Essentials in action - some anecdotes

[Mercurius]

Last night I had my first game night with the two digest Essentials books and I got a few interesting responses and experiences. Why are these anecdotes at all meaningful? Well, I'd say my group is largely comprised of the type of people that WotC is targeting with Essentials: I'm the only serious gamer who has largely been in "active status" since I started playing in the early 80s, while everyone else is basically in one of the main demographics that Essentials is seemingly targeting: all 30-40s males who, for the most part, haven't played since the boom days of the 80s and only started playing again recently (two years ago) with 4E.

Rules Compendium: This was our first experience with this at the table and it proved to be a very useful book. It is the best table reference book I've ever owned; the index is actually quite comprehensive and it scored perfectly with the four or five quick rules checks we needed it for (much quicker and easier than the PHB or the DDI Compendium). Kudos to WotC for putting this out.

Heroes of the Fallen Lands: I explained and showed it to the rogue and fighter players, thinking that the fighter in particular might be interested in that he often seems confused by the wealth of powers his character has. The rogue player is very tactical, somehow finding a way to get combat advantage in every combat; neither seemed all that interested, the rogue in particular saying that he liked the power options. Actually, he made an interesting comment that he missed the writing of the old (AD&D) books because they were written much more interestingly, with more stories and flavor. That's a huge generalization and may largely be nostalgia, but worth noting.

Red Box: One of the players, the defacto note-keeper and map-maker, bought this to play with his two kids (I think five and ten year olds). He said he and they are enjoying it. When he pulled the box out it inspired oohs and ahs from one of the other players (the rogue) who said "I loved the old red box, it had everything! The expert set was even better."

Again, I mention these anecdotes not because I think they are particularly representative of a larger picture but because they are real life examples of the response Essentials is getting from people that it is geared for. The nostalgia effect of the Red Box is significant and is a good way to get people to bring their kids into the game (I gave it to my 10-year old nephew, although he also received Castle Ravenloft and was much more interested in that); the Rules Compendium was a big hit as a table reference; Heroes of the Fallen Lands got a more indifferent response.

Any other anecdotes about Essentials?

 

[Imaro]

Last night I had my first game night with the two digest Essentials books and I got a few interesting responses and experiences. Why are these anecdotes at all meaningful? Well, I'd say my group is largely comprised of the type of people that WotC is targeting with Essentials: I'm the only serious gamer who has largely been in "active status" since I started playing in the early 80s, while everyone else is basically in one of the main demographics that Essentials is seemingly targeting: all 30-40s males who, for the most part, haven't played since the boom days of the 80s and only started playing again recently (two years ago) with 4E.

Rules Compendium: This was our first experience with this at the table and it proved to be a very useful book. It is the best table reference book I've ever owned; the index is actually quite comprehensive and it scored perfectly with the four or five quick rules checks we needed it for (much quicker and easier than the PHB or the DDI Compendium). Kudos to WotC for putting this out.

Heroes of the Fallen Lands: I explained and showed it to the rogue and fighter players, thinking that the fighter in particular might be interested in that he often seems confused by the wealth of powers his character has. The rogue player is very tactical, somehow finding a way to get combat advantage in every combat; neither seemed all that interested, the rogue in particular saying that he liked the power options. Actually, he made an interesting comment that he missed the writing of the old (AD&D) books because they were written much more interestingly, with more stories and flavor. That's a huge generalization and may largely be nostalgia, but worth noting.

Red Box: One of the players, the defacto note-keeper and map-maker, bought this to play with his two kids (I think five and ten year olds). He said he and they are enjoying it. When he pulled the box out it inspired oohs and ahs from one of the other players (the rogue) who said "I loved the old red box, it had everything! The expert set was even better."

Again, I mention these anecdotes not because I think they are particularly representative of a larger picture but because they are real life examples of the response Essentials is getting from people that it is geared for. The nostalgia effect of the Red Box is significant and is a good way to get people to bring their kids into the game (I gave it to my 10-year old nephew, although he also received Castle Ravenloft and was much more interested in that); the Rules Compendium was a big hit as a table reference; Heroes of the Fallen Lands got a more indifferent response.

Any other anecdotes about Essentials?

Hey Mercurius, I am curious if the two players you showed the HotFL book to had characters already? If so, how long have you guys been playing and what level are they on?

I'm just wondering if this may have contributed to their general lack of interest in the new sub-classes, personally I am waiting for the second book to run an "Essentials" campaign from the ground up (we are tryng out Gamma World until then) as I imagine it would be difficult to get most players to stop playing a PC they are attached to for something new.

 

[filthgrinder]

Actually, those guys aren't who Essentials is targeting, you've already for them playing 4E (for two years apparently). From the Gencon seminar, they said, Essentials could be thought of as getting on the D&D highway at 1st street, where as 4E with the PHB, DMG, and MM was like getting on the highway at 4th street. Those guys are already on the highway, for them to be interested in playing Essentials classes, that would be like getting off the highway, circling back to 1st street, and then getting on the highway again.

The Essentials builds of the fighter and the rogue restrain the amount of options that the character has, so if you have people already playing, even if they don't think a martial character should have dailies, they probably wont want to give them up, because people just don't want to give up options. However, if you started them off with an Essentials build, they probably would buy into it without a problem.

So it seems like Essentials is really 2 years too late for these guys, but since you've got them playing, it looks like 4E worked out alright for them after all.

 

[Mercurius]

They're 9th level and we've been playing for almost two years (sessions are planned every two weeks, but for the first year or so they were only once a month, so we're talking about 30 sessions). The rogue player is the only surviving original party member and is very (scarily, even) attached to his character, while the fighter player has only been playing his character for a couple months.

But yeah, their lack of interest may be because they are happy with the characters they have. Personally speaking I am not sure what I think of "non-powers" martial characters; I like them in principle and I have always felt that 4E classes are a bit too similar, but on the other hand the powers are nice as well. The problem, however, is that powers abstract the player one more level from their character; for martial characters at least they don't make sense from the character's perspective, they require the player to step back and play their character like a game piece, with tactical maneuvers.

 

[Scribble]

But yeah, their lack of interest may be because they are happy with the characters they have. Personally speaking I am not sure what I think of "non-powers" martial characters; I like them in principle and I have always felt that 4E classes are a bit too similar, but on the other hand the powers are nice as well. The problem, however, is that powers abstract the player one more level from their character; for martial characters at least they don't make sense from the character's perspective, they require the player to step back and play their character like a game piece, with tactical maneuvers.

I'll be interested to see the results of re-formatting the original classes to fit the essentials format...

I'll be interested too see if adding more flavor to the power the way essentials does, will do anything to change the perspective people have on this.