|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 8:35PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Oct 15, 2010
|
erdana;color:#000000;font-size:9pt;">After buying and reading through Hotfl, I must admit, I really like the new design philosophy.
I've been playing D&D since 2nd edition, and have played through every iteration of the game since. I converted over to 4e because of the 'every PC is useful' philosophy as well as the vast improvements made on the DM side. I have enjoyed the 4e rule set so far, and I’m glad it continues to grow and evolve (I like errata too).
Our group is made up of mostly casual players (play one or two times a month) who enjoy these three elements of the game the most: hanging out, dishing out some damage, telling a good story.
I think the Essentials line offers the perfect mix of High to Low complexity choices for our group. We have a person in the group who will be absolutely thrilled playing a slayer. He is more concerned about making a witty insult then rolling a d20 to back it up, rather than flipping through 2 to 3 sheets of powers.
We have other players that will enjoy the less confusing class choices. They are mostly concerned with playing a cleric in this game, then a wizard in that game, then a fighter in the next game, rather then having the option to build 6 different kinds of fighters, then scanning for key words and rider effects, etc.
We also have some players that drop in and out. I think even Essentials might be too much for these guys. I sometimes have them play NPCs (monster manual type stats) when they decide to drop in. There may be some Essentials builds that they can pick up right away and be effective, but we'll see.
Overall, I praise the shift in design and hope this is the direction for 4e going forward. I think this is the perfect blend of what I love about 4e and what works practically for our casual gaming group. I'm hoping to see other classes like the avenger and barbarian classes Essentialized.
I know others disagree with me, but hey, its just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 8:39PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
I can agree with you about the classes. I'd like to see Essentials alternative builds for plenty of them.
Honestly, for as hard a time as I give Essentials, it's totally not the game's fault. It's a nice system, and I'll be happier when they come out with simplified magic classes as well, just so I don't feel like the Martial classes are a reenactment of "Revenge of the Nerds."
I still haven't gotten a chance to play any Essentials classes since the Red Box Game Day, since I spontaneously rediscovered how much I loved the character of my swordmage. Now there's a class that'd be cool to see in Essentials format, particularly if they call it the Duskblade, so the fandom could rejoice.
The original core books said that this was our game too. It doesn't feel like that anymore.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 8:44PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 26, 2010
|
In theory, I agree that a few more 'simple' classes were needed. I loved the choices in 4e, but some of the players I play with seemed to struggle with it's complexity.
Still waiting to see how it all pans out though.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 8:45PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
|
Uh oh.
I enjoy your opinion and agree with much of it. Don't let the fact that about 10 angry dudes are about to tell you how wrong you are dissuade you from hanging out on the boards.
There has been a huge amount of Essential craziness going on and I don't know if you realize what you just stumbled into.
Good luck and God Speed.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 8:48PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2008
|
erdana;color:#000000;font-size:9pt;">After buying and reading through Hotfl, I must admit, I really like the new design philosophy.
I've been playing D&D since 2nd edition, and have played through every iteration of the game since. I converted over to 4e because of the 'every PC is useful' philosophy as well as the vast improvements made on the DM side. I have enjoyed the 4e rule set so far, and I’m glad it continues to grow and evolve (I like errata too).
Our group is made up of mostly casual players (play one or two times a month) who enjoy these three elements of the game the most: hanging out, dishing out some damage, telling a good story.
I think the Essentials line offers the perfect mix of High to Low complexity choices for our group. We have a person in the group who will be absolutely thrilled playing a slayer. He is more concerned about making a witty insult then rolling a d20 to back it up, rather than flipping through 2 to 3 sheets of powers.
We have other players that will enjoy the less confusing class choices. They are mostly concerned with playing a cleric in this game, then a wizard in that game, then a fighter in the next game, rather then having the option to build 6 different kinds of fighters, then scanning for key words and rider effects, etc.
We also have some players that drop in and out. I think even Essentials might be too much for these guys. I sometimes have them play NPCs (monster manual type stats) when they decide to drop in. There may be some Essentials builds that they can pick up right away and be effective, but we'll see.
Overall, I praise the shift in design and hope this is the direction for 4e going forward. I think this is the perfect blend of what I love about 4e and what works practically for our casual gaming group. I'm hoping to see other classes like the avenger and barbarian classes Essentialized.
I know others disagree with me, but hey, its just my opinion.
Glad that you are having fun with it. I've been pleased with what I've seen so far. I'm currently DMing one 4e game with original classes and an all Essentials game. I enjoy both, but I haven't really got to see them side by side yet.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 8:54PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2008
|
Just adding my support as well, I am beginning an essentials only game this weekend. So far my entire group has loved essentials, even managed to snag back one from Pathfinder.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 9:22PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
|
Just adding my support as well, I am beginning an essentials only game this weekend. So far my entire group has loved essentials, even managed to snag back one from Pathfinder.
That's cool.
I've been making tallies on the essential argument threads, just for my own nerdiness.
So far, it's about 4 to 1 in favor of essentials (getting closer to 5 to 1 in the last day or so). I've tracked about 15 threads and about 350 commenters.
In the threads I've been documenting, there have been about 15 commenters (5 of which seem to find EVERY one of those threads and comment dozens of times) who are VERY strongly ANTI Essentials and about 30 commenters who have taken issue with those same 15 repeatedly and appear to be strongly PRO essentials. Most of the other comments are from people who are marginally against or casually for Essentials. Lots of people have reserved judgement and are waiting to see what happens.
Based on this very UNscientific research, I'd say that Wizards will be in good shape, at least with the type of gamer that comments here. Lastly, based on this information, we've had about 4 positive comments on Essentials without a single negative. That means we should be getting a negative pretty quick if the ratio holds up. 
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 9:24PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2008
|
stop tracking me mbeacom.....you've now earned a Judo Chop! 
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 9:32PM
#9
|
|
|
And the best part is, even if I don't prefer Essentials, it doesn't matter. You can play an Essentials character alongside my not-Essentials character and nobody will care.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 15, 2010 - 9:34PM
#10
|
|
|
And the best part is, even if I don't prefer Essentials, it doesn't matter. You can play an Essentials character alongside my not-Essentials character and nobody will care.
I'm sure that's the case IRL, but you wouldn't know it from reading certain posters' comments.
Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad
Show
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
D20 Modern Toon PC Race.
Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.
|
|
|
