Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Essentials: More like 3.9e than 4.5e (link inside)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 5239714" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p>My read of the essentials line is this:</p><p></p><p>1) We [WOTC] had all this material we were going to put into various Power books, which is now going into the Essentials books. For example we had material for Martial Power 3, which would include a variant fighter that used At-Will/Encounter power-boosting instead of daily powers. We had variants of the other classes as well, intended for other Power books. Now all that goes into the Essentials line instead of new Power books.</p><p></p><p>2) We have all the errata from before, including some new errata for one line of Wizard spells, that will be included in this.</p><p></p><p>3) We re-formatted some rules and put in some better descriptions of some stuff, to make it easier for new players to pick this stuff up.</p><p></p><p>4) We put it all in paperback, so it's less expensive to buy.</p><p></p><p>None of that screams new edition to me, or new half edition either. All of the material is, from my read of it, stuff that would have ended up in expansion books anyway, and in errata anyway, except for some additional formatting and descriptions. But by packaging it in this different way, they pick up some new players (they hope) while still selling to old players (they hope).</p><p></p><p>It all also seems 100% compatible with existing 4e (with errata), given any changes to existing characters will be in the errata anyway, and are still relatively minor in their nature.</p><p></p><p>I suppose you can call try and call this 4.5e simply because of a larger amount of errata, but frankly I didn't think 3.5 was just 3.0e with more errata. Some things simply were not compatible between those two sub-editions, and could not just be fixed with some errata. </p><p></p><p>And yet, with the Essentials line, it does seem like it all works together, and the amount of errata is manageable and within the same rules sub-systems as opposed to a brand new sub-systems. </p><p></p><p>For example, adding some "miss" descriptors to some Wizard spells is not a new sub-system or new way of handling the Wizard class or their powers. It's a pretty normal add-on that I can see them doing with errata, and I seriously doubt that errata alone would have triggered anyone claiming it was a new edition.</p><p></p><p>Heck, it seems like a more minor change than the 3.5 polymorph errata they tried to do. That errata changed entire character concepts, some creature concepts, and a whole slew of stuff that had to be torn down and rebuilt almost from scratch. Maybe people called the polymorph errata a new edition too, but I don't recall that happening much.</p><p></p><p>Tevor Kidd's EW post seemed pretty telling to me:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And the EW News item from a couple days ago:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Now, could you honestly say that last paragraph about the changes between 3.0 and 3.5? I know I couldn't. My half-orc fighter was shredded in the changes to 3.5, and the entire concept had to be scrapped due to the changes. 3.5 seemed to require complete character rebuilds for my entire group. It would seem the Essentials line does not require that sort of change, thus making it not a new edition (or sub-edition or whatever you call adding a .X to the name).</p><p></p><p>The new Cleric article sheds some more light on the issue:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Overall, it sure doesn't seem like a new edition to me. Certainly not to the extent that 3.5 was a new edition from 3.0.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 5239714, member: 2525"] My read of the essentials line is this: 1) We [WOTC] had all this material we were going to put into various Power books, which is now going into the Essentials books. For example we had material for Martial Power 3, which would include a variant fighter that used At-Will/Encounter power-boosting instead of daily powers. We had variants of the other classes as well, intended for other Power books. Now all that goes into the Essentials line instead of new Power books. 2) We have all the errata from before, including some new errata for one line of Wizard spells, that will be included in this. 3) We re-formatted some rules and put in some better descriptions of some stuff, to make it easier for new players to pick this stuff up. 4) We put it all in paperback, so it's less expensive to buy. None of that screams new edition to me, or new half edition either. All of the material is, from my read of it, stuff that would have ended up in expansion books anyway, and in errata anyway, except for some additional formatting and descriptions. But by packaging it in this different way, they pick up some new players (they hope) while still selling to old players (they hope). It all also seems 100% compatible with existing 4e (with errata), given any changes to existing characters will be in the errata anyway, and are still relatively minor in their nature. I suppose you can call try and call this 4.5e simply because of a larger amount of errata, but frankly I didn't think 3.5 was just 3.0e with more errata. Some things simply were not compatible between those two sub-editions, and could not just be fixed with some errata. And yet, with the Essentials line, it does seem like it all works together, and the amount of errata is manageable and within the same rules sub-systems as opposed to a brand new sub-systems. For example, adding some "miss" descriptors to some Wizard spells is not a new sub-system or new way of handling the Wizard class or their powers. It's a pretty normal add-on that I can see them doing with errata, and I seriously doubt that errata alone would have triggered anyone claiming it was a new edition. Heck, it seems like a more minor change than the 3.5 polymorph errata they tried to do. That errata changed entire character concepts, some creature concepts, and a whole slew of stuff that had to be torn down and rebuilt almost from scratch. Maybe people called the polymorph errata a new edition too, but I don't recall that happening much. Tevor Kidd's EW post seemed pretty telling to me: And the EW News item from a couple days ago: Now, could you honestly say that last paragraph about the changes between 3.0 and 3.5? I know I couldn't. My half-orc fighter was shredded in the changes to 3.5, and the entire concept had to be scrapped due to the changes. 3.5 seemed to require complete character rebuilds for my entire group. It would seem the Essentials line does not require that sort of change, thus making it not a new edition (or sub-edition or whatever you call adding a .X to the name). The new Cleric article sheds some more light on the issue: Overall, it sure doesn't seem like a new edition to me. Certainly not to the extent that 3.5 was a new edition from 3.0. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Essentials: More like 3.9e than 4.5e (link inside)
Top