And this is tangential but related - as far as dealing with content that comes and goes like UA, it's not really different than existing classes that get modified by errata or subsequent sources. I'd suggest that the existing approach to patching content is what makes this difficult rather than versioning the official content and offering all versions to every one. It's odd that this is possible with homebrew but not done for official stuff as sometimes people might prefer classes or subclasses as originally published or even want the UA version of something was different than an official published version of the whatever it is. it would also be neat to see the differences between UA versions and published versions to understand what tweaking went into it from a game mechanics stand point (as a DM who wants to homebrew stuff).
I really love your idea of versioning. This would be amazing. I especially love the point about how sometimes things get changed after publication and perhaps your group wants to run it as published originally or in the case of UA run it like that as well.... I admit that versioning might be challenging from a dev perspective but certainly I know would really appreciate and love that feature on all the d&d beyond content and I'm certain that many more would love it as well!
Why is there such a pushback if people are willing to volunteer or give resources towards future UA integration? I feel like it's really closed-minded of DDB.
Just as plausible, if not more so, that this is mostly or all WotC's call.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Some people want to play the UA and when it gets integrated into a book (for instance fairies) it gets tweaked or changed and some people would rather play the UA version. You already had a bunch of the old UA working fine, why would you take it down spitefully... Why is there such a pushback if people are willing to volunteer or give resources towards future UA integration? I feel like it's really closed-minded of DDB.
Your understanding of how homebrew has existed on DDB seems so off that it asks the question as to whether you really understand what you're arguing. No UA has ever been permanently on DDB, it's always been taken down. The only way UA has ever been preserved in the game, and continues to preserved in the game is through maintaining the UA in your character collection. If you have a UA fairy in your collection, it was never "taken away" from you. You can copy that sheet and use it as the basis of an entire new character. Your misconception of UA's past workings in DDB just smacks of petulance trying to proclaim an injury where you're failing to recognize a practice that has always been in place. Acting like UA has always been a permanent resource the community was stripped of _six_ months ago is a bizarre posture if you're trying to advocate some sort of cooperation between your id, the broader D&D Beyond community, and the management of DDB.
The only argument I can make in regards to that is DDB have made it clear they don't want homebrew based on anything previously published officially my WotC and possibly other third party individuals released onto the public homebrew domain. Yes you can make and use your own versions of the UA content if you are willing to make them yourself (which given the complexity of the homebrew tools isn't something many people are willing to sit down and do) but I think the majority of people would just rather be ale to go and grab one off the public homebrew releases and use those instead, which they can't.
THAT SAID, I understand why it has to be that way since DDB has to protect itself from possibly lawsuit if they allowed individuals to, in theory, copy paste content from books and release it to the public through the homebrew tools. I just wish Unearthed Arcana material, which is freely released to the public, didn't fall under that umbrella of protections simply because it might be released in an official book at some point, modifications or not. I understand why that is and it's more a corporate money thing than something that can be helped, but it would be nice if WotC would chill out and let the UA stuff be publishable through public homebrew. I know why they can't do that, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.
(Mind you this is a comment but also me rambling into the void. I still think DDB is the best digital platform for D&D content out there and this is more me rambling about "big buisness sucks but it's the world we live in" than anything else.)
It's important to note that Unearthed Arcana content is still the intellectual property of Wizards of the Coast, even if said content has been abandoned from active development, or a newer version published in an official product.
As such, D&D Beyond cannot allow users to publish it using the homebrew tools as it would violate the rules against distributing copyrighted content and the IPs of Wizards of the Coast and third parties. The fact it is freely available on the Wizards of the Coast website is irrelevant; the content belongs to Wizards of the Coast and thus cannot be published on D&D Beyond by users. The same is true of any content made freely available outside of DDB; the amount of people who think they can publish homebrew copies of the Griffon's Saddlebag for example is staggering.
Yeah I know, but it's also why there are those who still wish UA was published on beyond since they can't publish it themselves, even if only for ease of use. I understand why the beyond team made the decision they did and honestly I think it was the right call given how long it takes for them to process official releases and get it all in the system, but I also know people want content and convenience for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party content. People would much rather just be able to go grab something off the homebrew section someone else put together than to do it themselves. By the same merit they would LOVE to have that Griffon's Saddlebag content at a button press, even though beyond can't legally publish it or allow it to be published for use on the site. My point is it ain't a perfect world, which sucks, but I also get why people wish it was.
Yeah I know, but it's also why there are those who still wish UA was published on beyond since they can't publish it themselves, even if only for ease of use. I understand why the beyond team made the decision they did and honestly I think it was the right call given how long it takes for them to process official releases and get it all in the system, but I also know people want content and convenience for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party content. People would much rather just be able to go grab something off the homebrew section someone else put together than to do it themselves. By the same merit they would LOVE to have that Griffon's Saddlebag content at a button press, even though beyond can't legally publish it or allow it to be published for use on the site. My point is it ain't a perfect world, which sucks, but I also get why people wish it was.
Your point goes well beyond UA content and into D&D Beyond supporting non-WotC content which is a whole different kettle of fish and beyond the scope of this thread
I mean, like no one was talking about Griffon's Saddlebag until you used it as a case in point, kinda let the genie out of the bottle there.
This thread was to announce the end of DDB official support for UA (while allowing legacy ownership of UA content and private homebrew). That was six months. The announcement and thread has done its job, and now this thread largely exists as a soapbox for members to hector DDB, with the hectoring more often than not based in an poor understanding of how UA was supported on DDB in the first place. Seems like this thread should be locked; and if folks want to complain about this policy shift they can do so in the UA subforum or feedback. This is yelling at old news.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I mean, like no one was talking about Griffon's Saddlebag until you used it as a case in point, kinda let the genie out of the bottle there.
This thread was to announce the end of DDB official support for UA (while allowing legacy ownership of UA content and private homebrew). That was six months. The announcement and thread has done its job, and now this thread largely exists as a soapbox for members to hector DDB, with the hectoring more often than not based in an poor understanding of how UA was supported on DDB in the first place. Seems like this thread should be locked; and if folks want to complain about this policy shift they can do so in the UA subforum or feedback. This is yelling at old news.
unfortunately lot sof people come here fromcritical role and they often brand griffon saddlebag. thats why the influx and people wanting it to happen here.
i agree that things that are older then a year should just be unpinned ! this is way old news.
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)
Genuinely happy to hear about dndbeyond joining the WoTC family and I presume there's a lot to be worked out before you know what will happen moving forward. However, it does raise the question, now that dndbeyond is a part of an 11 billion dollar company any chance you could find the resources to restore unearthed arcana options? Perhaps after the new features system is built out a bit? There should be no issue anymore with dndbeyond finding things out at the last minute and it seems like it would be a great way to get direct analytics to use in guiding publishing decisions.
In the alternative, what about authorizing users to share our own versions of unearthed arcana in the homebrew sections? Dndbeyond couldn't authorize us to share UA because they didn't own the IP but that's no longer a problem. It would be really awesome if every user who wanted UA options didn't have to spend time re-inventing the wheel.
Congratulations again on joining forces with WoTC and here's hoping it leads to cool stuff in the future for dndbeyond staff and the users.
Genuinely happy to hear about dndbeyond joining the WoTC family and I presume there's a lot to be worked out before you know what will happen moving forward. However, it does raise the question, now that dndbeyond is a part of an 11 billion dollar company any chance you could find the resources to restore unearthed arcana options? Perhaps after the new features system is built out a bit? There should be no issue anymore with dndbeyond finding things out at the last minute and it seems like it would be a great way to get direct analytics to use in guiding publishing decisions.
In the alternative, what about authorizing users to share our own versions of unearthed arcana in the homebrew sections? Dndbeyond couldn't authorize us to share UA because they didn't own the IP but that's no longer a problem. It would be really awesome if every user who wanted UA options didn't have to spend time re-inventing the wheel.
This was on my mind as well the moment I saw the announcement. Thanks for asking this.
Thank you for asking this question it has been my #2 Question since we got the great news.
PS can we please get Sidekicks & Patrons? getting containers before these two mechanics is a crime that should be punishable by being dipped in Black Pudding.
maybe, but it had led to a lot of stress for the devs, not just because they had to do it in shorter times, but because people have been literally asking for themto just do the work for them. and that was a problem. as an exemple... people were asking for them to keep the archived UA. as in people wanted to use the UA instead of the new material updates. so in the end it became a problem because the material would eventually just leave or be unable to be created with. and that is what people had problems with.
hence the reason why DDB eventually told people to recreate the sub classes and the races themselves instead. the real problem is not UA itself, but those who want UA to stay forever even if new content comes out.
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 don't see old UA being brought back, or the recent UA that was never implemented but later saw some version published. I do see the potential for new UA going live, and maybe even the day of release since there'll be in theory less of a communications barrier/blackout between the D&D and DDB devs. I'm not betting on it either way, but it'd be cool if that happened.
Of course, as I typed that I remembered that all DDB enabled UA that was taken down does exist on DDB in archive form for those who still have working copies of said UA among their DDB characters (I got a few UA stuff that got revised into Fizbans stuff). That would be a press of a button sort of task, so who knows?
What would also be neat, UA monsters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I’m still surprised how this is still going. I do see how some UA wasn’t able to be made on DDB, and why they stopped doing it.
i'm not... people are like that they want everything beta or not. its always been like that since day 1 of the UA.
really UA is a bother to them even if they are in WotC its still a bother, because even if they can make stuff in advance, they are still needing to remove them after a while. because its only beta. but this is where people cry about it. they dont want it to be removed, they want it to stick forever. as for them it is new content, beta content, but content anyway and just want them to stay. also those who dont pay here want it to stay because its again, free content. beta still, but still free content for them to use.
so yeah, even if they could redo this, would they really want to ? its a still a bother to them.
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)
so yeah, even if they could redo this, would they really want to ? its a still a bother to them.
Because it's the easiest way to get both feedback on the product regarding mechanics and its implementation in Ddb.
Its wanted by its consumer base, there are monetization options for it (separate beta tier), directly does its purpose (with testing and feedback for the UA with play, and discussion from these boards), gain data and insights from how it's being used from play, and gets them a leg up on releasing when offical, even more so with the new ownership.
This might of been a good call prior. But now it has weaker justification.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I really love your idea of versioning. This would be amazing. I especially love the point about how sometimes things get changed after publication and perhaps your group wants to run it as published originally or in the case of UA run it like that as well.... I admit that versioning might be challenging from a dev perspective but certainly I know would really appreciate and love that feature on all the d&d beyond content and I'm certain that many more would love it as well!
Just as plausible, if not more so, that this is mostly or all WotC's call.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Your understanding of how homebrew has existed on DDB seems so off that it asks the question as to whether you really understand what you're arguing. No UA has ever been permanently on DDB, it's always been taken down. The only way UA has ever been preserved in the game, and continues to preserved in the game is through maintaining the UA in your character collection. If you have a UA fairy in your collection, it was never "taken away" from you. You can copy that sheet and use it as the basis of an entire new character. Your misconception of UA's past workings in DDB just smacks of petulance trying to proclaim an injury where you're failing to recognize a practice that has always been in place. Acting like UA has always been a permanent resource the community was stripped of _six_ months ago is a bizarre posture if you're trying to advocate some sort of cooperation between your id, the broader D&D Beyond community, and the management of DDB.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
My sentiments exactly. Thank you, MidnightPlat!
The only argument I can make in regards to that is DDB have made it clear they don't want homebrew based on anything previously published officially my WotC and possibly other third party individuals released onto the public homebrew domain. Yes you can make and use your own versions of the UA content if you are willing to make them yourself (which given the complexity of the homebrew tools isn't something many people are willing to sit down and do) but I think the majority of people would just rather be ale to go and grab one off the public homebrew releases and use those instead, which they can't.
THAT SAID, I understand why it has to be that way since DDB has to protect itself from possibly lawsuit if they allowed individuals to, in theory, copy paste content from books and release it to the public through the homebrew tools. I just wish Unearthed Arcana material, which is freely released to the public, didn't fall under that umbrella of protections simply because it might be released in an official book at some point, modifications or not. I understand why that is and it's more a corporate money thing than something that can be helped, but it would be nice if WotC would chill out and let the UA stuff be publishable through public homebrew. I know why they can't do that, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.
(Mind you this is a comment but also me rambling into the void. I still think DDB is the best digital platform for D&D content out there and this is more me rambling about "big buisness sucks but it's the world we live in" than anything else.)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorIt's important to note that Unearthed Arcana content is still the intellectual property of Wizards of the Coast, even if said content has been abandoned from active development, or a newer version published in an official product.
As such, D&D Beyond cannot allow users to publish it using the homebrew tools as it would violate the rules against distributing copyrighted content and the IPs of Wizards of the Coast and third parties. The fact it is freely available on the Wizards of the Coast website is irrelevant; the content belongs to Wizards of the Coast and thus cannot be published on D&D Beyond by users. The same is true of any content made freely available outside of DDB; the amount of people who think they can publish homebrew copies of the Griffon's Saddlebag for example is staggering.
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
Yeah I know, but it's also why there are those who still wish UA was published on beyond since they can't publish it themselves, even if only for ease of use. I understand why the beyond team made the decision they did and honestly I think it was the right call given how long it takes for them to process official releases and get it all in the system, but I also know people want content and convenience for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party content. People would much rather just be able to go grab something off the homebrew section someone else put together than to do it themselves. By the same merit they would LOVE to have that Griffon's Saddlebag content at a button press, even though beyond can't legally publish it or allow it to be published for use on the site. My point is it ain't a perfect world, which sucks, but I also get why people wish it was.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorYour point goes well beyond UA content and into D&D Beyond supporting non-WotC content which is a whole different kettle of fish and beyond the scope of this thread
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
I mean, like no one was talking about Griffon's Saddlebag until you used it as a case in point, kinda let the genie out of the bottle there.
This thread was to announce the end of DDB official support for UA (while allowing legacy ownership of UA content and private homebrew). That was six months. The announcement and thread has done its job, and now this thread largely exists as a soapbox for members to hector DDB, with the hectoring more often than not based in an poor understanding of how UA was supported on DDB in the first place. Seems like this thread should be locked; and if folks want to complain about this policy shift they can do so in the UA subforum or feedback. This is yelling at old news.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
big bummer
unfortunately lot sof people come here fromcritical role and they often brand griffon saddlebag. thats why the influx and people wanting it to happen here.
i agree that things that are older then a year should just be unpinned !
this is way old news.
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)
Genuinely happy to hear about dndbeyond joining the WoTC family and I presume there's a lot to be worked out before you know what will happen moving forward. However, it does raise the question, now that dndbeyond is a part of an 11 billion dollar company any chance you could find the resources to restore unearthed arcana options? Perhaps after the new features system is built out a bit? There should be no issue anymore with dndbeyond finding things out at the last minute and it seems like it would be a great way to get direct analytics to use in guiding publishing decisions.
In the alternative, what about authorizing users to share our own versions of unearthed arcana in the homebrew sections? Dndbeyond couldn't authorize us to share UA because they didn't own the IP but that's no longer a problem. It would be really awesome if every user who wanted UA options didn't have to spend time re-inventing the wheel.
Congratulations again on joining forces with WoTC and here's hoping it leads to cool stuff in the future for dndbeyond staff and the users.
This was on my mind as well the moment I saw the announcement. Thanks for asking this.
Thank you for asking this question it has been my #2 Question since we got the great news.
PS can we please get Sidekicks & Patrons? getting containers before these two mechanics is a crime that should be punishable by being dipped in Black Pudding.
Do you think they will bring back some of this stuff as Beta material given their new integration to Wizards of the Coast?
maybe, but it had led to a lot of stress for the devs, not just because they had to do it in shorter times, but because people have been literally asking for themto just do the work for them. and that was a problem. as an exemple... people were asking for them to keep the archived UA. as in people wanted to use the UA instead of the new material updates. so in the end it became a problem because the material would eventually just leave or be unable to be created with. and that is what people had problems with.
hence the reason why DDB eventually told people to recreate the sub classes and the races themselves instead.
the real problem is not UA itself, but those who want UA to stay forever even if new content comes out.
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 don't see old UA being brought back, or the recent UA that was never implemented but later saw some version published. I do see the potential for new UA going live, and maybe even the day of release since there'll be in theory less of a communications barrier/blackout between the D&D and DDB devs. I'm not betting on it either way, but it'd be cool if that happened.
Of course, as I typed that I remembered that all DDB enabled UA that was taken down does exist on DDB in archive form for those who still have working copies of said UA among their DDB characters (I got a few UA stuff that got revised into Fizbans stuff). That would be a press of a button sort of task, so who knows?
What would also be neat, UA monsters.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I’m still surprised how this is still going. I do see how some UA wasn’t able to be made on DDB, and why they stopped doing it.
It pronounced Den Sake. It is not Japanese.
Website character sheet not working fix (Hopefully)
Semi-Expert at homebrew, just ask for my help.
i'm not... people are like that they want everything beta or not.
its always been like that since day 1 of the UA.
really UA is a bother to them even if they are in WotC its still a bother, because even if they can make stuff in advance, they are still needing to remove them after a while. because its only beta. but this is where people cry about it. they dont want it to be removed, they want it to stick forever. as for them it is new content, beta content, but content anyway and just want them to stay. also those who dont pay here want it to stay because its again, free content. beta still, but still free content for them to use.
so yeah, even if they could redo this, would they really want to ?
its a still a bother to them.
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)
Because it's the easiest way to get both feedback on the product regarding mechanics and its implementation in Ddb.
Its wanted by its consumer base, there are monetization options for it (separate beta tier), directly does its purpose (with testing and feedback for the UA with play, and discussion from these boards), gain data and insights from how it's being used from play, and gets them a leg up on releasing when offical, even more so with the new ownership.
This might of been a good call prior. But now it has weaker justification.