Essentials - calling a spade a spade

[Fifth Element]

Don't PHB2 Barbarians get a new class feature at 5th level (Rage Strike(?))?

Technically no, but effectively yes. They have Rage Strike at first level, but it's 100% useless until 5th level, when they get a second daily.

Edit: This is not correct.

 

[fanboy2000]

Technically no, but effectively yes. They have Rage Strike at first level, but it's 100% useless until 5th level, when they get a second daily.

Actually, that's the way it was in the play test Barbarian they put out about a year prior to the release of PHB 2. In the final product, Barbarians do indeed get Rage Strike at 5th level, not first. (PHB 2, pg 49 and 50)

IIRC, one of the minor complaints about the play test version was "why does the Barbarian get a power at first level that is completely useless until 5th? Why not just give it to them at 5th?"

 

[hbarsquared]

D&D Essentials is 4.5E only if...

• PHB3 and Psionics was 4.3E
• PHB2 was 4.1E, and
• each errata is another 0.0.1E

I'd rather just say it's all 4E, with the ability to seamlessly incorporate variants.

 

[Colmarr]

It is fundamentally not going to change my game any more significantly than adding the PHBIII to the mix.

The most obvious change is that where there was previously only one "deviant" class system (the psionic power source), there are now two of them (psionics and the new martial builds).

Okay, then the criteria are met now, before the release of Essentials. Is 4e really 4.5 right now?

Quite possibly. I guess for me the line gets drawn when you go back and mess with the fundamentals of an existing power source (in this case, martial). Prior to Essentials, I was happy to accept that 4e was just "evolving" as a living game tends to do.

But the argument that 4e will always just be 4e because they never put a .X after the title is ridiculous. There comes a point where it isn't the same game; it's a different iteration of it. Like I said in my blog post, I'm personally ready to say "yep, we have a new iteration".

I'm struggling to see how the game, post-Essentials will be fundamentally (your word) different in nature from what we have now.

All races (other than humans) will have floating attribute bonuses. Humans gets the choice between a bonus at-will or a racial encounter power instead.

Tieflings will have a new infernal wrath.

Magic missile is completely revamped.

(Yes the last two are here now but do you really believe they weren't born of Essentials?)

Wizard encounter powers now all suddenly have miss effects.

Implements now work across multi-class characters.

Martial classes no longer follow a common A/E/D build.

Treasure comes in different types - common, uncommon and rare.

The introduction of Basic Attack-based classes alters items and builds based on granting or affecting Basic Attacks

That's a pretty significant list...

Don't PHB2 Barbarians get a new class feature at 5th level (Rage Strike(?))?

One class with one higher level feature hardly breaks the mould, particularly if the original draft of the class granted the ability at level 1

Basically it's 4.5 because WotC did some advertising saying "look at our new stuff". But because it's marketing what they didn't say is "but it's not really new new - it's just the latest content for our 2 year old product line and if we're really lucky we'll get some of those pathfinder people back with some of the retro 'feel'".

Edit: Lesson for WotC? Don't advertise new products or material....oh wait....

Unwarranted sarcasm aside, you missed the point. My point was that if I had been pressed on the issue earlier, I might have said 4.5 had arrived then. But I wasn't, so I didn't. Essentials has put the issue in the spotlight, and it's obfuscation to respond to "Essentials is 4.5" with "it can't be because there have been previous changes and you didn't call them 4.5".

If WotC make such a big deal of how different Essentials is, then guess what - it probably is. And if it is significantly different, then it's a natural next step to question whether it "counts" as 4e.

Let me be clear. One of the guiding principles of 4e (as set out in Races and Classes) was common design. 4e wanted to move away from the Fighter/Wizard paradigm of previous editions. I don't (and never would have) hold WotC to that goal for psionics, because psionics has always been different. But when they move away from that goal for other power sources, something has changed.

Lest there be some confusion about my motives, I like most of the options being introduced in Essentials. I don't have a chip on my shoulder from 3.0-3.5. I only returned to D&D with 3.5, so I missed all the angst of that changeover. But, to me at least, D&D post-essentials will not be the same game as before.

I call that 4.5. YMMV, but if you insist on saying it's still 4.0, then I respectfully consider you wrong.

 

[BASHMAN]

I've been on a few-month hiatus from all things RPG-related, including playing, reading these boards, and paying attention to the RPG industry in general, so forgive me if all of this has been discussed ad nauseum already. I've just spent the last half hour or so investigating this "D&D Essentials" creature that's arrival is imminent; I had heard of it previously, not long after it was announced earlier in the year, but since then much more information is available. And from what I've gathered in my admittedly brief investigation, an impression has formed and that is: let's call a spade a spade--this is D&D 4.5E, folks.

If I am wrong, how am I wrong? How is this not 4.5? And if it is, how is WotC rationalizing it when they clearly said that there would be no 4.5?

Instead of 4.5 I think of it as a "Reverse Compatable 5e". It seems to be so different. I do have some concerns w/ the reverse compatability, though. Dwarves can get a STR bonus... but they also get a feat that gives them proficiency w/ all (even superior) axes and hammers w/ +2 Damage. The whole point of that feat existing was to balance the fact that they had no STR bonus (and yet were meant to be fighters). I'm cool with them getting both, but some GMs probably wont be. What I am concerned w/ is that they'll Nerf the feat out of existence.

 

[giant.robot]

...I call that 4.5. YMMV, but if you insist on saying it's still 4.0, then I respectfully consider you wrong.

For starters it is possible and supported by WotC to completely ignore the Essentials products. They're not going to stop printing any of the Core books. You'll still be able to run a game free of any Essentials rules. The fact that the new rules work with all the products previously published should tell you that essentials is not a new edition of the game. I'm going to get a copy of the Rules Compendium to keep at the game table because it will be a condensed and more portable version of all the rules everyone is already playing with.

Even if you incorporate the Essentials rules/builds/powers into an existing game very little if anything will break. You get some more options but nothing will really break. The WotC people have been pretty adamant that you don't need to throw out existing characters and games to use material from Essentials products. Items getting new classifications and Wizard encounter powers getting miss effects don't really break any existing games. The certainly don't break games more than any other errata. Magic Missile auto-hitting for 2+Int modifier damage is not a game breaking change. If you house rule MM to use the old rules nothing at all will break. Nothing will break if you use the old MM rules in an Essentials-only game.

The 4E game was designed from the outset to evolve over time. Thankfully WotC hasn't broken existing content with their new rules or builds. This is precisely what happened with 3.5E and why people were so wary with 4E. Essentials does not invalidate old material but instead just adds to it. With 3.5E your old 3E books were no longer actually valid (especially the MMs) and you had to do a lot of converting if you weren't interested in buying all new copies of books. I would only agree with the assertion that Essentials is a 4.5E if my existing books I own today weren't useful to me anymore. I've got damn near every 4E book published and I would be apoplectic if WotC repeated their 3.5E shenanigans. Nothing at all about essentials looks like they're doing this and actually looking at the 4E system I think it's obvious they designed it so they wouldn't ever have to do a "4.5E" re-release.

 

[Mapache]

What I am concerned w/ is that they'll Nerf the feat out of existence.

Whereas I'm expecting them to upgrade it to +2/3/4 damage depending on tier, to match all the new racial weapon proficiency feats.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Jap, +2,+3,+4 and a little bit more limited number of weapons. Which would bring it back in line with 4e PHB only. (It was adventurers vault, when this feat was becoming ridiculously good... because it was not carefully worded. But back then, they may have felt that leaving it this way was not the worst idea)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

snip

When 3.5 arrived i was not annoyed, because of new printing of the books, there were different issues:

good:
- better class design
- better feat design
- complete books were so much better than x and x splat books
- some spells were balanced better


bad:
- spells were shuffeled to different schools
- spells lost their versatility/were broken up into different spells
- use of minis was more encouraged
- many spells got a saving throw which had none before
- still errors

and most important:
using 3.0 material had terrible effects:

- feats could be combined to unbalanced effects
- PrC (after you redid the requirements) combined into unbalanced effects
- spells from splatbooks were unbalanced within the new spell categorization

all in all, your old crunch material was COMPLETELY USELESS, as using it was a real gamble. You usually ended unbalanced, to one side or the other...

and from a marketing point of view:
- many classes were not updated at all
- many classes were updated in newer splatbooks, and you had to pay for it
- many spells were updated, and you had to pay for it

And what is the difference in 4e?

- older material is not useless, we at least have a document with all changes listed. A bit more effort, but no investment to be up to date.
- a small number of changes in spells compared to 3.0 - 3.5
- small updates to classes, old classes are still viable

Call it 4.5 or whatever you like. Maybe I call it 4.5 myself.

Why? Because I wholeheartedly believe updating a game is the most important part of customer service. Back in the days we had houserules and options. Today we have a living system that updates every Month to make DM´s life better.
And actually, Wizards does a great job of updating. Tell me which other game is willing to patch their game that regularly?

Hmmh, maybe I consider calling essentials: 4e expansion set.

Like Broodwar, SC1 was perfectly playable before. Now, after 10 Years it was the most popular RtS. Why? Because of patch support and designers willing to tweak as needed.

Is D&D like a computer game now? Yes. And it is good that way!

 

[Artoomis]

What many people miss is the new philosophy of 4e. 4e is a living game in the sense that the rules are designed to be updated as needed. Essential updates the rules. That's all. It really is that simple.