BigZebra
Adventurer
Isn't it a matter of opinion and tastes? I mean I kind of liked Essentials. Or am I missing the mark.
The D&D 4th edition Rennaissaince: A look into the history of the edition, its flaws and its merits
- Thread starter the_rpg_gazette
- Start date
Joshua Randall
Legend
No. It is a matter of fact. Mearls did not DESIGN the 4e that was released in 2008 any more than Thomas Jefferson DESIGNED the Federalist Papers.
Last edited:
it seems to matter quite a lot to you, so much so that you have decided to shut down any actual discussion in this thread.
Congratulations?
Well sales in Essentials did drop a lot compared to the initial 4E launch (more than 3E to 3.5). So objectively spoken it was not in a good direction. We can also see this as only the first 2 "heroes of" were even named Essentials.
The Essential line confused people (to this day! You can still find new people asking about if it was a full edition 4.5 or what) and pissed off 4E fans (as obvious by Joshua Randall's answer)
Also Mike Mearls was the one working on the first released 4E adventure, which was really really not good. And one reason people say 4E fights take forever...
Also D&D 4E initial books DID sell better than D&D 3.5 and 3.0 (just not as both of them together, which makes sense since they were not compatible so people had to buy them new). So yes obviously it was not hated by all previous fans...
Well I really dont get why people who post such article do not do better research. Especially leaving out Andy Collins and naming Mike Mearls just feels disrespectfull.
The-Magic-Sword
Small Ball Archmage
I feel like the things that were good about essentials were incidentally good, and have to do with compatibility with the base game-- for example, having the 'low choices' variants of the classes alongside the original ones was a nice variety for some of my players who wanted a less fuss approach to character building, or allowing 4e characters to loot Essentials options here and there was nice, but the actual direction of the material was made tolerable in the context of 4e being matureish, a theoretical essentials Knight/Slayer-only fighter is a lot worse without the Weaponmaster right there for people who think they're too boring.
Getting the Hexblade subclass was nice for the warlock, and the Elementalist was a neat concept for the sorcerer, but both rely on already having the full 4e warlock and sorcerer to fall back on.
The Essentials Executioner Assassin, while nominally stronger than the O-Assassin, was even less distinct from an assassin built out of a rogue.
The Monster Vault was lovely in the sense that it represented an opportunity to apply MM3 math to MM1 monsters.
I agree, but I have Essentials a bit more positive overall.
I think it is a great idea to also have simplified classes. I think some of the simplified classes are really really cool. Hexblade is really flavourfull, scout is a really elegant way to bring the ranger to its core (multi attacks) etc.
I just think that the first book heroes of the fallen lands was as a whole a really bad idea. First the Mage was more complicated than the original wizard. (Cleric about as complex) and then just having these 2 as a contrast to the 2 tooo much simplified martials. (Especially the knight having a pure damage encounter ability...) was a bad choice.
It pissed 4E fans off. And The wizard and Cleric helped no one. Elementalist sorcerer or hexblade or even druid would have been way more helpfull. And would not have alienated fans as much.
Then I also think that the Cavalier was just a way better simplified class than the Fighter. It starts about as simple (2 different at wills is even simpler than having several passives to switch) and later still got daily powers. Also the punishment feature does not need any roll making combat faster with it.
I am honestly glad that the Essential material exist, but it still was handled really badly in the past. And I would have prefered to have Heinzo doing it over Mearls.
Well there is. More people start making 4E content again, videos articles etc.. Its not a huge spike but it was a steady grow the last 2 years.
Also more and more 4E inspired games are coming out and being played: Gunbat Banwa, Wyrdwood wand, bludgeon, beacon (in addition to Lancer, Icon, Pathfinder (and soon also Gloomhaven))
When 4E came out there was in general a growth in the hobby and nerdculture happening, unfortunately for 4E the big growth just happened a bit too late and 5E could mainly profit from it.
Joshua Randall
Legend
I mean the clickbait article worked. We’ve been baited. But I have read better post-mortems of 4e here and on RPGNet.
Similar Threads
