This is amazing news, thank you for asking Veredis, and for answering Stormknight! :) AMAZING! I will be all over the place when this goes live. Currently I‘m gathering all my 5e game design creations together for a proper publishing under a thematic bracket, similar to how UA is done.
Why aren't there plans to allow homebrew classes? Why is that the one thing you're not allowing homebrew content on?
For over a year, I've been playing an Artificer from UA. My DM decided he wanted to try this site out with everyone from the party, but I'm left out of that now because I can't recreate my character properly. Not having the UA content available still is a whole second issue, but why can't I recreate the class myself?
Why aren't there plans to allow homebrew classes? Why is that the one thing you're not allowing homebrew content on?
For over a year, I've been playing an Artificer from UA. My DM decided he wanted to try this site out with everyone from the party, but I'm left out of that now because I can't recreate my character properly. Not having the UA content available still is a whole second issue, but why can't I recreate the class myself?
The staff, when asked the same, have always replied that giving the possibility for users to create base classes presents problems in terms of integration and coding, especially in terms of making the whole process as user-friendly as possible. Creating things that do not change the fundamental mechanics of a class, but "simply" add on top of a solid base is one thing, creating from scratch a completely new "foundation" is different in the DDB environment, as far as we've been told. It is worth nothing that, at least for what I have seen, we moved from a stark "No" to homebrew classes to a softer "Not currently in the plans", which could mean (as well as not) that we might see it be part of the plans.
On the UA stuff, they actually are present, but, as per WotC request, only currently not archived content will be featured on DDB, and even that only until the playtest contents are either archived by WotC or made part of an official supplement. As per the above, unless there will be a new UA version of the Aritifcer released by WotC as part of a future UA article or as part of an official supplement, it will not come to DDB.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Why aren't there plans to allow homebrew classes? Why is that the one thing you're not allowing homebrew content on?
For over a year, I've been playing an Artificer from UA. My DM decided he wanted to try this site out with everyone from the party, but I'm left out of that now because I can't recreate my character properly. Not having the UA content available still is a whole second issue, but why can't I recreate the class myself?
Badeye has talked about this - Homebrew classes would be MASSIVELY complicated to implement (and to use if they did implement) and only benefit a relatively small percent of users.
That development time is much better used on features that will benefit the majority of users on a regular basis.
It's not my place to talk about what these features are here, but there are going to be some REALLY cool features/tools added to D&D Beyond over the course of this year - stuff that nobody else is doing yet.
With regards Unearthed Arcana (and the Artificer) - UA is playest rules and the Artificer playtest period is considered complete by Wizards of the Coast. At some point, they are likely to publish an updated version in a new UA article, or include a full version in a published book. At that point, it will be added to D&D Beyond by the devs.
Another question then about what are considered "Subclasses". I consider the Fighter's Champion and Eldritch Knight subclasses, and you have access to them both at level three. Other classes, such as the warlock, pick up their pacts at the same level (Blade, tome, chain), but the primary 'flavor' of the character is picked at level one via their patron, which in turn is what gives them the majority of their class identity (spell list, extra features and so on). So in what terms do certain classes consider Subclasses, what they gain access to at level three, or what, most of all, contributes to who they are as a class?
Another question then about what are considered "Subclasses". I consider the Fighter's Champion and Eldritch Knight subclasses, and you have access to them both at level three. Other classes, such as the warlock, pick up their pacts at the same level (Blade, tome, chain), but the primary 'flavor' of the character is picked at level one via their patron, which in turn is what gives them the majority of their class identity (spell list, extra features and so on). So in what terms do certain classes consider Subclasses, what they gain access to at level three, or what, most of all, contributes to who they are as a class?
Mechanically speaking, within the D&D 5ed system, Warlock Patron (or even the Wizard School, or the Cleric Domain) work the same as all other 3rd level subclasses, simply granting a degree of further specialization already at level one (or two), to cope for an otherwise initial underpowered-ness when compared to other classes (Cleric would not really be underpowered anyway, but that's all another can of worms).
After 1st (2nd) level, they behave exactly like any other subclasses, not changing the fundamental basis of the class (Warlocks have extremely few slots, but all of those are at Max level and they are extremely versatile thanks to Invocations, of which only very few need a certain Patron as prerequisite, Wizards still have a LOT of spell slots and spells known, and are generally very knowledgeable, Clerics are freaking beasts all around whatever you do with them [see the above can of worms]), but adding to it, in a flavor that allows the player to personalise the basic class to they're desired vision.
At least that is my view on this, judging by how subclasses behave and what they do. Some classes get more streamlined subclasses because the base class is already a very specific type of character (see Fighter, i.e., lots of possible flavors, but in the end you are 9/10 times the guy up in the face of the enemy), while spellcasters can be a wide variety of things, as a base class, and therefore benefit from an initial direction given by what then becomes their subclasses, following the "rules" of other subclasses.
The Warlock is an oddity here, because customizing this class can be done from several angles. Patrons are considered the subclass. Pact boon is just a single choice, but influences further picks. And last but not least, Invocations. Custom Invocations would be tremendously helpful, I have several ideas for the warlock alone, but I guess we’ll only get a single “subclass” to tinker with here. unless they make their system open enough that several Pick-Lists can be expanded on. That would make a lot of things possible.
The subclass flavor is added from levels 1-3, Wizards get their schools on level 2, clerics and warlocks on 1.
Mutagen To be listed in a lot more subclasses, with much more unique setups! Also, clerics, and paladins should get theirs at first level, as their training usually defaults in them being in the church.
Mike Mearls talks about their design choices in deciding which classes gain their subclasses at which levels. For warlocks, it's because your power comes from making a pact with a patron and you start gaining that power from level 1—it doesn't make sense to finally have that pact you've been using at 3rd level. It's a similar situation for sorcerers.
You can check out the first video here, where Mike talks us through how to create a subclass:
Totally, I understand the game design decisions why things are the way the are. Paladins, for example, have a lot of interesting mechanics that you need to get out of the way, before you can actually talk oaths, otherwise you would have to shift core features to later levels. with the cleric, it’s undeniably important to get the domain identity at first level, and there is plenty of room to have that pick at first level. with wizards, you can also see how the wizard specials are layered at level 2 to not be easily grabbable with a single wizard pick, also it is totally fine to be unspecialized at level 1. something that’s impossible with a warlock, as you mentioned.
thanks for the link! I’ll be looking forward to this, as I’ve said
This is help me out with a couple good ideas, especially for my dungeon Master exclusive warlock class for my bad guys(let's say the dark one is getting heavily rewritten because at the Pacific old God, which by the way the tentacle class and it does seem to be very influential as well. As well as the other one. Yes, I have two old God that are very Pacific, with unique setups and builds ones very much a trickster class. The other one well is a pretty much a legendary sea monster.)
Why aren't there plans to allow homebrew classes? Why is that the one thing you're not allowing homebrew content on?
For over a year, I've been playing an Artificer from UA. My DM decided he wanted to try this site out with everyone from the party, but I'm left out of that now because I can't recreate my character properly. Not having the UA content available still is a whole second issue, but why can't I recreate the class myself?
Badeye has talked about this - Homebrew classes would be MASSIVELY complicated to implement (and to use if they did implement) and only benefit a relatively small percent of users.
That development time is much better used on features that will benefit the majority of users on a regular basis.
It's not my place to talk about what these features are here, but there are going to be some REALLY cool features/tools added to D&D Beyond over the course of this year - stuff that nobody else is doing yet.
With regards Unearthed Arcana (and the Artificer) - UA is playest rules and the Artificer playtest period is considered complete by Wizards of the Coast. At some point, they are likely to publish an updated version in a new UA article, or include a full version in a published book. At that point, it will be added to D&D Beyond by the devs.
Bluntly, this reads as a cop out on something that is a pretty serious gap in the tool's capabilities. Because you can subscribe to other people's homebrew, it is simply a false claim that it would only benefit a small number of users.
Furthermore, it's hard to imagine this has to be as complicated as you're suggesting it is. Why can't there just be a generic template that features/spells/etc. can be grafted onto?
Just wondering if there will ever be support for something like this? Subclasses would honestly be fine by themselves for balance issues.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersHomebrew subclasses will be coming fairly soon.
There are currently no plans to add homebrew classes.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Thank you for the answer, and thanks to the developers for adding this kind of content.
This is amazing news, thank you for asking Veredis, and for answering Stormknight! :) AMAZING! I will be all over the place when this goes live. Currently I‘m gathering all my 5e game design creations together for a proper publishing under a thematic bracket, similar to how UA is done.
Zev Georg Mir, creator of Michtim: Fluffy Adventures
Game Designer, Storyteller, UX Gamedev, Homebrewer, Michtim
Get Michtim For D&D
The Tavern (casual RP socializing) game: DM, feel free to join, but read rules in first post and post questions if you have any!
Tym Eisenfuchs: ambiguous Michtim Warlock
Click links to find out more!
Why aren't there plans to allow homebrew classes? Why is that the one thing you're not allowing homebrew content on?
For over a year, I've been playing an Artificer from UA. My DM decided he wanted to try this site out with everyone from the party, but I'm left out of that now because I can't recreate my character properly. Not having the UA content available still is a whole second issue, but why can't I recreate the class myself?
Creating things that do not change the fundamental mechanics of a class, but "simply" add on top of a solid base is one thing, creating from scratch a completely new "foundation" is different in the DDB environment, as far as we've been told.
It is worth nothing that, at least for what I have seen, we moved from a stark "No" to homebrew classes to a softer "Not currently in the plans", which could mean (as well as not) that we might see it be part of the plans.
As per the above, unless there will be a new UA version of the Aritifcer released by WotC as part of a future UA article or as part of an official supplement, it will not come to DDB.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersPun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Another question then about what are considered "Subclasses". I consider the Fighter's Champion and Eldritch Knight subclasses, and you have access to them both at level three. Other classes, such as the warlock, pick up their pacts at the same level (Blade, tome, chain), but the primary 'flavor' of the character is picked at level one via their patron, which in turn is what gives them the majority of their class identity (spell list, extra features and so on). So in what terms do certain classes consider Subclasses, what they gain access to at level three, or what, most of all, contributes to who they are as a class?
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
The Warlock is an oddity here, because customizing this class can be done from several angles. Patrons are considered the subclass. Pact boon is just a single choice, but influences further picks. And last but not least, Invocations. Custom Invocations would be tremendously helpful, I have several ideas for the warlock alone, but I guess we’ll only get a single “subclass” to tinker with here. unless they make their system open enough that several Pick-Lists can be expanded on. That would make a lot of things possible.
The subclass flavor is added from levels 1-3, Wizards get their schools on level 2, clerics and warlocks on 1.
Zev Georg Mir, creator of Michtim: Fluffy Adventures
Game Designer, Storyteller, UX Gamedev, Homebrewer, Michtim
Get Michtim For D&D
The Tavern (casual RP socializing) game: DM, feel free to join, but read rules in first post and post questions if you have any!
Tym Eisenfuchs: ambiguous Michtim Warlock
Click links to find out more!
"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)
Mutagen To be listed in a lot more subclasses, with much more unique setups! Also, clerics, and paladins should get theirs at first level, as their training usually defaults in them being in the church.
Mike Mearls talks about their design choices in deciding which classes gain their subclasses at which levels. For warlocks, it's because your power comes from making a pact with a patron and you start gaining that power from level 1—it doesn't make sense to finally have that pact you've been using at 3rd level. It's a similar situation for sorcerers.
You can check out the first video here, where Mike talks us through how to create a subclass:
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
Totally, I understand the game design decisions why things are the way the are. Paladins, for example, have a lot of interesting mechanics that you need to get out of the way, before you can actually talk oaths, otherwise you would have to shift core features to later levels. with the cleric, it’s undeniably important to get the domain identity at first level, and there is plenty of room to have that pick at first level. with wizards, you can also see how the wizard specials are layered at level 2 to not be easily grabbable with a single wizard pick, also it is totally fine to be unspecialized at level 1. something that’s impossible with a warlock, as you mentioned.
thanks for the link! I’ll be looking forward to this, as I’ve said
Zev Georg Mir, creator of Michtim: Fluffy Adventures
Game Designer, Storyteller, UX Gamedev, Homebrewer, Michtim
Get Michtim For D&D
The Tavern (casual RP socializing) game: DM, feel free to join, but read rules in first post and post questions if you have any!
Tym Eisenfuchs: ambiguous Michtim Warlock
Click links to find out more!
This is help me out with a couple good ideas, especially for my dungeon Master exclusive warlock class for my bad guys(let's say the dark one is getting heavily rewritten because at the Pacific old God, which by the way the tentacle class and it does seem to be very influential as well. As well as the other one. Yes, I have two old God that are very Pacific, with unique setups and builds ones very much a trickster class. The other one well is a pretty much a legendary sea monster.)
let’s discuss your thoughts in private messages or a separate thread, that way you can properly talk about it.
Zev Georg Mir, creator of Michtim: Fluffy Adventures
Game Designer, Storyteller, UX Gamedev, Homebrewer, Michtim
Get Michtim For D&D
The Tavern (casual RP socializing) game: DM, feel free to join, but read rules in first post and post questions if you have any!
Tym Eisenfuchs: ambiguous Michtim Warlock
Click links to find out more!
Bluntly, this reads as a cop out on something that is a pretty serious gap in the tool's capabilities. Because you can subscribe to other people's homebrew, it is simply a false claim that it would only benefit a small number of users.
Furthermore, it's hard to imagine this has to be as complicated as you're suggesting it is. Why can't there just be a generic template that features/spells/etc. can be grafted onto?