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?
How to say we didn't actually read what people are upset about without saying we didn't actually read what people are upset about.
In other words, you still don't understand what your subscribers are wanting OR know what they are wanting but don't care.
If you are thinking that a toggle and separate database for legacy spells and character sheets is going to be too much for your servers to handle wait until everyone creates multiple versions of the legacy spells and link them all to their character sheets. Having worked IT in the past I can see some tough times ahead for your system admins.
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.
Yeah sure, I'll go back to doing things the old fashioned way and they can refund the several hundred dollars I spent on access to the tools they are breaking. Win Win.
However, if I'm not going to get a refund for the stuff they are stealing from me I'm going to continue to expect to use that stuff. I really don't think it's too much to ask that I be able to actually use the stuff they sold me. Anybody who disagrees with that sentiment is free to DM me and I'll happily sell you stuff you can't use all day long.
Quite an eye-opening view on how WotC is purported to view it's customers.
"
As for losing players, I can guarantee Beyond will gain more players than the lose. It is all but certain the hype surrounding a rules update will outweigh the people who are unwilling to accept errata. As anyone with a modicum of common sense can see, this decision was made to help new players - spell lists are already oppressively long, drastically increasing the length with spells that, for the most part, are functional equivalents only makes that harder on new players.
And, here is the reality most of the people rage quitting want to ignore.. and that Wizards almost certainly has thought about and will never vocalize - those players? The game is probably better off without them. There is an element of entitled laziness (if they spent half the time homebrewing as they spent whining, their problem would be solvedp by now), many of them have used personal attacks against anyone who disagrees, a number of them are the same people who have been throwing a fit since Wizards announced this would be the least bigoted version of D&D in history, etc. D&D is a community based game - Wizards probably is not all too broken up over toxic people ragequitting.
Plus, they are financially useless to Wizards. New players means new purchases - that’s the group whose user experience Wizards should care about. People who are so adamantly against the rules update that they’re unwilling to spend a couple minutes hitting the “copy spell” button few times, and are willing to ragequit over such a petty issue? Probably not going to purchase anything anytime soon - and, even if Wizards did appease them, anyone who throws a fit over something so small will probably throw another fit and threaten to ragequit sometime in the future. Not exactly the kind of customer you want to deal with."
I feel the need to point out this came from a random forum user and not anyone associated with D&D Beyond OR WotC OR even Hasbro.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Grant K. Smith A+, Network+, MCP x 2, BSIT/VC, MIS
Software Engineer & Dungeon Master
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." - J. R. R. Tolkien "Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup" - Anonymous
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?
In short, yes that's what it sounds like from their 'clarification'. It sounds as though if you have a Ranger for example, the spells that are on the character on September 2nd will be 2014, then on September 3rd will be the 2024 descriptions.
It wouldn't surprise me if the entire character sheet though is then later redesigned to accomodate the new sheet style for the 2024 books, with Species, Backgrounds and whatnot all being altered to reflect the way the work in the new 'not a new edition' edition. That's possibly me being a pessimist here though.
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.
1st of all. That isn't what "strawman" means, it's just an observation that maybe the people who complain all the time about how not enough people know how to use character sheets should whip one out themselves and just realize that this huge "problem" is super easily solved with a pencil.
Here's the reality of the situation. None of you back seat coders have any true idea of what it would take to do what you're asking for. I don't either, but neither do any of you.
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.
Ahh! the perfect example of a company listening to it's subscribers and changing the rules of their game in a permanent way to something that is better balanced makes more sense and.... Oh wait. That's what WOTC is trying to do right now.
But it's not just video games. I use Quickbooks in my office and it updates all the time. It can be harder to learn but there's usually very good reasons for the changes that I discover as I start to get used to the updates. And in this instance you can EASILY go back and use whatever content you want. Still exists, still very usable.
My complaint is more about completely hyperbolic, sky is falling mentality of the "fans" of this game and how that mentality is poisoning the water so to speak. If it were easy to toggle spells and adjust their hyperlinks etc.. I'm not like super apposed to it or anything but it just seems like the people who go on and on about this stuff every "scandal" that comes up are people who constantly talk about how they're decided to convert their games and and yet here they are again.
I like the 2024 updates, I'm running games in 2014 rules and am going to update them to 2024 the moment I can. If people don't like that they can print out character sheets or actually follow through on their threats of leaving.
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 mean you can disagree all you like… but it is objectively true to say that DnD is NOT an MMO, their are people still happily playing 3rd edition DnD - their aren’t people playing patch 1 FFXIV. (Because MMO’s are a fundamentally different beast from TTRPG’s)
also nothing you’ve said really engages with the simple fact that all content was sold with the express advertising that it unlocks the content for the tool set… it doesn’t matter what you think about how that should be received, all that matters is that advertising and marketing legislation literally says that kinda stuff is dubious AF.
this isn’t a “I’m really mad about a thing!” Type debate… this is a company has disregarded pretty basic consumer rights and is getting deserved backlash for it, kinda thing.
now if you’re interested in that or not… is very much up to you, but if you’re not interested - then why are you here commenting? Like we’ve all been online enough to know how forums work… there are multiple topics, you chat on the ones you’re interested in. People who wade into forum posts to say “I’m not bothered about the contents of this particular thread!” Have always been derided on the internet… because they’re the ones misunderstanding how forums work, not us.
Grant K. Smith A+, Network+, MCP x 2, BSIT/VC, MIS
Software Engineer & Dungeon Master
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." - J. R. R. Tolkien "Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup" - Anonymous
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.
...
I don't think it would be as difficult as you say to make this work. Let's break it down.
Let's assume everything is coded to refer to spells using names and not IDs.
Their database already contains the 2014 version of Healing Word under the name "Healing Word". Now Healing Word has changed in 2024 so one way or another the database needs to be touched to either add a new entry or edit the existing entry's description. From a database update perspective both are equally simple and easy.
So let's take the route less disruptive to the data, and add a new entry for "Healing Word (2024)". Note I am choosing to name the new spells "2024" for least disruption, but renaming the old spells to 2014/Legacy isn't too bad either just slightly more work to go through and update existing references, so that is also a possibility and can also be done as a second stage update as well.
So far nothing is impacted, everything existing is using the Healing Word name and refers to the 2014 version.
Ok so now the 2024 version needs to be referenced in a few places.
1. The new PHB, this is easy as it's also a new entry in their data store so nothing old is impacted.
2. Spell Search page: Since we have two entries in the database they will both appear in the spell search, with the new one clearly labeled 2024. If desired a user can filter by sourcebook already to only see 2014 or 2024 version of the spell as desired.
3. 2024 Classes, Subclasses, Feats, Species, Backgrounds: These are all new entries and therefore need to be created from scratch and can therefore be made to reference "Healing Word (2024)", again nothing old is impacted. Keep in mind they have already implemented toggles for the 2014 vs 2024 character options mentioned.
4. 2024 monsters: These are all new entries and therefore need to be created from scratch and can therefore be made to reference "Healing Word (2024)", again nothing old is impacted. Again they have already implemented toggles for 2014 vs 2024 monsters.
5. Character Sheet spells management: Since we have two entries in the database they will both appear in the spell search. As there are currently no filters in that tab, If they want to improve the user experience they can add a toggle that will filter out the 2014 or 2024 versions of Healing Word.
That's is it, this is the most basic thing they could have done which causes least disruption and makes both sets of spells available to 2014 and 2024 characters respectively. And this may seem hacky, but it should have been at least a first step in the update process, and as development continues and they get past the PHB 2024 release deadline, they could then focus on making this more robust and redesigning the site so it can support multiple versions seamlessly.
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?
How to say we didn't actually read what people are upset about without saying we didn't actually read what people are upset about.
In other words, you still don't understand what your subscribers are wanting OR know what they are wanting but don't care.
If you are thinking that a toggle and separate database for legacy spells and character sheets is going to be too much for your servers to handle wait until everyone creates multiple versions of the legacy spells and link them all to their character sheets. Having worked IT in the past I can see some tough times ahead for your system admins.
Yeah sure, I'll go back to doing things the old fashioned way and they can refund the several hundred dollars I spent on access to the tools they are breaking. Win Win.
However, if I'm not going to get a refund for the stuff they are stealing from me I'm going to continue to expect to use that stuff. I really don't think it's too much to ask that I be able to actually use the stuff they sold me. Anybody who disagrees with that sentiment is free to DM me and I'll happily sell you stuff you can't use all day long.
I feel the need to point out this came from a random forum user and not anyone associated with D&D Beyond OR WotC OR even Hasbro.
Grant K. Smith
A+, Network+, MCP x 2, BSIT/VC, MIS
Software Engineer & Dungeon Master
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." - J. R. R. Tolkien
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup" - Anonymous
In short, yes that's what it sounds like from their 'clarification'. It sounds as though if you have a Ranger for example, the spells that are on the character on September 2nd will be 2014, then on September 3rd will be the 2024 descriptions.
It wouldn't surprise me if the entire character sheet though is then later redesigned to accomodate the new sheet style for the 2024 books, with Species, Backgrounds and whatnot all being altered to reflect the way the work in the new 'not a new edition' edition. That's possibly me being a pessimist here though.
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.
1st of all. That isn't what "strawman" means, it's just an observation that maybe the people who complain all the time about how not enough people know how to use character sheets should whip one out themselves and just realize that this huge "problem" is super easily solved with a pencil.
Here's the reality of the situation. None of you back seat coders have any true idea of what it would take to do what you're asking for. I don't either, but neither do any of you.
Ahh! the perfect example of a company listening to it's subscribers and changing the rules of their game in a permanent way to something that is better balanced makes more sense and.... Oh wait. That's what WOTC is trying to do right now.
But it's not just video games. I use Quickbooks in my office and it updates all the time. It can be harder to learn but there's usually very good reasons for the changes that I discover as I start to get used to the updates. And in this instance you can EASILY go back and use whatever content you want. Still exists, still very usable.
My complaint is more about completely hyperbolic, sky is falling mentality of the "fans" of this game and how that mentality is poisoning the water so to speak. If it were easy to toggle spells and adjust their hyperlinks etc.. I'm not like super apposed to it or anything but it just seems like the people who go on and on about this stuff every "scandal" that comes up are people who constantly talk about how they're decided to convert their games and and yet here they are again.
I like the 2024 updates, I'm running games in 2014 rules and am going to update them to 2024 the moment I can. If people don't like that they can print out character sheets or actually follow through on their threats of leaving.
I mean you can disagree all you like… but it is objectively true to say that DnD is NOT an MMO, their are people still happily playing 3rd edition DnD - their aren’t people playing patch 1 FFXIV. (Because MMO’s are a fundamentally different beast from TTRPG’s)
also nothing you’ve said really engages with the simple fact that all content was sold with the express advertising that it unlocks the content for the tool set… it doesn’t matter what you think about how that should be received, all that matters is that advertising and marketing legislation literally says that kinda stuff is dubious AF.
this isn’t a “I’m really mad about a thing!” Type debate… this is a company has disregarded pretty basic consumer rights and is getting deserved backlash for it, kinda thing.
now if you’re interested in that or not… is very much up to you, but if you’re not interested - then why are you here commenting? Like we’ve all been online enough to know how forums work… there are multiple topics, you chat on the ones you’re interested in. People who wade into forum posts to say “I’m not bothered about the contents of this particular thread!” Have always been derided on the internet… because they’re the ones misunderstanding how forums work, not us.
Yes, they have a job posting for a manager in charge of doing a redesign. https://hasbro.eightfold.ai/careers?department=WIZARDS&pid=68743759127&domain=hasbro.com&sort_by=relevance
Grant K. Smith
A+, Network+, MCP x 2, BSIT/VC, MIS
Software Engineer & Dungeon Master
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." - J. R. R. Tolkien
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup" - Anonymous
I don't think it would be as difficult as you say to make this work. Let's break it down.
Let's assume everything is coded to refer to spells using names and not IDs.
Their database already contains the 2014 version of Healing Word under the name "Healing Word". Now Healing Word has changed in 2024 so one way or another the database needs to be touched to either add a new entry or edit the existing entry's description. From a database update perspective both are equally simple and easy.
So let's take the route less disruptive to the data, and add a new entry for "Healing Word (2024)". Note I am choosing to name the new spells "2024" for least disruption, but renaming the old spells to 2014/Legacy isn't too bad either just slightly more work to go through and update existing references, so that is also a possibility and can also be done as a second stage update as well.
So far nothing is impacted, everything existing is using the Healing Word name and refers to the 2014 version.
Ok so now the 2024 version needs to be referenced in a few places.
1. The new PHB, this is easy as it's also a new entry in their data store so nothing old is impacted.
2. Spell Search page: Since we have two entries in the database they will both appear in the spell search, with the new one clearly labeled 2024. If desired a user can filter by sourcebook already to only see 2014 or 2024 version of the spell as desired.
3. 2024 Classes, Subclasses, Feats, Species, Backgrounds: These are all new entries and therefore need to be created from scratch and can therefore be made to reference "Healing Word (2024)", again nothing old is impacted. Keep in mind they have already implemented toggles for the 2014 vs 2024 character options mentioned.
4. 2024 monsters: These are all new entries and therefore need to be created from scratch and can therefore be made to reference "Healing Word (2024)", again nothing old is impacted. Again they have already implemented toggles for 2014 vs 2024 monsters.
5. Character Sheet spells management: Since we have two entries in the database they will both appear in the spell search. As there are currently no filters in that tab, If they want to improve the user experience they can add a toggle that will filter out the 2014 or 2024 versions of Healing Word.
That's is it, this is the most basic thing they could have done which causes least disruption and makes both sets of spells available to 2014 and 2024 characters respectively. And this may seem hacky, but it should have been at least a first step in the update process, and as development continues and they get past the PHB 2024 release deadline, they could then focus on making this more robust and redesigning the site so it can support multiple versions seamlessly.