D&D 5th Edition Essentials: More like 3.9e than 4.5e (link inside) - Page 7





  1. #61
    Registered User
    Superhero (Lvl 15)



    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,002
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Aegeri
    Quote Originally Posted by MortalPlague View Post
    Being Canadian, the term band-wagon is usually applied to hockey. People hop on the band-wagon when the team does well, and hop off as soon as they lose a game. And so... band-wagon fans have a negative connotation here.
    Yeah, this is similar here and hence why I associate band-wagon with being a negative term: EG it is a short lived thing for something that will only be successful for a short time, then abandoned.

 

  • #62
    Registered User
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    ardoughter's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North kerry
    Posts
    1,576
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    I Defended The Walls!

    Ignore ardoughter
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice4Hire View Post
    Well, I should have mentioned I was assuming someone who wanted more books, but not more errata. I think there area a lot of DDI people like that.

    If I got DDI, I would want it to be the same as my physical books so I could use the DDI character builder to speed up my character building, but having large differences would not please me.

    Not a bad idea to keep copies out if that is possible.
    I know you can choose not to update and I know that it works off line I have not verified if it only updates when one updates or if it pulls stuff from the compendium when a connection is available.
    I suspect not,I believe that it pulls all data from the local cache. However, the monthly update is a user driven act and you can have 5 installations of the CB et al at the one time. So in principle you should be able to preserve the state of one installation at a particular point in time.
    The only downside is that when you get DDI initially it is the most current at the time so you cannot go back to the initial books, if that is what you want.

  • #63
    Moderator
    Superhero (Lvl 15)

    Stalker0's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    8,031
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Stalker0
    Well I'm not going to say if bandwagon has a positive or negative connotation, but it sure as heck has an Off Topic connotation.

    Can you guys take it somewhere else please?
    Is your game having issues with Grind? Check out Stalker0's Guide to Anti-Grind

    Do you want a skill challenge system that is less mechanical and encourages more roleplaying? Try my Obsidian Skill Challenge System

    Like the core 4e system, but prefer a more balanced system with additional options? Try my Alternate Core Skill Challenge System

  • #64
    Registered User
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)

    Shroomy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    3,299
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Shroomy
    Quote Originally Posted by Starfox View Post
    Looked at the presentation of the new cleric (warpriest). Even more rigid and pre-defined than 4E classes used to be. For me this is not 3.9, it is 2.5, back to the rigid class system with few options that existed back then.

    Not buying it.
    But you can swap out all the powers with a level for similar powers with a level from the larger class grouping.
    Veronica: Where's your brother?
    Dick: I think he took Ghost World up to his room. They're probably up there making love. Or playing Dungeons and Dragons. Or both, at the same time. They're both, like, 12th-level dorks. I'm just sayin'

  • #65
    Registered User
    Guide (Lvl 11)

    malraux's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    40059
    Posts
    2,224
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore malraux
    Quote Originally Posted by outsider View Post
    The only way I will buy into this is if the current character classes are the top of the line complexity-wise, and they are just going to gimp down the future martial classes. As long as existing martial classes are on the same complexity level as future caster classes, I can just ignore the new gimp martial stuff. If, however, they intend for the new casters to be more complex than existing martial characters, I'm out.
    Just because there will be differentiation between class complexity doesn't mean that all future martial classes will be less complex than all future arcane classes. Plausibly, they could decide to make a complicated martial class, just as they could make a simplified caster.

    But I will agree that returning to the idea that all martial classes should be simple is bad.
    Looking to start a new 4e group in Louisville.

  • #66
    Registered User
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)

    Shroomy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    3,299
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Shroomy
    Did I miss something? When did we get confirmation that martial characters were going to be "simple" or that having no dailies actually means simple? It seems pretty clear to me that the newb-friendliness of the Essentials line comes from having pre-made packages of abilities, clearer explanatory text, a cheaper price point, and consolidated materials.

    I would also argue that 4e already has a "simple" vs. "complex" split in terms of classes (sometimes within classes). There's hybrid classes, psionic augmentation classes, the monk's full discipline powers, runepriest rune states, the shaman and its spirit companion, summoning classes, the beastmaster ranger, the encounter long implications of barbarian rages and warden guardian forms, etc., etc. Next month, Dark Sun will be adding themes, which I'm sure will be expanded upon in other settings.

    There's nothing wrong with having both "simple" and "complex" classes within 4e, and we need to remember that it's all relative anyways. Given 4e's usage of powers and the tactical nature of combat, we're not going to be going back to the days of "I swing my sword" or "full attack!"
    Veronica: Where's your brother?
    Dick: I think he took Ghost World up to his room. They're probably up there making love. Or playing Dungeons and Dragons. Or both, at the same time. They're both, like, 12th-level dorks. I'm just sayin'

  • #67
    I think what 4E lacks in a class which has less complexity in character creation, making a non spellcasting PC in many former editions was often very simple with little decisions to be made. Some people want that, especially much younger players. 4E has normal and MORE complex classes ot play and create, but not much simple to play and certainly no simple to create (even with DDI there are a lot of decisions)
    Gloria Finis

  • #68
    Registered User
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)

    outsider's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SASKATOON
    Posts
    333
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore outsider
    Quote Originally Posted by Shroomy View Post
    Did I miss something? When did we get confirmation that martial characters were going to be "simple" or that having no dailies actually means simple?
    Playing a wizard presented different challenges and required more rules mastery than playing a fighter. We wanted to preserve and return to that aspect of the Dungeons & Dragons game in the Essentials products.
    At the very least, they intend for the new fighter to be less complex than the new wizard. Do they also intend for the old fighter to be less complex than the new wizard? Do they intend for all martial characters to be less complex than the new wizard? Many of the people that they are trying to appeal to here specifically want spellcasters to be more complex than martial types. Just how far backwards is Wizards moving in order to please these people?

    You're right that differences in class complexity already exist in 4e, and I've argued pretty vehemently against it every time it's announced. There'll always be small differences in complexity, but 4e is better off without stuff like psionic power points, and classes deliberately designed to have less complex options than others. Classes are both mechanics and character themes. The level of mechanical complexity should -NOT- be tied to character theme.

  • #69
    Potassium-Rich Moderator
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)

    Kamikaze Midget's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    13,263
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Blog Entries
    24

    Ignore Kamikaze Midget
    At the very least, they intend for the new fighter to be less complex than the new wizard.
    I read that as saying, essentially, "We're going to use Essentials to give options to people who think that a wall of 200 powers is too complex of an experience. In previous editions, the fighter provided that experience, but these days, we don't currently have an option for the player who doesn't have the level of rules mastery that we assumed with the 4e launch, since with the 4e launch, we were more targeting current players, and now we're targeting newbies, who could really benefit from a "just hit things" class that is as effective, in its own way, as any other. We're also gonna make the classes play more differently. In earlier editions, a fighter and a wizard played very differently, but right now, everyone uses the same power scheme. Feedback has told us that people are bored with that, and like stuff that changes it up a bit."

    "Rules mastery" is not, AFAICT, code for "Now all wizards will be more fun than all fighters, because we've decided all of our previous findings about how people actually enjoyed playing fighters and wanted more options was wrong, and clearly they are only meant to be effectively hirelings for the omnipotent Wizard. Also, we will give arcane spellcasters cake, and fighters will get no cake, ever, and will have to eat wizard-poo, which, in the Essentials line, smells like cinnamon, because Wizards are perfect and Fighters suck."

    I believe you're jumping at shadows.

    FWIW, it would suck if they made all fighters less fun than all wizards.

    I don't think there's even a remote chance of that happening. Take a deep breath, and repeat to yourself, swords are awesome, swords are awesome, swords are awesome...
    Last edited by Kamikaze Midget; Sunday, 11th July, 2010 at 07:09 AM.
    -- Jacob J Driscoll, Unsleeping---
    "A one inch mound of flesh with a scar running down it"

    PS5e v. 0.1: Faction Backgrounds
    Tieflings (& other planetouched) | Bariaur | Githzerai | Outcaste Modron
    FINAL FANTASY ZERO
    finalfantasyzero.wikidot.com

  • #70
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)

    Mouseferatu's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    9,048
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Blog Entries
    10

    Ignore Mouseferatu
    Quote Originally Posted by outsider View Post
    At the very least, they intend for the new fighter to be less complex than the new wizard. Do they also intend for the old fighter to be less complex than the new wizard?
    For that to be the case, they would have to make the new wizard more complex than the old wizard, since right now the old fighter and the old wizard are close to being on par. (I suppose the old wizard is a little more complex, what with the spellbook, but it's a very minor difference.) Thus, they would have to make an Essentials class markedly more complex than its PHB counterpart.

    I think the odds of that happening are so close to absolute zero that my keyboard's actually threatening to frost over.
    Ari Marmell, aka Mouseferatu--Rodent of the Dark

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 7 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. D&D Essentials
      By Omertalvendetta in forum D&D and Pathfinder Rules & Discussion
      Replies: 30
      Last Post: Monday, 10th May, 2010, 02:29 PM
    2. What do we know of D&D Essentials?
      By xechnao in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 28
      Last Post: Friday, 7th May, 2010, 02:24 PM
    3. D&D Essentials
      By Sage in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 39
      Last Post: Friday, 14th October, 2005, 11:00 AM
    4. PPC PDA Essentials
      By Vrylakos in forum Miscellaneous Geek Talk & Media Lounge
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: Friday, 25th July, 2003, 07:27 PM
    5. NPC Essentials
      By PosterBoy in forum Fan Reviews
      Replies: 5
      Last Post: Wednesday, 26th March, 2003, 05:00 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •