|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 12:50PM
#1
|
|
|
What's the difference?
Is Essentials just an aditional set of books that simplify things or is it like a 4.5e?
And there's the Creepy Doll  That always follows you It's got a ruined eye That's always open And there's a Creepy Doll That always follows you It's got a pretty mouth To swallow you whole
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 12:55PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2006
|
essentials is just a simpler presentation of some of the classes really.
its not even close to 4.5 e, all the rules are the same as "classic"4e and essentials classes work just fine alongside non Essentials classes.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 12:56PM
#3
|
|
|
Essentials is an additional set of books that give more options, just like the (Source) Power books did. There is no difference; Essentials is 4e, 4e is Essentials.
They are not 4.5, because they replaced nothing. You can have a Knight or Slayer hiking around in a group with a Weaponmaster Fighter with no rules hiccups at all.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 12:57PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
|
Essentials is just the latest line of books in 4th edition. There are some minor design philosophy tweaks (like trying to streamline classes rather than the massive power spam required to release a "core" class, or using the new monster math espoused in the DMG update/Monster Manual 3) but the rules they operate under are exactly the same as everything else in 4th edition. EDIT - Lol, I sort of saw this reply spam happening but wanted to reply anyway 
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 1:08PM
#5
|
|
|
Thanks for clearing that up guys.
And there's the Creepy Doll That always follows you It's got a ruined eye That's always open And there's a Creepy Doll That always follows you It's got a pretty mouth To swallow you whole
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 1:08PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
What's the difference?
Is Essentials just an aditional set of books that simplify things or is it like a 4.5e?
Essentials tries to be all things to all people, including a simplified 'on-ramp' to D&D, and a 4.5e, yes.
My opinion is that it's mainly two things:
1) The vangaurd for a WotC-proclaimed 'new direction,' which, again, claims to try to do a lot, but, mostly seems to be about easing the load on developers. That may be to cut costs for their dark corporate masters at Hasbro (there /is/ a recession on, and cost-cutting without regard to quality, patriotism or humanity is still in vogue), or to free up resources for a 5e (Monte Cook, who did 3.0 has been brought back on board, and there have certainly been plenty of rumors flying).
2) Vigorous backpeddling on the improvements made by 4e - such as class balance, consistency, precision, playabilty, etc - which were soundly rejected by 3.5 fans (now playing Pathfinder). D&D has the longest legacy of any RPG (being the 'first,' afterall), and while being a /good/ game is generally better than being a bad game, when you have over 3 decades of built up affection for the quirks and foibles that make a classic game technically inferior, it can be hard to get people to move on to something better.
Bottom line: if you like what 4e did with D&D, don't bother with Essentials - it just un-does 4e's progress - and keep playing 4e with the material already out. If you don't like what 4e did to D&D, don't bother with Essentials - it doesn't un-do enough of 4e's damage - and just keep playing 3.5/Pathfinder.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 1:14PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
|
Bottom line: if you like what 4e did with D&D, don't bother with Essentials - it just un-does 4e's progress - and keep playing 4e with the material already out. If you don't like what 4e did to D&D, don't bother with Essentials - it doesn't un-do enough of 4e's damage - and just keep playing 3.5/Pathfinder.
I like what 4e did and also like Essentials... clearly your reasoning went wrong somewhere, I think...
At the very least the Essentials Monster Vault is definitely a step forward and not back. The player material is some of both IMO.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 1:17PM
#8
|
|
|
Thanks for clearing that up guys.
Yeah, I had always heard terrible things about the D&D boards but they're actually pretty nice aren't they?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 1:20PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2008
|
Who's nice? The internet isn't nice ... no not at all.
Tony Vargas is right, as a player you have a different experience playing with PHB1/2/3 classes and playing with classes from newer books. There are many reasons but the simplest is this: they were designed by different people.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 04, 2011 - 4:03PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2010
|
The mage combines the best of 4E and Essentials, and should be a clue for how to deal with the differences in the future, or rather combine both as a template for class design.
|
|
|
