There still seem to be some missing maps throughout some of the products. Am I just missing them or were the player maps not available? The maps I can't find player version for are Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, and Against the Giants, from Tales of the Yawning Portal. I posted a bug report, maybe that wasn't where I was supposed to post missing assets.
i think WOTC didnt made them all available thats probably why those are not available here but if i remember correctly the team of DDB for those not rls by wotc they will create them for us ... not sure were i saw that
There still seem to be some missing maps throughout some of the products. Am I just missing them or were the player maps not available? The maps I can't find player version for are Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, and Against the Giants, from Tales of the Yawning Portal. I posted a bug report, maybe that wasn't where I was supposed to post missing assets.
We were able to track down the player version for Hidden Shrine and it has been added. Unfortunately, we don't have any player versions available for the maps in Against the Giants. If that ever changes, we will certainly add them.
I get the "play with people who don't want to spoil it" idea, but it's still a lot of players clicking past a lot of content that they don't want to read trying to find a link to the map they do want.
I love that they are in, I would love even more to have a link from the "my campaign" page that would take you straight to those maps. If I could set "my campaign" to be aligned with a particular adventure and make the maps available as a DM-toggle (so they can see where they are and have been but not where they are going) that would be even better.
My players aren't cheaters and don't want to be spoiled at all. But it feels to me like the "my campaign" page is the natural players place to interact with their part of the campaign content, rather than clicking through the whole book.
Still, though, awesome that it's in.
We could do something like this in the future along with whitelisting/ blacklisting content. We'd have the ability to tie a specific adventure to a campaign, and all the maps, etc. would be housed there.
Another thing that will likely make this easier is we will be adding a "player pack" for maps, handouts, etc. to the table of contents page for each adventure soon.
Honestly, I feel this is a serious problem. Sure there might be some groups out there that wouldnt take advantage of having the content. But I feel it's far more likely that people will take advantage. At minimum "adventure" content should be tagged as player or DM content. And DM content should be blocked by non-owner's/players by default.
I get the "play with people who don't want to spoil it" idea, but it's still a lot of players clicking past a lot of content that they don't want to read trying to find a link to the map they do want.
I love that they are in, I would love even more to have a link from the "my campaign" page that would take you straight to those maps. If I could set "my campaign" to be aligned with a particular adventure and make the maps available as a DM-toggle (so they can see where they are and have been but not where they are going) that would be even better.
My players aren't cheaters and don't want to be spoiled at all. But it feels to me like the "my campaign" page is the natural players place to interact with their part of the campaign content, rather than clicking through the whole book.
Still, though, awesome that it's in.
We could do something like this in the future along with whitelisting/ blacklisting content. We'd have the ability to tie a specific adventure to a campaign, and all the maps, etc. would be housed there.
Another thing that will likely make this easier is we will be adding a "player pack" for maps, handouts, etc. to the table of contents page for each adventure soon.
Honestly, I feel this is a serious problem. Sure there might be some groups out there that wouldnt take advantage of having the content. But I feel it's far more likely that people will take advantage. At minimum "adventure" content should be tagged as player or DM content. And DM content should be blocked by non-owner's/players by default.
So how do you solve the problem of a group who all bought into the program together, one of the key features that was promoted as Beyond launched? A DM shouldn't be allowed to block me from content I paid into. Granted they could just kick me from all the games all together, but that's an entirely different scenario which has much more severe implications.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
I wanted to drop a quick line before the end of the week to let you know that all the player versions of maps have been added where they are available to every adventure.
Simply visit the "View Player Version" link under the maps as they appear in the adventure. A helpful hint - right click the lightboxed image to open it in a new tab to see the super-hi-res version of that map.
As for the Backgrounds revamp that is currently in progress, it is not quite ready for this week. I hope to see that deployed next week, but we'll have to see how it goes as we work through the last couple of issues. Keep you updated!
Lastly, starting this month, I'll be starting a livestream (at least) monthly with information on recent updates, the near future, and time for Q&A. More details on that soon.
Have a great weekend - thanks!
Can we also get an update on Adohand? I miss hearing about how he is doing and last I heard he went away. You need to fix this. Thank you for being awesome DDB!!! :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...Debts must always be paid, sometimes in more than blood and gold. But this is Ordo Ursa," Ren places his hand on Erakas's chest, right where the Dragonborn's heart is. "Right here. And it always has been and always will be. Don't ever forget that. Because I won't."
Serandis Mendaen (Aereni Elven Rogue/maybe one day Wizard)- Project Point Playtest
I get the "play with people who don't want to spoil it" idea, but it's still a lot of players clicking past a lot of content that they don't want to read trying to find a link to the map they do want.
I love that they are in, I would love even more to have a link from the "my campaign" page that would take you straight to those maps. If I could set "my campaign" to be aligned with a particular adventure and make the maps available as a DM-toggle (so they can see where they are and have been but not where they are going) that would be even better.
My players aren't cheaters and don't want to be spoiled at all. But it feels to me like the "my campaign" page is the natural players place to interact with their part of the campaign content, rather than clicking through the whole book.
Still, though, awesome that it's in.
We could do something like this in the future along with whitelisting/ blacklisting content. We'd have the ability to tie a specific adventure to a campaign, and all the maps, etc. would be housed there.
Another thing that will likely make this easier is we will be adding a "player pack" for maps, handouts, etc. to the table of contents page for each adventure soon.
Honestly, I feel this is a serious problem. Sure there might be some groups out there that wouldnt take advantage of having the content. But I feel it's far more likely that people will take advantage. At minimum "adventure" content should be tagged as player or DM content. And DM content should be blocked by non-owner's/players by default.
So how do you solve the problem of a group who all bought into the program together, one of the key features that was promoted as Beyond launched? A DM shouldn't be allowed to block me from content I paid into. Granted they could just kick me from all the games all together, but that's an entirely different scenario which has much more severe implications.
As an aside, I'll point out that I bought ToA on here for a game I'm playing. My DM owned the hardback, but my intention was to buy it eventually to run for a different group, so I just went ahead and got the DDB version for her to use. I've been able to resist temptation to peek ahead, as the fun for me is not knowing what's coming next.
I also run PotA, and my users have access to the book through their DDB accounts, but they feel the same way as me regarding spoilers. My attitude is that even without DDB, the books are out there and readily available. Any player that wants to cheat bad enough can. I have other module hardbacks on my bookshelf that I haven't read yet in case I get a chance to play them before I can run them.
I'm not saying a blacklist isn't something they should implement, I just don't think it's an urgent matter if you can trust your players.
I get the "play with people who don't want to spoil it" idea, but it's still a lot of players clicking past a lot of content that they don't want to read trying to find a link to the map they do want.
I love that they are in, I would love even more to have a link from the "my campaign" page that would take you straight to those maps. If I could set "my campaign" to be aligned with a particular adventure and make the maps available as a DM-toggle (so they can see where they are and have been but not where they are going) that would be even better.
My players aren't cheaters and don't want to be spoiled at all. But it feels to me like the "my campaign" page is the natural players place to interact with their part of the campaign content, rather than clicking through the whole book.
Still, though, awesome that it's in.
We could do something like this in the future along with whitelisting/ blacklisting content. We'd have the ability to tie a specific adventure to a campaign, and all the maps, etc. would be housed there.
Another thing that will likely make this easier is we will be adding a "player pack" for maps, handouts, etc. to the table of contents page for each adventure soon.
Honestly, I feel this is a serious problem. Sure there might be some groups out there that wouldnt take advantage of having the content. But I feel it's far more likely that people will take advantage. At minimum "adventure" content should be tagged as player or DM content. And DM content should be blocked by non-owner's/players by default.
So how do you solve the problem of a group who all bought into the program together, one of the key features that was promoted as Beyond launched? A DM shouldn't be allowed to block me from content I paid into. Granted they could just kick me from all the games all together, but that's an entirely different scenario which has much more severe implications.
As an aside, I'll point out that I bought ToA on here for a game I'm playing. My DM owned the hardback, but my intention was to buy it eventually to run for a different group, so I just went ahead and got the DDB version for her to use. I've been able to resist temptation to peek ahead, as the fun for me is not knowing what's coming next.
I also run PotA, and my users have access to the book through their DDB accounts, but they feel the same way as me regarding spoilers. My attitude is that even without DDB, the books are out there and readily available. Any player that wants to cheat bad enough can. I have other module hardbacks on my bookshelf that I haven't read yet in case I get a chance to play them before I can run them.
I'm not saying a blacklist isn't something they should implement, I just don't think it's an urgent matter if you can trust your players.
That's admirable AdventureFight. But can you say with certainty that everyone you've ever played with won't look ahead? Or use it to know where the good loot is or manipulate an encounter to their advantage?
@Lokibryce If you want to share content in that way you should request that they make a new multi-user account type to handle that. Otherwise you are just leaving yourself to the mercy of the account owner. Because you will never be able to split the content or get back the money you spent if your relationship with that person goes down the drain.
I get the "play with people who don't want to spoil it" idea, but it's still a lot of players clicking past a lot of content that they don't want to read trying to find a link to the map they do want.
I love that they are in, I would love even more to have a link from the "my campaign" page that would take you straight to those maps. If I could set "my campaign" to be aligned with a particular adventure and make the maps available as a DM-toggle (so they can see where they are and have been but not where they are going) that would be even better.
My players aren't cheaters and don't want to be spoiled at all. But it feels to me like the "my campaign" page is the natural players place to interact with their part of the campaign content, rather than clicking through the whole book.
Still, though, awesome that it's in.
We could do something like this in the future along with whitelisting/ blacklisting content. We'd have the ability to tie a specific adventure to a campaign, and all the maps, etc. would be housed there.
Another thing that will likely make this easier is we will be adding a "player pack" for maps, handouts, etc. to the table of contents page for each adventure soon.
Honestly, I feel this is a serious problem. Sure there might be some groups out there that wouldnt take advantage of having the content. But I feel it's far more likely that people will take advantage. At minimum "adventure" content should be tagged as player or DM content. And DM content should be blocked by non-owner's/players by default.
So how do you solve the problem of a group who all bought into the program together, one of the key features that was promoted as Beyond launched? A DM shouldn't be allowed to block me from content I paid into. Granted they could just kick me from all the games all together, but that's an entirely different scenario which has much more severe implications.
As an aside, I'll point out that I bought ToA on here for a game I'm playing. My DM owned the hardback, but my intention was to buy it eventually to run for a different group, so I just went ahead and got the DDB version for her to use. I've been able to resist temptation to peek ahead, as the fun for me is not knowing what's coming next.
I also run PotA, and my users have access to the book through their DDB accounts, but they feel the same way as me regarding spoilers. My attitude is that even without DDB, the books are out there and readily available. Any player that wants to cheat bad enough can. I have other module hardbacks on my bookshelf that I haven't read yet in case I get a chance to play them before I can run them.
I'm not saying a blacklist isn't something they should implement, I just don't think it's an urgent matter if you can trust your players.
That's admirable AdventureFight. But can you say with certainty that everyone you've ever played with won't look ahead? Or use it to know where the good loot is or manipulate an encounter to their advantage?
@Lokibryce If you want to share content in that way you should request that they make a new multi-user account type to handle that. Otherwise you are just leaving yourself to the mercy of the account owner. Because you will never be able to split the content or get back the money you spent if your relationship with that person goes down the drain.
Luckily I am the account owner, and we are all very very close friends whom I would trust with my life. However my point is that they sold this system by marketing beyond to be used in this way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
But can you say with certainty that everyone you've ever played with won't look ahead?
Yes, because I wouldn't play with people who would cheat.
Exactly. We don't play D&D "to win", unlike a more competitive game like MTG or Warhammer. We play for the cooperative growing experience, and if someone wants to rob themselves of that thing we all share just to give their character an edge, they probably have the kind of personality type that wouldn't be welcome at my table for very long.
If you're playing with strangers at a store or other public place, or maybe online over VTTs, I can see this being more of an issue.
It wouldn't stop cheating anyway. That's not the point. The point is to avoid spoilers and reduce clutter for users. You don't give out maps to your players with the traps marked on and then tell them to ignore it.
So how do you solve the problem of a group who all bought into the program together, one of the key features that was promoted as Beyond launched? A DM shouldn't be allowed to block me from content I paid into. Granted they could just kick me from all the games all together, but that's an entirely different scenario which has much more severe implications.
As you keep saying, don't get into arrangements with people who would do that.
But DDB doesn't just give them the maps and info right in their way. The only part of the site that players should ever access are the Character Builder and the Rules Compendium. Yes, they CAN access the Adventures, but they have to actively seek out the information to get to it. There's not really clutter, because no matter what the DM has unlocked as far as Adventure content goes, the Player shouldn't be poking around there anyway.
I happen to be in the position where I DM one game, but own an Adventure I'm currently playing, so I do have to pass by it. However, all of the Adventures still show up in the list, so I was having to pass by it anyway. It looks identical except the text on the button changes when you buy it. So I still don't see anything in the way of clutter.
So it's not just handing out maps and asking players to ignore them. The players still have to seek out the maps. Even without a DDB account, I could find any map I wanted to see with minimal effort. I choose not to because it's less fun to know.
As it stands, as a player, to see the player version of a map on the site, I'd have to go browsing through the adventure book. The problem isn't that I can't find it, the problem is I can't find it without seeing the spoiled version first. The pen and paper solution to this problem back in the day was tear out or loose leaf handouts. It would be nice to have a modern equivalent for adventure book content intended to be viewed by players.
I'd suggest a DM / player role switch on the interface. That way you can choose to browse the site as a player or as DM. In the player role, your interface would be trimmed to rules book and characters and your search results filtered to exclude hits from the adventure books and so forth.
I'd suggest a DM / player role switch on the interface. That way you can choose to browse the site as a player or as DM. In the player role, your interface would be trimmed to rules book and characters and your search results filtered to exclude hits from the adventure books and so forth.
That might solve your problems, and I could just ignore it. Not bad. The only question is, will it solve your problems?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
As it stands, as a player, to see the player version of a map on the site, I'd have to go browsing through the adventure book. The problem isn't that I can't find it, the problem is I can't find it without seeing the spoiled version first. The pen and paper solution to this problem back in the day was tear out or loose leaf handouts. It would be nice to have a modern equivalent for adventure book content intended to be viewed by players.
Well, what I currently do is paste the links into the campaign notes. So my players don't have to look through the Adventure section at all.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersDon't know the legalities, but can you 'shop out symbols and use those? I did that for a few adventures and it worked out great.
Will world maps be available for each of the core campaign settings for free or perhaps behind a subscription wall at some point?
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
"...Debts must always be paid, sometimes in more than blood and gold. But this is Ordo Ursa," Ren places his hand on Erakas's chest, right where the Dragonborn's heart is. "Right here. And it always has been and always will be. Don't ever forget that. Because I won't."
Serandis Mendaen (Aereni Elven Rogue/maybe one day Wizard)- Project Point Playtest
I also run PotA, and my users have access to the book through their DDB accounts, but they feel the same way as me regarding spoilers. My attitude is that even without DDB, the books are out there and readily available. Any player that wants to cheat bad enough can. I have other module hardbacks on my bookshelf that I haven't read yet in case I get a chance to play them before I can run them.
I'm not saying a blacklist isn't something they should implement, I just don't think it's an urgent matter if you can trust your players.
The most memorable stories always begin with failure.
If you're playing with strangers at a store or other public place, or maybe online over VTTs, I can see this being more of an issue.
I happen to be in the position where I DM one game, but own an Adventure I'm currently playing, so I do have to pass by it. However, all of the Adventures still show up in the list, so I was having to pass by it anyway. It looks identical except the text on the button changes when you buy it. So I still don't see anything in the way of clutter.
So it's not just handing out maps and asking players to ignore them. The players still have to seek out the maps. Even without a DDB account, I could find any map I wanted to see with minimal effort. I choose not to because it's less fun to know.
As it stands, as a player, to see the player version of a map on the site, I'd have to go browsing through the adventure book. The problem isn't that I can't find it, the problem is I can't find it without seeing the spoiled version first. The pen and paper solution to this problem back in the day was tear out or loose leaf handouts. It would be nice to have a modern equivalent for adventure book content intended to be viewed by players.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
I'd suggest a DM / player role switch on the interface. That way you can choose to browse the site as a player or as DM. In the player role, your interface would be trimmed to rules book and characters and your search results filtered to exclude hits from the adventure books and so forth.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
We voluntarily avoid spoilers, and a DM/Player switch(s) would go a long way to helping us avoid blundering into stuff we didn't want to see.