Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5583588" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, pretty much what ODM says. From what I can see E-martial classes were basically made to answer people who hated the PHB1 fighter (aka Weaponmaster) because &quot;well, why can only do this move once per day/encounter.&quot; So, basically they can make their move all the time, but then obviously they basically have very few moves, which they then make again and again and... though they are actually still quite a bit more able to pull some variations than an AD&amp;D fighter was, maybe a bit more so than most 3.5 fighters too. Pretty much same story for the other E-martial classes, the E-rangers are more rangery, the thief has a bit easier time being stabbity, but they are a bit less flexible than their older counterparts.The Warpriest actually is also a bit less flexible. They have a full AEDU power suite, but when you pick your domain you lock in all your encounter powers. You still pick dailies and utilities and can pick those from the older power lists of the old cleric (aka Templar) as well. You can also pick at-wills from the old lists too IIRC. The concept I think is to give players a few less choices. If you play Essentials only it does really dial back player build choices a bunch, which can be good for some players. During play OTOH even the Essentials Slayer really isn't tactically simpler to run, though he'll have a couple less powers to need to worry about.Starting with Essentials isn't a bad choice. You can always pick up PHB1 etc and many classes can use the powers in those books (the Essentials Mage is barely at all different from the PHB1 style wizard, just a couple minor tweaks). It is a matter of taste, and otherwise the rules are identical and the changes made at Essentials release weren't actually any more extensive than many of the other errata/updates that have come before or since.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5583588, member: 82106"] Yeah, pretty much what ODM says. From what I can see E-martial classes were basically made to answer people who hated the PHB1 fighter (aka Weaponmaster) because "well, why can only do this move once per day/encounter." So, basically they can make their move all the time, but then obviously they basically have very few moves, which they then make again and again and... though they are actually still quite a bit more able to pull some variations than an AD&D fighter was, maybe a bit more so than most 3.5 fighters too. Pretty much same story for the other E-martial classes, the E-rangers are more rangery, the thief has a bit easier time being stabbity, but they are a bit less flexible than their older counterparts. The Warpriest actually is also a bit less flexible. They have a full AEDU power suite, but when you pick your domain you lock in all your encounter powers. You still pick dailies and utilities and can pick those from the older power lists of the old cleric (aka Templar) as well. You can also pick at-wills from the old lists too IIRC. The concept I think is to give players a few less choices. If you play Essentials only it does really dial back player build choices a bunch, which can be good for some players. During play OTOH even the Essentials Slayer really isn't tactically simpler to run, though he'll have a couple less powers to need to worry about. Starting with Essentials isn't a bad choice. You can always pick up PHB1 etc and many classes can use the powers in those books (the Essentials Mage is barely at all different from the PHB1 style wizard, just a couple minor tweaks). It is a matter of taste, and otherwise the rules are identical and the changes made at Essentials release weren't actually any more extensive than many of the other errata/updates that have come before or since. [/QUOTE]

Verification