D&D 5E D&D Beyond Announces Combat Tracker

"We're happy to announce the Alpha release of the Combat Tracker tool to subscribers of D&D Beyond! Try it out in your D&D games and your feedback will be used to make this the best it can be!"

D&D Beyond has just announced the alpha development version of a combat tracker. You can track monsters, initiative, and access quick reference information. This functionality is similar to that offered by Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds.

You can read more about the combat tracker here. The Alpha version is available to DDB subscribers.

"We have been using the Combat Tracker in our home games for a few weeks, and although it is certainly not in a finished state yet, we experienced enough value that we have decided to go ahead and release it now - even in its unfinished state - to both 1) let subscribers gain some of that value and 2) get feedback as early as possible.

Please keep in mind that this is not a finished product, and we invite subscribers to help us make it the best it can be!

Who can use the Combat Tracker?

All D&D Beyond Subscribers. The Combat Tracker is in full active development right now. We will be allowing early access to NEW Combat Tracker features to our Subscribers first, to prove out concepts and new functionality. We took the same approach with the Alpha version of the Encounter Builder with much success. This delivery method allows us to digest feedback in bite sized chunks and perform testing to figure out the best user experience possible.

What is a Development Alpha?

The Development Alpha of the Combat Tracker allows us to test features and user experience.

• Functional but expecting a lot of bugs
  • Should be no core functionality bugs
• Core functionality could change with feedback
• Functionality could appear or disappear at any time

We will be working on validating bug reports and cleaning up the Combat Tracker. Once these tasks have been completed we will release to Beta, essentially meaning the Combat Tracker tool is complete."

 

[Sacrosanct]

Again, as someone who proclaims themselves with an "educational background in linguistics ", it strikes me really odd that you're arguing that unless there are those added sections that you put in, something cannot be accepted as true as a definition. Now I"m really curious as to what your educational background in linguistics is, because this is twice now you're arguing the absurd. It's not only beyond hyperbolic, but it's factually wrong. Definitions are not presented that way either.

For example, jumping:

1. push oneself off a surface and into the air by using the muscles in one's legs and feet.

Your arguing that unless it says "push only oneself off a surface and into the air by only using the muscles in one's legs and feet, so help you god. ", then it's not really an accepted definition of jumping. Come on now.

Also, I never threw other testers under the bus. I'm pointing out games that had really poor quality testing done. That's a fact. It doesn't mean they didn't do any testing. It doesn't mean the team were bad people. It means the testing was inadequate. At the very base of what QA testing is, testing signoff can not be done if there are high severity defects open. That's true regardless of methodology or if you're using waterfall, Agile, etc.

And it's not because I'm refusing to accept other industries have different standards. There's one standard. I've provided numerous links as to what that standard is. So far, you've provided ZERO links that shows the definitions are different. Sure, they are using different standards. But the are not using the industry standard, which is the point.

So if you want to continue, please cite evidence supporting your position without resorting to absurd hyperbole or veiled attacks on my character.

 

[atanakar]

With all the long posts some of you are publishing, all day long, I wonder how much actual programming you get done...

( I'm retired )

 

[HarbingerX]

3) Some sort of mini-note capability next to each combatant. I do mostly TotM and want to be able to make quick notes like 'this monster is engaged with this character'.

That marriage isn't going to last long...

 

[HarbingerX]

First time I've used ENWorld's ignore feature. Works quite well, though it would be nice if other people stop replying.

 

[Oofta]

I don't see the combat tracker being useful to me just yet as I don't use the encounter builder at the table. At first glance it seemed ok with the few features it has:

1. Integration to encounter builder
2. Initiative order tracker
3. hit point tracker
4. cross reference to monster stat block

Some things it needs:

• Character sheet integration. Perhaps it could show the character sheet as a stat block as well.
• Simple condition tracking.
• Death save roll tracking.

Thanks for the updates. For me the tool isn't going to work until I can integrate it into my campaign notes and encounter plans. The other things you mention are handy, but also easy to track on a piece of paper/index cards/whiteboard. But hints on how to track combat is a whole other topic.

So my (complete) wish list would include way more than what I expect them to deliver any time soon. It's a great reference tool and I make heavy use of the filtering/PC building. But it's still a long way from being easier than jotting notes down in a text document. Maybe someday.

 

[HarbingerX]

Thanks for the updates. For me the tool isn't going to work until I can integrate it into my campaign notes and encounter plans. The other things you mention are handy, but also easy to track on a piece of paper/index cards/whiteboard. But hints on how to track combat is a whole other topic.

So my (complete) wish list would include way more than what I expect them to deliver any time soon. It's a great reference tool and I make heavy use of the filtering/PC building. But it's still a long way from being easier than jotting notes down in a text document. Maybe someday.

Yeah, being able to keep campaign notes and annotating content are two big ones for me. I've looked at other campaign tracking online tools and they all have limitations as well. So for now I'm using OneNote with the SRD loaded.

 

[Panda-s1]

Again, as someone who proclaims themselves with an "educational background in linguistics ", it strikes me really odd that you're arguing that unless there are those added sections that you put in, something cannot be accepted as true as a definition. Now I"m really curious as to what your educational background in linguistics is, because this is twice now you're arguing the absurd. It's not only beyond hyperbolic, but it's factually wrong. Definitions are not presented that way either.

For example, jumping:

1. push oneself off a surface and into the air by using the muscles in one's legs and feet.

Your arguing that unless it says "push only oneself off a surface and into the air by only using the muscles in one's legs and feet, so help you god. ", then it's not really an accepted definition of jumping. Come on now.

I'm arguing that trying to point at definitions as being "correct" and prove your point is a pretty bad argument. if an alpha test doesn't meet some strict definition given by a website then that doesn't meant it's not an alpha test.

if, as you said, people use a word "incorrectly", the people at Merriam-Webster don't need to be informed, they will know, it's literally their job to pay attention to how people use language and decide how their dictionary defines words and if they need to be changed. people have constantly complained that singular "they" is incorrect, but this last year they updated the definition of "they" to include various references to singular entities. there's a lot of examples of this, and merriam-webster talks about this all the time.

Also, I never threw other testers under the bus. I'm pointing out games that had really poor quality testing done. That's a fact. It doesn't mean they didn't do any testing. It doesn't mean the team were bad people. It means the testing was inadequate. At the very base of what QA testing is, testing signoff can not be done if there are high severity defects open. That's true regardless of methodology or if you're using waterfall, Agile, etc.

and I'm saying it's not bad testing, it's poor decisions by developers that lead to shoddy releases. it's incredibly absurd to insinuate testers played a build filled with bugs and somehow missed all of them and didn't report them. I'm saying they absolutely found those bugs, and absolutely reported them, but they can't fix them, and the people who could fix them decided not to.

And it's not because I'm refusing to accept other industries have different standards. There's one standard. I've provided numerous links as to what that standard is. So far, you've provided ZERO links that shows the definitions are different. Sure, they are using different standards. But the are not using the industry standard, which is the point.

So if you want to continue, please cite evidence supporting your position without resorting to absurd hyperbole or veiled attacks on my character.

the links you gave don't set anything in stone, which is why I felt like making fun of them. a single open alpha release doesn't really mean anything.

anyway I should stop, I'm sure I had at least one person ignore me at this point. I made my case, and if you're not willing to accept the idea that I might know at least a little more about this language thing than you then that's your problem.

btw I did major in linguistics, saying you took Korean in college as a comparison is a bit quaint (also, I also took a quarter of Korean in college and lived around Korean speakers most of my young life so ¯\_____(ツ)_____/¯ )

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'll tell you what an alpha test isn't. It isn't where you put a feature on your production server and open it up to your entire user base. They can call this alpha, but it's a beta test by any definition I've ever heard.

As far as breaking the encounter builder goes... well, as you say, the encounter builder is itself in beta test, so it isn't the same thing as breaking something that's been "officially" released.

It’s only open to subscribers, not the entire user base.

If they're done testing, then why are they calling this a "test?"

A different stage of testing. This seems disengenuous. Surely you know about states of testing.

any time a build gets deployed, it’s called a release. And no one is saying there wouldn’t be major bugs in an alpha. But again, even by their own words, the alpha shouldn’t have had an impact to core functionality. And when code has been out there for several months to the general public, it is core functionality.

nope. The core functionality is only those things not in beta.

Exactly. Beta is a pilot. There will be no new functionality in beta. It’s only purpose is to identify minor issues that may come up, as well as user interface feedback. It is, for all intents and purposes, finished code. Especially if it’s left out there for months (because normal betas only last a couple weeks)

Well, no. The terms of a beta are determined by the company making the product. We in fact knew from day one that features would be added based on beta test feedback. And that isn’t all that strange in digital entertainment.

But even if your spuriously prescriptivist definitional arguments were correct (and they aren’t. Language doesn’t work that way. Period.), so the hell what? You mad that they’re using “beta” and “alpha” “incorrectly”? Really!?

That’s not how language works, sorry. Definitions don’t change just because a few people use them incorrectly. This isn’t an evolution of natural language. It’s just people talking about things they don’t know about. That’s it.

That is literally how definitions change. Or more commonly, how words gain new definitions, in addition to older definitions. Others have provided evidence, the gaming industry runs long term semi-open tests where new features are a possibility or where the functionality is throttled at first and features are revealed to the beta players one at a time. Every MMO I’ve played regularly in the last 20 year has entire servers that are literally just open beta tests, and sometimes alpha testing occurs there as well if they think they can get useful data early with a large scale stress test. These servers are open to literally everyone who plays the game.

Perhaps you should consider that “software” isn’t actually an industry, and that digital entertainment is a different industry from yours, and has different industry jargon and methodologies, and that sub industries of digital entertainment also differ from each other in jargon and methodology.

Thanks for the updates. For me the tool isn't going to work until I can integrate it into my campaign notes and encounter plans. The other things you mention are handy, but also easy to track on a piece of paper/index cards/whiteboard. But hints on how to track combat is a whole other topic.

So my (complete) wish list would include way more than what I expect them to deliver any time soon. It's a great reference tool and I make heavy use of the filtering/PC building. But it's still a long way from being easier than jotting notes down in a text document. Maybe someday.

Great points. For me, once it integrates with the PC character sheets it will be worth it to me. Well, that and when I can add an existing character to a campaign, rather than needing to rebuild the character from the campaign link.

 

[Oofta]

Yeah, being able to keep campaign notes and annotating content are two big ones for me. I've looked at other campaign tracking online tools and they all have limitations as well. So for now I'm using OneNote with the SRD loaded.

Between the filtering/sorting utilities and the ability to buy just the pieces of mods that I want and having all my players put their PCs in one place for me to reference, DDB has been worth it to me. I recently purchased just the Eberron monsters for example. I like being able to see the PCs so I can remind myself of bonds/flaws while getting a glance at what new features and spells they'll have.

But I've never found a tool that does my campaign/session/encounter tracking and design. Hope springs eternal, I know they have a lot coming. [must ... resist ... urge to make snarky comment ...]

EDIT: removed unnecessary snarky comment in attempt to adhere to my New Years resolution. Better late than never, right?

 

[Umbran]

Now I"m really curious as to what your educational background in linguistics is

Mod Note:
Enough.

Nobody owes you a set of credentials - providing them would be an appeal to authority anyway. You are effectively asking for someone to engage in logical fallacy.

Moreover, while we do allow for a lot of topic drift, this, along with the nitpicky quibbling over definitions, is so far from discussion of the new product as to constitute threadcrapping.

Please stop disrupting discussion of the new product offering.