D&D (2024) Early access to 2024 books in DnDBeyond is tied to subscription tier.

[mamba]

and now it is not.

yes, hence the complaints about taking it away

Also, Amazon has had preorders for a long time for D&D books and, IIRC, you got nothing for those.

Amazon is not the manufacturer, they are the vendor, they cannot ship the products two weeks before the release date

if you want to call it a restriction fine. Just not something for me to waste any more time on.

of course it is a restriction, there is no question about that, I am fine with you not wasting my time by pretending otherwise

 

[mamba]

Not the same. Comparing a vital need (food) to an entertainment desire (RPG books) is a serious lack of understanding of 1st world problems.

the same principle applies regardless of the severity of the outcome. This is not the first time you think a stronger outcome is a problem (my example of voting at 18), so is the approach bad but the outcome not all that terrible / acceptable, or is the approach / logic just fine?

In the latter case the outcome also is fine regardless of its severity. If the severity makes a difference to you, then you should have a problem with the approach you are defending

 

[DarkCrisis]

Are you suggesting that waiting to get a game system after Christmas (instead of on C-Day) is the same as a starving person waiting 2 weeks to get food? Is that what you say is so?

I'm saying its a net negative. It's taking away something. Not even taking away something it's taking it away and giving it to those with more money. It being a faster release of a digital book or a candy bar its still a taking away. Even if it's just time.

 

[mamba]

No you can't, that was clearly the point of my response.

if you cannot, then the logic is wrong, not the example

 

[dave2008]

the same principle applies regardless of the severity of the outcome. This is not the first time you think a stronger outcome is a problem (my example of voting at 18), so is the approach bad but the outcome not all that terrible / acceptable, or is the approach / logic just fine?

The logic is flawed. The severity and circumstances absolutely matter.

In the latter case the outcome also is fine regardless of its severity. If the severity makes a difference to you, then you should have a problem with the approach you are defending

I'm really not trying to defend anything. I just don't think it is a big deal that you have be a paid subscriber now to get early access. I don't feel any need to defend that and it is 100% fine if you want to get all worked up over it.

 

[mamba]

"Net" includes all debits and credits. So as of right now it is a net positive from when DnD Beyond started.

no one is basing how well they do based on how people lived 2000 years ago, they base it (at best) on how they did a few years ago.

Your ‘net positive since the beginning of time’ is just not how anyone will see it or should see it

 

[dave2008]

if you cannot, then the logic is wrong, not the example

I disagree. Logic that doesn't consider circumstances and severity is flawed logic.

 

[dave2008]

no one is basing how well they do based on how people lived 2000 years ago, they base it (at best) on how they did a few years ago.

Your ‘net positive since the beginning of time’ is just not how anyone will see it or should see it

I said since the start of D&D Beyond which is less than 10 years ago. I think that qualifies as "a few years ago," but YMMD.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I need to clarify. The "no you don't" comment wasn't about understanding other's reactions. I see how it came of that way, but it wasn't my intent. I do agree if you want to understand, precedent it helpful - but not everything you need either.

Oh okay, sorry that makes a lot more sense.

Then what about the steps they've done to improve the product? Or do we only count the negatives?

I think the rule is, quite honestly and genuinely "What have they done for me lately?". I think that's a reasonable position to hold with a business when looking at positives and negatives (I'd be less keen to hold it with individual people). Especially a large corporate business.

And looking at Beyond, I haven't seen any real improvements lately. Now, there is the VTT thing, but it still seems to be in a larval/nascent stage. I was honestly expecting it to be improve pretty rapidly, I guess I've been spoiled by all the vendors I'm working with at work atm, who have done some great rapid improvement of their products (and a lot of them are a lot smaller than Beyond). If they do get the VTT up to scratch, like, where it's worth using to me, absolutely then there's a good point. But I'm not even sure if there are any other real improvements they're working on. Did they ever fix stuff like options from VRGtR and now-ancient Theros not actually being available?

 

[mamba]

The logic is flawed. The severity and circumstances absolutely matter.

no they don’t, either a rule is sensible and justified, and then so is the outcome of it, or it is not.

If applying your logic / rule / law to different cases and you find some cases desirable / acceptable and other cases undesirable / unjust, then the problem is your logic, not the test case

I'm really not trying to defend anything.

try harder

I just don't think it is a big deal that you have be a paid subscriber now to get early access.

on that we agree