Essential Essentials

[doctorhook]

I love the Essentials line! I'd recommend it (especially HoFL, HoFK, Monster Vault, and Rules Compendium) to anybody over the previous 4E line, mostly because it's more concise, easier for n00bs to use, and has the benefit of two and a half years' hindsight compared to the original 4E PH. (That said, I wouldn't hesitate to point them to certain 4E titles for their next purchases; MM2, MM3, PH2, and DMG2 are all awesome!)

Some folks have disparaged the simpler structure of the Essentials classes, but I think it's a benefit. I think D&D has become toxically awash in option-bloat since the 3E days. While this was a strength at first, IMHO it's become a major weakness; there were very few options in pre-3E editions, and yet those games were very successful. FWIW, I really think Essentials is pretty damn close to the ideal amount of option-bloat (and the fact that it's 100% backwards-compatible with 4E is just gravy).

 

[doctorhook]

it's a book that so heavily features "essentials-style" content that only the most pedantic of people would leave it out of any discussion on "the essentials books"

while it may not be from the essentials line it's still an essentials book.

It's not part of Essentials, man; it's "post-Essentials", as someone else already pointed out. Fine distinction, sure, but an important one.

The release of the Essentials line was an event which has changed the nature of D&D content since then. Heroes of Shadow came after Essentials and is structured like the Essentials, but it's clearly not a part of the Essentials line.

Would you mind if we got back to the topic at hand now?

 

[ForeverSlayer]

It's an "Essentials" book with the word "Essentials" off the cover. Essentials was the new direction going forward and the term "Essentials" is what's used to identify everything that comes after it.

Someone with the Heroes of Shadow book please look on the back and tell us what it says about what you need with this book.

 

[mneme]

FS: Give it up. What do you have wrong with using "post-essentials?" It describes exactly what you're trying to say by calling everything published after Essentials an "essentials" book without being, what we call in New York, "a lie."

 

[italianranma]

I'm not sure a discussion of what rates Essentials vs. Non-Essentials products is what the OP is looking for.

[MENTION=6682861]barabelsftw[/MENTION], If you go to the WOTC's character optimization forum, you can get a good look at all the classes and how they interact with the most up to date feats. The D&DI subscription and the Character Builder it comes with also include all this information without having to actually buy any of the books. That being said, I do like having a paper copy, so if one of your players finds a class they really like they can go pick it up.

But yeah, if you're only looking for an overview look in the CharOP forum post I linked for the class you're interested in. Alternatively if you want I wrote up a file for my little brother that summarizes all the classes. Just PM me if you want that.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

FS: Give it up. What do you have wrong with using "post-essentials?" It describes exactly what you're trying to say by calling everything published after Essentials an "essentials" book without being, what we call in New York, "a lie."

So I'm supposed to give up and say you are right just because you say so, not happening. What's wrong with calling it "Essentials"?

I'm still waiting for someone with the book to take a look at the back cover and tell us what it says.

 

[Neonchameleon]

So I'm supposed to give up and say you are right just because you say so, not happening. What's wrong with calling it "Essentials"?

That it is false. And you are wrong. Incorrect. Not right.

Now post-essentials is correct and conveys the message you want to. It has been influenced by Essentials designs and supports the classes in the Essentials books as well as classes not in Essentials. There is a style to essentials, and it is in that style. But that does not make it a product that is part of the Essentials line.

Post-essentials conveys what you claim is happening. That Essentials has had a strong influence on the most recent splatbook(s). Fluff heavy, tight builds, wizard heavy. And it does so with the benefit of not being wrong.

Words have meanings. And you don't get to pay them extra to mean different things.

Edit: And IIRC, Heroes of Shadow says on the back that it's to be used with HoFL and HoFK. Those books are Essentials books. This no more makes Heroes of Shadow Essentials than Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords was 3.5e Core because you were meant to use it with the PHB. Or than fridge magnets are a fridge if the instructions say to stick them on a fridge.

 

[Gort]

I must say, I've loved the feel of every character I've seen made using the Essentials books. They seem to play a lot faster than the original classes, and often have nice little refinements to powers that make you think, "Why didn't they do it that way in the first place?". Mostly, though, I like that a newbie or less rules-savvy player can know exactly what to do on their turn the moment it comes up with an Essentials class.

I'm also a big fan of classes with no daily powers, and AFAIK Essentials has the only ones of those that exist.

The format of the books is also excellent, they take up a lot less table space. The refined feats are very good, often giving nice side-benefits on top of what old feats did.

Edit: PS - the "Is Heroes of Shadow Essentials" derail is the most pointless posting I've seen on the Internet today. For shame.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Edit: And IIRC, Heroes of Shadow says on the back that it's to be used with HoFL and HoFK. Those books are Essentials books.

Thanks, you don't need to say anything else. You have already confirmed what I already knew and you helped my argument.

You can say I'm wrong all day long but that won't make it true. Just because it doesn't have the word "Essentials" on the cover doesn't mean it's not an essentials book.

I haven't seen much of anyone else using this "Post Essentials" title that you talk about. Head on over to the D&D forums and look at some of the other forums here and you will "Essentials" used instead of "Post Essentials".

Bill Slav has already said that Essentials is the design going forward.

 

[mneme]

Post-essentials conveys what you claim is happening. That Essentials has had a strong influence on the most recent splatbook(s). Fluff heavy, tight builds, wizard heavy. And it does so with the benefit of not being wrong.

Exactly. FS, the argument over terminology is completely separate from the argument over whether one likes or hates the Essentials books and post-essentials design. It's entirely reasonable to argue against (or for) the design, but you just make yourself look like a jackass by arguing black is white and pink is beige.

You don't win internet arguments by holding on to points that don't support your argument and get in the way of clear communication. You win internet arguments (or at least, don't lose them) by conceeding what you can conceed and cutting to the actual points of disagreement rather than getting sidetracked on terminology.

Words have meanings. And you don't get to pay them extra to mean different things.

I do! [Also, ++ Carol reference]. The thing is, to get words to mean different things, you actually -do- have to pay them double; it requires more work, not less--and you have to have a -reason- to mess with terminology. If your choice of words comes down to "yes it is," "no it isn't", "yes it is", you chose the wrong words.