Just how compatible is Essentials?

[wolfattack]

It would be the same as saying that 3.5 was just an option for 3rd edition and we all know that would have been a lie. For Essentials to be "just an option", the designers sure are changing everything that came before to fit with this new "option".

Sorry,but you can't compare D&D 3.5 with 4th edition. 3.5 is far better than 4th,and you have the feeling that you are playing a genuine D&D game with 3.5,not what seems to be just a copy of WoW with the D&D logo.i like the 4th game,but Wizards has just failed with this edition.Essentials its the prove of that.they are trying to correct things,but its too late.lets wait the next edition.

ps: guys,don't throw rocks on me for this,but its what i think of the current version of D&D.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Sorry,but you can't compare D&D 3.5 with 4th edition. 3.5 is far better than 4th,and you have the feeling that you are playing a genuine D&D game with 3.5,not what seems to be just a copy of WoW with the D&D logo.i like the 4th game,but Wizards has just failed with this edition.Essentials its the prove of that.they are trying to correct things,but its too late.lets wait the next edition.

ps: guys,don't throw rocks on me for this,but its what i think of the current version of D&D.

Once you de-lurk, you are fair game.

 

[MerricB]

I already have. I would suggest you go back and read the thread.

I just did. I found only one post.

Now when I say having trouble being compatible I don't mean from all aspects. Technically, 3.0 and 3.5 could be played together but I wouldn't exactly call them compatible.

Pre-E and Essentials are a lot like 3.0 and 3.5. Sure your 3.0 Ranger could play in the same party perfectly, but he isn't going to have the amount of options that the 3.5 Ranger has.

Changes had to be made to Pre-E material in order for it play nice with Essentials material. Melee Training anyone? There is actually an article about the changes that were made in order for the two to mesh together a bit better and as soon as I find it I will post it.

This is the link you posted:
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Changes Coming in Essentials)

In fact, the article you posted actually just lists the rules revisions that are found in Heroes of the Fallen Lands. Very few of them really are to "play nice with Essentials"; rather they're part of a regular update process of powers. Melee Training is one of the very, very few updates that we know was changed because it didn't play well with D&D Essentials. (The explanation is actually here: Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Powers, Implements, Feats ...))

Removing the ability of Prestidigitation to move things? That's an update that distinguishes the power from Mage Hand, and should have there from the beginning - Essentials just provided a good opportunity to update it.

We had a Pre-E fighter that was looking at some of the Knight's stances and the Slayer's stances and since they were technically "fighters" he thought he could take them, but I told him he could not.

What I have been seeing of a good many powers is that, yes they can be taken by certain classes but the effects that it has for that class makes it not worth taking and is better suited for the class that it was made for.

Take Power Strike for instance. Sure a Pre-E Fighter can use it, but he would be better off taking a Pre-E Fighter Encounter Power because Power Strike is for Melee Basic Attacks.

I suggest you don't look at your Player's Handbook, because there's a class called the Cleric in there which has Strength-based powers and Wisdom-based powers. A wisdom-based cleric is better off not taking strength-based powers. Astonishingly, this predates D&D Essentials, and has been around since the beginning of D&D 4E.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Are you seriously trying to claim that a classes basic abilities should be hot-swappable? By that logic I should be able to swap the battlerager's temporary hit point gain for the defending fighter's +1 to hit bonus with one-handed weapons. Hell, why restrict it at class boundaries since builds mean nothing? Let's swap everything willy-damn-nilly! Build a class however you want! I'm all for that.

No I am not. I believe ForeverSlayer is and I am chosing to ask him a fundamental question about why not being able to take encounter and daily attack powers from the classic fighter is bad rather than arguing minutae with him. As far as I can tell he has yet to come up with an answer. I know the differences and as I have said can see them from my perspective. But for trying to understand where he is coming from it is better to accept his frame of reference rather than yours. Which means when there are multiple ways to understand and phrase things while I am trying to understand the answer I want I will pick the one closest to him.

The most important part of communication is not speaking but listening and trying to understand. And a good way to do that is accept as many of the premises as possible of the viewpoint you disagree with. (Oh, and please don't come back with a pedantic point like the Martial Cross Training feat. It's ultimately irrelevant.)

[MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION], the reason the Slayer and Knight couldn't be just builds is that they wanted to give classes to the people who want (in combat) to just say "I hit him." And to not look through their encounter and daily powers. You like first customising minutely and then having a lot of options at the tabletop. So do I. There are people who break straight into Analysis Paralysis from having too many options when given a 4e character. If we were to give them a classic style build, that wouldn't solve the analysis paralysis, especially if they wanted to roleplay and weren't that interested in combat in the first place. What is wrong with people who don't want lots of powers to first pick and then pick from having classes to suit them in 4e?

Also, Foreverslayer, would you care to point out where at the tabletop you have problems mixing Essentials and Classic classes. Your entire objections I've noticed revolve around you wanting to pick options off what are ultimately other classes although they share utility powers and feats. And these objections appear to be entirely theoretical.

Finally [MENTION=6670510]wolfattack[/MENTION], there wasn't an edition war until you showed up here. Reported.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I just did. I found only one post.



This is the link you posted:
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Changes Coming in Essentials)

In fact, the article you posted actually just lists the rules revisions that are found in Heroes of the Fallen Lands. Very few of them really are to "play nice with Essentials"; rather they're part of a regular update process of powers. Melee Training is one of the very, very few updates that we know was changed because it didn't play well with D&D Essentials. (The explanation is actually here: Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Powers, Implements, Feats ...))

Removing the ability of Prestidigitation to move things? That's an update that distinguishes the power from Mage Hand, and should have there from the beginning - Essentials just provided a good opportunity to update it.



I suggest you don't look at your Player's Handbook, because there's a class called the Cleric in there which has Strength-based powers and Wisdom-based powers. A wisdom-based cleric is better off not taking strength-based powers. Astonishingly, this predates D&D Essentials, and has been around since the beginning of D&D 4E.

What exactly does the above have to do with the topic at hand? Don't take the time because I will go ahead and fill you in, nothing. The discussion is Pre-E and Essentials, not one build of the Pre-E cleric and another build of the same class.

 

[Umbran]

ps: guys,don't throw rocks on me for this,but its what i think of the current version of D&D.

Well, then maybe you shouldn't be posting in a forum DEDICATED to 4e, which is filled with fans of the game. Dropping that load of crud on them is rude - like spitting in their bowl of ice cream. You don't have to like their game, but you should respect them for at least sharing the same general hobby - and you treat them like this?

EN World has tons of space where you can talk positively about things you like. Why on Earth are you wasting your time saying bad things about a game you don't like? Go build something useful, instead of tearing other people's fun down!

 

[mneme]

What exactly does the above have to do with the topic at hand? Don't take the time because I will go ahead and fill you in, nothing. The discussion is Pre-E and Essentials, not one build of the Pre-E cleric and another build of the same class.

Wow, what a jerk. Hmm. Maybe your should read your posts before posting them?

But since you seem to have missed the point, your claim regarding, say, the Knight and the Weaponmaster is that options one can take, the other cannot -- and that even options that are good for one build are pointless for the other (for instance, feats that require you to have a target marked are going to be pointless to the Knight). Clearly, you have claimed, this indicates an edition shift, with a new class that is functionally incompatable with the old version of the class.

Except, of course, that PH1 had classes that were functionally incompatible with themselves. The Strength Cleric and the Wisdom Cleric share a small set of powers that are useful to both versions of the class, and a very large set of options that were only useful to one type of cleric. It can hardly be honestly stated that the idea of having multiple versions of a class, each bearing different options, is a novel idea of Essentials; the emphasis may be different, but it's hardly a deep philisohpical change, nor an example of "incompatability."

For that matter, the first class having fewer options than other classes also appears in PH1. I'll leave its identity as an exercise for the reader, though.

 

[Dannager]

Sorry,but you can't compare D&D 3.5 with 4th edition. 3.5 is far better than 4th,and you have the feeling that you are playing a genuine D&D game with 3.5,not what seems to be just a copy of WoW with the D&D logo.i like the 4th game,but Wizards has just failed with this edition.Essentials its the prove of that.they are trying to correct things,but its too late.lets wait the next edition.

ps: guys,don't throw rocks on me for this,but its what i think of the current version of D&D.

What is this I don't even.

 

[Jhaelen]

Why is this still being debated? Why does it matter? Why am I not wearing any pants?

All questions that are really not important. The number one question should be: Do you enjoy getting together with your buds and play D&D?

For what it's worth, my players mix and match content. There's really not a different at all.

Here's why it matters:
Let's imagine one of the few D&D players left in Germany visits her favorite FLRPGS and notices a new supplement like, say 'Heroes of Shadow'. Having ignored the ten new introductory Essentials product, since she already has all of the 'classic' core books (and in German to boot), she's happy to see something that is apparently not an Essentials product.

However, when looking at the back cover she notices something that worries her:

For use with these Dungeons & Dragons Essentials products:
Heroes of the Fallen Lands
Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms
Rules Compendium

So, is it an Essentials product after all? Apparently so.
Since there's no mention about the book being useable without the listed Essentials books she asks the shop owner who tells her, that yes, the old books are no longer compatible and she will have to get the Essentials books to get any use out of 'Heroes of Shadow'.

Disappointed she puts the book back in the rack. Looking for something else to buy she notices something called Pathfinder. Curious she picks up one book and, wo and behold, it's German and it's apparently something like the successor of D&D.

That's the reality of where D&D 4e is today (in Germany).

In my opinion WotCs course of action actively discourages D&D players from continuing to support D&D 4e. Essentials hasn't helped to bring back players to D&D. It has made matters worse than ever by seeding confusion and uncertainty, initiating D&D's path back into obscurity.

To find out that 'Heroes of Shadow' is actually mostly compatible with the original core books you have to either research the issue on the internet or you have to buy it and see for yourself despite what the back cover tells you. And that's just plain bad.

If 'classic' 4e and Essentials are as compatible as so many here claim, why isn't it acknowledged on the new products?! My opinion: It's not acknowledged for the same reason why it wasn't acknowledged after the switch from 3.0 to 3.5 happened: Some of the contained material might be difficult to use and/or require adaptation for someone who only has the old books (and it doesn't matter one bit if that is because it's a new edition or not).

Wasn't there in the 3e days some sales promotion where you could exchange your old books for the new ones? Something like this would have to happen for 4e, too, to (re)gain acceptance. And of course: The books must, must, must be translated into German again!

 

[Dannager]

Since there's no mention about the book being useable without the listed Essentials books she asks the shop owner who tells her, that yes, the old books are no longer compatible and she will have to get the Essentials books to get any use out of 'Heroes of Shadow'.

So your argument really boils down to: If a game store owner tells people that they can't use something, they'll probably be less likely to buy it?

Having a crappy, uninformed game store owner does not strike me as a good way to blame WotC for confusion. Knowing that Essentials is a 4e product, period, is not exactly difficult. You can really ask anyone. Any forum online. Anywhere on WotC's site. Any promotional materials. For someone who makes tabletop RPGs a part of their livelihood, not knowing this is inexcusable, and is certainly not WotC's fault - at every opportunity, they've explain in no uncertain terms that Essentials is 4e.