Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
With pact boons now being invocations, can I pick one of them when taking the feat Eldritch Adept?
I tried to do that with one of my characters and the pacts don't show up as options. Is it not something you can do? Is it because I didn't buy the 2024 player's handbook? Or is it a mistake/oversight by dndbeyond?
The rules allow it provided it doesn't have a requirement. Because Eldritch Invocations were moved to 1st level (down from 2nd), many invocations that previously had no requirements in 2014 now require Warlock level 2 and are no longer eligible for the feat. The Pact invocations don't have a requirement though, so they're fair game. I don't know if the DDB character creator currently allows it (there's a few outstanding bugs involving the mixing of 2014 and 2024 features) but I highly doubt you have access to the invocations from the 2024 PHB without having bought it.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I can't say for certain how they intend for it to work, but I just checked by making a quick bard (I do have the 2024 stuff purchased) and Eldritch Adept still only shows 2014 Invocations (include the 2014 versions of ones that have been updated). Fighting Initiate currently works the same way also, so they haven't updated them to include the new stuff and I don't know if they plan to.
Is there a way to make a customer feat to give the invocation?
Closest you could do would be a feat which grants options that replicate the effects of the invocations. Might be doable.
There is still no word from the dnd beyond team about fixing this bug. I prefer making my characters both on paper and in dnd beyond because it helps me track information but I cannot make the character in the app until they fix this.
I don't think it's intended that you use this 2014 feat with the new invocations.
You mean in the app? Or now allowed per the rules?
For example, Pact of the Blade doesn't have any prerequisites.
Just for the rules.
This is one of the cases in using old material where I think people should just wait and see what happen some of the old feats don't seem to mesh well with the current rules.
Trying to mix and match the two rule sets is messy. Don't expect DDB to handle it well. It still has missing functionality for very straightforward 2014 RAW features. You shouldn't expect them to have everything in 2024 rules, let alone their odd interactions set in place.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I disagree, simply because they stated, emphatically I believe, that the 5.5e rules are backward compatible.
And yet, there are incompatibilities because features or mechanics changed between editions so older references no longer function or are clearly intended to function differently.
Some things will be obvious updates, like changing a reference of level 1+ spells known to spells prepared.
Others are redundant, like the Wood Elf Magic feat from Xanathar's.
I recall something that was completely incompatible, but it was a while ago and I no longer remember.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
They also stated emphatically that backwards compatible doesn't mean there won't be some conflicts between the rules or other friction points and as such you should carefully decide how you mix the rules.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
But Xanathar's is not mixing rules. Those rules are still valid based as they aren't 5e rules, but rules that are considered as both editions.
Hence why they and Tasha's features aren't marked legacy (except for the artificer class as of the release of the new Eberron source book).
I don't think it's unfair to expect things to work when they were advertised as being able to work. If they slapped 'legacy' on all that content and came out with replacements in the phb like they did for a lot of content, or even removed it by marking legacy and putting no replacement (I know they did that for some content, but I'm drawing a blank on it), that would certainly be frustrating, but also fair game. They didnt do that.
Finally, if anything should work, its xanathars and Tasha's. Those are THE supplemental source materials. If stuff from Fizbans or something similar didn't work properly, I'd be more inclined to go, oh ok. Fair enough this semi obscure content didn't come over correctly. But these 2 source books are just outside of core for dnd now.
Honestly, it hits like theyre going, its still content you need to pay extra for because we aren't including updated versions in the phb, but also we aren't going to do any work so it functions to get that extra money now.
Yeah, these problems have been there for years. At this point I'm pretty sure they're not working on them all. They just don't care.
<Insert man with hand on shoulder meme>
There are a lot of things that either don't work, don't work as advertised, or are just objectively bad choices compared to the alternatives. "Unfair" doesn't matter. If something is too OP, it will get nerfed in an errata. If something is too weak, it will get updated when it sells more product.
Using anything from before the 2024 PHB with the 2024+ content is mixing rules.
They won't be marked legacy until the content is updated.
If they marked it legacy, it likely would have hurt sales. If they removed it from the marketplace, they definitely couldn't sell anymore. Instead, they replaced "Legacy" with "5e", which doesn't have the same stigma as "Legacy". It is now less obvious that you are buying potentially outdated content. This is a deliberate change in the marketing for these older products.
Why would you expect older sourcebooks (Tasha's and Xanathar's) to be more compatible with the current edition than the newest sourcebook of the previous edition (Fizban)?
The design of 5e D&D changed over time since the initial launch in 2014 and you can see some of what 2024 was bringing in the more recent products. The newer books are going to naturally fit with newer implementation than older books, because they already incorporated some of the changes and may have been written with the future design language in mind.
That likely wasn't possible for Tasha's or Xanathar's.
Yes. It's exactly that. They will try to get you to pay for content as many times as they think they can. Maybe +1. And a subscription. There's a digital exclusive, didn't you hear?
If you have content that you are struggling to make work, we're here to help you work through it though.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
If it worked, it would only work for the pacts, armor of shadows and the advantage on concentration checks one. Given that the pacts are class identifying invocations and when 2014 was around weren't even invocations, I am not sure it is intended. It is a completely different set of invocations that it works on now which have a different impact. But the earliest you can take it is at 4th level not 1st with the right race. So maybe it would work as is. The point is, there are enough changes that it is hard to know if it should work as is.
I hope they rewrite it and the sorcerer one soon they need changes. Personally I'd like both to have a repeatable tag but only if the feat is picked up with a ability score improvement when taken from either warlock/sorcerer level ups. So most people are limited to one, but if you take it with your level 4 and 8 warlock level up you could take it twice. Lets the classes they are form double down on the feature.
Xanathar's and Tasha's were designed around the core of 5e well before they'd even started working on 5.5e, the rules changes in 5.5e were never once considered when developing those books, and the 5.5e rules weren't designed to accommodate those books specifically. They're no more special than any adventure module or other supplement for 5e.
These are mutually exclusive. It is either current rules or legacy rules, not both, and certainly not neither (if you catch the reference).
If I sold you wine and you drank it and it was ice tea, youd just be like, thats not fair, but oh, unfair doesn't matter, so I guess we're good? Saying its one thing to sell it, and it turns out to be another thing, is kind of a problem. This might not be as egregious as ice tea instead of wine (or maybe more so since the rule books are way more than any bottle of wine I'm buying), but it is in the same category of not what was agreed to.
Literally for the reason I said and you quoted.
And the changes in dnd *were* Tasha's and Xanathar's. Those are the books that changed how things worked. You can't say things changed so those couldn't be implemented when those things *were* the changes you're talking about.
Whats wrong with metamagic adept? I'm using it on a character right now and it seems to be working fine. But yeah, as it is eldritch adept got really weird. 2 *clean* options that are both kind of lack luster. Free mage armor might be worth it, but advantage on concentration saves youre better off with warcaster. Then there's the previous pacts that might not be intended, but hey, wotc decided those now take one of your invocation slots, so they're fair game to me. Although only tome seems worth it. Closely reading it, it sounds like every short rest you can swap all the chosen spells out with the tome. Never played a warlock so not sure thats intended, but it reads that way.