D&D 4E Essentials isn't 4.5e, but is 4e as we know it over?

[lrsach01]

Bill Slavicsek is "the man" over at WotC as far as D&D goes. If he is saying that essentials is the direction that they are going in the future, it is a good bet that is the case.

Anything more than about a year out is wishful thinking and flies in the face of established WotC practices. Remember when 3e was going to be the cash cow as other companies put the time and effort into 3rd party products and WotC JUST came out with the core books? Yeah... THAT plan lasted.

WotC is part of a BIG company now... for better or worse. They will not be nimble and they will not be terribly innovative. We can only hope for the best.

 

[Steelwill]

Hope for the best is pretty much where I am at now. I hope Essentials gets it right, because 4E has been problematic thus far. Longest and most bitter edition wars, most mid-edition errata/update/revision, and its made me lose faith in the brain trust at WOTC, rather their poor handling of it coupled with generally bad business decisions.

I can only hope they can restore the game and some faith with Essentials, if not, me and D&D/WOTC will have to part company for the first time in more than 10 years. Here's hoping they nail it with this new direction.

 

[abyssaldeath]

I think the last paragraph immediately above tells the tale, especially the portions I have underlined. Essentials will be 4E rebooted with a new design philosophy, and the legacy material will be compatible, but it will be legacy in all ways going forward. Calling Essentials 4.5, a sub-edition, or a beginner set doesn't matter, it amounts to a new edition of core materials being born based on the above.

That's quite the leap in logic. From everything we have seen so far, they are only changing class design philosophy. Which amounts to new options without necessarily invalidating the old class options. The core of the game is remaining unchanged as far as we currently know.

 

[keterys]

Longest and most bitter edition wars, most mid-edition errata/update/revision

Both of those are largely because of the internet being far more accessible than previously. It just wasn't a viable option before.

 

[Steelwill]

That's quite the leap in logic. From everything we have seen so far, they are only changing class design philosophy. Which amounts to new options without necessarily invalidating the old class options. The core of the game is remaining unchanged as far as we currently know.

Starting in September and rolling out until the end of the year, the Dungeons & Dragons Essentials products consist of 10 key products that form the basis of the roleplaying game system going forward. These 10 key products are designed to be a great place to start your Dungeons & Dragons game experience, as well as being a set of core reference tools for everyone playing the game."

Just the underlined parts above tell me its not a leap in logic, its reading the words off the page. I don't see it being much clearer than that. Time will tell soon enough though. I don't care if it is a reboot, I am just sad like the OP that we are here already. I am sad 4E legacy? Core? Pre-update revisions? Unmodified maybe? is looking like its going the way of the dodo bird. And its not really meaningful to say,"Well its still compatible and not being phased out" when in fact it is by way of rules updates and revisions. That's like saying 3.5 is still playable...sure, but its not the current ruleset receiving support from WOTC anymore. Essentials will be, 4E core won't,"going forward". As I said before, here is hoping WOTC gets it right this time with Essentials.

 

[Scribble]

Starting in September and rolling out until the end of the year, the Dungeons & Dragons Essentials products consist of 10 key products that form the basis of the roleplaying game system going forward. These 10 key products are designed to be a great place to start your Dungeons & Dragons game experience, as well as being a set of core reference tools for everyone playing the game."

Just the underlined parts above tell me its not a leap in logic, its reading the words off the page. I don't see it being much clearer than that. Time will tell soon enough though. I don't care if it is a reboot, I am just sad like the OP that we are here already. I am sad 4E legacy? Core? Pre-update revisions? Unmodified maybe? is looking like its going the way of the dodo bird. And its not really meaningful to say,"Well its still compatible and not being phased out" when in fact it is by way of rules updates and revisions. That's like saying 3.5 is still playable...sure, but its not the current ruleset receiving support from WOTC anymore. Essentials will be, 4E core won't,"going forward". As I said before, here is hoping WOTC gets it right this time with Essentials.

Umm you're still maiing a lot of jumps in logic, and ignoring the fact that the core rules of the game are not changing.

They're adding new character builds. They're also looking at what they learned about how malleable the rule-set is for future builds.

I'm seeing pretty much the opposite of what you're seeing actually- They're excited by the fact that they have much more leeway then they thought for giving us new rules options WITHIN the existing rule-set framework.

Maybe a re-packaging? (I mean yeah the base rule books seem to be getting a cosmetic face lift.)

But a reboot of the rules, or a new edition?

Definitely not.

 

[Festivus]

That's quite the leap in logic. From everything we have seen so far, they are only changing class design philosophy. Which amounts to new options without necessarily invalidating the old class options. The core of the game is remaining unchanged as far as we currently know.

I agree with you, the core game rules aren't changing (I de-couple character powers from the rules... because they are really exceptions to those rules). The core rules fit in 32 or so pages... and I don't think those are changing (beyond being reprinted with the errata). When they change that engine... yes, I would say call it something new.

I am really loving the simplicity of this 4e game engine with it's flexibility to pull off these sorts of changes without disrupting the basic game. When Gamma World comes out this fall, everyone will immediately know how to play it if they have been playing 4E all this time. Who knows, perhaps they will re-boot Star Wars into this engine as well.

Optimistically yours,

-Fest

 

[abyssaldeath]

Starting in September and rolling out until the end of the year, the Dungeons & Dragons Essentials products consist of 10 key products that form the basis of the roleplaying game system going forward. These 10 key products are designed to be a great place to start your Dungeons & Dragons game experience, as well as being a set of core reference tools for everyone playing the game."

Just the underlined parts above tell me its not a leap in logic, its reading the words off the page. I don't see it being much clearer than that. Time will tell soon enough though. I don't care if it is a reboot, I am just sad like the OP that we are here already. I am sad 4E legacy? Core? Pre-update revisions? Unmodified maybe? is looking like its going the way of the dodo bird. And its not really meaningful to say,"Well its still compatible and not being phased out" when in fact it is by way of rules updates and revisions. That's like saying 3.5 is still playable...sure, but its not the current ruleset receiving support from WOTC anymore. Essentials will be, 4E core won't,"going forward". As I said before, here is hoping WOTC gets it right this time with Essentials.

Sure, when you take sentences out of context you can make them mean whatever you want them to. If you read those sentences, in the context of the information released so far, I don't see how you can possibly come to the conclusion you have. Like you said though, time will tell.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Umm you're still maiing a lot of jumps in logic, and ignoring the fact that the core rules of the game are not changing.

They're adding new character builds. They're also looking at what they learned about how malleable the rule-set is for future builds.

I'm seeing pretty much the opposite of what you're seeing actually- They're excited by the fact that they have much more leeway then they thought for giving us new rules options WITHIN the existing rule-set framework.

Maybe a re-packaging? (I mean yeah the base rule books seem to be getting a cosmetic face lift.)

But a reboot of the rules, or a new edition?

Definitely not.

Exactly, this is NO different than when MP came out and suddenly you had a battlerager and a tempest build for fighter. Now you're going to have a knight and a slayer build as well. Sure they may use a slightly different power progression and be made with beginners to the game in mind but it's still not really different from how 4e has been progressing so far.

As far as existing players are concerned Essentials is really nothing more than a big splat book and a new rule book that folds in the errata.

Really I fail to understand all the hand wringing about Essentials classes being 'better' or more popular. Given the framework of the game they really can't be much different. They may be more interesting to some players, maybe even most players, so what? Some people like Druid more than Fighter. Some people like tempest fighter more than great weapon fighter. Nothing new there.

The hand wringing about 'lack of ongoing support' for existing classes/builds sort of puzzles me too. How much more can most of these classes need? There's a point where new options for old classes is a game of diminishing returns. You could play for 100 years with the existing rules and not exhaust all possibilities.

 

[Terramotus]

I am really loving the simplicity of this 4e game engine with it's flexibility to pull off these sorts of changes without disrupting the basic game. When Gamma World comes out this fall, everyone will immediately know how to play it if they have been playing 4E all this time. Who knows, perhaps they will re-boot Star Wars into this engine as well.

Ugh, I had actually managed to forget about that CCG abomination. Now I really don't think I trust the logic going on over there. Modern day Magic is almost not even "collectible" anymore - it's more like an old school arcade: you pay some money for access to a single tournament.

But anyway...

As to the whole "it's just the classes" argument, I think that's the core of the game. Without the classes, you really don't have much left. At its core, 4E is almost identical to 3E. Take 3E, remove some combat options, tone down the magic items in exchange for 1/2 level benefits, and the changes to how stat modifiers are used, and you've pretty much got the core of 4E.