Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="sunrisekid" data-source="post: 5514736" data-attributes="member: 57326">I'm going to throw my 2cents into the mix in favour of the Essentials class design, but also express disappointment in the warlord article.I really appreciate the simplified MBA approach to combat for the reasons you've all heard before (less video gamey, faster play, less to fuss with, etc).  I recognize that many players prefer the more complex offerings of core-4E but my preference is for an older style of play and Essentials is a great move in that direction.  That said, I am not one who buys expansion books (my players and I have fairly pedestrian tastes); the core classes are all I run in my game, so it would seem I am not of that gaming demographic that collects endless book releases.I replaced my original 4E books with Essentials but was mildly disappointed, though not surprised, to see the warlord was left behind.  Warlord was my favourite 4E class and I jumped to the conclusion that it would be "essentialized" in the new manner of things, upon hearing of this article; I find this reprint misleading that it be classified with Essentials.I would love to see somebody's efforts on houseruling the Warlord to be somewhat more inline with the Knight and Slayer!</blockquote>