D&D 4E Do you mix'n'match Essentials with standard 4e?

[Osgood]

There has been no interest in essentials characters at my table, so it hasn't been an issue. I have allowed the feats, which most have jumped on. In a secondary game, we have had two essentials characters--an executioner and a hexblade--working alongside standard characters. Mostly this was to give the classes a fair shake.

Mechanically, the classes work okay. It seems like these classes are a bit underpowered as strikers (neither can hit as hard as the party's avenging paladin or dagger rogue).

From a fun perspective, both players are pretty bored with the classes. At the table, the hexblade player is usually fine, but reports no joy from character creation or leveling. The executioner is bored both building and playing the class; he says it seemed decent on paper, but despite having a variety of at-will attacks, he winds up doing one of the same couple of things over and over.

To answer the original question, there are currently no restrictions, but my group as a whole is disinterested.

 

[Locutus Zero]

I simply allow anything legal in the character builder, assuming it isn't something totally out of place for the story. My game started before Essentials, and of the characters built since we started no one has wanted to go Essentials.

I rolled a Hunter for the game I'm playing in, he's the only Essentials character in that game. I wanted a controller in Dark Sun that worked with Thri-Kreen, and it was my best bet.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

We don't have any problem with mixing Essentials and non- in our 4e games.

In our "Eberron Invades the New World" game, my minotaur Str cleric retrained into warpriest once we got a reliable striker. This worked surprisingly well, though it was a touch boring, since I wasn't hitting things for high damage numbers any more, and I couldn't pull off my Teal'c "Renounce your false gods and you may live" speech with a straight face. On the other hand, I was a brick wall. Realizing it took a 15 for a mind flayer to hit my Will defense pretty much made all of the above worthwhile.

In our Dark Sun game, the DM at one point disallowed the Essentials classes, but feats are okay. Then he let someone do a controlling ranger from HotFK, and the oassassin player is thinking of doing an eassassin.

Brad

 

[OnlineDM]

At my tables, players can use material from any of the 4e sources - and yes Heroes of the Fallen Lands and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms are 4e!

I retain veto power over power-level or flavor issues on a case by case basis, which I rarely invoke. It has nothing to do with post September 2010 books versus pre September 2010 books, though. In most of my campaigns I'd be hard pressed to be cool with someone playing a Vampire or a Shade just because they wouldn't really fit into the world. The non-AEDU Heroes of... classes are fine, though some players have tried them out, gotten bored with them, and rebuilt their characters as PHB1/2/3 classes. Whichever approach they prefer is okay with me.

 

[Vael]

Mix and Match at will. Our Paragon party (currently on hiatus) consists of a Bard, Warden, Sorcerer, Swordmage, Scout and Executioner. We just started a new adventure at 2nd level, and we have two rogues, a PHB1 Rogue and an Essentials Thief. I almost tried the Cavalier, but ended up with a Tiefling Paladin.

Honestly, I do not see such a big difference. Essentials classes have meshed quite well with the pre-Essentials classes. If nothing else, the Paragon party finds the Essentials players are much quicker to play.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

It's all 4E. And its all available in one convenient (for me) place online. So mix and match.

I sometimes wonder if they had just released the material without the Essentials moniker if there would be so much hate.

 

[Mengu]

It's all one character builder to me. I'm not going to bother sorting through what's what. If it's in CB, it's typically kosher in my games, with few campaign specific limitations like no spell scars or wild psionic talents unless I decide to run FR or DS.

 

[Balesir]

None of the players have wanted to swap their (Paragon) characters for Essentials classes released after they were created, in the game I run. But we are agreed that any game element not world-specific (i.e. in a "world" book) or in the Dragon is open to use.

 

[caudor]

Mix and match...with worries.

I'm open to allowing players to select any class they want. However, when they do choose a non-essentials PC, I'm faced with grappling with all that errata. Yuck, I'm not even sure if I have the numbers right most of the time. My errata kung fu is weak.

It is this whole errata thing (the sheer bulk of it), that turns me off. I like the Class Compendium articles because they make using older classes easier, but still....classes like Bard, Barbarian, and others may never see Class Compendium updates.

In the end, the rift between core and essentials has left a big rift in my mind. If they went through and updated every classes published before essentials, I'd be happy, but I don't think that is going to happen.

But I'm not going to restrict my players because of hassles it creates for me. I just hate when my books become obsolete and are not reprinted (or even updated) in some form.

 

[john112364]

In the game I'm currently playing in we have a Swordmage, a Wizard, a Thief, and a Warlord/Ranger Hybrid. We also had a Warpriest though the player had to drop out for personal reasons. I have not seen any compatability problems.