strapline if the e-clases

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
In the player's strategy guide page 16-17 there is a very brief description of the classes in the player handbooks 1-3. I was wondering if there is something similar for the essential classes?
The Essentials classes ARE the 4e classes.  Slayers and Knights are still fighters, Mages are still Wizards, Thieves are still Rogues, etc.
Yes, but do they do the same things in the same way as described in the players strategy guide?
Dose the class advise given in strategy guide always applie to an essentials class derived from the same base class? 
The sea looks at the stabillity of the mountian and sighs. The mountian watches the freedom of the sea and cries.
Yes, but do they do the same things in the same way as described in the players strategy guide?
Dose the class advise given in strategy guide always applie to an essentials class derived from the same base class? 




Eh, not really.
A perfect example is the Fighter.
The PSG refers to fighters meaning the defender role fighter in the phb (aka weaponmaster).
But Fighter (Slayer) is a striker, so the stuff in PSG doesn't really apply.


Sadly, at this stage of the game/edition/errata a lot of the class/race specific crunch in the PSG is not really relevant anymore.
Fortunately, a lot of the general strategy (like general party composition and focus firing) still is.
FWIW [4e designer] baseline assumption was that roughly 70% of your feats would be put towards combat effectiveness, parties would coordinate, and strikers would do 20/40/60 at-will damage+novas. If your party isn't doing that... well, you are below baseline, so yes, you need to optimize slightly to meet baseline. -Alcestis
...This thread is hilariously mistitled. Laughing

@ OP: No, not that I know of.
let me know if i miss any:



  • Fighter (Knight): A well-armored non-magical defender who uses a Defender Aura mechanic instead of marking foes. Some prefer aura defenders because of their OA punishment, others prefer the Weaponmaster's full suite of powers.

  • Fighter (Slayer): A brutal striker with an emphasis on large two-handed weapons and basic attacks. A strong, simple choice at any optimization level. Any attack-granting leader ally will love you dearly.

  • Paladin (Cavalier): A well-armored divine defender who uses a Defender Aura mechanic instead of marking foes, but whose punishment is entirely meaningless and ignorable at all levels of play. A bad choice.

  • Paladin (Blackguard): A well-armored divine striker whose striker mechanic is conditional and who lacks in-class support. Not a great choice.

  • Rogue (Thief): As the original Rogue, but more accurate and with near-automatic CA. Lacks only the o-rogue's full power support, but still an excellent striker choice. Can be played at range or as a charger.

  • Ranger (Scout): Keeps the o-ranger's emphasis on multiattacks and restriction of striker-mechanic to 1/round. Trades the full suite of power selection for increased mobility and freedom of target selection. One of the most brutal charger bases. No ranged build.

  • Ranger (Hunter): A very long ranged, very accurate single-target controller build. Trades any power selection choices for excellent versatility in choosing the effect of his powers on a round by round basis, but lacks any means to stun, weaken, dominate, sleep, petrify, or banish targets. Not a bad choice for heroic tier, but by mid-paragon an archer o-Ranger has more effective control effects.

  • Warlock (Binder): No. A "controller" build of the Warlock that has both less control and damage than the original. What little control this build offers often blocks ranged allies' line of sight. Just don't.

  • Warlock (Hexblade): An arcane melee striker who trades warlock's curse for a stat-based damage boost. Limited access to stealing multiattack powers from other classes and limited non-ranged daily choices make the Hexblade taper off after Heroic tier unless built as a charger with WLMR.

  • Cleric (Warpriest): Essentially (no pun intended) a collection of wisdom-based battle-clerics, with all class features and at-will/encounter power selections dictated by domain or diety selection. The nine builds vary wildly in power, but none are unplayable.

  • Druid (Sentinel): A leader build with an animal companion. The lack of proper scaling on the beast companion's attacks, as well as the lack of any healing/leading power options outside of the standard 2/encounter minor action heals makes the Sentinel not the best choice.

  • Druid (Protector): An o-druid without wild-shape or any choice in their daily power selections. Big emphasis on zones and summons. Meant for druid players who would rather hinder enemies with rapidly growing vines than turn into a bear and maul them in the face,

  • Bard (Skald): A leader build built around adding additional effects onto melee or ranged basic attacks and a unique Skald aura that allows the ally who needs healing to trigger it themselves for a minor action in addition to letting you do so if you want to. Retains access to all o-bard power choices.

  • Barbarian (Berserker): An attempt at a hybrid defender/striker build, which is often accused of failing. It does alright so long as you build it almost entirely with one or the other as your focus, and given the base class, Barbarians unsurprisingly have a lot more striker support. 

  • Sorcerer (Elementalist): A ranged striker who chooses allegience to one of the 4 main elements, gaining features based upon that choice. Best RBA in the game, but no choice in encounter powers, no multiattacks, and no daily powers at all hold this class back from being excellent. Still, their damage can be boosted sky high, and they retain their parent class' ability to AoE when the situation calls for it.

  • Assassin (Executioner): A less stealthy and more brutal approach to assasination. Still, only ever getting one encounter power per enounter isn't great. Dailies are entirely replaced with poisons, which work better out of combat than in, if your party ever handles assasinations out of combat. Can make a decent charger, particularly when hybrided with an eldritch strike warlock and stacking both striker features.

  • Wizard (Mage): Trades the o-Wizard's implement mastery feature choices for spell-school mastery choices. Neither better nor worse than the original, and not very different. Retains full power selection. In some ways more thematic than the original - a mage can be an Illusionist, an Enchanter, a Pyromancer - while the original Wizard...likes to use orbs? Is really good with his wand?

  • Wizard (Witch): Trades the o-Wizard's class features away without getting anything at all in return except for one saved not very useful feat. Still, retains full power selection, so can perform fine.

  • Wizard (Sha'ir): See Wizard (Witch).

  • Wizard (Bladesinger): A melee "controller" build with a striker feature, potential multiattacks, easy vulnerability abuse, a striker encounter power (that they only ever get one use of) and no control stronger than prone. Gets o-Wizard encounter powers as daily powers. Quite powerful for the first two rounds of combat when treated as a striker, then falls off hard.


Very impressive Nirafelos.

Though I believe your list is missing the Bladesinger as another wizard variant.
Very impressive Nirafelos.

Though I believe your list is missing the Bladesinger as another wizard variant.



Fixed, thanks!


  • Assassin (Executioner): A less stealthy and more brutal approach to assasination. Still, only ever getting one encounter power per enounter, that adds [W] dice, when your striker feature only works on weapons with small dice, isn't fantastic. Dailies are entirely replaced with poisons, which work better out of combat than in, if your party ever handles assasinations out of combat.





Assassin's Strike damage is d10, not [W].



  • Assassin (Executioner): A less stealthy and more brutal approach to assasination. Still, only ever getting one encounter power per enounter, that adds [W] dice, when your striker feature only works on weapons with small dice, isn't fantastic. Dailies are entirely replaced with poisons, which work better out of combat than in, if your party ever handles assasinations out of combat.





Assassin's Strike damage is d10, not [W].




so it is!
Vhat no Vhampire?

I think it would be fair to mention that in a well planed out adventure* with a supportive DM the Wizard (witch) can get some use out of augury and the extended rest retraining of daillies.

*or a very improvised adventure with player input 
The sea looks at the stabillity of the mountian and sighs. The mountian watches the freedom of the sea and cries.
Firstly sorry for the subject errors, that what posting via smart phone in a rush gets you!

Secondly this list is pretty ace! However it has confirmed what my players were telling me, eclasses are not as good as o's.
Firstly sorry for the subject errors, that what posting via smart phone in a rush gets you! Secondly this list is pretty ace! However it has confirmed what my players were telling me, eclasses are not as good as o's.

You should try them before reaching that conclusion. I used to to be down on Essentials and I generally prefer the originals, but having played an Essentials mag for 2 years, I don't see any significant differences between the original classes and Essentials.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

Firstly sorry for the subject errors, that what posting via smart phone in a rush gets you! Secondly this list is pretty ace! However it has confirmed what my players were telling me, eclasses are not as good as o's.

You should try them before reaching that conclusion. I used to to be down on Essentials and I generally prefer the originals, but having played an Essentials mag for 2 years, I don't see any significant differences between the original classes and Essentials.



This is my experience as well.

In normal play, you won't see much difference. In optimized play, where every player is squeezing out every erg of power they can get their hands on, the e-classes come up short. Their optimization potential is not quite as high. On the flipside, their baseline performance is generally equal or higher (except for the Binder, which is outclassed in damage AND control by all other flavors of Warlock), and it is much harder to screw up the builds.

Most all of the e-classes have their place. All of the strikers (even the vampire who I forgot) are perfectly functional out of the box, and perform roughly like a moderately optimal o-class. It's only when/if you get out of heroic that the o-classes catch up or pass the e-classes.

My first character was a hunter, and I loved it. I also have both a berserker and an elementalist that I play in LFR and that are now in paragon tier still holding their own.