Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Essentials classes - eaiser to play... at reduced tactical complexity?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5582410" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>Y'know, I'm playing a mostly-Essentials home game right now. We've got a Hexblade, a Thief, and an eHunter; and a Paladin from the PHB (with additional options added).</p><p></p><p>It has been so much easier to get the three E people on board with understanding how their character works than it has to get the Paladin on board with the same thing. </p><p></p><p>I've also played Essentials classes in mostly-InEssential parties, though I'm a pretty experienced 4e player by this point. </p><p></p><p>There's not a lot of "tough choices" in Essentials power-use or character-building. IMXP, this is <em>awesome</em>. The purpose mostly seems to be to provide you a no-muss, no-fuss way of being the kind of hero suggested by your class. Thieves <em>get to</em> move adeptly and strike frequently (and with sneak attack!). They don't have to bother performing mild calculus to set up their most iconic ability.</p><p></p><p>This has been great for me as a player and for me as a DM, since it lets the players focus on things aside from their characters' specific powers and abilities. They can pay attention to the plot more. They can pay attention to their personality more. </p><p></p><p>Now, as a disclaimer, I was probably predisposed to liking Essentials -- I'm one of those folks who thinks that 4e's intricate combat complexity is mostly a waste of space, time, and effort, so a simpler, more straightforward design appealed to me from the get-go. So if you're inclined to enjoy 4e's complexity, this might not be such a great thing for you personally. However, part of the greatness, IMO, is that the complexity was reduced at the <em>player</em> level. The DM has about as much complexity as they've ever had, and can design complex combats with difficult tactical options as they always have. And a player who enjoys that can choose a complex class (like the Runepriest) and have lots of options each turn about every little thing. A player who doesn't enjoy that can make a Slayer, pump up their STR, DEX, and CON, and look for a way to make a charge (or take a basic attack) each round. </p><p></p><p>So it only reduces complexity for those who want it reduced -- for those who enjoy Essentials classes. I'm one of those people, but if you're not, the game still has options -- indeed, most of the options in the game -- there for ya. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5582410, member: 2067"] Y'know, I'm playing a mostly-Essentials home game right now. We've got a Hexblade, a Thief, and an eHunter; and a Paladin from the PHB (with additional options added). It has been so much easier to get the three E people on board with understanding how their character works than it has to get the Paladin on board with the same thing. I've also played Essentials classes in mostly-InEssential parties, though I'm a pretty experienced 4e player by this point. There's not a lot of "tough choices" in Essentials power-use or character-building. IMXP, this is [I]awesome[/I]. The purpose mostly seems to be to provide you a no-muss, no-fuss way of being the kind of hero suggested by your class. Thieves [I]get to[/I] move adeptly and strike frequently (and with sneak attack!). They don't have to bother performing mild calculus to set up their most iconic ability. This has been great for me as a player and for me as a DM, since it lets the players focus on things aside from their characters' specific powers and abilities. They can pay attention to the plot more. They can pay attention to their personality more. Now, as a disclaimer, I was probably predisposed to liking Essentials -- I'm one of those folks who thinks that 4e's intricate combat complexity is mostly a waste of space, time, and effort, so a simpler, more straightforward design appealed to me from the get-go. So if you're inclined to enjoy 4e's complexity, this might not be such a great thing for you personally. However, part of the greatness, IMO, is that the complexity was reduced at the [I]player[/I] level. The DM has about as much complexity as they've ever had, and can design complex combats with difficult tactical options as they always have. And a player who enjoys that can choose a complex class (like the Runepriest) and have lots of options each turn about every little thing. A player who doesn't enjoy that can make a Slayer, pump up their STR, DEX, and CON, and look for a way to make a charge (or take a basic attack) each round. So it only reduces complexity for those who want it reduced -- for those who enjoy Essentials classes. I'm one of those people, but if you're not, the game still has options -- indeed, most of the options in the game -- there for ya. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Essentials classes - eaiser to play... at reduced tactical complexity?
Top