D&D 5E (2024) D&D Beyond's Development Roadmap Is A Complete Rebuild Of Platform

D&D Beyond has announced its roadmap for the future, including features in active development and those planned for later down the line. These include a full rebuild of the game platform's engine, a new character builder, tools for Dungeon Masters, and more.

Over the past few months, we’ve launched a new homepage, a revamped and more sortable content library, image reveals in the Maps VTT to help DMs immerse their players more easily, and several other quality-of-life improvements.

2026 is a year of refocusing and rebuilding D&D Beyond to make it easier to play D&D your way. Three major initiatives will drive most of our work:

• Rebuilding D&D Beyond’s Game Platform
• Improving Player Onboarding and Revamping the Character Builder Experience
• Launching a Suite of Dungeon Master Tools

 

[Artamo]

Every company is capable of lucking into one-off successes. BG3 and DaDHaT are currently those. Will they be followed up by more successes? Or failures? We shall see. DDB is also a one-off success but not really by WotC at all (they just acquired it) that hasn't improved all the much since it launched (I'm not saying it's nothing, but we're talking small iterative changes, no really good overhauls etc.). If they succeed, great, but expecting it is wild.

My understanding is that Maps VTT has been fairly well-regarded as part of the bigger whole within D&DBeyond, i.e. it gets the job done well enough.

Also, WotC bought D&D Beyond in 2022. BG3 and Honor Amongst Thieves were both released in 2023. It’s not like they were years apart. At what point do these stop being one-off successes?

 

[Scribe]

My understanding is that Maps VTT has been fairly well-regarded as part of the bigger whole within D&DBeyond, i.e. it gets the job done well enough.

Also, WotC bought D&D Beyond in 2022. BG3 and Honor Amongst Thieves were both released in 2023. It’s not like they were years apart. At what point do these stop being one-off successes?

Well, they bought D&D Beyond, BG3, they didnt make it, and HAT...was a movie they also did not make.

Nobody is arguing that the IP is weak, it clearly is not. Is it Wizards, that makes it great?

 

[Artamo]

Well, they bought D&D Beyond, BG3, they didnt make it, and HAT...was a movie they also did not make.

Nobody is arguing that the IP is weak, it clearly is not. Is it Wizards, that makes it great?

I guess that’s my point - if their strategy is about licensing their IP and getting the bulk of their revenues in that way, then they don’t really care if everything they do in-house is a big success or not. It’s like the BG3 show that just got announced - if that does gangbusters and becomes the next big show for HBO, Hasbro/WotC are gonna call that a win, right? Doesn’t matter that it’s done with a studio and Craig Mazin’s help.

 

[OB1]

DDB kinda, maps absolutely not. DDB and Sigil were at war literally from before DDB was acquired by WotC. In the great OGL 2.0 debacle, on thing that leaked was how aggressively opposed the leader of the 3D VTT team was to acquiring DDB. The way WotC handled them internally


Maps a mediocre and limited version of a 2D VTT with really only technical (rather than disability) accessibility and "It's effectively free" to recommend it (which isn't nothing!), a thing that has existed since the 1990s. Even on accessibility it's beaten by things like Owlbear Rodeo. It was never in competition with the 3D VTT and isn't an impressive feature, especially given how slowly it's developed as compared to their initial goals.


No. Absolutely not. Not in any area of life or work.

You have to look at consistency.

Every company is capable of lucking into one-off successes. BG3 and DaDHaT are currently those. Will they be followed up by more successes? Or failures? We shall see. DDB is also a one-off success but not really by WotC at all (they just acquired it) that hasn't improved all the much since it launched (I'm not saying it's nothing, but we're talking small iterative changes, no really good overhauls etc.). If they succeed, great, but expecting it is wild.

Guess we just have fundamentally different views of how goods product Maps is. You see it is a limited and flawed piece of software, I see it as a game changing tool for the way I run and play D&D online. I went from hating prepping for online play with Roll20 to it being a breeze. And also am able to improvise on the fly in a way I never could before. The product has also been steadily and noticeably improving for the last 18 months.

And I still stand by my statement that if not for Maps, WotC would still be trying to make Sigil work. Because of Maps, they were comfortable killing the project.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I have used both versions. I do not like a lot of the change for the sake of change items.

Whereas i do not see any of the changes that way at all.

For instance, changing beast types to fey or new invisibility.

They should have done 6e or optional adds like the way feats were handled in 5.0.

Gods above no. I am very glad they didnt do this.

I just do not see much good in 5.5. I may use a few things like the new healing spells but I feel 5.0 is a more solid game.

I dont get it, but fair enough.