D&D 5E Essentials: More like 3.9e than 4.5e (link inside)


log in or register to remove this ad

Is it just me, or does that fail at the explicit design goal of being simpler for new players? Or, at the very least, I think it's more akin to old school games, but likely less intelligible to the non-PnP gamer.

A set of conditionals seems far less intuitive and more complex than executing discrete powers. "I use this power" vs. "I use this other more powerful but limited power" makes intuitive sense and maps onto how lots of board games and video games work, so you can expect a certain level of pre-exposure to like concepts in most young people. "I make a basic attack" is actually more jargon-y in the first place, and then you have to consider which of several modifiers are in place, and also make a separate decision of whether to apply additional options like "Power Strike." I'm not sure having fewer options for each action but making a larger number of choices and condition tracking to execute each action is going to work out as a net positive with a naive player.

Heck, I'm not sure it would be simpler for me. It sounds irksome and awkward.

So, they streamlined character creation, but made using it at the table more obtuse. It's an old school flavored brand of obtuse, so it has a certain charm, but it's still obtuse.
 
Last edited:

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Is it just me, or does that fail at the explicit design goal of being simpler for new players? Or, at the very least, I think it's more akin to old school games, but likely less intelligible to the non-PnP gamer.

A set of conditionals seems far less intuitive and more complex than executing discrete powers. "I use this power" vs. "I use this other more powerful but limited power" makes intuitive sense and maps onto how lots of board games and video games work, so you can expect a certain level of pre-exposure to like concepts in most young people. "I make a basic attack" is actually more jargon-y in the first place, and then you have to consider which of several modifiers are in place, and also make a separate decision of whether to apply additional options like "Power Strike." I'm not sure having fewer options for each action but making a larger number of choices and condition tracking to execute each action is going to work out as a net positive with a naive player.

Heck, I'm not sure it would be simpler for me. It sounds irksome and awkward.

So, they streamlined character creation, but made using it at the table more obtuse. It's an old school flavored brand of obtuse, so it has a certain charm, but it's still obtuse.

Yup just as fiddly.

I will be voting no with my wallet I have both a nephew and a niece slated for introduction to D&D xmas presents... the PHB/MM/DMG combo looks better all the time... I wonder if they are interested in the Dresden Files.
 

Yup just as fiddly.

I will be voting no with my wallet I have both a nephew and a niece slated for introduction to D&D xmas presents... the PHB/MM/DMG combo looks better all the time... I wonder if they are interested in the Dresden Files.
Only if this Combo receives an overhaul, otherwise I guess the essential line will be the place to start.

It really may be easier to explain:

As a fighter you have different techniques you can use against the enemies. You can switch between them as a minor action. Once per battle you can evoke a bit of extra power when you know it is important.

Also you defend your allies once you have taken up a good position. You need to reasses the situation if you have fallen unconscious.
 

Kaiyanwang

First Post
Is it just me, or does that fail at the explicit design goal of being simpler for new players? Or, at the very least, I think it's more akin to old school games, but likely less intelligible to the non-PnP gamer.

A set of conditionals seems far less intuitive and more complex than executing discrete powers. "I use this power" vs. "I use this other more powerful but limited power" makes intuitive sense and maps onto how lots of board games and video games work, so you can expect a certain level of pre-exposure to like concepts in most young people. "I make a basic attack" is actually more jargon-y in the first place, and then you have to consider which of several modifiers are in place, and also make a separate decision of whether to apply additional options like "Power Strike." I'm not sure having fewer options for each action but making a larger number of choices and condition tracking to execute each action is going to work out as a net positive with a naive player.

Heck, I'm not sure it would be simpler for me. It sounds irksome and awkward.

So, they streamlined character creation, but made using it at the table more obtuse. It's an old school flavored brand of obtuse, so it has a certain charm, but it's still obtuse.

In my opinion, the knight strong suggests that the main target of essentials is old gamers that didn't switched, and not newbies.

Maybe I'm wrong, but these things or Magic Missle make me suspect this (not to say is right or wrong, just a consideration).
 

Starfox

Hero
But what a lot of players tend to gloss over is that the difference between an optimal build and an average build is not that great compared to previous system.

In my experience, playing lvls 1-28, the difference between a combat optimized and a concept-optimized build is huge in 4E. And unlike 3E, you don't really get much back with your concept.

Offense is not very build-sensitive, it is mostly a given based on class, but build can do A LOT for your defenses.
 

Remove ads

Top