Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5459861" data-attributes="member: 82106">Not meant as a criticism at all, but have you played Essentials or 'classic' 4e? There simply is no mechanical incompatibility between them AT ALL, none. The Essentials RC reprints the general rules of the game, taking into account the errata, and makes a very few minor additional changes that basically are only of interest to rules lawyers or in very specific situations (and are very minor things at that). The addition of new character options with Essentials is just that, addition. As with any supplement they do sometimes tend to obsolete a few older options, but you have to understand that for all the words expended on the subject it is really not all that consequential.In terms of terminology like what the sub-classes are named, well, they had to call them something. I really don't think Essentials qualifies as an 'edition' even in the most technical sense. It is a different product, an extension of the existing product and also a stand-alone product.OTOH I think there is a certain equivocal attitude at WotC HQ these days. I don't think it centers on Essentials though. I think it centers on classic 4e itself. I think basically they created an almost entirely new game from whole cloth 3 years ago. It is all new mechanics and different concepts. 4e was a prototype. It is a great game, but it is also an imperfect game. 3 years of experience and it is PAINFULLY obvious how it could be improved and could have been better. Yet the long shadow of 3.5 lies across everything WotC does. They CANNOT revise it. As much as 4e begs and weeps to be reforged and re-released in a "4.5" it simply cannot be done. Moreover it can't be done for business reasons either, there's a big inventory of MM1, PHB1, DMG1 still stacked in warehouses that they simply cannot afford to write off. Essentials is a half measure. It is what CAN be done.</blockquote>

Verification