D&D 4E Inquiry: How do 4E fans feel about 4E Essentials?

[TheAlkaizer]

Overall, I'm pretty neutral. But do understand that at the time, I had splurged an obscene amount of money on 4E books as WotC bombarbed us with material over three years. I played a ton of 4E, had some of my best TTRPG moments with it. Then, a mere three years or so after I got into it, they release a new set of books that invalidate some of the books I had.

For me, it was too early. I didn't want to invalidate hundreds of dollars of purchases (PHBs, Monster books). I bought Essentials out of curiosity and collection when it came out, but I had little intention to play it. I've been going back to it (mostly reading) in the years after, and I think it is positively mostly good changes. But I never played it.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I can't really say that I dislike Essentials as much as what it implied. On its own, I enjoy the cleaner, streamlining of the game itself. It was easy to see how it could run entirely without any previous 4e material and it would feel like a complete game. And while it is technically compatible with the older books, it really muddied the waters for people who were completely happy with the original structure of the game. It's not so much that we were allowed to choose if we wanted to do so or not, but it felt like a strong insistence that everyone should.

Also worth noting, Essentials became the only acceptable options for the Encounters program. So it wasn't even a gentle nudge at the point.

Regarding the survivor thread, it should be a matter of personal experience not dictated by popular opinion or thought. When I choose to play or run 4e, it is either pre-Essentials or Essentials only. Both are acceptable options for me. So I understand some of the animosity towards it from 4e fans. Its not unlike the 3.5 crowd trying to bury 3.0 or Pathfinder.

 

[HammerMan]

Another thing Essentials did that I liked was it changed a lot of at-will powers to modify your basic attacks instead of being attacks themselves. I found that a common experience with new 4e players was having to sort of teach them not to use basic attacks.

I agree, another good change. I think if they even had a pool of powersource at wills/always on that some did that it would do wonders...

 

[Lord Shark]

As a 4E fan, I think the biggest problem with Essentials is not the books themselves but how poorly they were marketed. WotC wasn't clear about whether Essentials was meant as a replacement for the original books -- i.e., a "4.5E" -- or whether it was meant as a supplement to the game, and it produced a lot of confusion and arguments, especially since those of us who had been supporting the game all along were concerned about what it meant for the future.

I also don't find many of the Essentials classes very interesting or well designed. The slayer and knight are boring compared to the PHB fighter. There was also dreck like the binder, bladesinger, and witch that had apparently never passed a playtester; they were strictly worse than their parent classes.

I don't hate all the classes, though. The Essentials mage is an improvement on the PHB wizard, although possibly a bit overpowered. I did like the hexblade as well. The thief and scout looked interesting but I've never seen them in play. I liked the concept of the vampire, although it really needed a redesign and better balance. The elementalist sorcerer wasn't to my taste but it was a great example of what a simple caster class could look like (as opposed to the model of having all martial classes be simple and all caster classes be complex).

Beyond the classes, the Rules Compendium is really handy to have, and the Monster Vault books were an outstanding and necessary revision, so it wasn't all bad.

 

[Undrave]

I'll probably have more to say, but the thing that stung the most was the feeling of 'giving in' to the Grognards. Walking back stuff to 3e, adding all that useless 'naturalistic language' that was really repetitive, and a lot of muddying of the great 4e Lore. It also felt like a lot of the classes in need of fleshing out were being kicked to the curb just to give us a redundant 'Mage' and bringing back the sacrosanct School of Magics, for exemple.

 

[Undrave]

The Essentials mage is an improvement on the PHB wizard, although possibly a bit overpowered

Considering how much the 4e Lead had to fight his team to keep the Wizard balanced... it was probably on purpose, even if only subconsciously.

I don't know if it's because it's the name of the company or just old school player bias, but the Wizard is WOTC's favorite class and you KNOW they give more weight to the grievance of Wizard players... who are also the most vocal whiners the moment somebody else gets a piece of the spotlight...

No I'm not bitter, what are you talking about?

 

[Charlaquin]

Overall, I'm pretty neutral. But do understand that at the time, I had splurged an obscene amount of money on 4E books as WotC bombarbed us with material over three years. I played a ton of 4E, had some of my best TTRPG moments with it. Then, a mere three years or so after I got into it, they release a new set of books that invalidate some of the books I had.

For me, it was too early. I didn't want to invalidate hundreds of dollars of purchases (PHBs, Monster books). I bought Essentials out of curiosity and collection when it came out, but I had little intention to play it. I've been going back to it (mostly reading) in the years after, and I think it is positively mostly good changes. But I never played it.

I think this was mostly a marketing fail. While Essentials played great standalone, it also played great alongside the rest of 4e. But the marketing couldn’t decide if it was a beginner’s set, or an add-on to 4e, or a 4.5e, or “fixing” 4e, or what.

 

[Charlaquin]

Also worth noting, Essentials became the only acceptable options for the Encounters program. So it wasn't even a gentle nudge at the point.

Wow, really? I didn’t know that. That definitely adds some context to the hate Essentials got from other 4e fans at the time.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't hate all the classes, though. The Essentials mage is an improvement on the PHB wizard, although possibly a bit overpowered. I did like the hexblade as well. The thief and scout looked interesting but I've never seen them in play.

I loved the Essentials Thief. But it was kind of a “solved” class. There was one optimal way to build them, and not a lot of room to make it your own, short of just playing an unoptimized character.

 

[Aldarc]

I think this was mostly a marketing fail. While Essentials played great standalone, it also played great alongside the rest of 4e. But the marketing couldn’t decide if it was a beginner’s set, or an add-on to 4e, or a 4.5e, or “fixing” 4e, or what.

Jein. It could be played alongside the rest of 4e, but it couldn't really be played "great alongside the rest of 4e" without quite a large amount of errata that plagued a lot of the early releases, especially until the math got fixed.

Wow, really? I didn’t know that. That definitely adds some context to the hate Essentials got from other 4e fans at the time.

Which precluded Warlords too.