal, but the very idea of every player at the table having access to a digital copy of Storm King's Thunder (for free!) while the group is playing through STK is just plain silly.
The other side of this, though, is that while you could block it within your campaign, if you are splitting the cost of everything with the entire group (one of the main reasons the DM tier subscription was setup the way it is) then you really can't restrict their access to the books outside of your campaign (in the general app). I would be very upset if I was paying in a pool to share all of the content then was blocked from accessing some of it. So that would need to be solved.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
Doesn't matter, because there is no way fr them to know if you bought it with friends or not. that is something you should discuss with your other parts. i for my part do not care cause i dont share buying with anybody. and to be honest that's gonna be like less then 1% of the people who buy them with others. the reality beinbg that people could check up on the adventures.
as was mentionned, the DMG and PHB are fine, but monsters and volos guide are other things. but the most important ones we want to be able to stop peeking in are adventures. again for my part i dont care because im not gonna buy adventures and just gonna do my own. but for those who do the adventures, it would be crucial for players not to look into it. something a ton of players would do on a whim.
at the end of the day you could say "trust" is of utmost of importance and i would be agreeing with you. but at the end of the day if you could prevent a potential danger, you just should do it.
as to how to solve these things.. well its easy for them apparently... they could either put a simple filter on sharing with giving us options. or they could simply block the content for players that players will not need. exemple the players are there to play, so everything the players will need... feats, classes, races and backgrounds should be availlable. but the rest of the content should not. for good measures you could keep the PHB and DMG availlable entirely but the rest should be only feats, classes, races and background. after all they are players and dont need more then that !
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I am about to start a campaign in which I am the DM. I would like to use DnD Beyond to manage my campaign, and allow my players to create characters using the content I purchase. I understand sharing my content in the campaign enables this, but I was wondering what is required from the player? Can they use a free account to access my content, or do they need a "Hero" subscription? I don't really want to make my players pay for anything because I want to use the online tool.
I know the conversation is going somewhere else, but I didn't want to create a new thread to ask my related question.
I am about to start a campaign in which I am the DM. I would like to use DnD Beyond to manage my campaign, and allow my players to create characters using the content I purchase. I understand sharing my content in the campaign enables this, but I was wondering what is required from the player? Can they use a free account to access my content, or do they need a "Hero" subscription? I don't really want to make my players pay for anything because I want to use the online tool.
I know the conversation is going somewhere else, but I didn't want to create a new thread to ask my related question.
Someone needs a Master Tier subscription. Everyone else doesn't need anything.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I am about to start a campaign in which I am the DM. I would like to use DnD Beyond to manage my campaign, and allow my players to create characters using the content I purchase. I understand sharing my content in the campaign enables this, but I was wondering what is required from the player? Can they use a free account to access my content, or do they need a "Hero" subscription? I don't really want to make my players pay for anything because I want to use the online tool.
I know the conversation is going somewhere else, but I didn't want to create a new thread to ask my related question.
Someone needs a Master Tier subscription. Everyone else doesn't need anything.
The debate over costs of running the game has been around long before Beyond came out. I for one would love it if players chipped in for game but have never asked, and I've never been asked.
Part of the GM gig is to buy books, mats etc and for players to enjoy it for free. Some players like minis, buy other books, but some don't.
In my case I bought 3 core books, and players are getting access to them for nothing. There's zero chance I would buy adventure here (plus I heard Tomb of Annihilation has a sweet poster map in the back of book!).
I also agree about limiting what my players can see/use! Honestly it would make things way easier if the players just don't see options you've marked as not appropriate for this campaign. It means you may not have to explain your reasoning if you don't want to (esp. if it's something related to plot that you're not ready to reveal, such as "all elves were killed off in the great war") and it just simplifies the "encounter".
On that note, does anyone know if homebrew content is shared under this? Like if I create monsters or items for a specific campaign, can all my players see it?
I also agree about limiting what my players can see/use! Honestly it would make things way easier if the players just don't see options you've marked as not appropriate for this campaign. It means you may not have to explain your reasoning if you don't want to (esp. if it's something related to plot that you're not ready to reveal, such as "all elves were killed off in the great war") and it just simplifies the "encounter".
On that note, does anyone know if homebrew content is shared under this? Like if I create monsters or items for a specific campaign, can all my players see it?
Cheers,
Zillin
I do believe it was stated that private homebrew can be used in a private campaign and shared with those users. Haven't tried it but I think others have confirmed that it works. Mods could tell you for certain.
I also agree about limiting what my players can see/use! Honestly it would make things way easier if the players just don't see options you've marked as not appropriate for this campaign. It means you may not have to explain your reasoning if you don't want to (esp. if it's something related to plot that you're not ready to reveal, such as "all elves were killed off in the great war") and it just simplifies the "encounter".
On that note, does anyone know if homebrew content is shared under this? Like if I create monsters or items for a specific campaign, can all my players see it?
Cheers,
Zillin
Yes I have been able to create homebrew items and they appear in my players item list for adding to their sheet. It is how we are working around some of the minor changes to our characters (such as an extra stat increase and homebrew changes to the classes)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
I would love a feature that gave me control over which books I share within my campaign. I'm going to be starting a campaign soon and it's weird that I have to share the campaign book with them.
I would love a feature that gave me control over which books I share within my campaign. I'm going to be starting a campaign soon and it's weird that I have to share the campaign book with them.
That's coming.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I am about to start a campaign in which I am the DM. I would like to use DnD Beyond to manage my campaign, and allow my players to create characters using the content I purchase. I understand sharing my content in the campaign enables this, but I was wondering what is required from the player? Can they use a free account to access my content, or do they need a "Hero" subscription? I don't really want to make my players pay for anything because I want to use the online tool.
I know the conversation is going somewhere else, but I didn't want to create a new thread to ask my related question.
Someone needs a Master Tier subscription. Everyone else doesn't need anything.
Also, the one's on the free accounts need to have a character join a campaign from the Master Tier player/GM in order to see the new stuff afaik.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In the end it is pretty similar to telling people not to peek at their books or not use this race or that class, I do see the concern about the freely available information though, I have had groups that would take advantage of that.
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
the only goal here is not to have players looks at adventures while you are playing them.
i too would want that to be a thing. also some people are not gonna use UA. so when that becomes availlable. one might want to disable it.
a simple sharing content list would solve all issues and wouldn't be too much of a problem to add to this thing. unless everything is hard coded into the website which is something i highly doubt.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
That being said, I could absolutely see the desire, especially for new players, to be able to turn on and off all the optional rules (such as feats or locking players into fixed HP), to simplify building while teaching, but I hope that, for the most part, it will never be a necessity because of disagreements between players and DMs.
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
Again, the only reason for one to allow everything is for sake of min maxing. for most people this is not an option. i have seen people create worlds where your sole race you cna get are humans and the creator have created variants. the idea here is not to stop players from building what they want. but for the DM to be able to recreate his homeworld the way he wants. because after all... players are joining HIS table. his tables his rules.
i for exemple hates mystics. to me psionics powers were always way too strong and 5e is not making it any better considering the psionics of this edition are even stronger then the ones from older editions. the one thing i surely want is to be able to say no to mystics. if i leave everything availlable. a player can just say i got the option so reguardless of what you say i'll be makign one. and to that effect it becomes not just your table. it becomes their table their rules and then things gets chaotic. the best way to not have these is to simply not allow content sharing from the things you dont want in your campaign. that is better then removing a player because you have left the option in !
i for one when i join a campaign, always ask the DM what he wants. because i do know DMs who do not allow monster races because she hates them to a crisp.
that's one exemple out of many we've seen over the years. back in 3e... many people didn't want the book of nine swords to be a thing, yet it was. after toying with it i understood full well why people didn't want it. my friends crusader was literally the healer, the tank and the DPS all into one character. the others were literally watching him kill stuff while healing them every hits. the mechanics were broken.
again this might not seem like a big issue for now, but in the future it will be. and if a DM doesn't allow you what you desire then maybe that table is not for you. as a player you should never force a DM into playing what you desire if they dont want it at the table.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
There are compelling arguments for sharing / not sharing everything with players in campaign.
At the end of the day it's not debate club, and no one has changed my mind. I want the option to share these things to my players, and hope a tool will be added where I can block resources to players in my campaign.
The MM (and to a lesser extent the DMG) are arguably not as big of deal, but the very idea of every player at the table having access to a digital copy of Storm King's Thunder (for free!) while the group is playing through STK is just plain silly.
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
Doesn't matter, because there is no way fr them to know if you bought it with friends or not. that is something you should discuss with your other parts. i for my part do not care cause i dont share buying with anybody. and to be honest that's gonna be like less then 1% of the people who buy them with others. the reality beinbg that people could check up on the adventures.
as was mentionned, the DMG and PHB are fine, but monsters and volos guide are other things. but the most important ones we want to be able to stop peeking in are adventures.
again for my part i dont care because im not gonna buy adventures and just gonna do my own. but for those who do the adventures, it would be crucial for players not to look into it. something a ton of players would do on a whim.
at the end of the day you could say "trust" is of utmost of importance and i would be agreeing with you. but at the end of the day if you could prevent a potential danger, you just should do it.
as to how to solve these things.. well its easy for them apparently... they could either put a simple filter on sharing with giving us options. or they could simply block the content for players that players will not need. exemple the players are there to play, so everything the players will need... feats, classes, races and backgrounds should be availlable. but the rest of the content should not. for good measures you could keep the PHB and DMG availlable entirely but the rest should be only feats, classes, races and background. after all they are players and dont need more then that !
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I am about to start a campaign in which I am the DM. I would like to use DnD Beyond to manage my campaign, and allow my players to create characters using the content I purchase. I understand sharing my content in the campaign enables this, but I was wondering what is required from the player? Can they use a free account to access my content, or do they need a "Hero" subscription? I don't really want to make my players pay for anything because I want to use the online tool.
I know the conversation is going somewhere else, but I didn't want to create a new thread to ask my related question.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
I've confirmed with one of my players that a test share of my Legendary Bundle to his free account through a campaign was successful.
The debate over costs of running the game has been around long before Beyond came out. I for one would love it if players chipped in for game but have never asked, and I've never been asked.
Part of the GM gig is to buy books, mats etc and for players to enjoy it for free. Some players like minis, buy other books, but some don't.
In my case I bought 3 core books, and players are getting access to them for nothing. There's zero chance I would buy adventure here (plus I heard Tomb of Annihilation has a sweet poster map in the back of book!).
I also agree about limiting what my players can see/use! Honestly it would make things way easier if the players just don't see options you've marked as not appropriate for this campaign. It means you may not have to explain your reasoning if you don't want to (esp. if it's something related to plot that you're not ready to reveal, such as "all elves were killed off in the great war") and it just simplifies the "encounter".
On that note, does anyone know if homebrew content is shared under this? Like if I create monsters or items for a specific campaign, can all my players see it?
Cheers,
Zillin
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
I would love a feature that gave me control over which books I share within my campaign. I'm going to be starting a campaign soon and it's weird that I have to share the campaign book with them.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)