You can definitely get 'very angry'. Without knowing their software and how its logically laid out, its impossible to say if the UA is a logical prerequisite for the capability to fix the Spells of the Mark issue, but if you enjoy getting 'very angry' without understanding the core of the problem and the optimal solution trajectories, have at it.
You can definitely get 'very angry'. Without knowing their software and how its logically laid out, its impossible to say if the UA is a logical prerequisite for the capability to fix the Spells of the Mark issue, but if you enjoy getting 'very angry' without understanding the core of the problem and the optimal solution trajectories, have at it.
No...I can be plenty angry that they don't talk about the spells of the mark at all on Dev talks
Not only is your comment condescending its not even accurate representation of my argument. They are ignoring it in communications and putting the UA in the focus because thats what the majority wants...
If you think that people who both paid the content to be integrated into the tool AND they subscribe to share with others don't get a solution to integrate their PAID content 7 months after it was released shouldn't be upset then I am not sure what to say.
I'd recommend raising that issue in Feedback, rather than here. I have personal proof that they do pay attention in there, which is absolutely wild for a company like this.
I'd recommend raising that issue in Feedback, rather than here. I have personal proof that they do pay attention in there, which is absolutely wild for a company like this.
This is why I continue to say that the level of customer service is very high. When the VP of the whole decision of the company took time out of his day to respond in forums to user complaints... blew my mind. The level of service any time I made a support claim, and other things as well. I can tell that they are literally going out of their way to make our experience better.
... if the UA is rolled out before they fix Spells of the Mark I am going to be very angry.
Like I said, they might have a very good reason for rolling out the UA before the Spells of the Mark are fixed. The first might be a logical prerequisite for the other. We don't know enough about the internal structure of their code to know. You can always ask them instead of expecting to get 'very angry'. I assume they have a good reason for what they are doing.
... if the UA is rolled out before they fix Spells of the Mark I am going to be very angry.
Like I said, they might have a very good reason for rolling out the UA before the Spells of the Mark are fixed. The first might be a logical prerequisite for the other. We don't know enough about the internal structure of their code to know. You can always ask them instead of expecting to get 'very angry'. I assume they have a good reason for what they are doing.
I have....No answer.
Go check the last 4 dev updates and see if Spells of the Mark is mentioned at all. (Its not)
Sorry, I must have missed where you said that you reached out to Feedback or support instead of just saying that you would be 'very angry' on the forum.
Sorry, I must have missed where you said that you reached out to Feedback or support instead of just saying that you would be 'very angry' on the forum.
... if the UA is rolled out before they fix Spells of the Mark I am going to be very angry.
Like I said, they might have a very good reason for rolling out the UA before the Spells of the Mark are fixed. The first might be a logical prerequisite for the other. We don't know enough about the internal structure of their code to know. You can always ask them instead of expecting to get 'very angry'. I assume they have a good reason for what they are doing.
I have....No answer.
Go check the last 4 dev updates and see if Spells of the Mark is mentioned at all. (Its not)
Ah, I see it. I am surprised that if you sent a question to them directly you were not directly answered like many other people have been. When I read 'Go check the last 4 dev updates' it looked like you were complaining here and expecting an answer in the dev updates.
Ah, I see it. I am surprised that if you sent a question to them directly you were not directly answered like many other people have been. When I read 'Go check the last 4 dev updates' it looked like you were complaining here and expecting an answer in the dev updates.
I have tried about every avenue to get feedback and mostly hear about "its coming" without any suggestion if Spells of the Mark will come first, last, or never.
They say it is related to the backend character sheet work which is fair enough, but there has been absolutely no evidence/statements/comments regarding the UA having to come first. I am not sure why the UA would have to come first as they have never said this is the case, nor have they even stated which one will come first.
So yes the anger would be a combination of:
1. Lack of communication 2. Support of free content over paid content with no good excuse/reason outlined
If you wouldn't be upset about that then I guess good for you?
I just personally don’t give a hoot about Spells of the Mark, but have been anxiously checking to see if CFVs have been implemented yet on an almost daily basis. For me, it has nothing to do with “paid content” vs “free content,” it’s just content I don’t care about verses content I do care about. I imagine we’ll get it all eventually, and probably most of it all at/around the same time. If you get your SotM before I get my CFVs then that’s just the way the cookie crumbles.
1) Development is complicated and slow, with process dependencies not being clear externally. This means I have no idea what must come first without being trained on their codebase. 2) They never give timelines (understandably).
With those two points, no, I'm not angry. I have no reason to believe that they will never fix this bug. They have said they will fix it. They are the experts on their codebase and they know how and when to fix it best. They know what they need to do and they have far more information than we do. It's a pain in the ass to homebrew stuff to cover gaps, but I'm making it work for my characters that have UA and Eberron content. They still have the best integrated character management tool out there.
I just personally don’t give a hoot about Spells of the Mark, but have been anxiously checking to see if CFVs have been implemented yet on an almost daily basis. For me, it has nothing to do with “paid content” vs “free content,” it’s just content I don’t care about verses content I do care about. I imagine we’ll get it all eventually, and probably most of it all at/around the same time. If you get your SotM before I get my CFVs then that’s just the way the cookie crumbles.
No there is a HUGE difference between them.
One is paid content and the other is not. If there is no limitations either way choosing to support free content over those who have paid to have content is just stupid.
For all we know the UA might not even make it into a book and they have to go turn it off anyway....
We know the SotM are here to stay as they are in a published book that people paid for.
1) Development is complicated and slow, with process dependencies not being clear externally. This means I have no idea what must come first without being trained on their codebase. 2) They never give timelines (understandably).
With those two points, no, I'm not angry. I have no reason to believe that they will never fix this bug. They have said they will fix it. They are the experts on their codebase and they know how and when to fix it best. They know what they need to do and they have far more information than we do. It's a pain in the ass to homebrew stuff to cover gaps, but I'm making it work for my characters that have UA and Eberron content. They still have the best integrated character management tool out there.
Being good at something does not mean you can't be held accountable for poor communication.
I don't think that their communication has been poor. They have communicated that they will fix the issue but they don't have a timeline they are willing to publish. They have communicated what they are currently working on implementing right now (and have been doing this for quite some time). It seems like you want them to publish exact timelines, but that's just not something that they can do.
I don't think that their communication has been poor. They have communicated that they will fix the issue but they don't have a timeline they are willing to publish. They have communicated what they are currently working on implementing right now (and have been doing this for quite some time). It seems like you want them to publish exact timelines, but that's just not something that they can do.
No it has been. They sell the book with the following:
"This purchase unlocks the entire contents of the book version for use with D&D Beyond, including the sourcebook in digital format and access to all the sourcebook's options in the searchable listings, character builder, and digital sheet"
They never disclosed ahead of time that the spells of the mark would not work. Nor do they now even with it being a known issue.
Also if they truly cared about making it right for the people who bought the book they would implement a workaround if they have no idea of how long it will take to make the change for paid content.
They have done this before with several items (Artificer infusions before the system was up, adding custom items that mimic'd features from feats like revanant blade, etc...)
So poor communication on not only when to expect a fix but also that there is an item that needs a fix and execution on promises made on the item sold are there.
I just personally don’t give a hoot about Spells of the Mark, but have been anxiously checking to see if CFVs have been implemented yet on an almost daily basis. For me, it has nothing to do with “paid content” vs “free content,” it’s just content I don’t care about verses content I do care about. I imagine we’ll get it all eventually, and probably most of it all at/around the same time. If you get your SotM before I get my CFVs then that’s just the way the cookie crumbles.
No there is a HUGE difference between them.
One is paid content and the other is not. If there is no limitations either way choosing to support free content over those who have paid to have content is just stupid.
For all we know the UA might not even make it into a book and they have to go turn it off anyway....
We know the SotM are here to stay as they are in a published book that people paid for.
For YOU it is a huge difference. I don’t give two [REDACTED] about that difference. I even stated that as purely my opinion when I wrote:
“For me, it has nothing to do with ‘paid content’ vs ‘free content,’ it’s just content I don’t care about verses content I do care about.”
So don’t gorram tell me what I should or should not flipping care about, and I’ll return the favor.
If you want to have the “right” insist that I should care about that, then I might feel I deserve the “right” to tell you that you shouldn’t....
And to be clear, I paid for that book too and I still don’t give a crap about SotM.
For me, the fact that they haven't done the Spells of the Marks isn't a huge deal, just a minor inconvenience. I don't care more about it, and won't. I don't understand how it is different from Warlock added spell lists, but again, I could not care more about this. It's such a minor problem for me, it is barely worth complaining about. Sure, it's paid content. Also, the Class Feature Variants probably takes more work, will likely become paid content as well when a book with the options inside it is published, and will likely be a larger problem converting than just a few racial spell lists.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
You can definitely get 'very angry'. Without knowing their software and how its logically laid out, its impossible to say if the UA is a logical prerequisite for the capability to fix the Spells of the Mark issue, but if you enjoy getting 'very angry' without understanding the core of the problem and the optimal solution trajectories, have at it.
No...I can be plenty angry that they don't talk about the spells of the mark at all on Dev talks
Not only is your comment condescending its not even accurate representation of my argument. They are ignoring it in communications and putting the UA in the focus because thats what the majority wants...
If you think that people who both paid the content to be integrated into the tool AND they subscribe to share with others don't get a solution to integrate their PAID content 7 months after it was released shouldn't be upset then I am not sure what to say.
I'd recommend raising that issue in Feedback, rather than here. I have personal proof that they do pay attention in there, which is absolutely wild for a company like this.
Please do not contact or message me.
This is why I continue to say that the level of customer service is very high. When the VP of the whole decision of the company took time out of his day to respond in forums to user complaints... blew my mind. The level of service any time I made a support claim, and other things as well. I can tell that they are literally going out of their way to make our experience better.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Like I said, they might have a very good reason for rolling out the UA before the Spells of the Mark are fixed. The first might be a logical prerequisite for the other. We don't know enough about the internal structure of their code to know. You can always ask them instead of expecting to get 'very angry'. I assume they have a good reason for what they are doing.
I have....No answer.
Go check the last 4 dev updates and see if Spells of the Mark is mentioned at all. (Its not)
Then *ask* feedback/support about it instead of expecting to be 'very angry' without asking what is the plan.
[REDACTED]
I did with no answer.
Sorry, I must have missed where you said that you reached out to Feedback or support instead of just saying that you would be 'very angry' on the forum.
Sorry but I can't read for you....
Ah, I see it. I am surprised that if you sent a question to them directly you were not directly answered like many other people have been. When I read 'Go check the last 4 dev updates' it looked like you were complaining here and expecting an answer in the dev updates.
I have tried about every avenue to get feedback and mostly hear about "its coming" without any suggestion if Spells of the Mark will come first, last, or never.
They say it is related to the backend character sheet work which is fair enough, but there has been absolutely no evidence/statements/comments regarding the UA having to come first. I am not sure why the UA would have to come first as they have never said this is the case, nor have they even stated which one will come first.
So yes the anger would be a combination of:
1. Lack of communication
2. Support of free content over paid content with no good excuse/reason outlined
If you wouldn't be upset about that then I guess good for you?
I just personally don’t give a hoot about Spells of the Mark, but have been anxiously checking to see if CFVs have been implemented yet on an almost daily basis. For me, it has nothing to do with “paid content” vs “free content,” it’s just content I don’t care about verses content I do care about. I imagine we’ll get it all eventually, and probably most of it all at/around the same time. If you get your SotM before I get my CFVs then that’s just the way the cookie crumbles.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I understand
1) Development is complicated and slow, with process dependencies not being clear externally. This means I have no idea what must come first without being trained on their codebase.
2) They never give timelines (understandably).
With those two points, no, I'm not angry. I have no reason to believe that they will never fix this bug. They have said they will fix it. They are the experts on their codebase and they know how and when to fix it best. They know what they need to do and they have far more information than we do. It's a pain in the ass to homebrew stuff to cover gaps, but I'm making it work for my characters that have UA and Eberron content. They still have the best integrated character management tool out there.
No there is a HUGE difference between them.
One is paid content and the other is not. If there is no limitations either way choosing to support free content over those who have paid to have content is just stupid.
For all we know the UA might not even make it into a book and they have to go turn it off anyway....
We know the SotM are here to stay as they are in a published book that people paid for.
Being good at something does not mean you can't be held accountable for poor communication.
I don't think that their communication has been poor. They have communicated that they will fix the issue but they don't have a timeline they are willing to publish. They have communicated what they are currently working on implementing right now (and have been doing this for quite some time). It seems like you want them to publish exact timelines, but that's just not something that they can do.
No it has been. They sell the book with the following:
"This purchase unlocks the entire contents of the book version for use with D&D Beyond, including the sourcebook in digital format and access to all the sourcebook's options in the searchable listings, character builder, and digital sheet"
They never disclosed ahead of time that the spells of the mark would not work. Nor do they now even with it being a known issue.
Also if they truly cared about making it right for the people who bought the book they would implement a workaround if they have no idea of how long it will take to make the change for paid content.
They have done this before with several items (Artificer infusions before the system was up, adding custom items that mimic'd features from feats like revanant blade, etc...)
So poor communication on not only when to expect a fix but also that there is an item that needs a fix and execution on promises made on the item sold are there.
For YOU it is a huge difference. I don’t give two [REDACTED] about that difference. I even stated that as purely my opinion when I wrote:
“For me, it has nothing to do with ‘paid content’ vs ‘free content,’ it’s just content I don’t care about verses content I do care about.”
So don’t gorram tell me what I should or should not flipping care about, and I’ll return the favor.
If you want to have the “right” insist that I should care about that, then I might feel I deserve the “right” to tell you that you shouldn’t....
And to be clear, I paid for that book too and I still don’t give a crap about SotM.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
For me, the fact that they haven't done the Spells of the Marks isn't a huge deal, just a minor inconvenience. I don't care more about it, and won't. I don't understand how it is different from Warlock added spell lists, but again, I could not care more about this. It's such a minor problem for me, it is barely worth complaining about. Sure, it's paid content. Also, the Class Feature Variants probably takes more work, will likely become paid content as well when a book with the options inside it is published, and will likely be a larger problem converting than just a few racial spell lists.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms