All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
But you see, Hasbro *said* backwards compatible w/no conditions attatched. That means that every little thing MUST be, or else they didn't tell the truth entirely.
Personally, Shepherd Druid is a FAR better example of "not 100% backwards compatible in the slightest".
And I DO want that Druidic Warrior fix as much as I want Sorcererous Burst, Chromatic Orb, True Strike & Hellfire fixed. I LOVE Rangers with a pocket Vine Whip.
They literally never once said it that way. They said 2014 characters could still be played under 2024 rules without breaking the game, and that anything not replaced is still valid. Classes were replaced in their entirety, meaning any options for the 2014 classes aren't valid on 2024 classes because they're two separate classes as far as the game is concerned.
Checking my 12h level 2024 ranger in the character builder today I was surprised to see i say I hadn't selected a fighting feat .. when I know I selected Archery ... and even more surprised that when i tried to fix this that Archery wasn't listed as a Fighting Style under the Core Rules pulldown! Anyone else see this? Is this a recently introduced bug?
I'm really not sure why this is the hill you wish to die on, but additional options from books like tasha's were supposed to stay, that's what they said a day before release, that the old options will stay, and that's why the old classes are still available on the website. There is literally nothing game breaking about allowing the warlock to use the full range of Invocations. Additionally, they stated that legacy content will not be available, i.e. content that was reworked, and after choosing to keep the old stuff, we were meant to keep the old stuff, that was my understanding, because that makes sense, otherwise their website becomes a worse way to play compared to pen and paper, it makes 0 sense to remove options for classes that are not reworked and don't break the game. That's one
Another thing is, pact of the talisman was a full subclass, they claimed they made all subclasses available, but I guess you'll argue that because it's not a subclass anymore it's fine to remove it? Bottom line is, make the content on here available in its entirety, there is no reason to remove or limit any of it, because it makes the platform a worse experience overall. If I got off here tomorrow and used pen and paper, I could easily use whatever option and invocation I want, so why not here? What purpose does it actually serve, and what does it add to the website experience?
All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
This is incorrect on many levels due to the simple fact that 2024 warlock on pen and paper can use Tasha's invocations, PHB 2014 invocations, and any other invocations between perfectly fine and is legally allowed to even in AL.
This is a disgrace on the D&D beyond team that it has been this long and such an obvious feature is still not working. I want my money back.
All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
But you see, Hasbro *said* backwards compatible w/no conditions attatched. That means that every little thing MUST be, or else they didn't tell the truth entirely.
Personally, Shepherd Druid is a FAR better example of "not 100% backwards compatible in the slightest".
And I DO want that Druidic Warrior fix as much as I want Sorcererous Burst, Chromatic Orb, True Strike & Hellfire fixed. I LOVE Rangers with a pocket Vine Whip.
They literally never once said it that way. They said 2014 characters could still be played under 2024 rules without breaking the game, and that anything not replaced is still valid. Classes were replaced in their entirety, meaning any options for the 2014 classes aren't valid on 2024 classes because they're two separate classes as far as the game is concerned.
This is not how the pen and paper game works in the slightest, it should not be how the D&D beyond version which seeks to emulate the game should work either.
There was never a replacement, it was an update. 2014 options are "backwards compatible" therefore invocations, a 2014 OPTION NEED to be backwards compatible.
It has been how many months since you've released a product and it still doesn't work as advertised?
This is worthy of a class action law suite. You charged people not only for BROKEN CONTENT but content you seem uninterested in fixing in favor of pushing MORE broken content! On top of all this, there has been ZERO communication and a complete and utter breakdown of BASIC features.
Of all of the bugs Agonizing Blast is the most obvious.
But the truth is that there should be a public list of known bugs, and how long they have existed. Not to shame DND beyond, though I believe it is deeply embarrassing, but because the bugs create confusion about what is allowed under the rules.
Some things they might skip because it's debatable whether it's a bug, but the truth is that there are hundreds of not thousands of bugs that collectively make using dndbeyond for its most basic function, very frustrating, because we don't know what is or isn't legitimately a bug.
I'm really not sure why this is the hill you wish to die on, but additional options from books like tasha's were supposed to stay, that's what they said a day before release, that the old options will stay, and that's why the old classes are still available on the website. There is literally nothing game breaking about allowing the warlock to use the full range of Invocations. Additionally, they stated that legacy content will not be available, i.e. content that was reworked, and after choosing to keep the old stuff, we were meant to keep the old stuff, that was my understanding, because that makes sense, otherwise their website becomes a worse way to play compared to pen and paper, it makes 0 sense to remove options for classes that are not reworked and don't break the game. That's one
Another thing is, pact of the talisman was a full subclass, they claimed they made all subclasses available, but I guess you'll argue that because it's not a subclass anymore it's fine to remove it? Bottom line is, make the content on here available in its entirety, there is no reason to remove or limit any of it, because it makes the platform a worse experience overall. If I got off here tomorrow and used pen and paper, I could easily use whatever option and invocation I want, so why not here? What purpose does it actually serve, and what does it add to the website experience?
You'll need to show proof they stated that you were supposed to be able to mix-and-match features from 2014 classes with 2024 classes. The big uproar that kept old options around was so that people could still have access to 2014 things like spells. That doesn't mean the rules change and you can suddenly mix 2014 and 2024 spells on a sheet; the rules still mandate that you only use the most updated version if playing with the 2024 rules.
Pact of the Talisman wasn't a subclass; none of the pacts were. It was a pact, which was a class feature and you got to select one. In reworking Warlock, they chose to turn pacts into invocations, and chose not to add Talisman to 2024 Warlock at this time. You can still use any of the old subclasses that weren't replaced (those being Fathomless, Genie, Hexblade, Undead, and Undying; Mother of Sorrows also existed as 3rd party and is valid to use, but you have to homebrew it currently to 2024 to use due to what we assume are legal conflicts).
As far as using pen and paper, sure, you could. But that wouldn't be playing by 5e rules, which is why it isn't being supported on Beyond: D&D Beyond is designed only to support the current ruleset of 5e, not whatever people want to do. It's a rules-as-written character builder.
All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
This is incorrect on many levels due to the simple fact that 2024 warlock on pen and paper can use Tasha's invocations, PHB 2014 invocations, and any other invocations between perfectly fine and is legally allowed to even in AL.
This is a disgrace on the D&D beyond team that it has been this long and such an obvious feature is still not working. I want my money back.
AL's guidance is as follows and supports what I've been saying: "If a rules option appears in a previously published sourcebook such as Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything or Xanathar’s Guide to Everything and was updated in the 2024 rules, use the updated rules."
All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
But you see, Hasbro *said* backwards compatible w/no conditions attatched. That means that every little thing MUST be, or else they didn't tell the truth entirely.
Personally, Shepherd Druid is a FAR better example of "not 100% backwards compatible in the slightest".
And I DO want that Druidic Warrior fix as much as I want Sorcererous Burst, Chromatic Orb, True Strike & Hellfire fixed. I LOVE Rangers with a pocket Vine Whip.
They literally never once said it that way. They said 2014 characters could still be played under 2024 rules without breaking the game, and that anything not replaced is still valid. Classes were replaced in their entirety, meaning any options for the 2014 classes aren't valid on 2024 classes because they're two separate classes as far as the game is concerned.
This is not how the pen and paper game works in the slightest, it should not be how the D&D beyond version which seeks to emulate the game should work either.
There was never a replacement, it was an update. 2014 options are "backwards compatible" therefore invocations, a 2014 OPTION NEED to be backwards compatible.
Any other excuse made for D&D beyond to not fix this issue is stupid and an excuse for lazy development of people who take your money.
Stop boot licking
As stated above, D&D Beyond supports the most up-to-date rules for 5e. While it's appropriate to keep the past options for 2014 characters (as people can still play games under the 2014 rules) it is NOT appropriate to demand that they make the builder break the rules by mix-and-matching features that have been replaced. Because what happens to old content when new content is made to update it? It gets replaced. And 2014 was never supposed to be backward compatible piecemeal, it's only those options which haven't been replaced. All class features of the 2014 Warlock are replaced by the whole of 2024 Warlock and only subclasses are usable when not yet replaced. (As a note to that, a few of the old subclasses have versions in the newest UA, which would make the old Knowledge Cleric, Purple Dragon Knight Fighter, and Bladesinger Wizard invalid immediately if officially printed.)
You show me the replacements for invocations I'll listen. Until then you're arguing on bad faith out of some misguided obligation to defend a company screwing you out of your money.
Don't make this the hill you die on. Invocations from 2014, especially expanded rules invocations, need to be brought back. Sit down.
I'm really not sure why this is the hill you wish to die on, but additional options from books like tasha's were supposed to stay, that's what they said a day before release, that the old options will stay, and that's why the old classes are still available on the website. There is literally nothing game breaking about allowing the warlock to use the full range of Invocations. Additionally, they stated that legacy content will not be available, i.e. content that was reworked, and after choosing to keep the old stuff, we were meant to keep the old stuff, that was my understanding, because that makes sense, otherwise their website becomes a worse way to play compared to pen and paper, it makes 0 sense to remove options for classes that are not reworked and don't break the game. That's one
Another thing is, pact of the talisman was a full subclass, they claimed they made all subclasses available, but I guess you'll argue that because it's not a subclass anymore it's fine to remove it? Bottom line is, make the content on here available in its entirety, there is no reason to remove or limit any of it, because it makes the platform a worse experience overall. If I got off here tomorrow and used pen and paper, I could easily use whatever option and invocation I want, so why not here? What purpose does it actually serve, and what does it add to the website experience?
You'll need to show proof they stated that you were supposed to be able to mix-and-match features from 2014 classes with 2024 classes. The big uproar that kept old options around was so that people could still have access to 2014 things like spells. That doesn't mean the rules change and you can suddenly mix 2014 and 2024 spells on a sheet; the rules still mandate that you only use the most updated version if playing with the 2024 rules.
Pact of the Talisman wasn't a subclass; none of the pacts were. It was a pact, which was a class feature and you got to select one. In reworking Warlock, they chose to turn pacts into invocations, and chose not to add Talisman to 2024 Warlock at this time. You can still use any of the old subclasses that weren't replaced (those being Fathomless, Genie, Hexblade, Undead, and Undying; Mother of Sorrows also existed as 3rd party and is valid to use, but you have to homebrew it currently to 2024 to use due to what we assume are legal conflicts).
As far as using pen and paper, sure, you could. But that wouldn't be playing by 5e rules, which is why it isn't being supported on Beyond: D&D Beyond is designed only to support the current ruleset of 5e, not whatever people want to do. It's a rules-as-written character builder.
All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
This is incorrect on many levels due to the simple fact that 2024 warlock on pen and paper can use Tasha's invocations, PHB 2014 invocations, and any other invocations between perfectly fine and is legally allowed to even in AL.
This is a disgrace on the D&D beyond team that it has been this long and such an obvious feature is still not working. I want my money back.
AL's guidance is as follows and supports what I've been saying: "If a rules option appears in a previously published sourcebook such as Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything or Xanathar’s Guide to Everything and was updated in the 2024 rules, use the updated rules."
All the classes lost the optional features from Tasha's because they were either redesigned and technically still there in some form, or not really needed after the class was reworked. These were optional features specifically designed to improve 5th edition classes, and they existed specifically to make these classes play better, which is why classes that really struggled got more of them (like the ranger). Invocations are not optional features, despite being options. If you think understanding most of that list is irrelevant is the same as not reading, that's perfectly fine, you can continue to live with that.
I didn't notice the fighter, but those should be added too, they should, just like the invocations, not have been removed. Also, Druidic warrior is not lost, it's right there, I'm not sure what fighting styles you are reading.
Anywho, this argument is pointless, the invocations, fighting styles and maneuvers should be added back, optional features I'm personally fine with being gone for the most part as they are mostly redundant for the new classes.
You're right about why the optional features were lost; however, you're wrong about the Invocations for one major reason. The 2024 Warlock has access to none of what the 2014 Warlock had access to, except where the 2024 Warlock specifically spells out that it does. This is because it replaced 100% of the 2014 Warlock. Those old Invocations are all options attached to the 2014 Warlock class, as it exists as a separate entity.
Druidic Warrior being in the character builder but not in the Ranger page is a major oversight on Beyond's part, and I was going based on the Ranger page as my reference.
But you see, Hasbro *said* backwards compatible w/no conditions attatched. That means that every little thing MUST be, or else they didn't tell the truth entirely.
Personally, Shepherd Druid is a FAR better example of "not 100% backwards compatible in the slightest".
And I DO want that Druidic Warrior fix as much as I want Sorcererous Burst, Chromatic Orb, True Strike & Hellfire fixed. I LOVE Rangers with a pocket Vine Whip.
They literally never once said it that way. They said 2014 characters could still be played under 2024 rules without breaking the game, and that anything not replaced is still valid. Classes were replaced in their entirety, meaning any options for the 2014 classes aren't valid on 2024 classes because they're two separate classes as far as the game is concerned.
This is not how the pen and paper game works in the slightest, it should not be how the D&D beyond version which seeks to emulate the game should work either.
There was never a replacement, it was an update. 2014 options are "backwards compatible" therefore invocations, a 2014 OPTION NEED to be backwards compatible.
Any other excuse made for D&D beyond to not fix this issue is stupid and an excuse for lazy development of people who take your money.
Stop boot licking
As stated above, D&D Beyond supports the most up-to-date rules for 5e. While it's appropriate to keep the past options for 2014 characters (as people can still play games under the 2014 rules) it is NOT appropriate to demand that they make the builder break the rules by mix-and-matching features that have been replaced. Because what happens to old content when new content is made to update it? It gets replaced. And 2014 was never supposed to be backward compatible piecemeal, it's only those options which haven't been replaced. All class features of the 2014 Warlock are replaced by the whole of 2024 Warlock and only subclasses are usable when not yet replaced. (As a note to that, a few of the old subclasses have versions in the newest UA, which would make the old Knowledge Cleric, Purple Dragon Knight Fighter, and Bladesinger Wizard invalid immediately if officially printed.)
It does not "break the rules". Content from expanded source books, including invocations, are available to the 2024 warlock. Learn to play before you lecture people.
As someone said earlier, no point arguing about 2014 invocations when dndbeyond hasn't even implemented the 2024 invocations properly. And if their track record from Tasha's is anything to go by, probably never will.
i just noticed this while updating a sheet on Roll20 but in the DNDBeyond when looking at the 2024 Ranger class from the class section it has Beast of the Sky and Beast of the Sea with the same stats, when you look in the PHB 2024 section on beyond Beast of the Sky instead has the Beast of the Land stats, but then the physical PHB has them reversed
roll20s 2024 PHB has the latter where Beast of the Land and Beast of the Sea have the same stats and Sky is the offlier
You show me the replacements for invocations I'll listen. Until then you're arguing on bad faith out of some misguided obligation to defend a company screwing you out of your money.
Don't make this the hill you die on. Invocations from 2014, especially expanded rules invocations, need to be brought back. Sit down.
Why are you unable to understand that the 2014 Warlock and the 2024 Warlock are 100% separate entities? That's the crux of all of this.
i just noticed this while updating a sheet on Roll20 but in the DNDBeyond when looking at the 2024 Ranger class from the class section it has Beast of the Sky and Beast of the Sea with the same stats, when you look in the PHB 2024 section on beyond Beast of the Sky instead has the Beast of the Land stats, but then the physical PHB has them reversed
roll20s 2024 PHB has the latter where Beast of the Land and Beast of the Sea have the same stats and Sky is the offlier
It seems the physical and digital books flipped the order of Beast of the Sky and Beast of the Sea. That last screenshot (from Roll20) has the same as the physical book. I'd go based on that until errata is published at least.
I've just done some googling and found a message from a mod stating that the 3024 invocations should be usable on 2024 warlocks, and they are only unavailable due to system limitations on DDB. So it is a "bug", but I suspect one that they won't bother to fix. See posts 5 and 6 here:
Considering the amount of time they've had to fix it and the fact that they never needed to even try to share features, but could have simply dropped them in as 2024 features? Not a safe assumption to make.
Considering the amount of time they've had to fix it and the fact that they never needed to even try to share features, but could have simply dropped them in as 2024 features? Not a safe assumption to make.
What assumption? That's a post from a mod who has checked and confirmed that they should be available, but aren't due to system limitations. Unless you have anything official that contradicts that I think the case is closed.
The fact that they haven't fixed it yet (and have given no indication whether they will or not) is what we're all complaining about. Either they're not spending enough time fixing bugs, or they've intentionally decided not to implement legal 5th edition content (which is what a lot of us believe, but officially they claim to still support all of 5e).
Considering the amount of time they've had to fix it and the fact that they never needed to even try to share features, but could have simply dropped them in as 2024 features? Not a safe assumption to make.
What assumption? That's a post from a mod who has checked and confirmed that they should be available, but aren't due to system limitations. Unless you have anything official that contradicts that I think the case is closed.
The fact that they haven't fixed it yet (and have given no indication whether they will or not) is what we're all complaining about. Either they're not spending enough time fixing bugs, or they've intentionally decided not to implement legal 5th edition content (which is what a lot of us believe, but officially they claim to still support all of 5e).
That mod made no mention of who they spoke with and how far up the chain that came from. Mods' domain extends to the forums and no further, meaning that unless we get a full source, that's still not the word of anyone actually in charge of the decision-making process.
It seems clear to me they were referring to either the dev team, or the wider DDB team. Regardless, I've posted two official responses showing that the invocations should be available. What evidence do you have that they should not be, other than your own opinion?
Literally the way the rules work: The class was replaced. The whole class, including invocations. If you can't understand how a game works, that's on you.
And yet we can still use old subclasses, which were part of the old classes. WotC & DDB haven't been entirely clear on what is & isn't backwards compatible, some things are while others aren't.
If you can point to anything official saying that invocations aren't supposed to be compatible that would be great, until then DDB's position seems to be that they are, and that's about as definitive as we're likely to get.
They literally never once said it that way. They said 2014 characters could still be played under 2024 rules without breaking the game, and that anything not replaced is still valid. Classes were replaced in their entirety, meaning any options for the 2014 classes aren't valid on 2024 classes because they're two separate classes as far as the game is concerned.
Checking my 12h level 2024 ranger in the character builder today I was surprised to see i say I hadn't selected a fighting feat .. when I know I selected Archery ... and even more surprised that when i tried to fix this that Archery wasn't listed as a Fighting Style under the Core Rules pulldown! Anyone else see this? Is this a recently introduced bug?
I'm really not sure why this is the hill you wish to die on, but additional options from books like tasha's were supposed to stay, that's what they said a day before release, that the old options will stay, and that's why the old classes are still available on the website. There is literally nothing game breaking about allowing the warlock to use the full range of Invocations. Additionally, they stated that legacy content will not be available, i.e. content that was reworked, and after choosing to keep the old stuff, we were meant to keep the old stuff, that was my understanding, because that makes sense, otherwise their website becomes a worse way to play compared to pen and paper, it makes 0 sense to remove options for classes that are not reworked and don't break the game. That's one
Another thing is, pact of the talisman was a full subclass, they claimed they made all subclasses available, but I guess you'll argue that because it's not a subclass anymore it's fine to remove it? Bottom line is, make the content on here available in its entirety, there is no reason to remove or limit any of it, because it makes the platform a worse experience overall. If I got off here tomorrow and used pen and paper, I could easily use whatever option and invocation I want, so why not here? What purpose does it actually serve, and what does it add to the website experience?
This is incorrect on many levels due to the simple fact that 2024 warlock on pen and paper can use Tasha's invocations, PHB 2014 invocations, and any other invocations between perfectly fine and is legally allowed to even in AL.
This is a disgrace on the D&D beyond team that it has been this long and such an obvious feature is still not working. I want my money back.
This is not how the pen and paper game works in the slightest, it should not be how the D&D beyond version which seeks to emulate the game should work either.
There was never a replacement, it was an update. 2014 options are "backwards compatible" therefore invocations, a 2014 OPTION NEED to be backwards compatible.
[Redacted]
It has been how many months since you've released a product and it still doesn't work as advertised?
This is worthy of a class action law suite. You charged people not only for BROKEN CONTENT but content you seem uninterested in fixing in favor of pushing MORE broken content! On top of all this, there has been ZERO communication and a complete and utter breakdown of BASIC features.
Fix your shit before a court has to make you.
Of all of the bugs Agonizing Blast is the most obvious.
But the truth is that there should be a public list of known bugs, and how long they have existed. Not to shame DND beyond, though I believe it is deeply embarrassing, but because the bugs create confusion about what is allowed under the rules.
Some things they might skip because it's debatable whether it's a bug, but the truth is that there are hundreds of not thousands of bugs that collectively make using dndbeyond for its most basic function, very frustrating, because we don't know what is or isn't legitimately a bug.
You'll need to show proof they stated that you were supposed to be able to mix-and-match features from 2014 classes with 2024 classes. The big uproar that kept old options around was so that people could still have access to 2014 things like spells. That doesn't mean the rules change and you can suddenly mix 2014 and 2024 spells on a sheet; the rules still mandate that you only use the most updated version if playing with the 2024 rules.
Pact of the Talisman wasn't a subclass; none of the pacts were. It was a pact, which was a class feature and you got to select one. In reworking Warlock, they chose to turn pacts into invocations, and chose not to add Talisman to 2024 Warlock at this time. You can still use any of the old subclasses that weren't replaced (those being Fathomless, Genie, Hexblade, Undead, and Undying; Mother of Sorrows also existed as 3rd party and is valid to use, but you have to homebrew it currently to 2024 to use due to what we assume are legal conflicts).
As far as using pen and paper, sure, you could. But that wouldn't be playing by 5e rules, which is why it isn't being supported on Beyond: D&D Beyond is designed only to support the current ruleset of 5e, not whatever people want to do. It's a rules-as-written character builder.
AL's guidance is as follows and supports what I've been saying: "If a rules option appears in a previously published sourcebook such as Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything or Xanathar’s Guide to Everything and was updated in the 2024 rules, use the updated rules."
As stated above, D&D Beyond supports the most up-to-date rules for 5e. While it's appropriate to keep the past options for 2014 characters (as people can still play games under the 2014 rules) it is NOT appropriate to demand that they make the builder break the rules by mix-and-matching features that have been replaced. Because what happens to old content when new content is made to update it? It gets replaced. And 2014 was never supposed to be backward compatible piecemeal, it's only those options which haven't been replaced. All class features of the 2014 Warlock are replaced by the whole of 2024 Warlock and only subclasses are usable when not yet replaced. (As a note to that, a few of the old subclasses have versions in the newest UA, which would make the old Knowledge Cleric, Purple Dragon Knight Fighter, and Bladesinger Wizard invalid immediately if officially printed.)
For those Playing Adventurer's League. Will this mean if you are NOT playing in the Forgotten Realms, you cannot be a knowledge Cleric?
You show me the replacements for invocations I'll listen. Until then you're arguing on bad faith out of some misguided obligation to defend a company screwing you out of your money.
Don't make this the hill you die on. Invocations from 2014, especially expanded rules invocations, need to be brought back. Sit down.
It does not "break the rules". Content from expanded source books, including invocations, are available to the 2024 warlock. Learn to play before you lecture people.
As someone said earlier, no point arguing about 2014 invocations when dndbeyond hasn't even implemented the 2024 invocations properly. And if their track record from Tasha's is anything to go by, probably never will.
i just noticed this while updating a sheet on Roll20 but in the DNDBeyond when looking at the 2024 Ranger class from the class section it has Beast of the Sky and Beast of the Sea with the same stats, when you look in the PHB 2024 section on beyond Beast of the Sky instead has the Beast of the Land stats, but then the physical PHB has them reversed
roll20s 2024 PHB has the latter where Beast of the Land and Beast of the Sea have the same stats and Sky is the offlier
Which is it bc in 2 different places on beyond theyre different and neither are the same as the Physical book
https://imgur.com/ipvS3aF
https://imgur.com/ueJkBtr
https://imgur.com/mz1T8t3
Why are you unable to understand that the 2014 Warlock and the 2024 Warlock are 100% separate entities? That's the crux of all of this.
It seems the physical and digital books flipped the order of Beast of the Sky and Beast of the Sea. That last screenshot (from Roll20) has the same as the physical book. I'd go based on that until errata is published at least.
I've just done some googling and found a message from a mod stating that the 3024 invocations should be usable on 2024 warlocks, and they are only unavailable due to system limitations on DDB. So it is a "bug", but I suspect one that they won't bother to fix. See posts 5 and 6 here:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/bugs-support/205316-invocations-from-older-sources-not-showing-up-for?comment=5
Unless anyone can point to anything more official saying that they shouldn't be backwards compatible, I think that puts this argument to rest.
Considering the amount of time they've had to fix it and the fact that they never needed to even try to share features, but could have simply dropped them in as 2024 features? Not a safe assumption to make.
What assumption? That's a post from a mod who has checked and confirmed that they should be available, but aren't due to system limitations. Unless you have anything official that contradicts that I think the case is closed.
The fact that they haven't fixed it yet (and have given no indication whether they will or not) is what we're all complaining about. Either they're not spending enough time fixing bugs, or they've intentionally decided not to implement legal 5th edition content (which is what a lot of us believe, but officially they claim to still support all of 5e).
That mod made no mention of who they spoke with and how far up the chain that came from. Mods' domain extends to the forums and no further, meaning that unless we get a full source, that's still not the word of anyone actually in charge of the decision-making process.
It seems clear to me they were referring to either the dev team, or the wider DDB team. Regardless, I've posted two official responses showing that the invocations should be available. What evidence do you have that they should not be, other than your own opinion?
And yet we can still use old subclasses, which were part of the old classes. WotC & DDB haven't been entirely clear on what is & isn't backwards compatible, some things are while others aren't.
If you can point to anything official saying that invocations aren't supposed to be compatible that would be great, until then DDB's position seems to be that they are, and that's about as definitive as we're likely to get.
As further evidence, here's another post by someone with the title "D&D Beyond Staff" saying that they're working on implementation. It seems unlikely that they'd add this to their already hefty backlog of bugs and missing features if it wasn't supported by the rules. https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/bugs-support/214799-humblewood-tales-bug-and-support?comment=3