Core and Essentials

[cavalier973]

I have been going back and reading the Core Rules, and am really having a good time doing it. The following thoughts are kind of random....

The Core DM Guide is superior in every way to the Essentials DM Book, excepting for the updated skill challenge rules (which, if one has the PDF of the core DMG has the updated rules).

For a small example, in each book's section on the Town of Fallcrest, area 1 is "The Tower of Waiting", and the descriptions are identical. However, the DMG (core) has a box that has a "DM's Tip" that one of the prisoners held there was a princess that cavorted with devils, and that a small dungeon could be designed for the players to investigate strange goings on there. The DMB (Essentials) gives no such tip.

The DMG has extended rules for traps and diseases, for building random dungeons, for building monsters, for artifacts--all of which are missing from the DMB (the latter tome does have some of those rules, but they are truncated, in my estimation).

 

[Tony Vargas]

Some missing crunch may be found in the Essentials RC, which I found much more worthwhile than the DM kit... really, the RC was prettymuch the sole bright spot in Essentials, and even then only for the convenience.

Though it suffered from the initial take on SCs, the DMG1 was otherwise pretty good, the DMG2 was better and fleshed out Paragon. Too bad there was never a 3 to expound upon Epic DMing.

 

[cavalier973]

Now, the Monster Vault has the updated maths, and the lore is more narratively descriptive (see, for example, the description of a red dragon). The MV1 does not have the "Lore" sections, which give a player more information with a higher successful check.
The MV1 and MV2 suffers from not having any Epic tier monsters over 27th level (a Balor). Without the DMG rules for levelling up monsters (which are neither in the DMB nor the Rules Compendium), the DM who has only the Essentials books will be left with throwing scores of Balors and Elder Red Dragons at the players.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Without the DMG rules for levelling up monsters (which are neither in the DMB nor the Rules Compendium), the DM who has only the Essentials books will be left with throwing scores of Balors and Elder Red Dragons at the players.

I never noticed that omission, that's actually pretty bad. Of course, it was easy to level up monsters in the Monster Builder, if you had DDI.

Essentials and after didn't put forth a lot of effort outside heroic, in general.

 

[cavalier973]

Essentials and after didn't put forth a lot of effort outside heroic, in general.

No kidding. Even the Hotel/FK "Epic Destinies" weren't really about the character's "destiny", but a small collection of pretty good additional features and powers hanging on a bland, "you're a superhero, now" narrative. No discussion of the character possibly attaining some aspect of immortality.

I am speaking disparagingly of Essentials, but I am actually a big fan, and were I to run a game campaign, I would strongly encourage the players to choose the 4eE races/characters.

It is grievously unfortunate that there was not an Essentials Warlord, especially since five classes---knight, slayer, thief, scout, and hunter--all used basic attacks modified by stances,,which would,have been ideal when paired with a warlord who could dish out basic attacks like candy, but from what I could tell, the developers of 4eE were highly unappreciative of the warlord class.

The 4eE knight gains a very few leader-like powers--if the right skills are chosen, so it could have been developed into a defender-y warlord-style leader...

 

[cavalier973]

Things I like about the 4eE character class/races:

Non-human races get one static ability bump and a choice between two other abilities to bump. If the character builder is a guide, then this applied to core races after 4eE was introduced.

I like that the warpriest gets heavy shield proficiency as a class feature. I like that the thief gets additional skill training at higher levels. I like that the Hexblade uses melee attacks.

I like the updated weapon and implement expertise feats that add features to the +1/2/3 per level attack bonus, as well as the superior defense feats, which give additional benefits to the +1/2/3 per level bonus.

(These feats are compatible with core character classes, of course.)

I like that classes--for the most part--don't have to split their ability scores. A warpriest only needs a high wisdom for attack rolls, not wisdom or strength. (Constitution is actually the preferred second highest ability score, for the secondary effects of some powers.) A Cavalier needs a high strength and secondarily a high Charisma, and the player isnt penalised for not having a high wisdom, as well.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No kidding. Even the Hotel/FK "Epic Destinies" weren't really about the character's "destiny", but a small collection of pretty good additional features and powers hanging on a bland, "you're a superhero, now" narrative. No discussion of the character possibly attaining some aspect of immortality.

They were trying really hard to return to the class/level tables of yore, which meant bland PP/EDs that were extensions of the class at those levels.

 

[pemerton]

The Core DM Guide is superior in every way to the Essentials DM Book, excepting for the updated skill challenge rules

In my memory, at least, the later book has a better presentation of "the D&D world".

 

[dave2008]

No kidding. Even the Hotel/FK "Epic Destinies" weren't really about the character's "destiny", but a small collection of pretty good additional features and powers hanging on a bland, "you're a superhero, now" narrative. No discussion of the character possibly attaining some aspect of immortality.

I am speaking disparagingly of Essentials, but I am actually a big fan, and were I to run a game campaign, I would strongly encourage the players to choose the 4eE races/characters.

It is grievously unfortunate that there was not an Essentials Warlord, especially since five classes---knight, slayer, thief, scout, and hunter--all used basic attacks modified by stances,,which would,have been ideal when paired with a warlord who could dish out basic attacks like candy, but from what I could tell, the developers of 4eE were highly unappreciative of the warlord class.

The 4eE knight gains a very few leader-like powers--if the right skills are chosen, so it could have been developed into a defender-y warlord-style leader...

Well, you can use a 4e warlord right along any 4eE class. They work together just fine (4e and 4eE classes). We didn't have a warlord, but we mixed and match 4e and 4eE classes in our group with no issues.

 

[cavalier973]

Well, you can use a 4e warlord right along any 4eE class. They work together just fine (4e and 4eE classes). We didn't have a warlord, but we mixed and match 4e and 4eE classes in our group with no issues.

You are correct, but someone who bought only the Essentials products would have missed out.

One or two of the Dragon issues offered a complete update to the warlord, renamed the "Marshall", but one would have had to had a DDI subscription.

As an aside, one of the big promotional activities (that I think surprised the D&D team by its popularity) was the Acquisitions, Inc. podcasts. The players were given the pregens from Keep on the Shadowfell, amd Jerry Holkins's character was the half-elf cleric.

I wonder how different the series would have been had Omin been a warlord, instead. One of the pregen characters was a dragonborn paladin, so they introduced one of the new player races; they should have introduced the new classes, as well.

In the free re-release of KotS, they added a Tiefling Warlord.

The pregens in the 4e Starter Set (a three-encounter mini dungeon) were the same as in KotS, excepting that the cleric was human, and the wizard was an Eladrin.