I'm not carrying the loot yet it's being added to my carry weight so i'm listed as heavily encumbered with impacted movement speed and the like when I'm not the one carrying it. Can't see an option to move the item to a bag of holding either so items in bag of holding also get added to my weight when they shouldn't be.
The current workaround is to click the equipment item - click Customise in the pop-out menu - change its weight to 0 and change the name by adding a prefix like BoH or Mount or an emoji or whatever so that it sorts it in the list so you can easily see contents of your bag or mount of whatever.
The current workaround is to click the equipment item - click Customise in the pop-out menu - change its weight to 0 and change the name by adding a prefix like BoH or Mount or an emoji or whatever so that it sorts it in the list so you can easily see contents of your bag or mount of whatever.
Yeah the trouble is these items need to have weight so I can see all the weight of everything since my mount and all the loot is going on a raft so if the items has it's weight as 0 I don't have the right values for making sure we don't overload the canoes xD but if I leave the weight on I'm wrongly over encumbered when I'm not. Causes big issues.
I was looking for how to do this too. Saddle bags on the horse is on my character which is weird. Emmber's solution will work for me at the moment on land, but would help if this functionality could be added at some point.
+Edit.
Just tried updating a character sheet with the work around. Works fine for unique items. But for say putting a Quiver on a horse and a Quiver on my character and splitting up the arrows it became a little weird. Customising one Quiver and then adding another converts the customised one back into a normal one and updates the count. :(
The current workaround is to click the equipment item - click Customise in the pop-out menu - change its weight to 0 and change the name by adding a prefix like BoH or Mount or an emoji or whatever so that it sorts it in the list so you can easily see contents of your bag or mount of whatever.
Yeah the trouble is these items need to have weight so I can see all the weight of everything since my mount and all the loot is going on a raft so if the items has it's weight as 0 I don't have the right values for making sure we don't overload the canoes xD but if I leave the weight on I'm wrongly over encumbered when I'm not. Causes big issues.
You can try creating a second character and name it Bag of Holding, Horse, or something. It does use up a character sheet slot though, so if you are not a subscriber but are in multiple campaigns, that might be an issue.
Then you'll need to note down the weights elsewhere. There's not really any alternative.
The problem is there should be. This has been brought up over and over for years but DnD Beyond won’t work on it. There are apps that will sort them for you or let you use sub-inventories so it’s not a stretch to think that DnD Beyond couldn’t have had one out by now except they don’t want to.
They have been working on it, but have been delayed as priorities change -- new content coming out, possibly having to hold for the new character sheet framework, etc. Currently it's on the roadmap for next quarter. Now, that's definitely no guarantee that it'll come out next quarter, but to say they aren't working on it is untrue.
They have been working on it, but have been delayed as priorities change -- new content coming out, possibly having to hold for the new character sheet framework, etc. Currently it's on the roadmap for next quarter. Now, that's definitely no guarantee that it'll come out next quarter, but to say they aren't working on it is untrue.
I saw a post from three years ago asking about this issue. They’ve had ample time to show at least some progress towards a workable solution by now.
They have been working on it, but have been delayed as priorities change -- new content coming out, possibly having to hold for the new character sheet framework, etc. Currently it's on the roadmap for next quarter. Now, that's definitely no guarantee that it'll come out next quarter, but to say they aren't working on it is untrue.
I saw a post from three years ago asking about this issue. They’ve had ample time to show at least some progress towards a workable solution by now.
“Ample time” by your demanding, entitled sense of things only. Software development is a world of shifting priorities and a matter of resource allocation to the things that are most demanding or critical. With infinite resources, sure, every little nit-picky thing could get worked on at the same time but that’s just not how it is. While it seems like a small thing to you, depending on the framework they are using and how it’s implemented, such a change could actually demand a great deal of work which you would never be privy to. That it is on the roadmap for the platform means they are aware of the demand, intended to do it, but need to find the time where allocation of resources can be made for the work, which may be a great deal more complicated than you think it is. It would be a lot better to be respectful of this reality and the work people are doing to provide you with a service than to berate them because some things aren’t developed fast enough for your liking.
They have been working on it, but have been delayed as priorities change -- new content coming out, possibly having to hold for the new character sheet framework, etc. Currently it's on the roadmap for next quarter. Now, that's definitely no guarantee that it'll come out next quarter, but to say they aren't working on it is untrue.
I saw a post from three years ago asking about this issue. They’ve had ample time to show at least some progress towards a workable solution by now.
“Ample time” by your demanding, entitled sense of things only. Software development is a world of shifting priorities and a matter of resource allocation to the things that are most demanding or critical. With infinite resources, sure, every little nit-picky thing could get worked on at the same time but that’s just not how it is. While it seems like a small thing to you, depending on the framework they are using and how it’s implemented, such a change could actually demand a great deal of work which you would never be privy to. That it is on the roadmap for the platform means they are aware of the demand, intended to do it, but need to find the time where allocation of resources can be made for the work, which may be a great deal more complicated than you think it is. It would be a lot better to be respectful of this reality and the work people are doing to provide you with a service than to berate them because some things aren’t developed fast enough for your liking.
I’m aware of issues in the programming world, don’t presume that you know everything about every either else you’ll be guilty of what you preach. I just find it hard to believe that a paid for service can’t find the time or resources to implement some of the same things that free smart phone apps have had in practice for a long time now. Especially when this much time has passed and the level of demand from the community has been consistent.
I find it hard to believe someone who is “aware of issues in the programming world” finds it hard to believe a developer could be strapped for resources that requires prioritizing big ticket items over QoL items. How big of a company, how big of a team, are you assuming DDB is? How many devs does Fandom have employed that are strictly allocated to DDB? I know with the rather complex platform I work on, we have a team of 10 and are always slammed with having to prioritize the big ticket items over the smaller things we’d like to do. Just like everyone else. It would just plain be more polite to acknowledge the hard work the team is doing than to complain in one of the most entitled ways possible about not having something when you don’t know what the real world aspects are that determine the actions the devs take. It’s on the roadmap. It will happen when they can make it happen. Being polite about that would be of more benefit.
It’s actually pretty cool of them to publish their roadmap like this in addition to the weekly Dev Update stream. Very few developers are this transparent about their work and DDB deserves a lot more credit for this than they get.
I think that the best work around now is to use the "Weight Override" feature - not sure when it was implemented.
I can make a negative weight adjustment equal to the gear weight carried on the mount. For example - rope & saddle weigh 35 lb. Under the mount (could be any container)'s name \ Item Description \ Customize \ Weight Override ... Insert -35 to it.
Other options in the Customize panel = Cost override, Name & Notes...
2022 now - Mounts (familiars etc.) all still need inventory, and attunement slots.
Summoned Mounts need a way to choose which form they take (that's still associated with the inventory, and attuned items) Familiar need this also (and some like the Imp need a why to reflect which form they are in while still being an Imp) Items placed into eithers inventory be available for attunement, & equip to the creature
But this does get into a much deeper issue: DM tools - for proper character sheets DM's need tools that give them fine control over which rules they are using, magical resizing armor may make barding unnecessary in your game, or even with magical resizing armor - it might still be necessary.
There really needs to be a Q&A section for DM's on campaigns on every optional (yep that's work, more work then developing a PC video game? I don't actually know, but doesn't seem like it - it's a ton of if / than statements.)
Barding - needs to be an option box on every armor? only on non-magical armor? answer to that depends on the DM (with the players input one would hope), and the campaign.
This is just kicking unfinished work further down the road - these are core rules, not (as has been mentioned by one person) a quality of life thing, in some cases it's a Class Feature - that's not been properly implemented for the character sheet. It's effecting Cavaliers, Paladins, every class with a familiar, and every PC that wants to use a mount for combat, or storage while traveling. They the ability to carry gear, attune items, and are extremely squishy without those abilities.
Homebrew should not have to be used as a work around for unfinished core features.
In short - D&D Beyond is awesome - great site! But it's suffering for a lack of follow through. We're talking basic core rules that aren't usable on the character sheets without work arounds - they were just never implemented.
You can add particular types of Mounts to inventory now that will act as Containers. Try adding a Riding Horse to your inventory. Then you can add/move items to it. So long as you don't have that container-mount Equipped, it won't count towards your total carry weight. If you have an exotic mount (one of my characters has a Displacer Beast), you can Customize a standard container-mount to change the name, weight, and carrying capacity.
So that's inventory covered. For the creature itself, you can add it to the Extras tab. From there, you can adjust the Armor Class and note the reason (e.g. chainmail barding.)
There's a major system overhaul in progress at this time, which will make it more possible for DDB to implement the direct character sheet features you're wanting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
You can add particular types of Mounts to inventory now that will act as Containers. Try adding a Riding Horse to your inventory. Then you can add/move items to it. So long as you don't have that container-mount Equipped, it won't count towards your total carry weight. If you have an exotic mount (one of my characters has a Displacer Beast), you can Customize a standard container-mount to change the name, weight, and carrying capacity.
So that's inventory covered. For the creature itself, you can add it to the Extras tab. From there, you can adjust the Armor Class and note the reason (e.g. chainmail barding.)
There's a major system overhaul in progress at this time, which will make it more possible for DDB to implement the direct character sheet features you're wanting.
Unless I'm doing something wrong, this doesn't work, I've made a mount container but putting things in and out of it makes no difference to the weight I'm carrying
I'm not carrying the loot yet it's being added to my carry weight so i'm listed as heavily encumbered with impacted movement speed and the like when I'm not the one carrying it. Can't see an option to move the item to a bag of holding either so items in bag of holding also get added to my weight when they shouldn't be.
There is no way to do that yet.
The current workaround is to click the equipment item - click Customise in the pop-out menu - change its weight to 0 and change the name by adding a prefix like BoH or Mount or an emoji or whatever so that it sorts it in the list so you can easily see contents of your bag or mount of whatever.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Yeah the trouble is these items need to have weight so I can see all the weight of everything since my mount and all the loot is going on a raft so if the items has it's weight as 0 I don't have the right values for making sure we don't overload the canoes xD but if I leave the weight on I'm wrongly over encumbered when I'm not. Causes big issues.
Then you'll need to note down the weights elsewhere. There's not really any alternative.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I was looking for how to do this too. Saddle bags on the horse is on my character which is weird. Emmber's solution will work for me at the moment on land, but would help if this functionality could be added at some point.
+Edit.
Just tried updating a character sheet with the work around. Works fine for unique items. But for say putting a Quiver on a horse and a Quiver on my character and splitting up the arrows it became a little weird. Customising one Quiver and then adding another converts the customised one back into a normal one and updates the count. :(
You can try creating a second character and name it Bag of Holding, Horse, or something. It does use up a character sheet slot though, so if you are not a subscriber but are in multiple campaigns, that might be an issue.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
The problem is there should be. This has been brought up over and over for years but DnD Beyond won’t work on it. There are apps that will sort them for you or let you use sub-inventories so it’s not a stretch to think that DnD Beyond couldn’t have had one out by now except they don’t want to.
They have been working on it, but have been delayed as priorities change -- new content coming out, possibly having to hold for the new character sheet framework, etc. Currently it's on the roadmap for next quarter. Now, that's definitely no guarantee that it'll come out next quarter, but to say they aren't working on it is untrue.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
I saw a post from three years ago asking about this issue. They’ve had ample time to show at least some progress towards a workable solution by now.
“Ample time” by your demanding, entitled sense of things only. Software development is a world of shifting priorities and a matter of resource allocation to the things that are most demanding or critical. With infinite resources, sure, every little nit-picky thing could get worked on at the same time but that’s just not how it is. While it seems like a small thing to you, depending on the framework they are using and how it’s implemented, such a change could actually demand a great deal of work which you would never be privy to. That it is on the roadmap for the platform means they are aware of the demand, intended to do it, but need to find the time where allocation of resources can be made for the work, which may be a great deal more complicated than you think it is. It would be a lot better to be respectful of this reality and the work people are doing to provide you with a service than to berate them because some things aren’t developed fast enough for your liking.
I’m aware of issues in the programming world, don’t presume that you know everything about every either else you’ll be guilty of what you preach. I just find it hard to believe that a paid for service can’t find the time or resources to implement some of the same things that free smart phone apps have had in practice for a long time now. Especially when this much time has passed and the level of demand from the community has been consistent.
I find it hard to believe someone who is “aware of issues in the programming world” finds it hard to believe a developer could be strapped for resources that requires prioritizing big ticket items over QoL items. How big of a company, how big of a team, are you assuming DDB is? How many devs does Fandom have employed that are strictly allocated to DDB? I know with the rather complex platform I work on, we have a team of 10 and are always slammed with having to prioritize the big ticket items over the smaller things we’d like to do. Just like everyone else. It would just plain be more polite to acknowledge the hard work the team is doing than to complain in one of the most entitled ways possible about not having something when you don’t know what the real world aspects are that determine the actions the devs take. It’s on the roadmap. It will happen when they can make it happen. Being polite about that would be of more benefit.
It’s actually pretty cool of them to publish their roadmap like this in addition to the weekly Dev Update stream. Very few developers are this transparent about their work and DDB deserves a lot more credit for this than they get.
I think that the best work around now is to use the "Weight Override" feature - not sure when it was implemented.
I can make a negative weight adjustment equal to the gear weight carried on the mount. For example - rope & saddle weigh 35 lb. Under the mount (could be any container)'s name \ Item Description \ Customize \ Weight Override ... Insert -35 to it.
Other options in the Customize panel = Cost override, Name & Notes...
2022 now - Mounts (familiars etc.) all still need inventory, and attunement slots.
Summoned Mounts need a way to choose which form they take (that's still associated with the inventory, and attuned items)
Familiar need this also (and some like the Imp need a why to reflect which form they are in while still being an Imp)
Items placed into eithers inventory be available for attunement, & equip to the creature
But this does get into a much deeper issue: DM tools - for proper character sheets DM's need tools that give them fine control over which rules they are using, magical resizing armor may make barding unnecessary in your game, or even with magical resizing armor - it might still be necessary.
There really needs to be a Q&A section for DM's on campaigns on every optional (yep that's work, more work then developing a PC video game? I don't actually know, but doesn't seem like it - it's a ton of if / than statements.)
Barding - needs to be an option box on every armor? only on non-magical armor? answer to that depends on the DM (with the players input one would hope), and the campaign.
This is just kicking unfinished work further down the road - these are core rules, not (as has been mentioned by one person) a quality of life thing, in some cases it's a Class Feature - that's not been properly implemented for the character sheet. It's effecting Cavaliers, Paladins, every class with a familiar, and every PC that wants to use a mount for combat, or storage while traveling. They the ability to carry gear, attune items, and are extremely squishy without those abilities.
Homebrew should not have to be used as a work around for unfinished core features.
In short - D&D Beyond is awesome - great site! But it's suffering for a lack of follow through. We're talking basic core rules that aren't usable on the character sheets without work arounds - they were just never implemented.
You can add particular types of Mounts to inventory now that will act as Containers. Try adding a Riding Horse to your inventory. Then you can add/move items to it. So long as you don't have that container-mount Equipped, it won't count towards your total carry weight. If you have an exotic mount (one of my characters has a Displacer Beast), you can Customize a standard container-mount to change the name, weight, and carrying capacity.
So that's inventory covered. For the creature itself, you can add it to the Extras tab. From there, you can adjust the Armor Class and note the reason (e.g. chainmail barding.)
There's a major system overhaul in progress at this time, which will make it more possible for DDB to implement the direct character sheet features you're wanting.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
Unless I'm doing something wrong, this doesn't work, I've made a mount container but putting things in and out of it makes no difference to the weight I'm carrying
Make sure you haven't Equipped the mount container. (Unless you're carrying the horse over your shoulder everywhere...)
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)