Do You Plan To Use Essentials In Your Game (No '4.5 Edition Sucks' Plz, Kthx)

[Nifft]

When it's in the online Compendium and the Character Builder, sure, we'll probably give it a try.

Cheers, -- N

 

[deganawida]

I'm going to be putting together an Essentials-only campaign, with initial characters limited to the four base classes and five base races, and with the option to choose a new character from the second book after a few levels. I am even going so far as to set it in Nentir Valley. I want a classic feel for the campaign, with tight archetypes, in order to play off what I now recognize as one of D&D's strengths (the rigidity of old classes and races). I am also going to develop a "named level" stronghold system for when my PCs hit Paragon, in order to change the way Paragon is played, add more diversity to encounters, and again callback to that old-school feel.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No current plans on using essentials line material or purchasing the books at this time.

If any players want to use it, I have no problem with that as all 4E material is legal. I'm intrigued by the snippets so far, but I can't say I'm excited about it.

That being said, I'm most likely going to use the essentials monster manual assuming all (or the vast majority) monster stats within are new.

This. I have no pressing desire to use it but I wouldn't disallow it either. We're a bunch of old, static people, so "putting together a new campaign" and "finding new players" doesn't happen for us.

 

[Kobold Boots]

As I've said elsewhere, after posing the question to my player group, we're going to stick with 4E core.

Personally, (and I don't mean this to start a discussion, rather just to be honest) I've got a lot of wallet fear in regards to the new line and frankly more than a bit of deja vue. Rationally, I feel that Essentials is probably going to be integrated in some way over time in any 4E campaign, including mine.

Gutwise though, (and I suppose this could be labeled irrationally) the advent of Essentials and the way WoTC's press releases are being presented here and elsewhere makes me want to stop playing D&D altogether and write my own game system that I control the releases for.

Silly really.
KB

 

[Jack99]

I will be buying it for sure. Whether we will use them alongside core 4e or we will run a 4e Essentials only will depend on a great many things, but right now, I am tempted to do just that, if my players are game.

 

[Initiate]

I haven't seen very much from Essentials yet, but from what I have read I think I will use it in my campaigns. I will have to give it a good read first though.

I figure if making the character creation process easier helps sway some of the people who are on the fence about playing D&D, why not?

 

[SteveC]

I am of mixed feelings about purchasing the new rules, but I'll definitely be using the new classes. I don't expect my players to take them from what I've seen so far, so they'll just be part of other options that they won't necessarily use.

I'm going to take a look at the rule compendium, and if it really is a fully up to date copy of the rules, I'll probably buy it and then sell my original PHB, MM and DMG. Come to think of it, I should probably sell them anyway since they're either material that's out of date or something I have online.

But if it's in the Compendium and the Character Builder, I'll let them use it.

 

[Falstaff]

I'm going to be putting together an Essentials-only campaign, with initial characters limited to the four base classes and five base races, and with the option to choose a new character from the second book after a few levels. I am even going so far as to set it in Nentir Valley. I want a classic feel for the campaign, with tight archetypes, in order to play off what I now recognize as one of D&D's strengths (the rigidity of old classes and races). I am also going to develop a "named level" stronghold system for when my PCs hit Paragon, in order to change the way Paragon is played, add more diversity to encounters, and again callback to that old-school feel.

Yes, this describes my plan too. I'm even going so far as to only allow class/race combinations that match AD&D 1st restrictions.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I don't think we'd have any issues with it. I haven't seen anything really interesting in them that'd tempt me to play one of the classes, but hey.

Brad

 

[kaomera]

I'm buying the Essentials products, in fact I'm getting kind of impatient for some new books to read. I am a bit underwhelmed by some of the design choices (but I haven't actually seen them in play so that could change), and honestly all of the previews and subsequent (over?-) reactions to them gets me down. It seems like the new sub-classes will integrate well into 4e, and they may even be easier to play, but having them alongside the original options is going to be a bit confusing.

I'm already seeing this now that Psionics has crept into my game, as it's taken about two months to get to the point where power points are actually getting spent on a regular basis. Hopefully (and I am pretty hopeful, actually) the Essentials books will have enough material, and be balanced well enough that they are largely self-contained. The you're only looking outside those books (which should only contain viable options) for a limited amount of stuff, which makes catching things (I'm thinking in particular of anything that modifies a range of powers that your build gives up; like options that improve encounter powers being useless for a power-point using Psionic class) that won't work that much easier.