Imaro
Legend
And yet, this is exactly what they are doing. Read the post and even go to the link I provided.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Encounters- Essentials Only, Moving Forward...
- Thread starter Imaro
- Start date
And yet, this is exactly what they are doing. Read the post and even go to the link I provided.
Festivus
First Post
My expectation is that the Encounter program is going to show off the newest books. It did so for Season 1 (Psionics in PHB3), Season 2 (Dark Sun) and Season 3 (Essentials).
In Season 1, you got bonus points for making a PHB3 class and taking a feat from that book. Season 2 required pregens for the first two chapters, and they were Dark Sun.
In season 2 - Chapter 3, you could make a Dark Sun character instead of using the pregens.
In Season 3 - You make an essentials character.
In Season 4 - You make a Boot Hill gunslinger and show up to the event.
This isn't anything surprising to me at least. That you can't bring a PHB1-3 character into Encounters is fine with me, because it might not fit the feel of the encounter (like warforged in Forgotten Realms, which always rubbed me wrong anyhow).
In Season 1, you got bonus points for making a PHB3 class and taking a feat from that book. Season 2 required pregens for the first two chapters, and they were Dark Sun.
In season 2 - Chapter 3, you could make a Dark Sun character instead of using the pregens.
In Season 3 - You make an essentials character.
In Season 4 - You make a Boot Hill gunslinger and show up to the event.
This isn't anything surprising to me at least. That you can't bring a PHB1-3 character into Encounters is fine with me, because it might not fit the feel of the encounter (like warforged in Forgotten Realms, which always rubbed me wrong anyhow).
Imaro
Legend
I'm of two minds on this...
On the one hand I think it's a good thing for trying to rope in more DM's and providing a discrete set of options for players to be familiar with, and sort of rests everyone back to a "beginner" status as far as builds and optimization go. It will definitely push the Essentials line more and will undoubtedly help sales of it. I also think it is a good thing that they are creating a new program for all options (though this is with the caveat that it is actually implemented and not a half-hearted attempt).
On the other hand, I'm not sure the "divide" being created is a good thing, especially with the 4e/4.5 debates raging. I feel like new and old players should be able to come together and play together, especially if options of essentials and non-essentials are balanced and compatible.
On the one hand I think it's a good thing for trying to rope in more DM's and providing a discrete set of options for players to be familiar with, and sort of rests everyone back to a "beginner" status as far as builds and optimization go. It will definitely push the Essentials line more and will undoubtedly help sales of it. I also think it is a good thing that they are creating a new program for all options (though this is with the caveat that it is actually implemented and not a half-hearted attempt).
On the other hand, I'm not sure the "divide" being created is a good thing, especially with the 4e/4.5 debates raging. I feel like new and old players should be able to come together and play together, especially if options of essentials and non-essentials are balanced and compatible.
UniversalMonster
First Post
No, it's not "what they are doing". It's how you interpreted an article.
I have my suspicions why people (who generally come down on the negative-on-4e side) are really pushing this interpretation (for one thing, it will show that D&D 4E players are "forced" to play Essentials) but I really don't think that's true.
It's a demo program. What they are trying to demo is Essentials itself. That's how decision like this are made.
I have my suspicions why people (who generally come down on the negative-on-4e side) are really pushing this interpretation (for one thing, it will show that D&D 4E players are "forced" to play Essentials) but I really don't think that's true.
It's a demo program. What they are trying to demo is Essentials itself. That's how decision like this are made.
SupremeBadgerLord
First Post
They won't be required.
Imaro
Legend
Yeah, that reasoning might fly except...as I noted... they will be rolling out another program for those who want to use pre-essential material (so you really can't argue they are forcing anything yet.). But again, it's easier to ignore what is actually there.
Rex Blunder
First Post
I agree with Imaro. It sounds like their current plan is that each season will combine
a) Essentials (their "evergreen books") and
b) whatever book they are currently showcasing (for instance, their Shadow sourcebook in a few months).
This is also consistent with their statements that, going forward, Essentials will be their main access point to D&D for new players.
I this it's perfectly reasonable to assume that no future Essentials seasons will include, for instance, the Tactical Warlord.
This seems fine to me. Encounters is mostly about providing a simple D&D pickup game for new people, right? Essentials seems like a good way to go. As 4e expands, increased options will mean increased analysis paralysis, and limiting builds to a handful of books is quite rational.
I'm not sure if Imaro is for or against this change in policy, but I believe his interpretation of the post is correct.
a) Essentials (their "evergreen books") and
b) whatever book they are currently showcasing (for instance, their Shadow sourcebook in a few months).
This is also consistent with their statements that, going forward, Essentials will be their main access point to D&D for new players.
I this it's perfectly reasonable to assume that no future Essentials seasons will include, for instance, the Tactical Warlord.
This seems fine to me. Encounters is mostly about providing a simple D&D pickup game for new people, right? Essentials seems like a good way to go. As 4e expands, increased options will mean increased analysis paralysis, and limiting builds to a handful of books is quite rational.
I'm not sure if Imaro is for or against this change in policy, but I believe his interpretation of the post is correct.
Last edited:
In my area, Encounters is the regular public play. For me, it's the only regular play. (I DM two irregular games.) we don't have LFR. I want to buy the red box for my eight-year-old for Christmas, not for me now. I have 30 hardcovers, I don't need the box.
I hated the pregens in season 2 and was thrilled when Chapter 3 allowed me to bring MY character. But now I guess I don't get to. Unless I stick with one of those eight character concepts. Or I skip for five months.
I hated the pregens in season 2 and was thrilled when Chapter 3 allowed me to bring MY character. But now I guess I don't get to. Unless I stick with one of those eight character concepts. Or I skip for five months.
Mithreinmaethor
First Post
If you cant have fun by just PLAYING, and not having it be all about you cant have fun unless its done the way you want it to be, then Encounters is definitely not for you.
I personally DM encounters but the people that come out are there for the fun of playing and the camaraderie of others having fun as well.
