D&D (2024) How D&D Beyond Will Handle Access To 2014 Rules

D&D Beyond has announced how the transition to the new 2024 edition will work on the platform, and how legacy access to the 2014 version of D&D will be implemented.

• You will still be able to access the 2014 Basic Rules and core rulebooks.
• You will still be able to make characters using the 2014 Player's Handbook.
• Existing home-brew content will not be impacted.
• These 2014 rules will be accessible and will be marked with a 'legacy' badge: classes, subclasses, species, backgrounds, feats, monsters.
• Tooltips will reflect the 2024 rules.
• Monster stat blocks will be updated to 2024.
• There will be terminology changes (Heroic Inspiration, Species, etc.)

D&D (2024) - Wizards of the Coast Backtracks on D&D Beyond and 2014 Content

Wizards of the Coast posted an overnight update stating that they are not going forward with previously released plans to require those wishing to use some 2014 content on D&D Beyond to use the Homebrew function to manually enter it. Instead, all the content including spells and magic items will...

www.enworld.org

 

[OB1]

The fact that this came as a surprise to them shows they REALLY REALLY don't have their finger on the pulse of the community, which is a real failing, especially after their PR blundering last year.

I'm part of the community and it didn't bother me at all. In fact, I prefer the way they did it originally. Don't equate 1,000 people loudly complaining with what most people feel.

What's interesting is this isn't the first time this has happened though.

They've done similar "We refuse to put in even minimal effort" deals before, and they got very negative feedback about it, but totally dismissed that feedback. I think what's making them listen now is the heightened environment because WotC have screwed up enough that people are more likely to actually walk (i.e cancel subs).

Companies make mistakes. It's how they respond to the mistakes that matters. No one was harmed by the original decision to upgrade a portion of the rules for free. Enough people shared their preference to choose which version to play with that they obliged.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I understand people's frustrations, and I'm glad they changed their approach, but I wouldn't have stressed about it, myself - I would just use whatever rules are on the character sheet. I can't imagine being so concerned with some sort of (non-existent) balance that a (IMO) minor difference to how something works would be worth stressing over. Does the wolf trip get a save or not? Does it really matter all that much? DM makes a decision and we move on. Not worth arguing about.

But I appreciate that others feel differently.

 

[Demetrios1453]

We bought the spells. We bought the books the spells are in. They are removing those spells and replacing them with the new versions. If we want to keep them, we have to homebrew them. Copy them. Thus they are clawing back the content we purchased.

They weren't. They would still have existed in the Compendium to be found. You would have just lost the tooltips and links, but the spells would still have been there under the legacy content.

Anyways, it's all moot now.

 

[Umbran]

Will you stop freaking out over people voicing their displeasure with corporate shenanigans?

The problem is the characterization as "shenanigans" (or whichever of a variety of forms the accusation takes).

There's an old aphorism - Do not attribute to malice that which can be explained with incompetence/ignorance.

Is it shenanigans, or is it just a poor choice based on an inaccurate idea of how users are apt to approach use of the new rules? Everyone seems to think they know why choices were made.

If you did that to a person on this site, you'd be apt to see red text. It being a non-person who isn't here means we might not moderate it, but doesn't make it valid supposition.

Especially not valid enough to use is as a shamehammer on others who don't come to the same conclusion.

 

[Belen]

They weren't. They would still have existed in the Compendium to be found. You would have just lost the tooltips and links, but the spells would still have been there under the legacy content.

Anyways, it's all moot now.

The character sheet functionality that most people use it for would be lost and that was why so many were upset.

 

[Demetrios1453]

The character sheet functionality that most people use it for would be lost and that was why so many were upset.

Yes. But that wasnt the point of the post. What I was responding to, for the second time in this thread, was a poster who keeps erroneously saying that the old spells and so on would have been completely removed and inaccessible, when, even before the recent announcement, that wasn't the case.

 

[Belen]

Yes. But that wasnt the point of the post. What I was responding to, for the second time in this thread, was a poster who keeps erroneously saying that the old spells and so on would have been completely removed and inaccessible, when, even before the recent announcement, that wasn't the case.

I am pretty sure that poster was mistaking the missing tools access to say the functionality was going away.

The compendium access was fairly worthless. I doubt anyone buys content on DDB for the compendium.

 

[Mistwell]

Just like with the OGL debacle, they wouldn't have changed their mind if people hadn't freaked out.

I have yet to see someone explain why in practice they freaked out. Who here wanted the old version of True Strike and not the new version for free in their DNDBeyond usage? Raise your hand and give a brief honest explanation for why you didn't want this new errata'ed version to replace the old one.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm happy that they walked back. But I strongly disagree with your characterization. People like me were complaining, quite correctly, about a loss of functionality.

What was the loss of functionality in practical terms? You got access to the newer versions of the spells for free this way. Name me the newer version which isn't better than the older version in terms of any measure: quality of life, clarity, fixing errors from before, etc..

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The compendium access was fairly worthless. I doubt anyone buys content on DDB for the compendium.

I do. So does @darjr. I think a lot of people do. Sure, even more probably use the character builder, but a lot of those people would also have been happy to have had new stuff for free. There's all kinds of people, with all kinds of needs and desires.

This was a bad move, but not because it affected everyone. It was a bad move because it wasn't really necessary to affect anyone. The group that cared might even be quite small.