Essentials..core..do they work together?

[JeffB]

Background: I am planning on running KOTS for my 12yo son. We have been playing the PFBB for the past 10 months or so with great success,however after some "wish listing", he prefers fewer combats, but more dynamic/exciting ones. I figured i would prune KOTS of some of the repetitive encounters and run that to see what he thinks. Not to mention as a DM I prefer 4E monsters that have a bit more variety in attacks, and the easier to use statblocks/encounter formats.

I have the red box essentials starter and plan to use that as it already has a fighter similar to what he plays in PFBB, and having the power cards, will be a boon as well for him. I no longer have a DDI sub because my 4e group disbanded before essentials hit the market, so no printing out cards/character sheets.

Will the essentials fighter or other essentials classes "work" well enough with old core adventures/material? Or essentials monsters work ok with core?, etc. I am not a stickler for rules,nor is he,so minor stuff is not what I am worried about.

LONG WINDED POST which essentially can be summed up as "how compatible are the two systems"?

 

[Larrin]

They are perfectly compatible. I've played several mixed campaigns and never had a problem.

 

[Dice4Hire]

They are mostly compatible, but it is best to have essentials characters use essentials stuff and older stuff use older stuff. Mixing and matching can be problematic.

 

[Moorcrys]

We played with both together and never had any problems whatsoever.

 

[D'karr]

They are mostly compatible, but it is best to have essentials characters use essentials stuff and older stuff use older stuff. Mixing and matching can be problematic.

I somewhat disagree with this one, I don't find it problematic at all. We've been doing it since essentials came out without issue. YMMV

The essentials books cleaned up a lot. The problem is with the breadth of options, which can seem overwhelming. On the clean up side, for example, the "Expertise" feats kind of stopped being a feat tax with essentials because they were given additional options than a simple +1 to attacks per tier. Master-at-arms is a good example.

In addition some powers introduced with essentials gave legacy characters more interesting options. Some of the Primal powers for the Ranger come to mind. By choosing these "essentials" options you get a slightly different flavor to your legacy classes. Root gate and Bridge of Roots come to mind.

The "essentials" classes themselves work perfectly in line with the "core" classes and can be played side by side. We once had a group with a "Core TWF Ranger" and an "Essentials Scout" and neither seemed to overshadow the other. The scout was easier to play with a tighter subset of options, and the ranger was more complex with more options, but they both worked wonderfully as strikers.

As a DM I would use the essentials monsters rather than those from MM1. Any monster that appeared in Monster Vault will have tighter "math/mechanics" than the same creature in MM1. That is the only "problem" I would see of mixing and matching. I have done it though and it doesn't "break" anything you just have to be mindful of the "revised" math that started with MM3. If possible adjust your MM1 monsters that way. Definitely use the "revised" DC numbers from Essentials, they are better balanced.

If your son is more interested in fewer combats, KotS is probably not the adventure I'd recommend. KotS can serve as a wonderful "underlying framework" for set-piece combats, but the combats are too many, and some are repetitive (kobolds). In addition, I would work hard to give the adventure a much more "detailed" background. When I ran KotS, I made Kalarel, a half-elf female. I introduced her early in the adventure as her "carriage" was being attacked by the kobolds on the road. Enter the PCs. The PCs helped get rid of the kobolds, and she was "grateful". She left and the PCs didn't think much about that until the inevitable betrayal by Ninaran, who I made Kalarel's boy toy. This was all background information that the players could find out if they did more investigation. It also allowed me to have a tighter hook to Thunderspire Labyrinth by having Kalarel be a former apprentice to Paldemar, and at odds with him due to her pursuit of power. I also expanded Sir Keegan's story a lot more so that there was some grounding to it.

IMO, as it stands KotS is a "poor" dungeon crawl, but can serve as a very good kicker to a campaign if the DM works hard expanding it, and creating hooks between it and the other adventures in the series. I made many modifications that worked well for my group, but if I had run KotS right out of the box, it would have felt unsatisfying. YMMV

 

[Uller]

I basically did the same thing with my group of work friends. I ran the Red Box adventure for the group with one PC until the "go back to town" interlude then they all made PCs. Some essentials, some from PHB and PHB2 (Ranger and Druid). Then we finished Red Box and I used the skull as a hook to get them to Winterhaven.

It seems to me the essentials characters are generally more effective in the hands of newer players because they are just easier to play and build.

You have to prune down the intro or beef up the entire adventure since they'll be starting it at 2nd level. That throws things.

Also, don't forget to adjust the damage math for all the monsters in KotS. Our group rampaged through it until I realized the monsters just weren't doing enough damage. Once I did, it was much more enjoyable (the first fight was with the Ogres...

 

[Ferghis]

There are two tactics that a group that includes both non-essential and essential characters should be aware of.

Essentials classes consistently have excellent basic attacks. So leaders that grant basic attacks really benefit from them. This could make the non-essentials players feel left out, although I've never really seen this happen.

Essential defenders have a non-traditional marking system that is not technically marking: the defender aura. Having a regular defender mark an enemy who is in an e-defender's aura gives that enemy penalties (and/or punishment) no matter which target it chooses to attack (unless it attacks both defenders).

These are the only "glitches" I have noted, and I can't say they really are problematic in any way.

 

[herrozerro]

There are two tactics that a group that includes both non-essential and essential characters should be aware of.

Essentials classes consistently have excellent basic attacks. So leaders that grant basic attacks really benefit from them. This could make the non-essentials players feel left out, although I've never really seen this happen.

Essential defenders have a non-traditional marking system that is not technically marking: the defender aura. Having a regular defender mark an enemy who is in an e-defender's aura gives that enemy penalties (and/or punishment) no matter which target it chooses to attack (unless it attacks both defenders).

These are the only "glitches" I have noted, and I can't say they really are problematic in any way.

The defender issue isnt an issue. Defenders aura excludes marked enemies iirc.

 

[JeffB]

Lots of good advice here folks,.thanks.

As for the new Monster Math, is there a formula or chart or something on the WOTC website to update monsters from MM1/2 and earlier adventures?

If the session/s go well I plan on investing in the Essentials books and the Monster Vault to replace my old core books.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Our 4Ed campaign has a mix of PCs covering PHB1-3 and the Essentials books- absolutely zero issues.