Essentials Versions of Other Classes

13 posts / 0 new
Last post
Has there been anything official done about Essentials versions of other classes (ie, standard warlock, avenger, invoker, any psionic classes, etc).

For that matter, are there any official rules about Essentials versions of other races (ie, goliaths, gnomes, etc)?

Thanks all for your help.
I'm not sure what you mean by essentials versions of races. Essentials only made flex stats basline, and gave 2 races optional encounter power to make up for the fact not all classes get normal at-wills. Flex stats were then given to the remaining races (except gnolls, because WoTC decided to throw them under the buss) in a pdf some time ago.

There are no offical essentials versions of the listed classes though. Essentials tried to stick to more "classic D&D" archetypes, and psionics was simply deemed unpopular by WoTC.


There was an essentials Avenger produced on these boards some time ago, mostly working as a hybrid of the slayer, avenger, and alittle of the paladin's smites tossed in. You can probably use the search feature for that.


Warlock could probably be done sort of like the elementalist, since the pre-4e lock had alot of manipulations of Eldritch blast.


An alternative invoker could be cool, and maybe be similar to the mage, but probably requires more powers geared for keywords.


Psionics is sort of the precursor of essentials, due to breaking the normal power progression. I think essentialized it'd probably be less "swapping" of at-wills at higher levels, and just some base at-wills at first level you augment that simply improve on their own as you level up.
Has there been anything official done about Essentials versions of other classes (ie, standard warlock, avenger, invoker, any psionic classes, etc).

No.   But PH classes can be played alongside E sub-classes with no more trouble than playing a Mage alongside a Knight.

For that matter, are there any official rules about Essentials versions of other races (ie, goliaths, gnomes, etc)?

AFAIK, only the human and half-elf had to be changed in Essentials - to make them compatible with certain E-classes, oddly enough.

All races did get the alternate stat bonuses, though, as mentioned.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Though, technically, flex-stat races were introduced before Essentials, starting with the Changlings printed in the Eberron Player's Guide, IIRC.  Though, as noted, almost all races recieved the flex-stat treatment in preparation for Essentials.
Thinking about creating a race for 4e? Make things a lil' easier on yourself by reading my Race Mechanic Creation Guide first.
4e is dead.  I doubt anything so ambitious as new E-classes will be forthcoming.
Has there been anything official done about Essentials versions of other classes (ie, standard warlock, avenger, invoker, any psionic classes, etc).

For that matter, are there any official rules about Essentials versions of other races (ie, goliaths, gnomes, etc)?

Thanks all for your help.



Technically there are Essentials versions of the Warlock- Hexblade and Binder.  But the Hexblade's inferior as a striker to an Eldritch Striking warlock, and the Binder's inferior to a Warlock with some focus on control.
By "standard warlock" i think he means a warlock that behaves much like the current one, just essentialized.


Though beyond being nerfed by restricting its powers (like the binder) it probably wouldnt turn out well.     
By "standard warlock" i think he means a warlock that behaves much like the current one, just essentialized.
 



The problem is that this doesn't exist for many of the Essentials classes.  Slayers, for example, aren't all that much like Fighters, since they're not Defenders, and the same is true of Blackguard.  Elementalists are ranged strikers, but the plain Sorcerer is really a close in specialist (yes, sorcerers have plenty of ranged powers, but they're not that good).

4e is dead.  I doubt anything so ambitious as new E-classes will be forthcoming.


4e's not dead.  It's simply the unwanted orphan relative locked up in a cupboard under the stairs.  It may be brought back out to the light of day after the current experiment blows up in everyone's faces, or the master company farms it out officially or unofficially at some point, or 13th Age picks it up and brushes it off and turns it into the star that it ought to be, or some combination of those events.  Hell, even BECMI's not dead.  So I seriously doubt 4e could be considered as such.

Besides which, new races are still coming out through official channels, so anything is possible.

4e is dead.  I doubt anything so ambitious as new E-classes will be forthcoming.


4e's not dead.  It's simply the unwanted orphan relative locked up in a cupboard under the stairs.  It may be brought back out to the light of day after the current experiment blows up in everyone's faces, or the master company farms it out officially or unofficially at some point, or 13th Age picks it up and brushes it off and turns it into the star that it ought to be, or some combination of those events.  Hell, even BECMI's not dead.  So I seriously doubt 4e could be considered as such.

Besides which, new races are still coming out through official channels, so anything is possible.


Locked in the cupboard is pretty fair.  3.5 and earlier versions are all represented by retro-clones (sometimes several cloning the same edition), and thus you can play a retro-clone or use support for a retro-clone as ongoing support for your earlier-ed game.  They are thus very much alive and active.  4e, OTOH, cannot be legally cloned, and all 3pp support for it can be cut off at a moments notice under the GSL.  Thus 4e can be locked in that cupboard until it starves.

OTOH, it's also already 'dead' in the sense that no new book has been published for it for a year now.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

How can it not be cloned if the other editions are? Just rename some things and make some tweaks and poor, clone.
By "standard warlock" i think he means a warlock that behaves much like the current one, just essentialized.
 



The problem is that this doesn't exist for many of the Essentials classes.  Slayers, for example, aren't all that much like Fighters, since they're not Defenders, and the same is true of Blackguard.  Elementalists are ranged strikers, but the plain Sorcerer is really a close in specialist (yes, sorcerers have plenty of ranged powers, but they're not that good).




Knights, Thieves, Scouts, Cavaliers, Warpriests, Mages, Witches, Sha'Ir, Protector, Skald are all pretty much just their parent class.


Also, elementalists can go close  as well. They may not be as good at it as sorcerers are, but  they tend not to be as good as sorcerors in general.


Warlock is the only 'parent class' that has essentials versions who doesnt have an essential clone who isnt trying to do much of the same thing. I guess barbarian might count, but its very weak as a defender and is beter left a a striker.
I can't help but wonder if certain other companies...(cough, Paizo, cough)...will convert their game system to 4E, or perhaps adopt it, since Wizards wants nothing to do with it any more.