It gives them a way to say you can kinda still use what you paid for and want without spending money, but it won't really work right, so just buy this book you don't want and play the game how we tell you to.
I'm on 3 games using 2014 right now, none of which have decided whether we want to switch to 2024. I think it is a better ruleset but change is hard and some people just want to show up, roll some dice, and make some inappropriate jokes at the DMs expense (and that is totally fine)
However I beg of you, please read what they are ACTUALLY SAYING and not what some rage baiting 3rd party is spewing for clout or clicks. 2014 will continue to exist both on the compendium and character sheet. It will not be forced upon you, DDB will not change your characters. The only thing they are updating on the character sheet automatically are the 2 items OP cited and the spells that appear in both 2014 and 2024. (My guess is that the changes are so small they decided not to spend resources forking those databases like the monsters and classes are)
If any of my players' characters use one of those spells, and if those spells have changed, and if the change is bad I'll gladly take a couple of minutes of my prep to homebrew the old version for them. Otherwise, I think they wouldn't even notice
You have fundamentally missed out that for DDB character sheets (which many players use) they will not be able to have the old version of the spells on their sheets for quick reference without extra (in my view unnecessary) work. The only people this doesn't affect are those using PDF or physical characters sheets, or using an entirely different service for character sheets.
With respect, and as someone who has DMd a LOT of games over the decades, I gotta say that even a small change can have a massive impact on a DM. This gets even bigger if they are a DM for relatively new or inexperienced players.
D&D 5e (2014) has one of the highest workload, lowest support levels for Game Masters than any other modern TTRPG. This is largely due to the trashfire that is their DMG. Now it is a system that my players and I have had lots of fun running with...but when I heard this news all I saw in that moment was WotC once again failing to care or consider the DMs. The people who literally make the game system work. They were once again making things just that little bit more work for us. Now I don't know if you're player or a DM in the games you mention, but do consider those DMs who have limited enough time as it is now having to expend even more time understanding the impact of these changes, then having to word it in non-prejudicial ways to their tables, then have a chat with their tables about if they want to use the new rules and spell wordings. Just that alone is extra work. Then if the tables wish to retain all the 2014 wordings and rules, that has another impact on DM prep time even if it is measured in seconds consulting the books for a spell wording or clarification. In person a DM previous could ask the player to read the spell description from their character sheet on DDB, now there's extra search time to open up a browser and check the spell info through the compendium, or flipping through the physical book. In a virtual setting, the exact same issue exists. That's the problem from a selfish point of view.
WotC have long failed to show consideration for DMs and I've long since criticised them for that. DMs make the game work, there are fewer of us than there are players and many of us run not just more than one, but often several games.
Even then this decision flies in the face of the reason many people came to DDB in the first place. A digital character sheet that was easy and inuitive to use, than would allow you to have on your tablet or phone instead of a worn, tattered and beaten paper sheet. Literally for some players I've run games for the character sheet is the only reason they have a DDB account. That's it. They find it far more convenient. Now, that convenience has gone out the window for those expressing no interest in the 2024 ruleset and wording.
In the words of one of the players I run a game for 'if they've changed Counterspell, Sleep, and weapon properties so much why don't they call it a new edition?' Said player doesn't want to learn how to use the new versions of the spells they've been using for a good few years now, nor do they want to learn any of the new stuff. As a result they've got no interest in the 2024 books. For those unconvinced by that train of thought - take a look at Conjure Animals, which in 2014 can be used as a good crowd control and tactical resource. Monsters are forced to waste attacks on these creatures (8 wolves for example) which can surround them and block their way. In 2024, that's not possible with the altered wording. The spell literally has to be learned how to use all over again.
For my players (and the group of fellow DMs I'm a part of for playtesting crazy ideas), all but one group who have yet to decide are fleeing the scene and moving to different services because we're part way through campaigns. That was their choice when given in plain discussion, with me announcing my biases and trying my absolute best to represent both sides of the issue. The reaction from my players at least has been that DDB and WotC are mistaken in this. That's a small sample size of 21 (out of the 26 total) I know who play D&D 5e. Maybe its confirmation bias but I genuinely am seeing more criticism of this move than acceptance when I compare the views I've heard from people I know to those I don't online.
Why do people keep saying "90% of spells are the same" or "It's only a few spells that have changed" or "Just a few dozen."
This does not appear to be true.
According to a reputable source, there are 106 spells that have been mechanically changed in some way. (From what I can see here)
On top of that, in order to effectively restore your access to these original versions of spells and their functionality in the character sheet, you would not only need to homebrew these spells manually, you would also need to homebrew the following features: (As mentioned elsewhere in this thread by WolfmanRIP)
Every subclass that grants spells needs to be homebrewed
Every item that grants spells needs to be homebrewed
Every warlock invocation that grants spells - these cannot be homebrewed and will not be usable with 2014 rules
Every class that grants extra spells (mainly through the Tasha's expanded spell lists) - as far as I know these also cannot be homebrewed so will be unusable.
Every monster that casts spells will need to be homebrewed
(Adding one of my own here) Every mundane and magical item that is being changed with the new ruleset (the numbers of which are as of yet unknown)
Which is, of course, to speak nothing about the actual monetary value that every single person who has purchased digital rulebooks from D&D Beyond is losing out on.
It's been argued ad nauseam but we say it louder for the people in the back.
The vast majority of those upset feel they have been wronged because when they purchased the digital copies of these books, they bought into an agreement, understanding, promise, whatever you wish to call it, that they would be able to utilize this content, AS STATED IN THE PRODUCT DETAILS TO THIS VERY DAY, within D&D Beyond's "Digital Toolset".
When this functionality is removed from the site, those of us who specifically purchased access to use this content in the Digital Toolset will effectively have the primary purpose of our purchases ripped away from us. This is what we find unacceptable. This is what we find objectionable.
We recognize that there are people who are happy to receive these updates for free. We understand that they see this as 'getting something instead of nothing'.
But WE DO NOT SEE IT THE SAME WAY. It is clear, if you take just a brief glance around the various D&D communities around the internet that a significant majority of discourse centers around the fact that we FIND LITTLE TO NO VALUE IN THE 2024 RULESET that we will be receiving because we DID NOT ASK FOR IT AND DO NOT WANT TO USE IT.
The decisions by whatever powers that be to take a Profit focused approach (Because it is very clear that this is a push to 'encourage' long-standing members of the D&D Beyond community to spend even more money buying into updated systems they do not want or need by cutting off their access to the Digital Toolset they have already paid to use), is predatory, insulting, and a betrayal of their userbase.
What would we like to be done about it?
I would hope the answer to that question would be obvious.
Must-Have: - Creating a duplicate database for the 2014 content that, upon character/campaign creation, can be selected, via a toggle, dropdown menu, etc, as the primary ruleset for said character/campaign which would allow new and existing 5e characters and campaigns to proceed unchanged. Would be Nice: - Develop a system to migrate existing 2014 characters/campaigns to the updated 2024 ruleset for those who wish to opt-in to the new rules in the future. Pipe-Dream: - Assurances that support for 2014 content within the Digital Toolset will be protected for as long as a significant portion (Can be defined later) of the userbase of D&D Beyond still utilizes the game-system.
Please Note:I, by no means, speak for everyone who is upset by these changes, but I have seen a significant amount of people making these statements all across the internet.
If I have missed something, or misrepresented something, it is not due to intentional malice, and is very likely due to my own incompetency.
I can't help but think about how much overlap there probably is between the people who're most mad about this who also constantly bemoan the fact that people don't know how to use character sheets anymore. Time to pull out your pencils folks.
What in the strawman is this?
And people aren't thinking about things like hyperlinks etc... I imagine stuff like that is much more complicated then people assume to deal with. Like if you look at subclass given spells which list of spells should they link to? That kind of thing seems complicated to me. Much more then just a toggle.
Except that if they flagged characters running off of the 2014 ruleset properly, they could simply reference all hyperlinks to the 2014 rulebooks people already purchased, and they already host on the site, and they will not be removing from their site.
Here's the reality of the situation:
They have a database full of 2014 content.
Rather than duplicate that database, update it with the 2024 ruleset, and develop a simple method to select which ruleset a character falls under in the character creation menu, they have chosen to obliterate the existing database in an effort to force people into purchasing as-of-yet unreleased content.
As an aside, frankly, it does not matter if it is difficult to do. What matters is that it is the right thing to do.
Let me speak to your video game references for a moment.
When No Man's Sky launched, it was a complete shit show. A technical nightmare full of lies and false promises. It is now widely regarded as one of the best space exploration games currently on the market because it's creators Did the hard, right thing to overhaul the entire game again and again and again, FOR FREE, until it not only rose to it's original promised state, but surpassed it.
When Final Fantasy 14 had it's abysmal launch, the company literally blew up the game world and re-created it into something that has now progressed to be one of the best MMO experiences of all time. It was by no means easy for them but it was the right thing to do.
There are other examples of this in the gaming space as well, what's important to remember is that doing the right thing may not be easy, but if a company cares about it's customers, it will certainly make an effort.
I just don't understand the lack of transparency on WHY they are doing this. There's clearly a specific reason why only spells and magic items are affected but they haven't explained it.
Fully done in full concience to push thier 2024 down everyones throat, claiming backwards compability (where is none) hoping they can sell a rushed unfinished product that has even more problems than the prior version.
That would make sense if they did it with everything. But just spells and items? I don't buy that.
Thing is it isn't just spells and items. As they roll out the changes for the 2024 rules, the character sheet is rumoured to be changing too. Feats are a requirement now, not an optional part of the game as they have been for so long. Mechanically, species work a little differently, as do backgrounds. As a result the character sheet will have to change to accomodate that. This is the literal tip of the iceberg. I have seen (but have no idea how authentic they are) screen caps of differently designed DDB character builder. If accurate more than just the spells are changing. If not, maybe I'm wrong here and we'll get the option between a 2024 character sheet and a 2014 character sheet in DDB?
I honestly think this was a marketing department of WotC decision. They looked around at Tales of the Valiant, at the Pathfinder 2e remaster and a whole load of other competitors and decided that they didn't want to compete with other publishers in launching a new edition. So they thought they'd have a crack at trying to pass this off as a simple clarification or errata. Having gone so far into this path of 'backwards compatibility' I think the designers were bent over a barrel. Now it is all about getting people to invest in the 2024 books before they realise that it had the potential to be entirely its own edition. There's legitimately enough there that had they wanted to make D&D 6e they could've with little extra work. I mean there are enough people out there already desperately trying to claim this as 5.5e or 6e, that there is a better than evens chance that these new books will be considered as a new edition by the customer base whether WotC want to call it that or not. That they didn't I can only fathom as a marketing choice 'no 6e didn't test well, let's just call this a clarification and rewording of existing rules, people are more likely to buy that aren't they?'
So, coming back to this after waking up. Still a garbage fire, still 100% WotC's fault. Just want to go over a few points.
-What's affected Just a reminder that, functionally, this only affects spells. This has the side effect of also affecting anything that calls on spells. Additionally, it's every spell in the PHB (some more than others) plus a list of 19 others from other books that are being reprinted as part of the new PHB. I got a chance to go over my friend's copy yesterday and make a list, I'll post just the names below so people know exactly what's impacted. This is ultimately a huge failing on DDB's part, as they could absolutely keep the legacy spells intact. The toggle's function would be "While spell exists on Legacy list, show Legacy spell description". For tooltips, it's less of a priority, but still should be something that should have a legacy list for the same purpose. At least tooltips don't have auto-rolling attached to them.
-To anyone insisting this isn't a big deal Wrong. As has been stated, the primary concern people have here is that we bought the books explicitly to access all of the content via the character creator. Which means for them to take any of this away is a form of theft. Most people don't have the time or understanding of the homebrew tools to make all of this work right, and you need a decent understanding of the tools to fix all the features this is breaking. It's not as simple as just clicking "Copy Spell" (which shouldn't even be necessary in the first place).
-Database Issues You know what isn't a database issue? Going through and making a single official Legacy list. You know what is? Player after player after player going through and making their OWN legacy list. The server load compounds as a direct result of this change.
WotC has exactly one acceptable path forward for all these people they've wronged, and if you think it's bad now? Wait 9 days. It's about to get so much worse when people who don't read the forums find out what happened.
Half of my group is using pen and paper, and the rest are using the Dnd Beyond app. We won't be upgrading to the new system, and we want spells to work the same for both paper and app players. If the app doesn't show how the spells work in the edition we are playing, there is no reason to keep paying for the subscription. You are taking away options we paid for (access to spells on our character sheets). Please listen to the users and make it possible to continue playing 5e-2014 using your service.
I'm also admittedly a little skeptical about comparing this to a video game. By definition, a tabletop roleplaying game is not a video game, despite what the powers that be would like it to be. It should not be subject to mandatory hotfixes. In fact, even a lot of video games aren't. I've got Tears of the Kingdom on my Switch, and it asks me every time to update, which I still haven't bothered doing. It lets me play it, no problem. It's only fully-online games that have required me to install updates to play.
Yes, this is an online service for a tabletop roleplaying game, so that skews things a little. It's a little similar to online games. And, obviously, WotC isn't (hopefully ever) going into our homes and rewriting all of our physical books. But those physical books still exist and will continue to be used, especially during a transitional period. (The physical books won't even be out yet!) When your tables are used to using multiple sources (all of which previously matched), this makes just one single character sheet source incompatible with every other. The easiest option for those tables would be to stop using the incompatible source.
And it's not like all the Starter Sets that are currently being sold are being magically updated to the new mechanics, either, so this is absolutely not helpful for new players in the short term.
I just don't understand the lack of transparency on WHY they are doing this. There's clearly a specific reason why only spells and magic items are affected but they haven't explained it.
Fully done in full concience to push thier 2024 down everyones throat, claiming backwards compability (where is none) hoping they can sell a rushed unfinished product that has even more problems than the prior version.
That would make sense if they did it with everything. But just spells and items? I don't buy that.
My guess is it would probably have been done due to clutter.
Realistically there's no reason the original spells can't be added back in the same way partnered content has been. "Go add the content back in" is after all DDB's actual suggested solution users do here.
But they want the core system to focus support on just the current edition, so regardless of if you are playing it or not every 2014 prep caster and 2014 GM looking through spells would have seen every single spell twice in the search, and some people might think that would have looked messy. (I'd still much prefer this to the solution of "Go add everything you bought back in yourself" though)
So to make such a system easily intuitive the ideal is to add a function to not just add spell lists but hide the base 2024 spell list too. I don't think thats unreasonable from a user perspective, it's a pretty basic feature to expect on a modern website- But it wouldn't be the first time a company set up a website to lack basic features for user experience and then never allotted resources to fix that problem.
There is no database design ever that would warrant replacement on a technical site at all.
Yeah there is. No good database design would require it, but if you think the backend code isn't held together with duct tape and baling wire you've been on a different site from me. My guess is that characters are stored as some blob (say, json or xml) that is storing known spells by name (rather than by some database unique ID). Not an unfixable problem, but not trivial.
Yup.
Fairly trivial... just add a new tag that points to the new content and the old code is still happy. Not my first rodeo...
I'm one of those players that would like to understand "why does the character sheet need to be locked to the new set of rules"... I'm on an ongoing campain, and I play as a Wizard, so from that update onwards, instead of having all the information I have in my character sheet, I'll need to search the actual book to see what they do?
It makes no sense, for my characters to, out of nowere, just start doing diferent things with the same spells.
What's the point of having it all on Beyond? I only have digital sources because they would automatically be on my characters sheets... Now I have to open a new tab and run the rule book in search of my spells, actions and so on?
Will there be refunds for all the money I spent due to this? We can all have access to all the Spells for free on google, and honestly it will be easier to find, that running down a book mid session.
It doesn't matter if this update is the new path that DnD is taking, I demand the power to choose what I want to use, and not be enforced.
This isn't even a "Mass Sugestion"... This is just wrong.
I just don't understand the lack of transparency on WHY they are doing this. There's clearly a specific reason why only spells and magic items are affected but they haven't explained it.
Fully done in full concience to push thier 2024 down everyones throat, claiming backwards compability (where is none) hoping they can sell a rushed unfinished product that has even more problems than the prior version.
I genuinely just don’t think that’s true.
like honestly I get the desire to assume the worst… I’m not pro WotC at all, but I really don’t think that’s it.
i think much more likely is that the backend of the database was never written with the concept of being updated like this and so the spells and magic items have been saved under actual names, rather than id’s and so updates like this become a lot more problematic. That’s not me defending them because a fix is not impossible, it’s just a lot more labour intensive and instead I think they’ve chosen the option that’s easiest for THEM and decides we should all have to front the work load for them in fixing a problem they created.
like let’s look at healing word as just an example… 2014 healing word heals for less than 2024 healing word. The way the database works is that not only does the character sheet point to 2014 healing word currently, all instances that use healing word in the game point to the 2014 version, so that would include subclasses, feat, monsters who use the spell, magical items that use the spell and so on and so forth.
to maintain a functional 2014 database at this junction they would need a healing word (2014) version, which would probably be named something like “Healing Word (Legacy)”and a healing word (2024) version, that would just be called healing word (because most up to date version always takes precedence). They would then need to duplicate all entries on the database and have one version that points to the 2024 version of the spell and one that points to the 2014 version of the spell. So that would kind that say you had a cleric enemy - you would need to have a 2024 and 2014 version of both pages because the spell links inside creature page would be pointing to different version of the spell.
now replicate that for literally everything in the game.
so I know people keep saying “just add a toggle” but it really isn’t as simple as that because of how the database currently works.
im not saying this to defend WotC - I genuinely think that’s a THEM problem, not an US problem. They want more money, they want to sell more books, they decided to buy DnD beyond… like ultimately that’s for them to sort out while not inconveniencing us. I have no sympathy for them or this nonsense they’re trying to pull now.
what they seem to have decided instead is to just be like “screw it… we’ll just update everything as it’s easiest for us going forward and we’ll take the losses now, in the hopes that this forms a solid bedrock for the next 10 years for the new version” - I don’t think it’s trying to drive us to 2024 purchases, I think they are genuinely just ambivalent to the impact to the community now.
now their is a fix to the database, however it would probably take a lot of recoding on the backend, so that instead of using names for spell links and pages, they instead used database ID’s (which is the superior choice - technically they could not use ID’s and just make legacy pages for everything, but honestly that doesn’t future proof for the next time they update stuff), but that again would mean going through every page with a link on it and completely remapping them to their new locations - which WotC clearly have no interest in doing because it’s time and labour intensive.
the other option (and imho the best and only actually workable option) is to copy the database as is and split it, have a front page that asks if you want to go to the 2014 version of DDB or the 2024 version DDB & just run it like that and have 2 sister databases working in tandem with one another. The problem with that is that they’ve kept saying “everything is backwards compatible” and that just wouldn’t be the case… you would need to keep the databases completely divided, which would mean 2 copies of every sourcebook/adventure and separate compendiums and tool sets. (Because they literally can’t work together with how the database works)
saying that this second option is still more workable than what they’re proposing, because you could still add all the 2014 adventures and sourcebooks into the 2024 version of the database and it would just use the 2024 spells and mechanics (which is exactly what they are proposing to do now for the whole site anyway), while also keeping the current database as is and allowing it to continue to work in the way it always has.
so genuinely I’m not really sure why they haven’t taken this approach? Maybe cost, maybe worry about confusing players, maybe because it doesn’t seem like an elegant solution, maybe because it probably means a lot more work or maybe they are worried that it could prevent players from watching to switch… I don’t know. I can’t speak to that, but genuinely it really is their problem to solve.
the only thing that REALLY confuses me and I genuinely think it’s what tips this from a company making a lazy blunder into something that is actually deserving of outrage due to the sheer arrogance of it - is them telling us we have to homebrew the spells we want to keep (which will still break all their links in monster pages and so on). There is literally nothing stopping them from making a free book with the 2014 spells and items in it and just releasing it to every existing account with a toggle. It wouldn’t fix the other things I’ve mentioned, like subclasses, expanded spell sets, and the monster stat bars all pointing to the newer stuff…. But it would achieve exactly what home brewing each spell ourselves would do, and it would show them investing even a modicum of effort to help their players.
like that’s the bit that really bamboozles me… as it’s just so shockingly entitled and shows not even the minimum level of effort on their part. It’s truly flabbergasting.
The full list of added spells coming from other books (NOT brand-new spells): Dragon's Breath Ice Knife Mind Sliver Mind Spike Steel Wind Strike Summon Aberration Summon Beast Summon Celestial Summon Construct Summon Dragon Summon Elemental Summon Fey Summon Fiend Summon Undead Synaptic Static Thunderclap Toll the Dead Vitriolic Sphere Word of Radiance
I just don't understand the lack of transparency on WHY they are doing this. There's clearly a specific reason why only spells and magic items are affected but they haven't explained it.
Fully done in full concience to push thier 2024 down everyones throat, claiming backwards compability (where is none) hoping they can sell a rushed unfinished product that has even more problems than the prior version.
I genuinely just don’t think that’s true.
like honestly I get the desire to assume the worst… I’m not pro WotC at all, but I really don’t think that’s it.
i think much more likely is that the backend of the database was never written with the concept of being updated like this and so the spells and magic items have been saved under actual names, rather than id’s and so updates like this become a lot more problematic. That’s not me defending them because a fix is not impossible, it’s just a lot more labour intensive and instead I think they’ve chosen the option that’s easiest for THEM and decides we should all have to front the work load for them in fixing a problem they created.
like let’s look at healing word as just an example… 2014 healing word heals for less than 2024 healing word. The way the database works is that not only does the character sheet point to 2014 healing word currently, all instances that use healing word in the game point to the 2014 version, so that would include subclasses, feat, monsters who use the spell, magical items that use the spell and so on and so forth.
to maintain a functional 2014 database at this junction they would need a healing word (2014) version, which would probably be named something like “Healing Word (Legacy)”and a healing word (2024) version, that would just be called healing word (because most up to date version always takes precedence). They would then need to duplicate all entries on the database and have one version that points to the 2024 version of the spell and one that points to the 2014 version of the spell. So that would kind that say you had a cleric enemy - you would need to have a 2024 and 2014 version of both pages because the spell links inside creature page would be pointing to different version of the spell.
now replicate that for literally everything in the game.
so I know people keep saying “just add a toggle” but it really isn’t as simple as that because of how the database currently works.
im not saying this to defend WotC - I genuinely think that’s a THEM problem, not an US problem. They want more money, they want to sell more books, they decided to buy DnD beyond… like ultimately that’s for them to sort out while not inconveniencing us. I have no sympathy for them or this nonsense they’re trying to pull now.
what they seem to have decided instead is to just be like “screw it… we’ll just update everything as it’s easiest for us going forward and we’ll take the losses now, in the hopes that this forms a solid bedrock for the next 10 years for the new version” - I don’t think it’s trying to drive us to 2024 purchases, I think they are genuinely just ambivalent to the impact to the community now.
now their is a fix to the database, however it would probably take a lot of recoding on the backend, so that instead of using names for spell links and pages, they instead used database ID’s (which is the superior choice), but that again would mean going through every page with a link on it and completely remapping them to their new locations - which WotC clearly have no interest in doing because it’s time and labour intensive.
You seem to forget: They wouldn't need to worry about the names. They'd just need the default behavior to point to the current list, and the toggle would point to an entirely separate Legacy list. They have the Legacy tagging system in place in the site already with identically-named entries existing side by side.
This change doesn't bother me in any way shape or form. Every single video game or sub/web based service I use get's updated all the time. I (we) asked for these changes. Complained at the lack of new rules and updates to spells etc...
I can't help but think about how much overlap there probably is between the people who're most mad about this who also constantly bemoan the fact that people don't know how to use character sheets anymore. Time to pull out your pencils folks.
And people aren't thinking about things like hyperlinks etc... I imagine stuff like that is much more complicated then people assume to deal with. Like if you look at subclass given spells which list of spells should they link to? That kind of thing seems complicated to me. Much more then just a toggle.
Yes keep imagining, this is not a video game, and this effects games that have been going on for years in some cases. this is not a genre of gaming where forcing changes mid game is or has been done until this instance. It is a shameful abuse of the players that do not want to change at this time. IT has a very simple though maybe not easy solution, the toggle and legacy tags. Since WotC chose the ruin everyone's game path and waited until there is no time to implement a reasonable solution this storm is theirs to deal with, choices have consequences, per my post above it appears those in the know are unashamed of letting us how WotC views it's customer base that just wants to play the game they are in and then decide which ruleset to use next. They seem to want livestock not customers.
Totally disagree. MMO's or really any online game really can also be played for years and can at any time change their rules for balancing issues etc.... and we ASKED for these changed.
All this IMO hyperbolic language around this is just silly to me. It makes it literally impossible for me to take it seriously. There's no "abuse" going on here? "Livestock?" I mean come on! This stuff is just so over the top.
Just print out a character sheet and write the spells down. Or open the compendium on the website and have them up.
I just don't understand the lack of transparency on WHY they are doing this. There's clearly a specific reason why only spells and magic items are affected but they haven't explained it.
Fully done in full concience to push thier 2024 down everyones throat, claiming backwards compability (where is none) hoping they can sell a rushed unfinished product that has even more problems than the prior version.
I genuinely just don’t think that’s true.
like honestly I get the desire to assume the worst… I’m not pro WotC at all, but I really don’t think that’s it.
i think much more likely is that the backend of the database was never written with the concept of being updated like this and so the spells and magic items have been saved under actual names, rather than id’s and so updates like this become a lot more problematic. That’s not me defending them because a fix is not impossible, it’s just a lot more labour intensive and instead I think they’ve chosen the option that’s easiest for THEM and decides we should all have to front the work load for them in fixing a problem they created.
like let’s look at healing word as just an example… 2014 healing word heals for less than 2024 healing word. The way the database works is that not only does the character sheet point to 2014 healing word currently, all instances that use healing word in the game point to the 2014 version, so that would include subclasses, feat, monsters who use the spell, magical items that use the spell and so on and so forth.
to maintain a functional 2014 database at this junction they would need a healing word (2014) version, which would probably be named something like “Healing Word (Legacy)”and a healing word (2024) version, that would just be called healing word (because most up to date version always takes precedence). They would then need to duplicate all entries on the database and have one version that points to the 2024 version of the spell and one that points to the 2014 version of the spell. So that would kind that say you had a cleric enemy - you would need to have a 2024 and 2014 version of both pages because the spell links inside creature page would be pointing to different version of the spell.
now replicate that for literally everything in the game.
so I know people keep saying “just add a toggle” but it really isn’t as simple as that because of how the database currently works.
im not saying this to defend WotC - I genuinely think that’s a THEM problem, not an US problem. They want more money, they want to sell more books, they decided to buy DnD beyond… like ultimately that’s for them to sort out while not inconveniencing us. I have no sympathy for them or this nonsense they’re trying to pull now.
what they seem to have decided instead is to just be like “screw it… we’ll just update everything as it’s easiest for us going forward and we’ll take the losses now, in the hopes that this forms a solid bedrock for the next 10 years for the new version” - I don’t think it’s trying to drive us to 2024 purchases, I think they are genuinely just ambivalent to the impact to the community now.
now their is a fix to the database, however it would probably take a lot of recoding on the backend, so that instead of using names for spell links and pages, they instead used database ID’s (which is the superior choice), but that again would mean going through every page with a link on it and completely remapping them to their new locations - which WotC clearly have no interest in doing because it’s time and labour intensive.
You seem to forget: They wouldn't need to worry about the names. They'd just need the default behavior to point to the current list, and the toggle would point to an entirely separate Legacy list. They have the Legacy tagging system in place in the site already with identically-named entries existing side by side.
Well I’ve not forgotten that… I just don’t think it’s relevant.
like this isn’t me running defence for them… have a look at how outraged I am in other posts. But I just don’t think the legacy toggle work’s in the way you’re proposing.
I can’t think of any content toggle that exists in DDB currently that isn’t just a show/hide option. So genuinely I’m asking how you think this toggle would work?
like say I’m running a 2014 adventure, I’ve got the legacy toggle turned on… I have a look, as I’m a dm, to see what spells the enemy wizard can cast and look at its spell list. In what way do you think the legacy toggle would work to ensure the spell links on the enemy stat page would link to the 2014 versions of the spells, rather than the 2024 versions?
(this isn’t me being shady either, I’m genuinely trying to understand your point)
Okay, so does this change as they're currently planning it mean that existing character sheets will change as well?
Not just in terms of the updated content of the available quick reference spells and magic items but in terms of ost basic character sheet?
Since race and backgrounds are gonna work differently, surely the plan is to have the whole character builder reflect the 2024 way of character creation. Will that be in this update as well?
If they go through with this in a few weeks, do I have to worry about it breaking entire existing sheets (race, background, feats etc.) in addition to the hassle of looking up each spell and magic item etc. individually?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It gives them a way to say you can kinda still use what you paid for and want without spending money, but it won't really work right, so just buy this book you don't want and play the game how we tell you to.
You have fundamentally missed out that for DDB character sheets (which many players use) they will not be able to have the old version of the spells on their sheets for quick reference without extra (in my view unnecessary) work. The only people this doesn't affect are those using PDF or physical characters sheets, or using an entirely different service for character sheets.
With respect, and as someone who has DMd a LOT of games over the decades, I gotta say that even a small change can have a massive impact on a DM. This gets even bigger if they are a DM for relatively new or inexperienced players.
D&D 5e (2014) has one of the highest workload, lowest support levels for Game Masters than any other modern TTRPG. This is largely due to the trashfire that is their DMG. Now it is a system that my players and I have had lots of fun running with...but when I heard this news all I saw in that moment was WotC once again failing to care or consider the DMs. The people who literally make the game system work. They were once again making things just that little bit more work for us. Now I don't know if you're player or a DM in the games you mention, but do consider those DMs who have limited enough time as it is now having to expend even more time understanding the impact of these changes, then having to word it in non-prejudicial ways to their tables, then have a chat with their tables about if they want to use the new rules and spell wordings. Just that alone is extra work. Then if the tables wish to retain all the 2014 wordings and rules, that has another impact on DM prep time even if it is measured in seconds consulting the books for a spell wording or clarification. In person a DM previous could ask the player to read the spell description from their character sheet on DDB, now there's extra search time to open up a browser and check the spell info through the compendium, or flipping through the physical book. In a virtual setting, the exact same issue exists. That's the problem from a selfish point of view.
WotC have long failed to show consideration for DMs and I've long since criticised them for that. DMs make the game work, there are fewer of us than there are players and many of us run not just more than one, but often several games.
Even then this decision flies in the face of the reason many people came to DDB in the first place. A digital character sheet that was easy and inuitive to use, than would allow you to have on your tablet or phone instead of a worn, tattered and beaten paper sheet. Literally for some players I've run games for the character sheet is the only reason they have a DDB account. That's it. They find it far more convenient. Now, that convenience has gone out the window for those expressing no interest in the 2024 ruleset and wording.
In the words of one of the players I run a game for 'if they've changed Counterspell, Sleep, and weapon properties so much why don't they call it a new edition?' Said player doesn't want to learn how to use the new versions of the spells they've been using for a good few years now, nor do they want to learn any of the new stuff. As a result they've got no interest in the 2024 books. For those unconvinced by that train of thought - take a look at Conjure Animals, which in 2014 can be used as a good crowd control and tactical resource. Monsters are forced to waste attacks on these creatures (8 wolves for example) which can surround them and block their way. In 2024, that's not possible with the altered wording. The spell literally has to be learned how to use all over again.
For my players (and the group of fellow DMs I'm a part of for playtesting crazy ideas), all but one group who have yet to decide are fleeing the scene and moving to different services because we're part way through campaigns. That was their choice when given in plain discussion, with me announcing my biases and trying my absolute best to represent both sides of the issue. The reaction from my players at least has been that DDB and WotC are mistaken in this. That's a small sample size of 21 (out of the 26 total) I know who play D&D 5e. Maybe its confirmation bias but I genuinely am seeing more criticism of this move than acceptance when I compare the views I've heard from people I know to those I don't online.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Also all of this. up vote it.
What in the strawman is this?
Except that if they flagged characters running off of the 2014 ruleset properly, they could simply reference all hyperlinks to the 2014 rulebooks people already purchased, and they already host on the site, and they will not be removing from their site.
Here's the reality of the situation:
They have a database full of 2014 content.
Rather than duplicate that database, update it with the 2024 ruleset, and develop a simple method to select which ruleset a character falls under in the character creation menu, they have chosen to obliterate the existing database in an effort to force people into purchasing as-of-yet unreleased content.
As an aside, frankly, it does not matter if it is difficult to do. What matters is that it is the right thing to do.
Let me speak to your video game references for a moment.
When No Man's Sky launched, it was a complete shit show. A technical nightmare full of lies and false promises. It is now widely regarded as one of the best space exploration games currently on the market because it's creators Did the hard, right thing to overhaul the entire game again and again and again, FOR FREE, until it not only rose to it's original promised state, but surpassed it.
When Final Fantasy 14 had it's abysmal launch, the company literally blew up the game world and re-created it into something that has now progressed to be one of the best MMO experiences of all time. It was by no means easy for them but it was the right thing to do.
There are other examples of this in the gaming space as well, what's important to remember is that doing the right thing may not be easy, but if a company cares about it's customers, it will certainly make an effort.
Thing is it isn't just spells and items. As they roll out the changes for the 2024 rules, the character sheet is rumoured to be changing too. Feats are a requirement now, not an optional part of the game as they have been for so long. Mechanically, species work a little differently, as do backgrounds. As a result the character sheet will have to change to accomodate that. This is the literal tip of the iceberg. I have seen (but have no idea how authentic they are) screen caps of differently designed DDB character builder. If accurate more than just the spells are changing. If not, maybe I'm wrong here and we'll get the option between a 2024 character sheet and a 2014 character sheet in DDB?
I honestly think this was a marketing department of WotC decision. They looked around at Tales of the Valiant, at the Pathfinder 2e remaster and a whole load of other competitors and decided that they didn't want to compete with other publishers in launching a new edition. So they thought they'd have a crack at trying to pass this off as a simple clarification or errata. Having gone so far into this path of 'backwards compatibility' I think the designers were bent over a barrel. Now it is all about getting people to invest in the 2024 books before they realise that it had the potential to be entirely its own edition. There's legitimately enough there that had they wanted to make D&D 6e they could've with little extra work. I mean there are enough people out there already desperately trying to claim this as 5.5e or 6e, that there is a better than evens chance that these new books will be considered as a new edition by the customer base whether WotC want to call it that or not. That they didn't I can only fathom as a marketing choice 'no 6e didn't test well, let's just call this a clarification and rewording of existing rules, people are more likely to buy that aren't they?'
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
So, coming back to this after waking up. Still a garbage fire, still 100% WotC's fault. Just want to go over a few points.
-What's affected
Just a reminder that, functionally, this only affects spells. This has the side effect of also affecting anything that calls on spells. Additionally, it's every spell in the PHB (some more than others) plus a list of 19 others from other books that are being reprinted as part of the new PHB. I got a chance to go over my friend's copy yesterday and make a list, I'll post just the names below so people know exactly what's impacted. This is ultimately a huge failing on DDB's part, as they could absolutely keep the legacy spells intact. The toggle's function would be "While spell exists on Legacy list, show Legacy spell description". For tooltips, it's less of a priority, but still should be something that should have a legacy list for the same purpose. At least tooltips don't have auto-rolling attached to them.
-To anyone insisting this isn't a big deal
Wrong. As has been stated, the primary concern people have here is that we bought the books explicitly to access all of the content via the character creator. Which means for them to take any of this away is a form of theft. Most people don't have the time or understanding of the homebrew tools to make all of this work right, and you need a decent understanding of the tools to fix all the features this is breaking. It's not as simple as just clicking "Copy Spell" (which shouldn't even be necessary in the first place).
-Database Issues
You know what isn't a database issue? Going through and making a single official Legacy list. You know what is? Player after player after player going through and making their OWN legacy list. The server load compounds as a direct result of this change.
WotC has exactly one acceptable path forward for all these people they've wronged, and if you think it's bad now? Wait 9 days. It's about to get so much worse when people who don't read the forums find out what happened.
Half of my group is using pen and paper, and the rest are using the Dnd Beyond app. We won't be upgrading to the new system, and we want spells to work the same for both paper and app players. If the app doesn't show how the spells work in the edition we are playing, there is no reason to keep paying for the subscription. You are taking away options we paid for (access to spells on our character sheets). Please listen to the users and make it possible to continue playing 5e-2014 using your service.
I'm also admittedly a little skeptical about comparing this to a video game. By definition, a tabletop roleplaying game is not a video game, despite what the powers that be would like it to be. It should not be subject to mandatory hotfixes. In fact, even a lot of video games aren't. I've got Tears of the Kingdom on my Switch, and it asks me every time to update, which I still haven't bothered doing. It lets me play it, no problem. It's only fully-online games that have required me to install updates to play.
Yes, this is an online service for a tabletop roleplaying game, so that skews things a little. It's a little similar to online games. And, obviously, WotC isn't (hopefully ever) going into our homes and rewriting all of our physical books. But those physical books still exist and will continue to be used, especially during a transitional period. (The physical books won't even be out yet!) When your tables are used to using multiple sources (all of which previously matched), this makes just one single character sheet source incompatible with every other. The easiest option for those tables would be to stop using the incompatible source.
And it's not like all the Starter Sets that are currently being sold are being magically updated to the new mechanics, either, so this is absolutely not helpful for new players in the short term.
My guess is it would probably have been done due to clutter.
Realistically there's no reason the original spells can't be added back in the same way partnered content has been. "Go add the content back in" is after all DDB's actual suggested solution users do here.
But they want the core system to focus support on just the current edition, so regardless of if you are playing it or not every 2014 prep caster and 2014 GM looking through spells would have seen every single spell twice in the search, and some people might think that would have looked messy. (I'd still much prefer this to the solution of "Go add everything you bought back in yourself" though)
So to make such a system easily intuitive the ideal is to add a function to not just add spell lists but hide the base 2024 spell list too. I don't think thats unreasonable from a user perspective, it's a pretty basic feature to expect on a modern website- But it wouldn't be the first time a company set up a website to lack basic features for user experience and then never allotted resources to fix that problem.
Fairly trivial... just add a new tag that points to the new content and the old code is still happy. Not my first rodeo...
Get off my lawn or roll for initiative!
Anyone got some good recommendations for DnDBeyond replacements for Dnd 5.2014? Something tells me this old dog needs to start learning new tricks. :(
Get off my lawn or roll for initiative!
I'm one of those players that would like to understand "why does the character sheet need to be locked to the new set of rules"... I'm on an ongoing campain, and I play as a Wizard, so from that update onwards, instead of having all the information I have in my character sheet, I'll need to search the actual book to see what they do?
It makes no sense, for my characters to, out of nowere, just start doing diferent things with the same spells.
What's the point of having it all on Beyond? I only have digital sources because they would automatically be on my characters sheets... Now I have to open a new tab and run the rule book in search of my spells, actions and so on?
Will there be refunds for all the money I spent due to this? We can all have access to all the Spells for free on google, and honestly it will be easier to find, that running down a book mid session.
It doesn't matter if this update is the new path that DnD is taking, I demand the power to choose what I want to use, and not be enforced.
This isn't even a "Mass Sugestion"... This is just wrong.
I genuinely just don’t think that’s true.
like honestly I get the desire to assume the worst… I’m not pro WotC at all, but I really don’t think that’s it.
i think much more likely is that the backend of the database was never written with the concept of being updated like this and so the spells and magic items have been saved under actual names, rather than id’s and so updates like this become a lot more problematic. That’s not me defending them because a fix is not impossible, it’s just a lot more labour intensive and instead I think they’ve chosen the option that’s easiest for THEM and decides we should all have to front the work load for them in fixing a problem they created.
like let’s look at healing word as just an example… 2014 healing word heals for less than 2024 healing word. The way the database works is that not only does the character sheet point to 2014 healing word currently, all instances that use healing word in the game point to the 2014 version, so that would include subclasses, feat, monsters who use the spell, magical items that use the spell and so on and so forth.
to maintain a functional 2014 database at this junction they would need a healing word (2014) version, which would probably be named something like “Healing Word (Legacy)”and a healing word (2024) version, that would just be called healing word (because most up to date version always takes precedence). They would then need to duplicate all entries on the database and have one version that points to the 2024 version of the spell and one that points to the 2014 version of the spell. So that would kind that say you had a cleric enemy - you would need to have a 2024 and 2014 version of both pages because the spell links inside creature page would be pointing to different version of the spell.
now replicate that for literally everything in the game.
so I know people keep saying “just add a toggle” but it really isn’t as simple as that because of how the database currently works.
im not saying this to defend WotC - I genuinely think that’s a THEM problem, not an US problem. They want more money, they want to sell more books, they decided to buy DnD beyond… like ultimately that’s for them to sort out while not inconveniencing us. I have no sympathy for them or this nonsense they’re trying to pull now.
what they seem to have decided instead is to just be like “screw it… we’ll just update everything as it’s easiest for us going forward and we’ll take the losses now, in the hopes that this forms a solid bedrock for the next 10 years for the new version” - I don’t think it’s trying to drive us to 2024 purchases, I think they are genuinely just ambivalent to the impact to the community now.
now their is a fix to the database, however it would probably take a lot of recoding on the backend, so that instead of using names for spell links and pages, they instead used database ID’s (which is the superior choice - technically they could not use ID’s and just make legacy pages for everything, but honestly that doesn’t future proof for the next time they update stuff), but that again would mean going through every page with a link on it and completely remapping them to their new locations - which WotC clearly have no interest in doing because it’s time and labour intensive.
the other option (and imho the best and only actually workable option) is to copy the database as is and split it, have a front page that asks if you want to go to the 2014 version of DDB or the 2024 version DDB & just run it like that and have 2 sister databases working in tandem with one another. The problem with that is that they’ve kept saying “everything is backwards compatible” and that just wouldn’t be the case… you would need to keep the databases completely divided, which would mean 2 copies of every sourcebook/adventure and separate compendiums and tool sets. (Because they literally can’t work together with how the database works)
saying that this second option is still more workable than what they’re proposing, because you could still add all the 2014 adventures and sourcebooks into the 2024 version of the database and it would just use the 2024 spells and mechanics (which is exactly what they are proposing to do now for the whole site anyway), while also keeping the current database as is and allowing it to continue to work in the way it always has.
so genuinely I’m not really sure why they haven’t taken this approach? Maybe cost, maybe worry about confusing players, maybe because it doesn’t seem like an elegant solution, maybe because it probably means a lot more work or maybe they are worried that it could prevent players from watching to switch… I don’t know. I can’t speak to that, but genuinely it really is their problem to solve.
the only thing that REALLY confuses me and I genuinely think it’s what tips this from a company making a lazy blunder into something that is actually deserving of outrage due to the sheer arrogance of it - is them telling us we have to homebrew the spells we want to keep (which will still break all their links in monster pages and so on). There is literally nothing stopping them from making a free book with the 2014 spells and items in it and just releasing it to every existing account with a toggle. It wouldn’t fix the other things I’ve mentioned, like subclasses, expanded spell sets, and the monster stat bars all pointing to the newer stuff…. But it would achieve exactly what home brewing each spell ourselves would do, and it would show them investing even a modicum of effort to help their players.
like that’s the bit that really bamboozles me… as it’s just so shockingly entitled and shows not even the minimum level of effort on their part. It’s truly flabbergasting.
Roll20 if you want compatibility in their tables. Otherwise, Dicecloud is a good option, and GSheet exists for the purpose as well.
The full list of added spells coming from other books (NOT brand-new spells):
Dragon's Breath
Ice Knife
Mind Sliver
Mind Spike
Steel Wind Strike
Summon Aberration
Summon Beast
Summon Celestial
Summon Construct
Summon Dragon
Summon Elemental
Summon Fey
Summon Fiend
Summon Undead
Synaptic Static
Thunderclap
Toll the Dead
Vitriolic Sphere
Word of Radiance
You seem to forget: They wouldn't need to worry about the names. They'd just need the default behavior to point to the current list, and the toggle would point to an entirely separate Legacy list. They have the Legacy tagging system in place in the site already with identically-named entries existing side by side.
you know going through this thread does Dnd Beyond just need someone that understands how to code databases?
Totally disagree. MMO's or really any online game really can also be played for years and can at any time change their rules for balancing issues etc.... and we ASKED for these changed.
All this IMO hyperbolic language around this is just silly to me. It makes it literally impossible for me to take it seriously. There's no "abuse" going on here? "Livestock?" I mean come on! This stuff is just so over the top.
Just print out a character sheet and write the spells down. Or open the compendium on the website and have them up.
Well I’ve not forgotten that… I just don’t think it’s relevant.
like this isn’t me running defence for them… have a look at how outraged I am in other posts. But I just don’t think the legacy toggle work’s in the way you’re proposing.
I can’t think of any content toggle that exists in DDB currently that isn’t just a show/hide option. So genuinely I’m asking how you think this toggle would work?
like say I’m running a 2014 adventure, I’ve got the legacy toggle turned on… I have a look, as I’m a dm, to see what spells the enemy wizard can cast and look at its spell list. In what way do you think the legacy toggle would work to ensure the spell links on the enemy stat page would link to the 2014 versions of the spells, rather than the 2024 versions?
(this isn’t me being shady either, I’m genuinely trying to understand your point)
Okay, so does this change as they're currently planning it mean that existing character sheets will change as well?
Not just in terms of the updated content of the available quick reference spells and magic items but in terms of ost basic character sheet?
Since race and backgrounds are gonna work differently, surely the plan is to have the whole character builder reflect the 2024 way of character creation. Will that be in this update as well?
If they go through with this in a few weeks, do I have to worry about it breaking entire existing sheets (race, background, feats etc.) in addition to the hassle of looking up each spell and magic item etc. individually?