Gencon: Any non-Essentials content coming up?

[Terramotus]

I've been searching through the Gencon news, but haven't seen anything about the question that's most important to me: Will any of the upcoming content in either Dragon or in the relatively few books announced actually be non-Essentials? Maybe new builds in versions of Essentials / O4E?

I know it's probably a forlorn hope. I want to keep giving them my money. I really do. But I'm about ready to give up looking for them to make content I'm interested in.

 

[Phaezen]

I've been searching through the Gencon news, but haven't seen anything about the question that's most important to me: Will any of the upcoming content in either Dragon or in the relatively few books announced actually be non-Essentials? Maybe new builds in versions of Essentials / O4E?

I know it's probably a forlorn hope. I want to keep giving them my money. I really do. But I'm about ready to give up looking for them to make content I'm interested in.

Specifically mentioned is a new non-essentials monk build, there is also a new Runepriest build but no mention on if that is essentials or not.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I think essentials is how classes will be presented from now on out.

Unfortunately.

This is not to say they are unusable for people who do not like essentials, but it is more work
.

 

[Zaphling]

Well, they did mention that classes will have the AEDU format, 'but' with a twist. Makes me feel giddy.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Won't these builds be presented in DDI and not in a book format?

I had heard there would be a little support for Pre-E classes so I am assuming it will be an article or two with a new build.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Well, with the warlock update they mentioned they would also be adding some more warlock con based powers. Those are pretty much only useful for old warlocks (if they do dailies, they might be useful to infernal hexblades). They did do the new battle templar sub-build of themed powers a while back, so they will presumably keep doing those small "help undersupported pre-Essential classes".

 

[Windjammer]

From blogofholding's transcript of the GenCon product 'forecast', it seems that we get builds for bards, runepriests, and seekers, classes which so far don't exist in Essentials. But this bit speaks fairly strongly against seeing build design in the old fashion:

New feywild builds use at-will powers and encounter powers but there are some twists. we don't want to make a seeker with a totally different power structure. Classes with less support get more traditional essentials versions.

Also,

Support for seeker? people are not playing it. They want to think about changing it to make it more exciting. Magazine is driven by submissions, and there are less submissions for the seeker.

It's nice of them to encourage submissions, but first and foremost it's WotC' own duty to provide minimal support for extant classes.

 

[frogged]

Classes and builds specifically mentioned at one of the GenCon panels:

Runepriest (in Dragon Sept or Oct)
Monk (Power of the Plane Below)
A new build for "the PHB1" Wizard (Power of the Plane Below)

Other classes/builds mentioned that were not specifically listed as being non-essential:

In Heroes of the Feywild:
Barbarian
Bard
Druid
(To paraphrase: These will be AEDU classes but with some twists)

In Power of the Plane Below:
Sorcerer


It was mentioned at the panel that when making a new class build they look first to see how much support the original version has. Under supported classes will receive new builds geared to help shore up the original design. New builds for well established classes can be either original AEDU or something different depending on design goals for that specific build.

 

[OnlineDM]

I was at the new products panel. My write-up is here.

The one specific example that they called out as having the AEDU structure was the Monk (and yes, they used the AEDU abbreviation specifically).

The one specific example that Mike Mearls called (and I quote) "essentialized" was the Sorcerer.

They did not get specific about the other builds that were mentioned.

 

[Marshall]

I was at the new products panel. My write-up is here.

The one specific example that they called out as having the AEDU structure was the Monk (and yes, they used the AEDU abbreviation specifically).

The one specific example that Mike Mearls called (and I quote) "essentialized" was the Sorcerer.

They did not get specific about the other builds that were mentioned.

People should note that the new Bladesinger is an AEDU and I dont believe anyone can legitimately claim that it fits the mold of a pre-E class. 4e is dead.