My bladesinger that I've been playing for 2 years has had the new version of the subclass updated on their character sheet which I don't want. Is there an easy way to change it back to the old version, given that errata is supposed to be optional.
Let me clarify: errata are not optional for D&D Beyond. What you do in your home game is entirely up to you, but DDB doesn’t have that choice - as far as I know their licencing contract requires them to use the latest ruleset at all times. Optional content, playtest content, all of that remains available in some form. But rules that get changed officially get changed officially.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The only changes are the number of times per day you can use Bladesong and being able to us a cantrip in place of one of your attacks with Extra Attack. I'm not sure why you'd oppose either of those changes but it's not like you can't keep using the old limits.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If I'm adhering to the old limits but have the new ones on my sheet and not using them, wtf is the point in using D&D Beyond? smh
D&D Beyond supports the official rules. What you’re wanting to do is homebrew. It’s unreasonable to expect DDB to support your homebrew right out of the box with no effort on your part.
Luckily, despite DDB’s lack of tool support for more creative homebrew options, the change you want is pretty simple to enact. Just make a copy of the bladesinger and change it back to the way you want it to be.
It's not unreasonable to have the option to keep the character sheet I've been playing for two years stay unchanged. It's not homebrew; I'm using the exact text in the book I own.
And it's not like D&D Beyond doesn't already have something like this in place; when UA is archived it stays unchanged on a character sheet. They should have implemented a similar option here. Forcing me to go and use their homebrew tools to create the exact thing I bought is ridiculous.
And it's not like D&D Beyond doesn't already have something like this in place; when UA is archived it stays unchanged on a character sheet. They should have implemented a similar option here. Forcing me to go and use their homebrew tools to create the exact thing I bought is ridiculous.
It's not quite the same thing. As far as I know implementing errata is a requirement of the licencing agreement. Ridiculous or not, DDB may not be allowed to do what you want them to do. I get that this annoys you. However, there more sides to this than just your satisfaction as one customer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It's not unreasonable to have the option to keep the character sheet I've been playing for two years stay unchanged. It's not homebrew; I'm using the exact text in the book I own.
And it's not like D&D Beyond doesn't already have something like this in place; when UA is archived it stays unchanged on a character sheet. They should have implemented a similar option here. Forcing me to go and use their homebrew tools to create the exact thing I bought is ridiculous.
The book you own contains out-of-date rules. Using outdated rules is homebrew. That point really isn't debatable. It seems that you don't actually understand what errata are. Wrapping your head around that will probably help you understand what's happening.
I get that it's a bit annoying to have to use the homebrew tools, because DDB's homebrew tools are clunky at best. But, again, it's not unreasonable that someone has to use the homebrew tools to implement homebrew rules.
So this is going to be an agree to disagree thing, right.
Both sides have valid points. OP has had a character for two years, in a campaign that was designed WAY before Tashas was even conceived. I don't blame him for not wanting to change his character. People have attachments to their characters, let's not marginalize that! Normally if we go through D&D Beyond stuff for UA, it gets "Archived" if published and if you had a UA character and the revisions were different, you'd be allowed to keep your UA variant, as long as you didn't remove it. Once you did, it was gone. I personally would have loved to see an archived version of the Bladesinger as it was.
To the above point, errata for D&D Beyond isn't optional. They pay for a license for the direct representation of the content as it is. Typos and all. Once the original classes change, they change. D&D Beyond has to represent the current iteration. It's honestly why I pay for the license, because any updates to content I don't have to worry about finding or hunting through, D&D Beyond maintains that. It's quite nice. However, this isn't for everyone.
Telling the person "they don't understand" in an accusatory tone accomplishes nothing and will never lead to a successful discussion.
Telling the person "they don't understand" in an accusatory tone accomplishes nothing and will never lead to a successful discussion.
I don't believe anything about my tone could be described as "accusatory." It's quite clear that the OP doesn't understand what errata are. Errata are updates to the official rules that deprecate older versions of the text they change. The originally-published bladesinger is no longer official. This update is not an optional feature. The OP has expressed the latter belief, and that belief lies at the heart of their complaint. All I'm trying to do is to explain to them that that belief is incorrect. I feel I've been very polite and non-confrontational.
If you're playing in a way that is contrary to the official rules, that is, by definition, homebrew. It's important that the OP understand that errata change what the official rules are.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My bladesinger that I've been playing for 2 years has had the new version of the subclass updated on their character sheet which I don't want. Is there an easy way to change it back to the old version, given that errata is supposed to be optional.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/8760-official-wizards-of-the-coast-errata
Errata are not optional.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Errata is 100% optional: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1247243375029268480
"As always, you are under no obligation to apply errata to your D&D game."
D&D Beyond shouldn't apply errata to a two-year-old character sheet without giving the option to not use it.
Let me clarify: errata are not optional for D&D Beyond. What you do in your home game is entirely up to you, but DDB doesn’t have that choice - as far as I know their licencing contract requires them to use the latest ruleset at all times. Optional content, playtest content, all of that remains available in some form. But rules that get changed officially get changed officially.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The only changes are the number of times per day you can use Bladesong and being able to us a cantrip in place of one of your attacks with Extra Attack. I'm not sure why you'd oppose either of those changes but it's not like you can't keep using the old limits.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
That's what I'm asking; is there a simple way to use the old limits.
No. You would either need an older, archived version of the subclass, or need to homebrew it back to the original version.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Or just adhere to the old limits without changing the sheet.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If I'm adhering to the old limits but have the new ones on my sheet and not using them, wtf is the point in using D&D Beyond? smh
D&D Beyond supports the official rules. What you’re wanting to do is homebrew. It’s unreasonable to expect DDB to support your homebrew right out of the box with no effort on your part.
Luckily, despite DDB’s lack of tool support for more creative homebrew options, the change you want is pretty simple to enact. Just make a copy of the bladesinger and change it back to the way you want it to be.
It's not unreasonable to have the option to keep the character sheet I've been playing for two years stay unchanged. It's not homebrew; I'm using the exact text in the book I own.
And it's not like D&D Beyond doesn't already have something like this in place; when UA is archived it stays unchanged on a character sheet. They should have implemented a similar option here. Forcing me to go and use their homebrew tools to create the exact thing I bought is ridiculous.
It's not quite the same thing. As far as I know implementing errata is a requirement of the licencing agreement. Ridiculous or not, DDB may not be allowed to do what you want them to do. I get that this annoys you. However, there more sides to this than just your satisfaction as one customer.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The best bet is to always download a PDF of your character sheet at each level. Then you always have a backup of your PC's current abilities.
The book you own contains out-of-date rules. Using outdated rules is homebrew. That point really isn't debatable. It seems that you don't actually understand what errata are. Wrapping your head around that will probably help you understand what's happening.
I get that it's a bit annoying to have to use the homebrew tools, because DDB's homebrew tools are clunky at best. But, again, it's not unreasonable that someone has to use the homebrew tools to implement homebrew rules.
So this is going to be an agree to disagree thing, right.
Both sides have valid points. OP has had a character for two years, in a campaign that was designed WAY before Tashas was even conceived. I don't blame him for not wanting to change his character. People have attachments to their characters, let's not marginalize that! Normally if we go through D&D Beyond stuff for UA, it gets "Archived" if published and if you had a UA character and the revisions were different, you'd be allowed to keep your UA variant, as long as you didn't remove it. Once you did, it was gone. I personally would have loved to see an archived version of the Bladesinger as it was.
To the above point, errata for D&D Beyond isn't optional. They pay for a license for the direct representation of the content as it is. Typos and all. Once the original classes change, they change. D&D Beyond has to represent the current iteration. It's honestly why I pay for the license, because any updates to content I don't have to worry about finding or hunting through, D&D Beyond maintains that. It's quite nice. However, this isn't for everyone.
Telling the person "they don't understand" in an accusatory tone accomplishes nothing and will never lead to a successful discussion.
I don't believe anything about my tone could be described as "accusatory." It's quite clear that the OP doesn't understand what errata are. Errata are updates to the official rules that deprecate older versions of the text they change. The originally-published bladesinger is no longer official. This update is not an optional feature. The OP has expressed the latter belief, and that belief lies at the heart of their complaint. All I'm trying to do is to explain to them that that belief is incorrect. I feel I've been very polite and non-confrontational.
If you're playing in a way that is contrary to the official rules, that is, by definition, homebrew. It's important that the OP understand that errata change what the official rules are.