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.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

See, I really think that insisting compatibility has nothing to do with anything except math

That's because it's all it has do with.

 

[Parmandur]

It is if you had a different idea of what is meant by compatible than WotC does.

No, a flawed understanding of compatibility doesn't put any burden on WotC. They have been very open about their process for the past couple of years, and everything have put out is completely compatible.

 

[Parmandur]

That's because it's all it has do with.

D&D is math. The math stays the same, the game stays the same.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Like if the new Core changes something like when the proficiency bonuses come that would cause an incompatibility . As all older characters and monsters would then require conversion to match up the new way or vice versa. This is an actual example of a potential incompatibility.

 

[Parmandur]

Like if the new Core changes something like when the proficiency bonuses come that would cause an incompatibility . As all older characters and monsters would then require conversion to match up the new way or vice versa. This is an actual example of a potential incompatibility.

Exactly. Even Feats at Level 1 isn't that significant because "give a free Feat" is a very mild correction without large systemic implications.

 

[HammerMan]

. So while an entire book is not made incompatible, parts of it are, as two conflicting versions cannot be used in the same game. I do that in my home games and I am sure many other groups do too.

I would assume most people are not letting those double but different sliding.

I will say that in 4e the errata was a pain. In 5e it is so far pretty easy. But the 3 to 3.5 change over was a book of errata (I got one at Gen Con)


Back in 2e me Ross and Becky all started with the 1 PHB I got. Over the years they each bought one. Mine didn’t have broad sword but Ross’s did. And min and Ross had restrictions on back stab that Becky’s didn’t.

 

[BookTenTiger]

It is if you had a different idea of what is meant by compatible than WotC does.

If you are judging WotC's efforts by your own definition and not theirs, then there is no way for them to match your desires. It's odd to me that you are creating this criteria of WotC meeting your interpretation of compatible when you already know that's not their intention. It feels to me like you are setting yourself up to be disappointed no matter what WotC does.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

If you are judging WotC's efforts by your own definition and not theirs, then there is no way for them to match your desires. It's odd to me that you are creating this criteria of WotC meeting your interpretation of compatible when you already know that's not their intention. It feels to me like you are setting yourself up to be disappointed no matter what WotC does.

Micah has already stated they have no intention of buying the new books, cause they don't agree with some of the changes.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Micah has already stated they have no intention of buying the new books, cause they don't agree with some of the changes.

Oh I know. I'm just surprised by some of the judgments happening in this thread. WotC has been very transparent with changes they are making to 5e. But I see some posters choosing to criticize the efforts simply because WotC uses a different definition. It's just... odd to me.

 

[HammerMan]

Oh I know. I'm just surprised by some of the judgments happening in this thread. WotC has been very transparent with changes they are making to 5e. But I see some posters choosing to criticize the efforts simply because WotC uses a different definition. It's just... odd to me.

I mean I know this has been brought up but if you go by what they said 3.5 was full compatibility (even though you needed a book to do it) and nothing changed form 3.5 to 4… are we not supposed to know there is marketing spin?