D&D 5E D&D Beyond Will Delist Two Books On May 17th

D&D Beyond will be permanently removing Volo’s Guide to Monsters and Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes on May 17th in favor of the upcoming Monsters of the Multiverse book, which largely compiles and updates that material.

As per the D&D Beyond FAQ for Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse:

Can I still buy Volo’s Guide to Monsters or Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes on D&D Beyond?
Starting on May 16, you can acquire the streamlined and up-to-date creatures and character race options, as well as a plethora of exciting new content, by purchasing Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse. On May 17, Volo's Guide to Monsters and Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes will be discontinued from our digital marketplace.

If you already own these two books you will still have access to your purchases and any characters or encounters you built with them. They won’t be removed from your purchased sourcebooks. Therefore, if you want the "fluff" and tables in those two tomes in D&D Beyond, you need to purchase them soon.

This is the first time books have been wholesale delisted from the D&D Beyond Platform rather than updated (much like physical book reprints are with errata and changes).

There’s no word from WotC on whether physical books will be discontinued and be allowed to sell out.

 

[Parmandur]

Keep in mind also that the "completely compatible" marketing is aimed at us, the internet-aware current player of 5E. The 2024 core books will be aimed at a general audience, and such backwards compatibility will have limited appeal to those folks. Also, as previously noted, post-Tasha's books seem to have forward compatibility in mind already... so if you let the older books lapse out of print, what marketing need is there for the 2024 core books to help convert anything? You should be able to use MOTM or the like as is, and clearly they don't plan on supporting VGTM or MTOF through official channels anymore...

Well, sure, they want to create a product thst is an on-ramp, but they don't want to make it feel like an off-ramp, either. They are interested in change in continuity, an evolution that fits in rather than a break or even a "fresh start."

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well, sure, they want to create a product thst is an on-ramp, but they don't want to make it feel like an off-ramp, either. They are interested in change in continuity, an evolution that fits in rather than a break or even a "fresh start."

and again a slowly winding road is better then an off ramp... even if it takes you off I 84

in this case we already see large parts of the 2014 books being rewritten with both major and minor changes... ones that at first were optional, then optional but in couraged, now look to be 'the way going forward'

 

[doctorbadwolf]

2024 edition will certainly remain compatible with 2014 5E, despite changes like that. But in the same way that you could use 3.5 material in a 3.0 game, or apply 2E character kits to a 1E PC; it works, but not perfectly, as you're combining elements from one set of default assumptions with elements from another set of assumptions.

So, I don’t think that literally any conversion will be required, so I can’t really agree with the comparison.

If they get rid of short rests, I will at least see where people are coming from calling it a new edition. If they don’t go that far, and in fact avoid any changes that require a “conversion document”, I won’t.

The fix is simple: if someone brings an old 2014 PC to a table, give them a free Feat or two. Balance restored.

It’s even simpler, just let them know what optional rules are in play before they make characters. Just like you would (be well advised to do) right now.

Sure. Same way you'd handle someone using a 3.0 character build that relied on stuff that changed in 3.5: you apply house rules.

Except not the same at all, because a feat at level 1 is already an optional rule in 5e, and has been since Theros. Adding it to the PHB doesn’t actually change it, or make characters require conversion.

On the contrary, they have gone out of their way so far to do two main things: let us know thst a revision is coming, and let us know thst the revision is compatible with older 5E content, "completely compatible" even: making anything appear like a clean break is explicitly against their market positioning. Saying "Hey folks, give your old PC a free Feat, and two if you already hit Level 4!" does not take up much real estate, at any rate, and is. If that's the biggest change, then that one sentence is a sufficient "conversion document."

And it’s not even a conversion! Lol It’s just, hey we are using this optional rule. It’s no different than saying Tasha’s optional variants are allowed in this game.

The example I used several times is an errata'd spell.

So, going with your narrowing of scope to just PHB to PHB, which is just a third of the core books we are talking about, there would need to be no changes to anything in the 2024 PHB that is not reflected in errata 2014 PHB.

Okay, we'll see.

This doesn’t make any sense, to me. I’ve no idea what you even think my position is.

also…why does this matter? Like can someone explain why they care whether it’s called a new edition? I don’t think it will be a new edition because I don’t think Tasha’s represents a new edition, and that’s the level of change I’m expecting. But I don’t care whether people on the internet end up calling it 6e in spite of wotc refusing to do the same.

 

[Parmandur]

and again a slowly winding road is better then an off ramp... even if it takes you off I 84

in this case we already see large parts of the 2014 books being rewritten with both major and minor changes... ones that at first were optional, then optional but in couraged, now look to be 'the way going forward'

Yes, and thrybare ztill fully compatible.

 

[Parmandur]

also…why does this matter? Like can someone explain why they care whether it’s called a new edition? I don’t think it will be a new edition because I don’t think Tasha’s represents a new edition, and that’s the level of change I’m expecting. But I don’t care whether people on the internet end up calling it 6e in spite of wotc refusing to do the same.

I expect that WotC might well call it 6E, but not feature that overly prominently anywhere. New Editions don't mean a total break: plenty of stories of people.mixing 1E and 2E material.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yes, and thrybare ztill fully compatible.

or not... since AGAIN you can check on this very board with DMs that wont allow tasha's and ones that wont allow pre... so already not... and as more changes pile up and up they wont be (anymore then my 2e wizard is)

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I expect that WotC might well call it 6E, but not feature that overly prominently anywhere. New Editions don't mean a total break: plenty of stories of people.mixing 1E and 2E material.

yup... and if you brought your 1e PHB or Unearthed Arcana to gencon and a 2e game they would tell you to make a 2e character

 

[eyeheartawk]

I don't know who this Tasha person is but you guys aren't being very nice saying she won't be allowed at all these places.

 

[HammerMan]

I know someone else around here (@HammerMan) has the same 90's experience I had where there were people playing late 2e calling it 3e (although we are in same tristate area so maybe just we are close enough).

Yeah there is no way it will not cause edition wars and ther is 00.00000001% chance it is full comparable.

 

[Remathilis]

and with slight tweeks I made a 2e wizard work in 5e... doesn't mean that is a very different edition. It also doesn't mean most, many or even some tables would let me...


sigh... saying something is evergreen doesn't mean it will still be supported. It doesn't even mean that it will stay evergreen 10 years later (I mean I am sure they hoped it would)

the world, the gaming community, and the D&D fan base in 2024 will look different then 2013 when they talked about ever green products. this will be a new edition.

In 1994, I could run B2: Keep on the Borderlands in either a Basic, 1e or 2e and the changes I needed to make were minimal. I could use the stat blocks in the module, the treasure was compatible, and most of the rules worked on the same principle. That's not to say they were 1:1 (initiative would be very different based on what system I was running) and some monster stat blocks did have differences, but I could run KotB in any of those three systems just fine.

Starting with 3e on, I would have to rebuild the module to make it work. The stat blocks are different, the rules on saves and checks are different, the format on spells and magic items are different. 4e even more so, with the large change in how encounters are built and resting. Even 5e is different enough that it can't be run as is. Sure, you can use the basics of the module, but the rules need to be overhauled in a way AD&D didn't need.

If the next edition in 2024 is like that; I can grab Curse of Strahd or Tomb of Annihilation and run it with very minimal changes or even out of the book as is rather than rebuild and convert, that's compatible enough for me.