D&D 4E can i use essentials with my 4e group?

[CM]

I guess I never really understood why a DM would do this. Isn't it just as constraining to the players to HAVE to play a character that is more of a generalist? It would be one thing if PCs with a 20 in their prime were really ridiculously better mechanically, but as it is its a real toss up IMHO. Anyway, just curious...

I think it accomplishes a couple of things which, while minor, I don't see a downside to.

1. The single-stat classes are knocked down a peg compared to MAD classes.
2. Lowers temptation to "compete" with the other players by maxing out their prime stat (I've seen it).
3. Removes the complaint that if someone doesn't start with a capped stat they aren't trying hard enough (haven't seen it personally but read about it here).
4. Lowers "glass cannon" effect on characters slightly by reducing offense and (probably) improving defense.
5. A little less work for me regarding boosting monster stats when building encounters.

 

[Storminator]

I was quite shocked at how little choice you have with the essentials characters. Compared to the PHB, it felt like a huge step backwards. Also, the fighter reverted to being the most boring combat class on the board.

For some, that's a feature. I have a player that is way, way behind the rest of the group in terms of powergaming. Three of my group really enjoy putting together a clever PC build, three are also good at it, but not as enamored of the style, and then one guy is pretty hopeless.

But pop a 20 in STR, and a 16 in DEX and his slayer is good to go - 30 damage, 30 damage, 30 damage, crit! 80 damage.

PS

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think it accomplishes a couple of things which, while minor, I don't see a downside to.

1. The single-stat classes are knocked down a peg compared to MAD classes.
2. Lowers temptation to "compete" with the other players by maxing out their prime stat (I've seen it).
3. Removes the complaint that if someone doesn't start with a capped stat they aren't trying hard enough (haven't seen it personally but read about it here).
4. Lowers "glass cannon" effect on characters slightly by reducing offense and (probably) improving defense.
5. A little less work for me regarding boosting monster stats when building encounters.

Hmmmm, I just never thought, and I'm pretty sure nobody in the groups I've run for really think, that a single primary 20 IS more powerful. It can be, but do the 'single stat classes' (builds really) have some actual advantage? I grant you there are classes that are a little weaker than others, or a lot trickier to build well. I'm just not seeing where that's tied to having a 20 in a stat. For instance there are a dozen ways to make a fighter, including some that will want a 20 STR, but you give up something to get there. Your 20 STR fighter will have less hit points, worse defenses, inferior feat options (this is a big one), and may miss out on a few other things, and will just be a markedly narrower character. He may be better in a theorycraft sort of way, MAYBE, but only when you add up DPR and don't think of any other aspect of the character at all.

Perceptions I can't comment on really. Things like that will vary a lot from table to table anyway. My impression from various groups was that the typical 4e player wants their character to be equally ass-kicking as the other PCs, but most don't calculate that too finely. They always seem to be interested enough in character concept that beyond putting their best stat in their prime and making it credible they might do any other thing that strikes their fancy. I had more trouble making sure people understood that they really did NOT want a 14 in their main stat starting off.

Anyway, I dunno, I think the players will figure out there preferences. I never really saw it as my job to tell them they had to do this or that. Essentials really made things clearer for new players, but I only saw a modest amount of interest from existing players in trying E-classes.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Hmmmm, I just never thought, and I'm pretty sure nobody in the groups I've run for really think, that a single primary 20 IS more powerful. It can be, but do the 'single stat classes' (builds really) have some actual advantage?

IME, a starting 20 can only be worth it if you're using a Dex or Int class. +1 hit, damage and AC seems too much to ignore.

Otherwise you're looking at very poor defenses. In our Greyhawk game, we had a Dex-secondary sorcerer who would have started with a Fort defense of 10 because they cranked their Charisma to 20 and insisted on a high Dex too. That left no points to boost healing surges or Fort defense.

But pop a 20 in STR, and a 16 in DEX and his slayer is good to go - 30 damage, 30 damage, 30 damage, crit! 80 damage.

PS

Wouldn't that character turn into a liability every time something attacks Will? Especially charm effects?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

IME, a starting 20 can only be worth it if you're using a Dex or Int class. +1 hit, damage and AC seems too much to ignore.

Otherwise you're looking at very poor defenses. In our Greyhawk game, we had a Dex-secondary sorcerer who would have started with a Fort defense of 10 because they cranked their Charisma to 20 and insisted on a high Dex too. That left no points to boost healing surges or Fort defense.

Sure, but what I found was that at the point where that bad FORT was a real liability, say starting up in paragon somewhere, there are a LOT of other ways to deal with it. For instance you can gain some resistance, get extra (or early) saves, save bonuses, sometimes interrupt abilities that will help, etc. Obviously a character can also get a feat to help cover their weak spot. Often you would want these things even without having a serious weak point, but its very hard to make a PC that is really good in all 3 defenses even with a more spread out set of stats. Its possible for some classes, but practically impossible for others. Sorcerers for instance almost always have a rather crappy REF, it just goes with the STR/CON/CHA based design of that class.

Wouldn't that character turn into a liability every time something attacks Will? Especially charm effects?

Sure, but he's also a holy terror in melee combat, and pretty simple to run. Fun character.

 

[Storminator]

Sure, but he's also a holy terror in melee combat, and pretty simple to run. Fun character.

This. Simple to run and has a clear way to contribute trumps hole in the defenses.

PS

 

[Storminator]

Wouldn't that character turn into a liability every time something attacks Will? Especially charm effects?

As I thought about this more, it don't think it's crippling. Charm effects are pretty limited and well defined in 4e. It's not so much that he's a liability as that he gets hit with Will powers, and if dominated he's going to smack his friends (same with any of the "force target to make a basic attack vs creature" powers). So not much more of a liability than the guy with a sucky Reflex defense.

PS