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]

So... they use terms differently than you do.

They are using terms differently than everyone in the industry uses. Terms like Alpha and Beta in the context of quality assurance testing have definitions. They aren't my definitions. They are industry standard definitions. I've mentioned this a few times, so I gotta ask. Why are you continuing to mischaracterize this and act like I'm the only one who uses those definitions?

 

[slobster]

They are using terms differently than everyone in the industry uses. Terms like Alpha and Beta in the context of quality assurance testing have definitions. They aren't my definitions. They are industry standard definitions. I've mentioned this a few times, so I gotta ask. Why are you continuing to mischaracterize this and act like I'm the only one who uses those definitions?

I mean, I've mentioned that in the games industry there is another alternative common definition for a "beta test" that pretty much matches what has been happening here...I know a lot of people hate the games industry definition, since it pretty much is a euphemism for "let's let some players play the role of QA so we don't have to pay for the process", but it is a real thing that happens all the time.

I feel bad for all ganging up on you though! Yeah obviously it would have been better if the thing didn't crash, I hope that as they get more ambitious about eventually making that VTT we all know is coming, their processes improve. So I can def agree on that part. It's just not a big deal YET.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I mean, I've mentioned that in the games industry there is another alternative common definition for a "beta test" that pretty much matches what has been happening here...I know a lot of people hate the games industry definition, since it pretty much is a euphemism for "let's let some players play the role of QA so we don't have to pay for the process", but it is a real thing that happens all the time.

I suppose I"d posit that D&D Beyond isn't a video game. You don't "play it". It's a record keeping/database platform, essentially, with some added features. Also, even video games pretty much follow the definitions of alpha and beta in the sense that beta windows are only a few weeks long. They don't go on for 5 months and counting. Also, a company using the terms incorrectly doesn't mean that they are my terms and definitions, or only terms and definitions in the finance industry.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

first of all, the example was people looking stuff up via the website, which should not be any different than looking it up in a book.

You wouldn't think so at first glance, but YES, it is. Moreso for those who were gaming PRIOR to the internet, smart phones, tablets, etc. Books ARE different to use. IF, however, the book is badly organized that is when digital approaches work better.

also that's huge amount of skepticism to assume the software would be in error for such a length of time that people would play the game incorrectly.

No. It is my personal experience. It is also not a matter of the software being in error but of players being SO dependent upon it that they never actually learn the game - the software does all the math for you and tells you when you have new choices to make - and it makes so that the PLAYERS never actually learn it. The software always holds their hand through playing the game.

so a website like The Hypertext d20 SRD is worthless in your opinion?

Not at all my point. It is just fine for what it is. But what it is, IME and IMO, isn't a seamless replacement for a physical book in learning the game. Players find it a great resource to use when creating and updating characters and character sheets. When it came to playing the game they tended to use it to quote rules at me out of context when they did use it because it just states rules rather than explains them - as a physical PH needs to do.

 

[Oofta]

They are using terms differently than everyone in the industry uses. Terms like Alpha and Beta in the context of quality assurance testing have definitions. They aren't my definitions. They are industry standard definitions. I've mentioned this a few times, so I gotta ask. Why are you continuing to mischaracterize this and act like I'm the only one who uses those definitions?

Well, you seem to be the only one who is apoplectic about this issue. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that you, and only you, get to decide what is acceptable for alpha/beta software.

As far as definitions, alpha software is expected to have bugs [1]. Even beta software [2] is not production ready. There is no "standard" for how long software can be in beta. The company only has so many resources and has focused on other issues.

So no, your definitions are not broadly accepted.

 

[slobster]

I suppose I"d posit that D&D Beyond isn't a video game. You don't "play it". It's a record keeping/database platform, essentially, with some added features. Also, even video games pretty much follow the definitions of alpha and beta in the sense that beta windows are only a few weeks long. They don't go on for 5 months and counting. Also, a company using the terms incorrectly doesn't mean that they are my terms and definitions, or only terms and definitions in the finance industry.

I mean DayZ was in "open Alpha" for over 3 years, and was in beta for another couple years. There are a ton of games on Steam that have spent the better part of a decade in wide release Alpha or Beta. Some games like War Thunder spent years in Beta and was eventually retired, never having been officially "released" in a final version, iirc.

Seriously, it's a running joke in the games industry. You can debate how funny the joke is, I know a lot of people HATE it, but it gets waaaay more excessive than this encounter builder thing.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well, you seem to be the only one who is apoplectic about this issue. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that you, and only you, get to decide what is acceptable for alpha/beta software.

As far as definitions, alpha software is expected to have bugs [1]. Even beta software [2] is not production ready. There is no "standard" for how long software can be in beta. The company only has so many resources and has focused on other issues.

So no, your definitions are not broadly accepted.

Check that link I provided in an earlier post. You are incorrect.

 

[Oofta]

Check that link I provided in an earlier post. You are incorrect.

I just posted my own links that support my statements.

I'll just say, nobody else cares or thinks this is a big issue. Have a good one.

 

[OB1]

This new code completely broke existing functionality to the monster databases.

You keep saying this, but that's not exactly what happened. The code was deployed, and the system worked for between 15 and 20 minutes (i know because I was testing it before it went down, I even sent alpha feedback from my initial test).

At some point shortly after deployment (and as word was getting out to the community that this feature had gone up), the Beta Encounter builder began not loading previously built encounters or allowing new ones to be built.

DDB then took down the Beta Encounter builder completely for about 2 hours, fixed the issue and put it back up. At no time could I not access the monster database as normal. Importantly, the core monster database is not a beta product, it's what is being paid for by subscribers and purchasers of content, and it was not affected.

If it was a code issue, and not a load issue, why did the system work for the first 20 minutes as word was getting out that the Alpha had been released?

 

[ArwensDaughter]

One of the reasons DDB does semi-public “alphas” is because they have learned that community input early on is very helpful to them design wise. With the initial character sheet, they designed something that made sense to them, and that worked mechanically, but once it was released they got a ton of feedback that their layout was not helpful or preferred by a lot of folks. So they went back and extensively reworked it. My sense has been that rather than experience that again, they decided to try giving subscribers early access to new features as they were being built, so they had more immediate feedback about what worked and what didn’t, not only in the sense of bugs, but also in terms of what was helpful/needed/desired/easy to use. The Encounter Builder was their first time doing that, and they were really pleased with in input they got doing it that way.

So, for those of you who are asking “how come it only does indicative tracking” or “is this all there is?” Please remember that they have been very clear that this is an early “alpha”, with limited functionality, but with plans for more. In the 30 hours or so it’s been live, they’ve already received a ton of feedback in terms of features people want, and they find that valuable as they work on other functions of the “alpha.”

NOTE: I don’t what to get dragged into the argument about whether or not the term alpha is correct for what DDB has chosen to release, or whether they are handling the alpha stage of development properly...which is why I put “alpha” in quotes. I don’t know enough about software development to weigh in myself, and voices I respect are at odds on these points. What I know is that DDB—rightly or wrongly—uses the term alpha, and I know what their staff has said about why they make such early builds (whatever you call them) available to subscribers.