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

[Joshua Randall]

flavor competing with function to use those resources

Nice turn of phrase. Sums up a lot of D&D's problems, across many editions. (Worse in some than others.)

4e started out strong with carving off the flavorful "spells" into Rituals, and mostly reserving powers (even Utility powers) for combat-function. But then it let a few flavor Utilities slip in, and a few combat-useful Rituals got written, and the whole plan fell apart like a house of (power) cards.

BTW - intelligently used Rituals are one of my favorite parts of 4e. Indeed, when I DM I typically have such complicated plots and well-prepared enemies that I assume the PCs will need Rituals to (A) figure out what the heck is going (with information gathering Rituals) and (B) have a chance to win (with preparatory Rituals, or defensive Rituals against when the proactive bad guys come after the PCs!).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The weird thing about the Bladesinger is that we already had the incredibly beloved Swordmage in 4e.

While monks are an Ok class, they have issues with resource management, especially in the one deadly fight per paradigm that seems to dominate 5e actual play.

But they are in no way trap options.

 

[Minigiant]

They also have lots of flavor competing with function to use those resources

Nice turn of phrase. Sums up a lot of D&D's problems, across many editions. (Worse in some than others.)

That was the real problem D&D always ran into indeed.

D&D, by starting as the grab bag of fantasy tropes, had an ever increasing list of fantasy hero types to convert. So youeitherwould haveto commit to making a TON of classes OR commit to "a few" and shut up about the secondary mechanics.

Pre-4e D&D did the former. Original 4e did the latter. Essentials did neither.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Dammit guys all this 4e talk makes me want to play it, like, RIGHT NOW.

I had been DMing it every week pre-COVID, but me and my group are frankly too lazy to do an online version of it (yes, we know there are lots of resources available) so we've been playing other games. Jonesing for COVID to definitively end so we can get back together in person will our grip of dice, our minis, our maps, our condition trackers, etc. etc. etc. Because not gonna lie, one of the things I like about D&D is the physical stuff.

I'm so desperate I would even play in an Essentials-only game.

 

[Undrave]

But they are in no way trap options.

It's not a trap as in it's completely useless or anything but...

I'd say Monks are a trap in so much as they only function if you play them in a specific way that in no shape or form actually matches the fiction people who would be attracted to the Monk want to play out. What's the best way to play a Monk according to its defender when you complain your character suck? "Slip into enemy ranks and stun the Casters!". Note that it doesn't say 'kill the casters' but 'stun the casters'. Basically the Monks is built like a 4e Lurker Monster, but it's not the fiction people want to play when picking a martial artist.

They're also a trap in so much as their Ki-using features aren't at all worth the same thing and that you can't just play fast and lose with that ressource. The Monk is much more difficult to master than it first appear.

 

[Mistwell]

My first time starting a thread...be gentle.

I am currently active in the Survivor: D&D Edition thread on the forum and have observed that while there are plenty of participants in said thread who like 4E I have yet to see a single upvote for 4E Essentials. I never played either version of 4E, have only a cursory knowledge of 4E and know nothing about Essentials.

So, 4E devotees, what were the changes made in Essentials that you dislike?

If there are any fans of Essentials actually out there, what were the changes that you DID like?

NOTE: I am genuinely curious about this topic and have ZERO interest in starting any kind of intra edition flame war, so please lets try to keep things civil.

Personally I loved loved loved 4e Essentials. I thought it was taking the basis of bones of 4e that I liked and adding back in the flavor and flexibility of more traditional D&D to bring the rules around to where I wanted them.

But I also knew a lot of people who didn't like them at the time.

 

[Undrave]

As an aside, I think the 4e Dragonborn was way cooler than the 5e version.

 

[Neonchameleon]

It's not a trap as in it's completely useless or anything but...

I'd say Monks are a trap in so much as they only function if you play them in a specific way that in no shape or form actually matches the fiction people who would be attracted to the Monk want to play out. What's the best way to play a Monk according to its defender when you complain your character suck? "Slip into enemy ranks and stun the Casters!". Note that it doesn't say 'kill the casters' but 'stun the casters'. Basically the Monks is built like a 4e Lurker Monster, but it's not the fiction people want to play when picking a martial artist.

They're also a trap in so much as their Ki-using features aren't at all worth the same thing and that you can't just play fast and lose with that ressource. The Monk is much more difficult to master than it first appear.

I think that a lot of this depends on your subclass. Slipping into the back lines and taking out the enemy silently is exactly what I signed up for when I signed up to play a Way of Shadow ninja given the hit point bloat in 5e, and the Way of the Drunken Master bumbling through to hit the important targets also works. But Four Elements doesn't work and I'd expect to do a beat down if playing Open Fist

 

[Minigiant]

I'd say Monks are a trap in so much as they only function if you play them in a specific way that in no shape or form actually matches the fiction people who would be attracted to the Monk want to play out. What's the best way to play a Monk according to its defender when you complain your character suck? "Slip into enemy ranks and stun the Casters!". Note that it doesn't say 'kill the casters' but 'stun the casters'. Basically the Monks is built like a 4e Lurker Monster, but it's not the fiction people want to play when picking a martial artist.

Well aint that the core issue D&D has with its class system.

The fanbase and community don't let all the classes come out. Instead they put too many ideas in the same class or make 1 version of the class and label it all of them. I mean the stun the casters isn't an incorrect fantasy of the Monk. It's just not the only one. You could easily make Ki it's own power source and make a Ki defender, striker, controller, and leader.

Defender	Striker	Controller	Leader
Brawler	Monk	????	Mystic

or

Stone Fist

Desert Wind

Eternal Tide

Centered Breath

But I get it as we would have to wait longer for monk or psion.

However that was the key issue with Essentials. What is the essence of each class? Which archetypes would you have to abandon?

It didn't answer the question because saying outloud would cause problems.

 

[Undrave]

Speaking of Dragonborn... you know what I'm sad we missed out on because of the switch to Essentials and the death of the edition?

More 'Player's Handbook Races' supplements! They made 1 for Dragonborn and 1 for Tiefling (which I own) and they were fantastic little things! They were these soft cover supplement about the size of an adventure module or so and were just filled with lore, paragon paths, an epic destiny or two, and feats for their specific race. I think they might have had racial utility powers for the Dragonborn? It had all sorts of ideas on how to build and play your character of that race it was just a load of fun.

Would have loved to see more of those. It'd be pretty cool to see that kind of smaller product for 5e as well.