4e: big change in essentials: no more daily powers!

[korjik]

"If you’re already playing a Dungeons & Dragons game, there’s one very important thing to remember—the Essentials products matter only as much as you want them to. We very carefully designed the new classes and added more options to the races in such a way that existing characters remain unchanged."

If you’re already playing a Dungeons & Dragons game, there’s one very important thing to remember—the Fourth edition products matter only as much as you want them to. We very carefully designed the new classes and added more options to the races in such a way that existing characters remain unchanged.

If you’re already playing a Dungeons & Dragons game, there’s one very important thing to remember—the 3.5 edition products matter only as much as you want them to. We very carefully designed the new classes and added more options to the races in such a way that existing characters remain unchanged.

If you’re already playing a Dungeons & Dragons game, there’s one very important thing to remember—the Third edition products matter only as much as you want them to. We very carefully designed the new classes and added more options to the races in such a way that existing characters remain unchanged.

If you’re already playing a Dungeons & Dragons game, there’s one very important thing to remember—the Second edition products matter only as much as you want them to. We very carefully designed the new classes and added more options to the races in such a way that existing characters remain unchanged.

ect....

So how exactly does this say anything about essentials being a ball-less 4.5?

 

[ggroy]

@ggroy if the Essentials is significantly OP, which do you think will happen more often:

A) a group playing normal 4e goes "ooh, uber-overpowered, let's buy that and throw all our old books away"
or
B) a group playing normal 4e goes "ooh, uber-overpowered? *meh* the game works as is, why break it?"

I can see powergamer types going for A.

For the players in my previous 4E games, they would most likely go for B. If the 4E Essentials titles turn out to be significantly overpowered, I can also see the B types banning some of the Essentials stuff from their games.

 

[Danzauker]

I like they are experimenting with new class paradigms other than the usual at-will/encounter/daily, just like I'm happy with they did with psionic classes.

True, they were not perfect, but I can just not play them if I don't like them and keep using the ones I like.

What feels strange to me is to have an "alternate fighter". If they just gave the class a new name, say Warrior or wathever, in order to avoid incongruences, I would have no problems. Still, I see why on a marketing perpective WotC doesn't want to promote a new "Essential D&D line" without including the four "essential" classes of fighter/wizard/cleric/rogue.

Funny that lots of people complain that they are giving people what many complained not having from the beginning: a fighter without dailies.

What matters most in my eyes anyway is that if I go play with my PHB fighter with a player which only owns the essential books, both our characters can play together. From what they boast, it seems it's so. We'll see if they keep their promise.

 

[Shazman]

But they won't be obsolete. They will be perfectly useable just like a lot of other things. The new stuff might be better in every way but nothing keeps those old classes from functioning just like they always did. Who cares if other players can do things with encounter powers that you can do with dailies. That just makes you more special.

I gotta say that playtesting is a major concern. If the decision to make these changes was made after getting feedback from PHB 3 then how much playtest could this new system have gotten? This all seems somewhat rushed IMHO.

Playtesting? This is WotC. They just release stuff, let people on char-op boards find broken combos and then nerf the offending material into sub-par options several months later with a "rules update". At least it seems like that's how they do it. I have yet to see much evidence of playtesting as a means of QA in 4E to date.

 

[Jhaelen]

Yet another thread that reminds me why I love the internet. Please keep speculating, everyone!

 

[ggroy]

Yet another thread that reminds me why I love the internet. Please keep speculating, everyone!

It replaces the Magic 8-Ball.

 

[Obryn]

Ack. Well, I'll still wait and see, but this is a much bigger switch than I had anticipated...

My main concern is that, as far as I remember, the Essentials line is supposed to be "evergreen" - that is, it will stay in production for the life of the edition. My impression was that it would eventually replace the traditional PHB/DMG/MM model.

I'm not sure if this news somewhat deflates that expectation, or reinforces it.

EDIT: As for calling it "4.5" - well, it'll largely depend on what we're looking at once the books are released. Honestly, I've been in favor of getting a "4.5" for a year or so now, after seeing how much better later releases have been than the original PHB and MM. The designers didn't really hit their stride, I think, until the rule-set was released to the public and they could see what a huge group does with the rules, as opposed to internal testing and a relatively small group of playtesters. Compatibility will be my big question, followed closely by obsolescence - that is, will the new "builds" out-compete the old ones? It will also depend on the future release schedule - will we see any new Daily powers for those classes who are losing theirs?

-O

 

[TerraDave]

As someone who was--speculating--that essentials was 4.x for sometime, I am not here to say I told you so, or at least not just that.

The errata and the later books already had us creeping to 4.5...compared to another RPG, core book D&D and DDI D&D would already be considered different editions. And yes, editions of a game can be compatible with each other. Just look at TSRs D&D.

I welcome these changes. I welcome everything said so far about essentials. Don't feel so warm and fuzzy about outdated books in 2 years, or the confusion they may cause.

 

[Shemeska]

This reminds me of when it was stated (by Rouse?) that there would be no 4.5, only 4e.

Interesting times. Interesting times.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I wonder how many happy and satisfied 4E fans are grumbling about Essentials?