Who Stayed purely 4E Books only, Who went Essentials only and who Mixed it up and why?

124 posts / 0 new
Last post
As the title says, I am wondering to what others have done so far, as for me I only have the Core 4E right now in the Hard Backs but have looked at the Essential lines of books at the local shop, I just don't see the need for them as we have been fine with the core set the way it is, might pick up the compendium though. What have you done and why?
Bought the Essentials line, mix it with the old stuff, and am currently playing classes from both sides, each with both Essentials and pre-Essentials options on the same character.
...whatever
I play 4e.

I mix them just because it's all good. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

As the title says, I am wondering to what others have done so far, as for me I only have the Core 4E right now in the Hard Backs but have looked at the Essential lines of books at the local shop, I just don't see the need for them as we have been fine with the core set the way it is, might pick up the compendium though. What have you done and why?

I play with both, I find the old classes more fun in general but I like very complex off role controlo harassment builds. That said I also have a few essentials characters and enjoy them and they can be very effective although they can feel a bit spammy from time to time. as they gain more options through leveling they get a bit more interesting. 

I like essentials style characters mixing in pre E feats and I like PHB123 classes with Essentials feats. for me more options is good. Neither takes away from the other and they work fine in the games I play in side by side "LFR"

Sometimes when playing my essentials Thief I miss having the dailies but then when playing my PHB Rogue I miss the consistency of the Thief. Each style has it's niche and every now and then I like seeing the silly damage and accuracy of my thief. I am so happy with the character I don't even plan to take Kulkor arms master because I feel my damage is more than sufficient to meet my role.

Basically I like having both to choose from when making a new character. 

Bought both, used both. Because my OCD is in remission.

"Ah, the age-old conundrum. Defenders of a game are too blind to see it's broken, and critics are too idiotic to see that it isn't." - Brian McCormick

I stick with classic 4e, because the at/e/d/u scheme is fun. I don't allow E classes in my campaign because I don't quite trust the retro design standard, and because with the exception of the Shadow book, they're all essentially redundant anyway. (Get it? Essentially redundant? Ah...nevermind. Bad joke.)

But the other DMs in my group are cool with everything, so there is a knight in our Dark Sun game.


Bought both, used both. Because my OCD is in remission.



Ah, I think you mean it's out of remission. Cool
I use both seamlessly.  I recommend the Rules Compendium either way, as it is a convenient compilation of the necessities.

Celebrate our differences.

Mix.  Can't resist power creep.

@mikemearls don't quite understand the difference

I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down. - Eric Cartman

Enough chitchat!  Time is candy! - Pinky Pie

Wow some interesting takes to say the least.  BTW what is OCD?

I think I am gonna have to take a second look at bringing Essentials into our games, might be cagey. 

I mix because there is no reason not to.

It all works together, exactly as was promised. Game balance does not suffer. In the last nine months, there has been only proof that it is all 4E, and no evidence that it is not.

< edited to remove "editions war" kindling >
This thread won't end well.




Why would you say that?


Wow some interesting takes to say the least.  BTW what is OCD?



Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. I suspect that the poster was using the term in jest. A mild form of OCD could compel one to collect ("Gotta catch'em all"), but OCD usually manifests in far more intrusive forms (having to wash one's hands a specific number of times before they are "clean," and the slightest bit of grime requires that the hands be washed again, and the like).

I think I am gonna have to take a second look at bringing Essentials into our games, might be cagey. 



Certain Feats are VERY good, and will probably be snapped up by savvy players pretty quickly. The classes, for the most part, are balanced (You should be very careful about which Items you let Scouts and Slayers have, though, because they can be very easily optimized for Charging, moreso than Barbarians).

< edited to remove "edition war" kindling >

This thread won't end well.




Why would you say that?





It can very easily turn into a pro Essentials / anti Essentials edition war. Many people seem to object to Essentials on the moral level, feeling that it is a betrayal of 4E and of themselves, rather than an addition to 4E with more options. 




Or some people simply don't like the direction the rules have gone. 
This thread won't end well.




Why would you say that?





It can very easily turn into a pro Essentials / anti Essentials edition war. Many people seem to object to Essentials on the moral level, feeling that it is a betrayal of 4E and of themselves, rather than an addition to 4E with more options. 




Or some people simply don't like the direction the rules have gone. 



< redacted long, detailed assessment of the situation >

There are 8 billion threads here in General that have the hashed and rehashed arguments of the support and objections to Essentials. Not going to do it again.
This thread won't end well.




Why would you say that?





It can very easily turn into a pro Essentials / anti Essentials edition war. Many people seem to object to Essentials on the moral level, feeling that it is a betrayal of 4E and of themselves, rather than an addition to 4E with more options. 




Or some people simply don't like the direction the rules have gone. 



< redacted long, detailed assessment of the situation >

There are 8 billion threads here in General that have the hashed and rehashed arguments of the support and objections to Essentials. Not going to do it again.



I never asked you to.  You state that people seem to hate Essentials because of a moral issue and while that may be true for some, thats not true for all.  Some people just simply don't like it and I see that a few people just can't seem to understand that. 

My only essentials only experience was a season of Encounters.  Would the current season with Heroes of Shadow still count as "Essentials only"?  In LFR and in the home game that I run there is a mix.  I basically like having lots of options.  Now if we didn't have the online tools for quickly identifying the available options I would be tempted to limit what people can use.  The times I have been playing a game that has lots of different books and the GM said that we can go use whatever(like a friend of mine did for a Rifts campaign) haven't really gone well.

I let my party use whatever they can find that fits. So far they've pulled from 4E Books, a few Essentials feats, we have a vampire who's pretty much straight out of the box (he uses an implement from a Dragon article, anyone else think it silly that there weren't any in HoS?) and then of course plenty from Dungeon and Dragon magazine (Athasian Manifestations for the Genasi, a Feat or two from the Winning Races: Mul, the Thri-Kreen has a few powers that came from the magazine iirc. I think our Elf is the only one who is made up of just 4E PHB Material, his race from the PHB1 and his class (Psion) from the PHB3, and all his equipment is from either of those sources, an Athasian ritual/spellshard.

So mixing has worked well so far.
Wow some interesting takes to say the least.  BTW what is OCD?



Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. I suspect that the poster was using the term in jest. A mild form of OCD could compel one to collect ("Gotta catch'em all"), but OCD usually manifests in far more intrusive forms (having to wash one's hands a specific number of times before they are "clean," and the slightest bit of grime requires that the hands be washed again, and the like).

I think I am gonna have to take a second look at bringing Essentials into our games, might be cagey. 



Certain Feats are VERY good, and will probably be snapped up by savvy players pretty quickly. The classes, for the most part, are balanced (You should be very careful about which Items you let Scouts and Slayers have, though, because they can be very easily optimized for Charging, moreso than Barbarians).






Ok got it, didn't put 2 & 2 together there on the ocd.

As far as the essentials good or bad for 4e crap, I really don't care one way or the other, to me its all DnD, I was just more interrested in compatability issues than anything else or any major changes, If someone here and there has a problem with 4e/E diffences that it makes them stir crazy, so be it, just don't post it here, I really don't want to debate it or hear them whine about it. I was just getting an idea of mixing essentials or converting to it entirely but from what I have read so far, it may be best to just mix it in a little at a time.
< edited to remove "edition wars" kindling >

Really, I don't understand why everyone gets all bent out of shape when a game goes out of print, its life and the way of business, but its not the end of the game, you can still play it as it is, make your own classes, write up some of your own powers or feats, who says you can't? WoTC?, Bah!.... I still have my original 1e DnD and AD&D games, plus 2e AD&D and I still run campaigns in them and TSR hasn't put out a thing for them in 20+ years now. So if a 5e comes out, nothing says we can't keep playing 4e or essentials anymore or even start playing 5e if we like, its all good. (except Pathfinder, thats badong).....jk.
i have everything tho all my players just use stuff from the books tho some of them do use a few things from the mags because they have found copies of them on the web........no one in my group uses DDI
I'm a min-maxer at heart; I like to roleplay, but I like to roleplay asskickers

You can't min-max without using both 4eE and O4e content: A slayer without surprising charge isn't min-maxed, a rogue without light blade expertise isn't min-maxed.  The fact that an Essentials class, which gets its "class feats" for free as they level up, can also make use of O4e's class feats (gaining, in effect, double feats) means a min-maxer would have to be stupid not to mix.  The fact that O4e feats assume basic attacks are always the second choice to at-will powers, while 4eE classes often use basic attacks as their at-will, encounter and daily damage equivalents, no min-maxer would ignore this.

As a DM I allow both at my table; I only have one player who is really into playing an actual Essentials class, and it's mostly because he doesn't really want to be playing D&D at all, he just wants to sit in the FLGS and hang out with everyone, and the Slayer happens to be a fairly thought-free class, so he can be a part of the group without putting as much effort into it.
This thread won't end well.




Why would you say that?





It can very easily turn into a pro Essentials / anti Essentials edition war. Many people seem to object to Essentials on the moral level, feeling that it is a betrayal of 4E and of themselves, rather than an addition to 4E with more options. 



And I love that it's Malak starting the debate.  Inflamatory strawman is inflamatory.  "This won't end well"  "Why?"  "Becaused I'm going to provoke people into defending their position via rhetoric."

The appearance that the edition is split is perpetuated by those insisting that it is not.
I mix stuff as I was late to the 4th ed party being a 3.X holdout. I only  own 3 4th ed books otherwise its DDI. DDI going down would probably make me quite 4th ed.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 



And I love that it's Malak starting the debate.  Inflamatory strawman is inflamatory.  "This won't end well"  "Why?"  "Becaused I'm going to provoke people into defending their position via rhetoric."

The appearance that the edition is split is perpetuated by those insisting that it is not.




Fair enough. I will accept my fair share of responsibility for these "debates."

This is what I get for writing out my first impulse rather than counting to ten before I post. I shall edit my posts which contribute to "edition wars" from this thread. I apologize to everyone involved.

Edit: Offensive material removed.
Should I ever find myself playing 4e again?  I'll just continue using the 4e hardbacks I allready own.

I gave 4e a shot.  I played & DM'd it for a year.  And I continued to play it for another year.
At some point during that time I determined that I just don't like this edition very much (I'm closer to being neutral about it vrs hating it)
At that point I stopped buying D&D products.
And then the last of the 4e games that I was playing in came to an end.  ( a natural end point in the stories being told/played)

   
My group uses a mix of of both. We have 4 'e-style' classes, but 2 of them are actually homebrew using e-style cause while I have alot against 'E' it does make building your own stuff alot faster.

Also, before 4 sounds like alot, my group has 9 characters :P.

I've never been one to restrict player content beyond stuff like expertise, and I have yet to see someone break the game at my table.
In all honesty, I stopped playing 4E the July of Essentials, and it's not that I'm not still interested in playing 4E (I played a singular RPGA game during that time), but the rest of my group just got fed up with the changes. As I, myself, was not particularly liking the direction the new class structure was going, I felt no need to continue playing.

While I still plan on using a 4E structure to run a One Shot Disney's Repunzle game, or an Acrobatic Mash up game (Prince of Persia + Assassin's Creed + Force Unleashed), and I still love the core system, I've been playing other games. Currently, I am running 3E Oriental Advnetures, and plan on running Chaosium's Elfquest soon.

That's not to say I won't play 4E again some time in the future, nor will I be snobbish to say no to characters from books past the July I quit. I just am not going to invest in books I don't like, that's all. Kind of like how I don't invest in Pathfinder, given how many other 3E books I already have.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/0a90721d221e50e5755af156c179fe51.jpg?v=90000)
I have not purchased any Essentials material, but I would not turn away an Essentials character brought to my game.  Contrary to what many DMs seem to believe, it's not all about me and what I like.  I would actually recommend Essentials to one of my players because, well, he doesn't quite 'get it' and often seems overwhelmed by 4e (he's played a Swordmage for 3 battles and has yet to mark anything).  We gleefully poach powers and feats from Essentials using the Character Builder.

Essentials is 4e, 4e is Essentials.  They are one and the same.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I stopped running D&D after Dark Sun, but I play in an E-only game (books only, so no vampires, fey-lady-whatever hexblades, earth clerics, etc). Well, sorta E-only, I guess. We're using magic items from beyond the E-books, because there aren't enough in them to be useful.
I DM, and I allow players to play essentials characters.  We have a mix and it's been just fine.
I have no issue with Essentials, but we don't have any.

I still want to pick up the Monster Vault but since we moved I live a bit further from the gameshop and I don't have the time to get it. And when I do, I forget -_-" 
Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
We're nearing the end of our current campaign which consist of O4e characters only, using a couple of feats and powers from the new 4E books (expertise feats are just too good to pass). I DM and am realy enjoying the MV, I get a lot of mileage out of it.

Next campaign, we all want to try one of the 4E characters so that campaign will probably be Essentials only. If all goes well, I'll be comfortable using both at the same table after that (my concerns are more about resources usage in a typical day for our campaigns than power-levels).
-Realize You are your own source of all Creation, of your own master plan.
Whatever the DM is willing to run...
Essentials books ARE 4E books. 

And we use all the 4E material, because more options are cool - same as we use material from Arcane Power and from Eberron, we use material from Forgotten Kingdoms.  There's no difference.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
The only Essentials resource our group has spent money on is the Monster Vault. Via the CB we've used e-classes and found them all boring (except for the Mage which is better than the Wizard, but we rarely play with a full controller anyways). We've had new players and guest stars play classes like the slayer or hexblade because they're easy to teach. Any of those players that have stuck around though usually switch to a real 4e class once they realize the rest of the party is doing different things on each of their turns instead of just spamming one option over and over and over and over...
We steal feats though. Power creep is always fun. We could care less about the new design direction. 
I purchased products from the Eessentials line, allow any D&D content because, well, it is D&D content.
I purchased products from the Eessentials line, allow any D&D content because, well, it is D&D content.


Ditto.
Yes, the latest book/release that you don't like is a blatant attempt by Wizards of the Coast to make money off the fanbase. They all are. That's kinda the point of the Free Enterprise system, companies are in it to make money...
Show
69889855 wrote:
You can't! I tried... and the next night masked men came into my house and beat me until I burned up my ranger character sheet and rolled a scout. They told me... if I ever thought of making a non-essential character that they would kill mitsy..... OH GOD THEY ARE COMING BACK AND ARE FORCING ME TO BUY HEROES OF SHADOWS! SOMEONE STOP THEM PLEASE!
58321818 wrote:
Your DM is your friend. He's not trying to screw with you, or dick you around. Play your character how your character would act. Accept that your character won't always be able to do what he's best at, but also know that as a goddamn HERO, he's gonna try to do his best at what he can do. Roleplay your goddamn character, make the decisions he would make, and roll appropriately. Everything will be fine.
57025236 wrote:
But filling a post with vitriol, hate-filled comments, like "these people should be fired", swearing at us or other ambiguous members of the company - there really is no reason for that. Please share your feedback respectfully, and consider how you would share your ideas if this were a face to face conversation between real people, not faceless names on a screen.
If you see me posting in a thread about editions or Essentials (that isn't simply a rules thread or similar) remind me that I'm trying to stay away from them. (My blood pressure will thank us both.)
We use everything.  That being said, nobody in our campaign is running an Essentials-build character, mainly because we like having more choices than the Essentials builds tend to give us.  (And the one person in our group who does suffer from being overwhelmed by choices specifically dislikes the one facet where Essentials did not restrict those choices: feats.)

I bought the books mainly as a resource (so that we wouldn't have to keep running to the DM's Insider account) and because yes, I am a completist.
loose [loos] vt. to let loose; to release; to unfasten, undo or untie; to shoot or discharge. lose [looz] vt. to come to be without (something in one's possession or care), through accident, theft, etc., so that there is little or no prospect of recovery; to fail inadvertently to retain (something) in such a way that it cannot be immediately recovered; to suffer the deprivation of. LEARN THE DAMN DIFFERENCE. The pen is mightier than the character builder. Copy this to your sig if you like 4e but don't use the CB. "OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player. 3E challenged the character, not the player. Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM. That's why I love 4E." -RedSiegfried
I use and allow all and i'm happy