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.
And then the entire DDB rules engine has to be updated to use all those new names appropriately. It's, presumably, not an easy lift.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by the DDB rules engine?
Sure! The set of computer code that knows what to display when and where and how to calculate dice rolls, etc.
In order for what you're proposing to actually work, there would have to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then the engine would have to know there are both 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then it would have to know if a character is 2014 or 2024, then it would have to be able to use that knowledge to link to and display all of the things that are flagged as 2014 or 2024 respectively. Just adding a toggle to show/hide wouldn't do anything, especially for anything outside of the basic character sheet info.
As an example, let's use a Staff of Power. If I have a 2014 character, the engine would need to know that so that it could grab a 2014 staff. The 2014 staff would need to know to link to the 2014 version of the spells. The character sheet would need to know that any dice rolls or mechanics involved needed to link to the 2014 versions, and etc. down the chain for everything connected to the character.
Right yes there would need to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things. But my point was that 2014 versions already exist, and they are already making 2024 versions of all the things (besides items and spells). So all the 2014 versions of things already refer to the 2014 versions of the spells. And when they created the 2024 versions of things they can point them specifically to the 2024 versions of spells. There's no need for a rules engine, it's just a series of links and references.
In your example, where there's a "Staff of Power” and "Staff of Power (2024)" the "Staff of Power" is already referencing "Fireball" and when the "Staff of Power (2024)" item is created it is instead referencing "Fireball (2024)". Again I want to point out I'm tagging the new item with 2024 for simplicity's sake, and the reverse can be done albeit with more work
By default both Staves of Power are available for a user to choose in the Inventory Management tab. Then a 2014/2024 toggle/filter can be added to the Inventory Management tab that changes what is available to choose. This is independent of what Class/Subclass/Species etc you have chosen during character creation.
Yes, the Staff of Power is referencing Fireball. What you're suggesting is that they now have to have a Staff of Power, a Staff of Power 2024, a Fireball, a Fireball 2024 and they have to plug all those things into one another and, in addition, make sure that any real mechanics tied to any of that are also versioned and linked up correctly and then they have to make sure that when your 2014 character grabs a Staff of Power, it uses the correct version with all the correct things linked up to it.
That's exactly what I'm suggesting because that is basically what they are asking us to do with homebrew, when it should be their job to do the same.
I don't disagree, I'm just trying to explain it's probably not the "easy" fix so many seem to think it is.
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
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
Wizards of the Cost you need to not mess with us like this. WHY wouldn't you just keep DNDBeyond with the 5e format - and create DNDBeyondONE - for the new stuff.
Something - or the very least - don't take EVERYTHING away - keep things with Legacy so we can access it - don't make it so we can't access the books we already paid for and the stuff we don't want changed.
Allow us to use 5e or One - just make it a toggle - do you want 5e to be your primary or One to be your primary.
You screw the people who are keeping you in business, not really very smart.
Your books aren't going anywhere. It's the character sheet-linked items that are being updated to the latest 5E rules.
We didn't pay for books.. we don't own them. We paid for the integration between those books and the DnDBeyond character sheet, and yes, they are taking that away.
There is a lot of jargon here that I'm just not familiar with or able to keep up within my tiny brain so I have a simple yes/no question;
Should I start making homebrew copies of all spells/magical items that I have available to me now so I don't lose access to these things within the character sheet?
I'm DMing my first campaign with all brand new players to D&D. None of us are experts in the current 5e mechanics but I know we all will be turned away if we can't continue in the 5e vein.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Wanting to reply to this to give you the best answer I can.
First off, sorry that all of this mess is overshadowing your first campaign and these player's first experience with the game.
Secondly, if you are intent on utilizing the 2014 versions of spells within the character sheets, then according to DnD Beyond, you will have to homebrew them yourself.
That said, the unfortunate reality of the situation here is that JUST homebrewing spells will not be enough to restore the functionality in the character sheets that are going to be lost on Sept 3rd.
From what has been discussed, it appears that if you want to use the character sheet tools in DnD Beyond as they currently are, you would have to do the following:
Homebrew every 2014 version of every spell (as mentioned above)
Homebrew every subclass that grants spells to reflect the 2014 version of said spell.
Homebrew every item that grants spells to reflect the 2014 version of said spell (which I have been informed may not be possible to do with the current Homebrew interface)
Homebrew every warlock invocation that grants spells - (these cannot be homebrewed and will not be usable on the character sheets with 2014 rules to the best of my knowledge.)
Homebrew every class that gains an expanded spell list through Tasha's expanded rules list to reflect the 2014 versions of these spells - (as far as I know these also cannot be homebrewed so will be unusable as well.)
Homebrew every monster that casts spells to reflect the 2014 version. (This is optional if you are simply referencing monster stat blocks via their sourcebooks instead of the encounter builder.)
And finally, not now, but eventually, you will need to Homebrew every mundane and magical item that is being changed with the new ruleset (the numbers of which are as of yet unknown) to reflect their 2014 versions.
As much as I dislike being forced into these new rules, I would say that if you are planning a new campaign, you may just want to re-structure it with the new version's rules in mind. For you, that would be the easiest solution to avoid most of the hassle. But if you are dead-set on using the 2014 versions of things, you can see that if things continue the way they are going, you may not really have many other options through DnD Beyond's interface.
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
Except you're forgetting that they've made the promise that the 2024 rules will be available on 9/3. So it's not as easy as asking for time either. No matter what way they go, they're messing someone up. Unless they fork the site and call it a day. #DDBClassic
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
Wizards of the Cost you need to not mess with us like this. WHY wouldn't you just keep DNDBeyond with the 5e format - and create DNDBeyondONE - for the new stuff.
Something - or the very least - don't take EVERYTHING away - keep things with Legacy so we can access it - don't make it so we can't access the books we already paid for and the stuff we don't want changed.
Allow us to use 5e or One - just make it a toggle - do you want 5e to be your primary or One to be your primary.
You screw the people who are keeping you in business, not really very smart.
Your books aren't going anywhere. It's the character sheet-linked items that are being updated to the latest 5E rules.
We didn't pay for books.. we don't own them. We paid for the integration between those books and the DnDBeyond character sheet, and yes, they are taking that away.
I was responding to "don't make it so we can't access the books we already paid for" by stating that the books aren't going anywhere and pointing out what IS changing. No need for you to come at me here.
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
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
Except you're forgetting that they've made the promise that the 2024 rules will be available on 9/3. So it's not as easy as asking for time either. No matter what way they go, they're messing someone up. Unless they fork the site and call it a day. #DDBClassic
Sorry to be clear when I said "Reasonable to ask for time" I mean in terms of "Reasonable to ask for time to re-integrate the 2014 features more seamlessly" not "Reasonable to delay the 2024 launch"
To me the best partial short term solution (Outside of a second website) is re-adding all the spells back just as they have with third party content. Behind a button that says "Show 2014 content?" this automates the "Go add it yourself" suggestion.
Then the optimal longterm solution is a second button that says "Show 2024 content?" that once turned off will remove the display of the new content cleaning up the 2014 sheet.. But I don't think it's unreasonable at all to say this will take some months to do given somehow WotC didn't manage to see this problem coming.
I personally don't agree with the need to keep 2014 content. I think it'd be better to move on as a community. If DnDB wants to do something for those who want to keep it then that's fine, unless in inconveniences me or my playground group in anyway. That includes me having to toggle or something stupid to use the current system. 2024 should be the standard and if people want to use old stuff then any inconvenience should be on that end. However, ideally there is no inconvenience for anyone.
Be kind to one another despite you're arguments and keep your arguments about the issues not the people on the other side.
I find it to be extremely unkind of you to suggest that putting a toggle option in your character builder is an inconvenience to you on par with the rest of us being unable to play with the ruleset we purchased.
It's easy to say "be kind to each other". Try actually doing it. Show some damn empathy to the 40 pages of people devastated by this news.
Sorry you feel that way, but that's how disagreements work. You want one thing. I want another. It's not a personal attack on you or others. You want an action to be taken that benefits you or dosen't inconvenience you. I want an action to be taken benefits me or dosen't inconvenience me.
I can understand the 40 pages of people devastated by the news and I can understand that it upsets them, but it doesn't mean I have to agree.
Does that make more sense?
The difference is that we aren't denying you the ability to toggle 2024 only. We are just asking to finish our current campaigns before losing the content we purchased.
You are supporting having the 2014 rules deleted and removed from the Beyond with very short notice. Why not announce the end of 2014 support so we would have a couple months to wrap up campaigns?
I could have shorted the story arcs and power leveled my players through the rest of the campaign so they would have at least one combat per level all the way to the epic showdown at level 20 against the BBEG.
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
Except you're forgetting that they've made the promise that the 2024 rules will be available on 9/3. So it's not as easy as asking for time either. No matter what way they go, they're messing someone up. Unless they fork the site and call it a day. #DDBClassic
Sorry to be clear when I said "Reasonable to ask for time" I mean in terms of "Reasonable to ask for time to re-integrate the 2014 features more seamlessly" not "Reasonable to delay the 2024 launch"
To me the best partial short term solution (Outside of a second website) is re-adding all the spells back just as they have with third party content. Behind a button that says "Show 2014 content?" this automates the "Go add it yourself" suggestion.
Then the optimal longterm solution is a second button that says "Show 2024 content?" that once turned off will remove the display of the new content cleaning up the 2014 sheet.. But I don't think it's unreasonable at all to say this will take some months to do given somehow WotC didn't manage to see this problem coming.
Ah, my mistake. I do think they could do that fairly easily but I don't think it would solve most of the issues people are bringing up, such as links out from equipment, monsters, etc. and the changes to the rules descriptions and other tooltips in the character sheet. It would save a lot of homebrewing though, for sure.
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
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
Except you're forgetting that they've made the promise that the 2024 rules will be available on 9/3. So it's not as easy as asking for time either. No matter what way they go, they're messing someone up. Unless they fork the site and call it a day. #DDBClassic
From what i understand, they also have promised full compatibility between 2014 and 2024 rules... they are breaking that promise right now~ All in all, they really didnt plan this out..
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.
And then the entire DDB rules engine has to be updated to use all those new names appropriately. It's, presumably, not an easy lift.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by the DDB rules engine?
Sure! The set of computer code that knows what to display when and where and how to calculate dice rolls, etc.
In order for what you're proposing to actually work, there would have to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then the engine would have to know there are both 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then it would have to know if a character is 2014 or 2024, then it would have to be able to use that knowledge to link to and display all of the things that are flagged as 2014 or 2024 respectively. Just adding a toggle to show/hide wouldn't do anything, especially for anything outside of the basic character sheet info.
As an example, let's use a Staff of Power. If I have a 2014 character, the engine would need to know that so that it could grab a 2014 staff. The 2014 staff would need to know to link to the 2014 version of the spells. The character sheet would need to know that any dice rolls or mechanics involved needed to link to the 2014 versions, and etc. down the chain for everything connected to the character.
Right yes there would need to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things. But my point was that 2014 versions already exist, and they are already making 2024 versions of all the things (besides items and spells). So all the 2014 versions of things already refer to the 2014 versions of the spells. And when they created the 2024 versions of things they can point them specifically to the 2024 versions of spells. There's no need for a rules engine, it's just a series of links and references.
In your example, where there's a "Staff of Power” and "Staff of Power (2024)" the "Staff of Power" is already referencing "Fireball" and when the "Staff of Power (2024)" item is created it is instead referencing "Fireball (2024)". Again I want to point out I'm tagging the new item with 2024 for simplicity's sake, and the reverse can be done albeit with more work
By default both Staves of Power are available for a user to choose in the Inventory Management tab. Then a 2014/2024 toggle/filter can be added to the Inventory Management tab that changes what is available to choose. This is independent of what Class/Subclass/Species etc you have chosen during character creation.
I used to do this at work. Microsoft Excel has a feature called "Find and Replace" that allows the addition of a tag such as (legacy) behind all current spell names. Then when new ones are created and added, the old ones would remain available for use.
Personally I prefer the toggle system that is already in place for home brew, Ravnica, Critical Role, and more. I had hoped they would expand the list to include all their books so that players could select the list that is allowed in a specific campaign and only see those options displayed.
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
Except you're forgetting that they've made the promise that the 2024 rules will be available on 9/3. So it's not as easy as asking for time either. No matter what way they go, they're messing someone up. Unless they fork the site and call it a day. #DDBClassic
From what i understand, they also have promised full compatibility between 2014 and 2024 rules... they are breaking that promise right now~ All in all, they really didnt plan this out..
The problem with the compatibility argument is that they promised compatibility in rules which they have provided fully in the 2024 PHB. The D&D Beyond toolset isn't necessarily part of that promise so far as I've seem. though if you have a source I'd love to get educated.
I agree that they didn't plan this out as well as they should've in terms of customer impact analysis.
#DDBClassic
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
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.
And then the entire DDB rules engine has to be updated to use all those new names appropriately. It's, presumably, not an easy lift.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by the DDB rules engine?
Sure! The set of computer code that knows what to display when and where and how to calculate dice rolls, etc.
In order for what you're proposing to actually work, there would have to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then the engine would have to know there are both 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then it would have to know if a character is 2014 or 2024, then it would have to be able to use that knowledge to link to and display all of the things that are flagged as 2014 or 2024 respectively. Just adding a toggle to show/hide wouldn't do anything, especially for anything outside of the basic character sheet info.
As an example, let's use a Staff of Power. If I have a 2014 character, the engine would need to know that so that it could grab a 2014 staff. The 2014 staff would need to know to link to the 2014 version of the spells. The character sheet would need to know that any dice rolls or mechanics involved needed to link to the 2014 versions, and etc. down the chain for everything connected to the character.
Right yes there would need to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things. But my point was that 2014 versions already exist, and they are already making 2024 versions of all the things (besides items and spells). So all the 2014 versions of things already refer to the 2014 versions of the spells. And when they created the 2024 versions of things they can point them specifically to the 2024 versions of spells. There's no need for a rules engine, it's just a series of links and references.
In your example, where there's a "Staff of Power” and "Staff of Power (2024)" the "Staff of Power" is already referencing "Fireball" and when the "Staff of Power (2024)" item is created it is instead referencing "Fireball (2024)". Again I want to point out I'm tagging the new item with 2024 for simplicity's sake, and the reverse can be done albeit with more work
By default both Staves of Power are available for a user to choose in the Inventory Management tab. Then a 2014/2024 toggle/filter can be added to the Inventory Management tab that changes what is available to choose. This is independent of what Class/Subclass/Species etc you have chosen during character creation.
I used to do this at work. Microsoft Excel has a feature called "Find and Replace" that allows the addition of a tag such as (legacy) behind all current spell names. Then when new ones are created and added, the old ones would remain available for use.
Personally I prefer the toggle system that is already in place for home brew, Ravnica, Critical Role, and more. I had hoped they would expand the list to include all their books so that players could select the list that is allowed in a specific campaign and only see those options displayed.
Yes, but just making duplicates doesn't solve all the problems of tying those duplicates into the rules engine in a meaningful way, which I've explained in detail.
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
If I cant access ALL (2014) stuff I've bought through d&d beyond IN THE CHARECTER SHEET then I will be requesting a refund of ALL purchases as you have taken the functionality away that I was paying for. (its literally the ONLY reason I bought stuff on D&D beyond vs any other platform).
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.
I started home brewing spells and a WotC employee denied them. How long until the incredibly difficult to support home brew toggle is removed from the character sheet causing me to have wasted 100 hours copying all the old content to finish off my current campaigns?
If we aren't allowed to collaborate to overcome a technological problem that WotC can't financially afford to solve, it becomes hard to believe that this isn't a direct attack against players who want to finish current campaigns using current rules as has been implied by the marketing of 2024.
Let me introduce you to my goblin NPC named Toggle.
Toggle is just a silly little guy. He is always switching back and forth between two things. My party has fallen in love with Toggle.
In my latest campaign, the party has run into a greedy BBEG that insists that their way is the right way. And like all the best villains, they’re maybe not WRONG, but the way they’re going about it hurts a lot of people.
The party has been beaten and battered going up against the BBEG for the last few sessions. They seem to be done for. From his safe hiding place, Toggle slowly steps out onto the battlefield.
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.
I started home brewing spells and a WotC employee denied them. How long until the incredibly difficult to support home brew toggle is removed from the character sheet causing me to have wasted 100 hours copying all the old content to finish off my current campaigns?
If we aren't allowed to collaborate to overcome a technological problem that WotC can't financially afford to solve, it becomes hard to believe that this isn't a direct attack against players who want to finish current campaigns using current rules as has been implied by the marketing of 2024.
That's neither here nor there. The post cited as "quite an eye-opening view on how WotC is purported to view it's customers" has absolutely nothing to do with anyone from the company and is merely conjecture and speculation.
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
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.
And then the entire DDB rules engine has to be updated to use all those new names appropriately. It's, presumably, not an easy lift.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by the DDB rules engine?
Sure! The set of computer code that knows what to display when and where and how to calculate dice rolls, etc.
In order for what you're proposing to actually work, there would have to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then the engine would have to know there are both 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things, then it would have to know if a character is 2014 or 2024, then it would have to be able to use that knowledge to link to and display all of the things that are flagged as 2014 or 2024 respectively. Just adding a toggle to show/hide wouldn't do anything, especially for anything outside of the basic character sheet info.
As an example, let's use a Staff of Power. If I have a 2014 character, the engine would need to know that so that it could grab a 2014 staff. The 2014 staff would need to know to link to the 2014 version of the spells. The character sheet would need to know that any dice rolls or mechanics involved needed to link to the 2014 versions, and etc. down the chain for everything connected to the character.
Right yes there would need to be 2014 and 2024 versions of all the things. But my point was that 2014 versions already exist, and they are already making 2024 versions of all the things (besides items and spells). So all the 2014 versions of things already refer to the 2014 versions of the spells. And when they created the 2024 versions of things they can point them specifically to the 2024 versions of spells. There's no need for a rules engine, it's just a series of links and references.
In your example, where there's a "Staff of Power” and "Staff of Power (2024)" the "Staff of Power" is already referencing "Fireball" and when the "Staff of Power (2024)" item is created it is instead referencing "Fireball (2024)". Again I want to point out I'm tagging the new item with 2024 for simplicity's sake, and the reverse can be done albeit with more work
By default both Staves of Power are available for a user to choose in the Inventory Management tab. Then a 2014/2024 toggle/filter can be added to the Inventory Management tab that changes what is available to choose. This is independent of what Class/Subclass/Species etc you have chosen during character creation.
I used to do this at work. Microsoft Excel has a feature called "Find and Replace" that allows the addition of a tag such as (legacy) behind all current spell names. Then when new ones are created and added, the old ones would remain available for use.
Personally I prefer the toggle system that is already in place for home brew, Ravnica, Critical Role, and more. I had hoped they would expand the list to include all their books so that players could select the list that is allowed in a specific campaign and only see those options displayed.
Yes, but just making duplicates doesn't solve all the problems of tying those duplicates into the rules engine in a meaningful way, which I've explained in detail.
If anyone has had time to work on getting a better solution to fit in the release timeline it is hands down wizbro, they have known this was coming the longest and are in complete control of how and when it rolls out. They are the ones that have painted us into this corner not the other way round, making excuses for them at this point is laughable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Let me introduce you to my goblin NPC named Toggle.
Toggle is just a silly little guy. He is always switching back and forth between two things. My party has fallen in love with Toggle.
In my latest campaign, the party has run into a greedy BBEG that insists that their way is the right way. And like all the best villains, they’re maybe not WRONG, but the way they’re going about it hurts a lot of people.
The party has been beaten and battered going up against the BBEG for the last few sessions. They seem to be done for. From his safe hiding place, Toggle slowly steps out onto the battlefield.
/cue Lithonia by Childish Gambino
“Toggle… save… friends!”
Toggle needs an army (of developers) to save (or rather fix) his friends (problems most people are raising with the toolset).
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
I don't disagree, I'm just trying to explain it's probably not the "easy" fix so many seem to think it is.
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
Depends on what you mean by easy.
On a subscription based website I think it's unreasonable to say Hasbro do not have the resources to do something as universal in modern web design as a toggle between an old and a new text file. (They do manage to toggle just fine between historic and standard MTG cards on their other MTG services for example.)
So the question is "Does the business care enough to do it?"
If the answer is yes then I think it's reasonable for the company to ask for time.
If the answer is no then I think it's reasonable for people to be upset that a website they have been paying a subscription fee to has less filter features than a website designed by a crypto scam artist.
We didn't pay for books.. we don't own them. We paid for the integration between those books and the DnDBeyond character sheet, and yes, they are taking that away.
Get off my lawn or roll for initiative!
Wanting to reply to this to give you the best answer I can.
First off, sorry that all of this mess is overshadowing your first campaign and these player's first experience with the game.
Secondly, if you are intent on utilizing the 2014 versions of spells within the character sheets, then according to DnD Beyond, you will have to homebrew them yourself.
That said, the unfortunate reality of the situation here is that JUST homebrewing spells will not be enough to restore the functionality in the character sheets that are going to be lost on Sept 3rd.
From what has been discussed, it appears that if you want to use the character sheet tools in DnD Beyond as they currently are, you would have to do the following:
As much as I dislike being forced into these new rules, I would say that if you are planning a new campaign, you may just want to re-structure it with the new version's rules in mind. For you, that would be the easiest solution to avoid most of the hassle. But if you are dead-set on using the 2014 versions of things, you can see that if things continue the way they are going, you may not really have many other options through DnD Beyond's interface.
Except you're forgetting that they've made the promise that the 2024 rules will be available on 9/3. So it's not as easy as asking for time either. No matter what way they go, they're messing someone up. Unless they fork the site and call it a day. #DDBClassic
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 was responding to "don't make it so we can't access the books we already paid for" by stating that the books aren't going anywhere and pointing out what IS changing. No need for you to come at me here.
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
Sorry to be clear when I said "Reasonable to ask for time" I mean in terms of "Reasonable to ask for time to re-integrate the 2014 features more seamlessly" not "Reasonable to delay the 2024 launch"
To me the best partial short term solution (Outside of a second website) is re-adding all the spells back just as they have with third party content. Behind a button that says "Show 2014 content?" this automates the "Go add it yourself" suggestion.
Then the optimal longterm solution is a second button that says "Show 2024 content?" that once turned off will remove the display of the new content cleaning up the 2014 sheet.. But I don't think it's unreasonable at all to say this will take some months to do given somehow WotC didn't manage to see this problem coming.
The difference is that we aren't denying you the ability to toggle 2024 only. We are just asking to finish our current campaigns before losing the content we purchased.
You are supporting having the 2014 rules deleted and removed from the Beyond with very short notice. Why not announce the end of 2014 support so we would have a couple months to wrap up campaigns?
I could have shorted the story arcs and power leveled my players through the rest of the campaign so they would have at least one combat per level all the way to the epic showdown at level 20 against the BBEG.
Ah, my mistake. I do think they could do that fairly easily but I don't think it would solve most of the issues people are bringing up, such as links out from equipment, monsters, etc. and the changes to the rules descriptions and other tooltips in the character sheet. It would save a lot of homebrewing though, for sure.
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
From what i understand, they also have promised full compatibility between 2014 and 2024 rules... they are breaking that promise right now~
All in all, they really didnt plan this out..
I used to do this at work. Microsoft Excel has a feature called "Find and Replace" that allows the addition of a tag such as (legacy) behind all current spell names. Then when new ones are created and added, the old ones would remain available for use.
Personally I prefer the toggle system that is already in place for home brew, Ravnica, Critical Role, and more. I had hoped they would expand the list to include all their books so that players could select the list that is allowed in a specific campaign and only see those options displayed.
The problem with the compatibility argument is that they promised compatibility in rules which they have provided fully in the 2024 PHB. The D&D Beyond toolset isn't necessarily part of that promise so far as I've seem. though if you have a source I'd love to get educated.
I agree that they didn't plan this out as well as they should've in terms of customer impact analysis.
#DDBClassic
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
Yes, but just making duplicates doesn't solve all the problems of tying those duplicates into the rules engine in a meaningful way, which I've explained in detail.
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
If I cant access ALL (2014) stuff I've bought through d&d beyond IN THE CHARECTER SHEET then I will be requesting a refund of ALL purchases as you have taken the functionality away that I was paying for. (its literally the ONLY reason I bought stuff on D&D beyond vs any other platform).
I started home brewing spells and a WotC employee denied them. How long until the incredibly difficult to support home brew toggle is removed from the character sheet causing me to have wasted 100 hours copying all the old content to finish off my current campaigns?
If we aren't allowed to collaborate to overcome a technological problem that WotC can't financially afford to solve, it becomes hard to believe that this isn't a direct attack against players who want to finish current campaigns using current rules as has been implied by the marketing of 2024.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/204164-publishing-2014-spells-and-homebrew
Let me introduce you to my goblin NPC named Toggle.
Toggle is just a silly little guy. He is always switching back and forth between two things. My party has fallen in love with Toggle.
In my latest campaign, the party has run into a greedy BBEG that insists that their way is the right way. And like all the best villains, they’re maybe not WRONG, but the way they’re going about it hurts a lot of people.
The party has been beaten and battered going up against the BBEG for the last few sessions. They seem to be done for. From his safe hiding place, Toggle slowly steps out onto the battlefield.
/cue Lithonia by Childish Gambino
“Toggle… save… friends!”
That's neither here nor there. The post cited as "quite an eye-opening view on how WotC is purported to view it's customers" has absolutely nothing to do with anyone from the company and is merely conjecture and speculation.
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
If anyone has had time to work on getting a better solution to fit in the release timeline it is hands down wizbro, they have known this was coming the longest and are in complete control of how and when it rolls out. They are the ones that have painted us into this corner not the other way round, making excuses for them at this point is laughable.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Toggle needs an army (of developers) to save (or rather fix) his friends (problems most people are raising with the toolset).
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
You would have to swap the spells on your list - but that's not that big a deal. Half the caster classes in the game do that every long rest anyway.
What exactly do you think it would not fix?