How far are they going with Essentials

Merric got to it before I could (and much better and more thorough than I would have had the patience for ).

Essentials is a product line within 4E. It is, in a sense, both a pseudo-evergreen product line and a variant take on 4E, especially classes. The distinction between "classic" 4E and Essentials is artificial in that they are both the same game. WotC could conceivably come out with another variant line next year, with different design precepts. In some ways you could say that with Essentials WotC flexed the muscles of the 4E game engine, displaying how flexible it is.

My guess is that WotC is going to try out some new ideas over the next couple years, gather info, and build towards a release of 5E in 2013 or 2014. How products like Essentials do, and what the response is to variant takes, will impact their design considerations.

Plane Sailing said:

If I run 4e again it will be an 'essentials only' game;

Click to expand...

This is what we're doing right now (Im DM'ing) and I'm loving it. It's also why I would like WOTC to focus on Essentials from here on out. Eventualy HofL & Hofk will get old and new Essential builds will be vital.

Plane Sailing said:

From my perspective it would be great to see one or two additional classes come through in Essentials format in a single book - say a monk, an assassin, a couple more runepriest domains, a couple more mage schools, that sort of thing

Click to expand...

Yebo! *zulu for "yes!"

AbdulAlhazred said:

Again, the point is being somewhat missed. Lets say there is an option for some sort of Thief build with shadow stuff attached to it, that isn't going to work with my PHB1 rogue. Sure, MAYBE I can take some feat, MAYBE I can take some power, but if I want to actually use the entire option I MUST take the simplified Thief and not the PHB1 rogue that I like to play.

Click to expand...

Right, because if you took the entire option, then you would be playing a Thief and not a PHB1 rogue.

You're talking about (essentialy)two different classes. Even though they are (supposedly) both "rogues"... in actuality, they're not. One is a rogue, rogue (if you will) and one is a rogue thief. They're more like cousins than brothers.

Incenjucar said:

They have revised rituals for Essentials/Post-Essentials. However, the book they were to be in was canceled, so they'll most likely place them in Dragon.



I really do wish individuals would try to ask questions before making statements about topics they have not researched. It would reduce a lot of the hysterics that fan cultures go through.

Click to expand...

Well since you've apparently done the research, would you mind telling us where you found this interesting piece of information?

Otherwise I might be inclined to assume you're just making stuff up

I guess, what it comes down to is just that I've become a (classic) 4e grognard. None of the changes introduced in the Essentials products felt like an improvement to me. For me the old format was perfect and I'd happily continued buying PHB4, DMG3, MM4, and X Power 2 ff.

I think I already mentioned I bought the Monster Vault, yes? To me, the one flaw the book has is the new format. The content is fine.

MerricB said:

However, that's not what most people are debating. What they're debating is the D&D Essentials Design Precepts. You see, while there won't be any more D&D Essentials-branded products, there will be products that contain material that corresponds to the designs used in Essentials. The doomsayers believe that there will never be any support of the older PHB1-3 material, it'll only be for the "Essential"-type classes.

Click to expand...

Precisely!
What I believe will happen is the 'Essentialization' of the PHB builds because the D&D Essentials Design Precepts are "clearly superior" to the ones previously used. Except, I feel the previous design precepts were superior.

Cheers,

Jhaelen Doomsayer

Great summary, Merric!

MerricB said:

However, that's not what most people are debating. What they're debating is the D&D Essentials Design Precepts. You see, while there won't be any more D&D Essentials-branded products, there will be products that contain material that corresponds to the designs used in Essentials. The doomsayers believe that there will never be any support of the older PHB1-3 material, it'll only be for the "Essential"-type classes.

Click to expand...

I guess I'm saying that support for Essentials *is* support for the rest of the stuff. My cleric has more options with the Warpriest than she did before, and much more than was in Martial Power 2. I get that I won't be able to use ALL the warpriest options if I play my cleric, but that's no different than a new cleric build in Divine Power 2. I wouldn't be able to use all the options there, either.

The format is different, and there might not be as much as there was before, but there's not as many books as there were before, either. And I cannot see getting upset because you can't use 100% of a new book. You could never use 100% of a new book. There were chunks of Martial Power 2 that were useless to 4.0 fighters, just as there will be chunks of future books that are useless to 4.0 fighters.

So, the new books DO provide options for the older classes, and even if your particular specific class isn't represented in a particular book, it's not like that's a new phenomenon, and it's not like there isn't 2 years worth of material for you to cull from that isn't this particular book.

Blackguards will provide paladin options. Necromancers will provide wizard options. Hexblades will provide warlock options. Races will provide everyone new character options. Feats will provide everyone (and probably especially stealthy characters) options. I don't imagine future books will be much different in this respect. Even if they continue to go with essentials design principles in the future, that doesn't mean you can't take a particular power or feat, if you find that it works for you.