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

[Tony Vargas]

One of the universal constants of RPG lines is power inflation.

4e has been suffering a bit less power inflation than you'd expect from the volume of material produced in 2 years. There are a couple of good reasons. First and foremost is the willingness to issue errata (albeit, not the willingness to /call/ it errata). If you're willing to nerf the broken rule you let slip out to make a dead line, at least it only screws the game up for a little while.

Second, the use of keyword-linked mechanics allows one rule (like, say, the 'restrained' condition) be used to model a variety of PC and monster abilities and magic items. You don't need every monster with a tentacle or web attack and every magic net and rope of entanglement to have it's own unique system, you just choose imobilized, grabbed or restrained, and end-of-next-turn, save ends, or escape to end it. The kind of thing other games figured out 20 years ago, but still, moderately slick.

Also, the structuring of PC powers gives a good guideline for keeping classes balanced. It's not sure-fire, but it's helpful to give everyone about the same balance of unlimitted and limited-use resources.


The announcements around Essentials are troubling for some related reasons. (Well, and also because they sound so much like the ones around 3.5 - it's not a new edition, your old books won't be useless, etc, etc).

The carefully structured class balance in 4e could be upset by the introduction of classes with different resource management issues.

Inevitably, power inflation will leave older material behind. It's not just big changes like essentials. For instance, when the PH first hit, STR-primary and even STR-secondary builds had a unique thing going for them, in that their OAs remained meaningful at all levels, because the MBA used STR. Paladin, Cleric, Ranger, even Rogue, all had builds that made use of STR that were just a bit more desireable because of that. Enter Melee Training and, coincidentally, the STR builds decline in desireability.

That was just one feat.

Essentials is a change in the whole direction of the game. It's compatible, notice, in the sense that the new classes get all the goodies of the old classes, not in the sense of the old classes getting to use everything published for the new. That's a virtual gaurantee of obsolescence as power inflation marches on and the old (/balanced/) classes get left behind. Whether the new classes are published in essentials-style books or PHXs, the result is the same.


If Essentials really does just give us all the mechanics in a nice, fully-errated compendium, and provide a bunch of 'training wheels' classes, that'd be fine. But, if it presages designers throwing the hard-won class balance of 4e out the window...

 

[UngainlyTitan]

One of the universal constants of RPG lines is power inflation.

This I agree with but...

snip ...

Inevitably, power inflation will leave older material behind. It's not just big changes like essentials.

This is less of a problem as long as they bring out new powers for the older classes that keep them on a par with the new stuff. So you retrain into the new stuff.

Essentials is a change in the whole direction of the game. It's compatible, notice, in the sense that the new classes get all the goodies of the old classes, not in the sense of the old classes getting to use everything published for the new.

This remains to be seen.

That's a virtual gaurantee of obsolescence as power inflation marches on and the old (/balanced/) classes get left behind. Whether the new classes are published in essentials-style books or PHXs, the result is the same.

as I said above not if the old classes get the new powers or varients of them also. Should not be a problem in the 4e architecture.

If Essentials really does just give us all the mechanics in a nice, fully-errated compendium, and provide a bunch of 'training wheels' classes, that'd be fine. But, if it presages designers throwing the hard-won class balance of 4e out the window...

This also remains to be seen.

 

[Jack99]

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.

You do realize that Mearls has explicitly stated that for the books he is working now, the 2011 books (aka post-Essentials books), he is still using the original PHB? That would seem to contradict your theories, no?

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

You do realize that Mearls has explicitly stated that for the books he is working now, the 2011 books (aka post-Essentials books), he is still using the original PHB? That would seem to contradict your theories, no?

He said he still used it as his primary reference source. Of course, that would be the case even if the Essentials line is 4.5e. After all, it contains the rules for combat, the rules for how skills work, and so on. None of which are changing with Essentials. Also, you want to keep the balance the same when designing a new class, so you always want to compare with the classes in the PHB1.

But he said it was his primary rule source. Which also implies that he also uses the Essentials books for some references.

I think the truth is somewhere in between the two extremes being discussed here. I think all classes in the future will use the Essentials philosophy on their design. I think the days of all classes getting the exact same number of at wills, encounters, dailies and receiving them at the same level are gone.

I think that nearly every class printed so far will receive the "Essentials Treatment". Therefore, indirectly retiring all the classes published in previous books. Not that the old classes won't be compatible, but that there will be a different "feel" to all the new classes that the old ones won't have. I'd say a lot like playing with 1e classes in a 2e game. Technically, they are compatible and use the same underlying system, but with a different design philosophy. Actually, the difference will probably be bigger than that. 1e and 2e were basically identical.

I think that sometime in the future(probably a year from now), when a new player joins our group, we'll be pulling out our Essentials books and saying "Here are the classes you can choose from. Technically, there are a bunch more classes from previous books, but they are way too complicated for new players and most of them are worse than the classes in these books, so it's not worth spending your time looking through them."

 

[MerricB]

Pertinent to this discussion is this subscriber-only Ampersand column from Bill Slaviscek: Beyond Essentials (March 2010).

Cheers!

 

[Henry]

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

Anyone who says 4E was the most bitter of the "Edition Wars" I have to disagree with, because I remember quite well the diatribes on rec.games.frp.dnd, and wizards' own usenet groups (before the days of their web forums!) of how 3E was going to turn D&D into a video game, and how it was the death of real roleplaying, wizards got far too many spells, PCs had far too many hit points, and removing percentile strength just destroyed the realism of the game.

Only difference was that 2nd edition was a dying game, not very actively supported, and there was no OGL to stoke the fires of those left behind. The OGL not only gave the 3E community a venue for continuing to support the game they wanted -- it gave that venue to the AD&D and Basic D&D crowd as well, through the retro-clones, who had the legal ground to borrow proper terms and re-purpose them! (Papers & Paychecks from OSRIC fame pretty much said he couldn't have done OSRIC without the OGL). That alone gave people the fire to move on. I imagine when 5E hits one day, the fan base will not be nearly as split because the support will dry up like a raisin in the sun thanks to the GSL.

 

[Jack99]

But he said it was his primary rule source. Which also implies that he also uses the Essentials books for some references.

no it implies he uses other books. Those could just as well be the PHB2&3.

Pertinent to this discussion is this subscriber-only Ampersand column from Bill Slaviscek: Beyond Essentials (March 2010).

Cheers!

you mean this part?

Front List in 2011

As I discussed last month, the Essentials line of products consists of 10 key products that will always be in stock and will form the core of the Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game experience moving forward. Each product is designed to provide a more streamlined, more directed, and less expensive experience for the user. These products don’t replace the existing Player’s Handbook, Dungeon Master’s Guide, or Monster Manual. They represent a separate pathway into the game. These 10 key products come out throughout the months of September, October, November, and December.

In January, 2011, our new front list products begin rolling out, providing expanded game options and materials for all players. We’re going to continue to use the lessons we learned from Essentials while applying the innovation and design we’re known for. You’ll see options for players that include new power sources, new class and race options, and even more universal options that work with the material you’re already playing with. For Dungeon Masters, options will include new campaign elements, new monsters, new tools to help plan and run the game, and more. These products will include our traditional formats, but you’ll also see new formats as well. There’s exciting things coming for D&D, and we’ll get more and more into this topic as the year progresses.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Yeah, I kind of get the impression that what he means by the "separate pathway into the game" is that you can buy all the Essentials books and still play 4e. Albeit without access to the old version of the classes.

That means that the Essentials books have to reprint any "necessary" feats in order to make sure you don't need to refer to the other PHBs. Either that or to build the classes in such a way that those "necessary" feats are no longer necessary. Maybe the Essentials classes have built in feat bonuses to hit as class features(so that they can't stack them with Expertise if they should happen to buy PHB2).

But after all of the Essentials books are done being printed, they can go back to printing some new books that are not part of the Essentials line. Although, I believe they will still follow the new standards set by Essentials in the same way that all monsters in the MM3 were created using the new monster creation rules. It means that some monsters in MM1 are a little obsolete because they might not have enough powers or they do too little damage. In that same way, some of the old classes might become a little bit obsolete.

The MM3 doesn't prevent the MM1 from being used or from being compatible with 4e, but it does set a new(and better) standard for monsters. I believe the Essentials books will be the same thing for classes.

 

[MrMyth]

I think the truth is somewhere in between the two extremes being discussed here. I think all classes in the future will use the Essentials philosophy on their design. I think the days of all classes getting the exact same number of at wills, encounters, dailies and receiving them at the same level are gone.

I am doubtful of this. I think even within Essentials, most of those details will remain absolutely the same across classes. There may be the occasional one that works different - as with Psionics, as with whatever Essentials class might do different things with dailies - but I don't think we are going to see the entire system tossed out. I don't think we'll see anyone gaining powers at different levels.

I think the chance of the old classes being 'worse' than the new ones, or rendered obsolete in any way, is pretty much nonexistent. We might present new players just with Essentials due to ease of use, but most players will select from both old and new without any hesitation, going with whatever fits their character concept the best.

I think the comparison to the MM situation is a flawed one. The MM3 monsters actively use updated math to fix an existing problem (and there are guidelines to easily update any MM1 or MM2 monsters.) Essentials isn't "fixing" the PHB classes. Perhaps in one or two very minor ways, but it is mostly just presenting them in a clearer and simpler fashion to make them more accessible to new players.

Saying that it sets a "new and better standard" is missing the goal of Essentials - it isn't to present an improved version for everyone, but instead a counterpart aimed at new players. I'm relatively sure there will remain room for both.

 

[bowbe]

Then again...

I know it's been a million years since I've bothered to post on en world. Been more of a lurker really as 4e has rolled out, made its splash "changed the face of gaming forever" and so on and so forth as all the promises went back when CP and BS gave their pronouncements of its inevitable arrival at the last Gen Con I managed to make it to.

With high hopes, I purchased the core trio in its premium box set. I read them. I furrowed my brow. I read them again. I played a few of the introductory adventures hosted at con's and local not so friendly game shops. I caught on early that basically every class is completely identical, with a trazillion HP and all have cool powers that are virtually the same with "different names' for the effects that they offered.

It wasn't the dynamic I like in (any) rpg. In other words, not to my taste. Fair enough and done. I decided not to throw vinnegar on everyone else's good time and... stopped posting here to avoid offending fans (either of my work, or the work of my friends who worked their tail off on products for 4e or actual 4ed WOTC licensed stuff.

Interestingly as I invest my time and research into the "new" direction that Wizards is taking, this rebranding with D&D essentials focused on *new* players I have to pause as many others in the industry and or/fans of it and go... this feels chillingly familiar.

For me it feels like when a book I had written was released for a previous edition (3.0 it is called now) the day 3.5 edition launched. Prior to this sales had been in the respectable thousands of units. Thanks to a "rebranding" sales took years to reach the same sales number that had once taken months and initiated a reprint. Dunno. I'm glad I don't have a book coming out in September that relies on a GSL, Thats for sure!

When the D&D (brand) is good, it's great for all kinds of gaming regardless of any excuses people make about the economy. The economy was horrid when I was a kid and I still had D&D and played it constantly. The economy is horrid now and I still game constantly. If anything my gaming expenditure is greater now than it has ever been DESPITE the economy. I guess here is hoping that the "Essential line" is good, but I would hate like hell to be a "3rd party" company who is tying their success to "Essentials" being fully compatible with whatever they currently have in production.

As for me and my creative enterprise, I have to admit, I've been done tying my name and fortunes to the whims of its "official license" for some time now and I have never been happier.

Sorry for the long post.

C.