I'm not trying to come across as difficult, I just misunderstood what you were saying before as you telling me RAW rather than you saying how you feel the matter should be resolved.Now I'm imagining a super-pedantic DM telling you that you can't play a viola at all because you wrote viol in on your character sheet. I would also prefer that that call was made in a game I was in.īut it's not strict RAW that they should be treated the same - and I say that as someone who's been hit with a penalty before because 'you have proficiency: flute, this is a piccolo, doesn't count.' (Thankfully not with a GM that I still game with) Like I say, if you don't want to distinguish between different instruments in the same family, then yes, a lyre and a small harp can be treated the same. (That said, the above posters are correct in that, if you're thinking of, say, Edward from Final Fantasy 4, that instrument is technically a lyre, which is one of the standard issue proficiencies.)Īh, so when you say the smaller harps should be considered lyres, you meant as in 'I prefer that they are' rather than 'RAW says that they are'? It'll even automatically alphabetize properly, so everything's nice and tidy. Click on some other part of the screen to get back out of the typing field.Īnd that should do it! Whatever you named the tool proficiency will show up in the list, all official looking and should also be there if you print it out.You can then click on that name and type whatever you want (you'll have to use backspace to delete the default text).

There should now be, at the top, a tool proficiency called 'Custom Tool 1'.

Look for 'Add new proficiencies' and open the pull down menu immediately below it.

Find the proficiency window and click on the area where it says 'Tools'.It looks like a little icon of a paper with writing on it near the upper left. (If you want to avoid having too many proficiencies, leave one of the 'select musical instrument proficiency' choices blank/unselected.) If you want to add a custom tool proficiency, here's what you do:

I don't care if you agree with them, nor should you care if I disagree. It's a monthly income, no less.Īlso, we don't have to agree with each other either. I'd be willing to pay a subscription fee if the platform worked how I thought it would. That's why I've decided to back down from ever touching D&D Beyond, ever again. I say it's bullcrap to demand payment twice for it. I'd understand if subscription for D&D Beyond would be required, but it seems you'd still have to pay twice for the actual rules content. In my country there's the national newspaper that provides the use of both old archived and newly published digital content AND physical prints as long as you're a subscriber, using the same customer ID to access them. It shouldn't matter in what form I get to use it, if more than one form is available and provided by them. I've paid for the right to use the material already. I understand how copyright works, but I still don't agree with their logic. Powers &8^]Understanding and agreement are not the same thing. That's where Fandom/Wikia (proprietor of D&D Beyond) comes in. If you want to use another copy of that content in a different form, you have to pay someone to digitize it and make it available on digital platforms. You don't own the content of the book WotC does. They do block 'homebrew' that is too close to published material from being made public, but you can absolutely do it for your own characters.Īs for the value proposition, you don't seem to understand how copyright works.

Anstruth harp dnd beyond