D&D 4E 4E feats vs Essential Feats. A list?

[Psikus]

As a contrasting point of view I don't think there is really any significant confusion. Same named elements in Essentials replace existing elements in 4e. Presumably errata may be issued at some point covering that.

There was errata for that when Heroes of the Fallen Lands was released. You can read the Essentials-related changes here.

 

[Kelvor Ravenstar]

IIRC you can build such characters in the new CB if you use the custom/home campaign option. The entire content of 4e is available so you could make a Kenku Cavalier with a Dark Sun theme. But if you select Dark Sun or Essentials it will limit you to the content of those product lines.

Sorry GameDoc, not yet true. To get access to Themes you need to build characters in the Darksun campaign setting rules, and they are not yet available for the Home Campaign option.
However, Kenku as a race is available in the Dark Sun builder rules, but all divine classes are not.
Hopefully this will be fixed in future when DMs can create Campaign setting documents that their players can import into the online builder.

 

[GameDoc]

Sorry GameDoc, not yet true. To get access to Themes you need to build characters in the Darksun campaign setting rules, and they are not yet available for the Home Campaign option.
However, Kenku as a race is available in the Dark Sun builder rules, but all divine classes are not.
Hopefully this will be fixed in future when DMs can create Campaign setting documents that their players can import into the online builder.

Yeah, after I posted that, I logged on to DDI to double check. My bad.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

There was errata for that when Heroes of the Fallen Lands was released. You can read the Essentials-related changes here.

Only covers some things. Most of the rest pretty much is a "buy a Rules Compendium" type stuff, but given the volume of changes to rules text there an 'errata' wouldn't really make sense.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

As a contrasting point of view I don't think there is really any significant confusion. <snip>

Not to be argumentative, but your post demonstrates perfectly the confusion that exists. Even though you seem to have a clear idea on how you perceive the answers should be obvious, others might have different views or opinions on the subject. This isn't because anyone is right or wrong, mind you. We simply lack any single, definitive answers from a true voice of authority. All we have are conflicting signals and mixed messages from a number of sources (i.e. = Confusion).

And as you pointed out, the official errata regarding adaptation of the Essentials rules leaves much to be desired in term of definitive answers.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Not to be argumentative, but your post demonstrates perfectly the confusion that exists. Even though you seem to have a clear idea on how you perceive the answers should be obvious, others might have different views or opinions on the subject. This isn't because anyone is right or wrong, mind you. We simply lack any single, definitive answers from a true voice of authority. All we have are conflicting signals and mixed messages from a number of sources (i.e. = Confusion).

And as you pointed out, the official errata regarding adaptation of the Essentials rules leaves much to be desired in term of definitive answers.

The errata updating the older books to the RC level of rules revision is incomplete. I'm not sure where that confusion. Clearly the RC is the definitive controlling rules source. If you lack an RC then there will be a few areas where your PHB1/DMG1 with fully updated errata will not (yet) provide the same rules, but the omissions are minor (more phraseology actually than anything else).

The only place confusion can exist is if I come to your table with my RC and you've been playing with PHB1+errata and we decide to have a rules debate. You may not be aware of a couple things and you may thus give different answers. Note though that these are pretty hair splitting kinds of things, like say the exact procedure for or DC for certain skill uses.

Of course if you are simply playing with your PHB1+errata there's no reason you should care what any other books say. This is true for both rules text and specific game elements. With game elements it is even less a problem. If I come along with an Essentials character that uses different text for a feat than your PHB1 character does there's no necessity to change the existing character. You COULD, but there's no need. Same for an item, power, etc.

 

[MrGrenadine]

As a contrasting point of view I don't think there is really any significant confusion. Same named elements in Essentials replace existing elements in 4e.

Regarding "significant confusion"--it looks to me like there's absolutely no consensus about how to address the new feats. Should players keep using the old ones, or use the Essential ones, or a combination? Do players get to automatically swap the old version for the better Essentials version, or should players wait until level up?

D&D has always been house ruled, but the fact that there are so many options about how to incorporate Essentials into a 4e game, but no clear optimal choice--that can't be by design.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

<everything he just said>

Ah, right. There's no confusion whatsoever now that you've explained it...

<everything he just said>

What he just said... which is what I've been trying to say all along.

 

[Lord Ernie]

Regarding "significant confusion"--it looks to me like there's absolutely no consensus about how to address the new feats. Should players keep using the old ones, or use the Essential ones, or a combination? Do players get to automatically swap the old version for the better Essentials version, or should players wait until level up?

D&D has always been house ruled, but the fact that there are so many options about how to incorporate Essentials into a 4e game, but no clear optimal choice--that can't be by design.

I don't see how this is an Essentials issue. Say I have a character who has certain feat choices, and a Dragon article arrives that provides much better options, what do I do? Can I rebuild my character? Or do I have to use the retraining rules? Officially, it's the latter, but then there's LFR rules that allow a complete rebuild at each level. While Essentials has certainly provided a slew of feats that are much better than some of the weak old feats (about time there was a standardized selection, too) and exacerbated the issue, it's not exactly new.

And yes, Essentials did update some existing feats, but these updates are accessible in the update document, the Online CB, and the Compendium. So again: what's the problem?

For the record, I allow my players a lot of leeway when it comes to building their characters, including allowing them to rebuild when better options become available. This includes retraining expertise feats for their Essentials counterparts when available, as well as certain other changes (e.g. our Tiefling Warlord changed his 'Scion of the Gods' feat to 'Improved Defenses'), without actual cost. I've even allowed mid-level retrains for some of my newer players, when they noticed they really didn't like a power they had. After all, who wants to play with a character they don't like?

 

[Psikus]

As a contrasting point of view I don't think there is really any significant confusion. Same named elements in Essentials replace existing elements in 4e.

There was errata for that when Heroes of the Fallen Lands was released. You can read the Essentials-related changes here.

Only covers some things. Most of the rest pretty much is a "buy a Rules Compendium" type stuff, but given the volume of changes to rules text there an 'errata' wouldn't really make sense.

Well, perhaps errata doesn't cover the full text of the Rules Compendium (though I'm pretty certain that all functional changes have been addressed this way), but I was under the impression that every rules element (feats, powers, races...) changed by Heroes of X had been included in an errata document. Do you have any example of an exception to this?