D&D 4E Essentials isn't 4.5e, but is 4e as we know it over?

[UngainlyTitan]

that could be quite overpowered considering the masteries... especially tome of readiness... (although picking up MM as a feature doesn´t sound wrong)

I was thinking the same but wondered what others thought.

 

[MrMyth]

Maybe. So far the new classes don't looks more powerful. However, they FEEL more like a 2e class than the rest of the classes in 4e so far. They feel slightly more flavorful(Wizards who specialize in Evocation as opposed to "I use a wand"). Given their complete compatibility with old powers, the new Wizard certainly seems like the one I'd play if given the choice.

They also appear to get Encounter powers as well as Dailies in their spell books, 3 at-will powers at first level(given, one of them HAS to be magic missile), and a class feature we don't know what it does. It also gains new class features as it goes up levels which the old Wizard doesn't.

It does seem better.

I wouldn't be surprised if, when Essentials hits, there is Errata giving all Wizards Magic Missile for free. We also haven't seen exactly how the Spellbook is working for them, either.

And I don't think we'll be seeing any new class features beyond first level.

I know, I know - it shows it right there in the preview! But I suspect that those later abilities of Expert Mage, Master Mage, etc... are going to be the equivalent of rituals.

Note, the Essentials Cleric and Wizard don't get Ritual Caster. Instead, I think they'll get appropriate equivalent abilities designed for their class or speciality. The Warpriest gets the equivalent of Remove Affliction and Raise Dead. The Mage will get Illusions or Enchantment or Evocation themed rituals or equivalent abilities.

Their level 1 specialty or domain abilities? I expect those will be the equivalent of most level 1 unique class features. So instead of Staff Mastery, we get Enchantment Mastery.

And they could in fact make it so the ability gets stronger at later levels - Arcane Implement Mastery does so automatically by being tied to stats. If the speciality powers aren't tied to stats, they could instead have more powerful versions at later levels without throwing off the class balance.

Overall, I think the Essentials classes will be strong, but I don't think they'll be outright better than ones that have come before them.

I could absolutely be wrong, of course. Apprentice Mage, Expert Mage, Master Mage - each of those could be an ability as potent as Arcane Implement Mastery, and the Mage thus outright more powerful than the standard Wizard.

But I'd be very surprised if that is the case.

Once again, I'm not saying that Essentials is going to make the new classes mandatory. However, I do think that after they come out, there might be a couple "Why would you take the Great Weapon Fighter? The Scourge gets the same bonus at first level and gets another bonus to hit at 11 and 21. And it still gets all the same power choices as the Great Weapon Fighter." conversations.

Yeah, I certainly don't think we'll see anything like that.

I think people will have the choice of playing a Great Weapon Fighter that gets +1 to hit with all two-handed weapons... vs playing a Scourge who instead gets some different benefits with, I don't know, a special school of weapons or the like. The chances of them just getting the same bonuses only bigger? Not gonna happen.

Maybe. So far the new classes don't looks more powerful. However, they FEEL more like a 2e class than the rest of the classes in 4e so far. They feel slightly more flavorful(Wizards who specialize in Evocation as opposed to "I use a wand"). Given their complete compatibility with old powers, the new Wizard certainly seems like the one I'd play if given the choice.

They also appear to get Encounter powers as well as Dailies in their spell books, 3 at-will powers at first level(given, one of them HAS to be magic missile), and a class feature we don't know what it does. It also gains new class features as it goes up levels which the old Wizard doesn't.

It does seem better.

I wouldn't be surprised if, when Essentials hits, there is Errata giving all Wizards Magic Missile for free. We also haven't seen exactly how the Spellbook is working for them, either.

And I don't think we'll be seeing any new class features beyond first level.

I know, I know - it shows it right there in the preview! But I suspect that those later abilities of Expert Mage, Master Mage, etc... are going to be the equivalent of rituals.

Note, the Essentials Cleric and Wizard don't get Ritual Caster. Instead, I think they'll get appropriate equivalent abilities designed for their class or speciality. The Warpriest gets the equivalent of Remove Affliction and Raise Dead. The Mage will get Illusions or Enchantment or Evocation themed rituals or equivalent abilities.

Their level 1 specialty or domain abilities? I expect those will be the equivalent of most level 1 unique class features. So instead of Staff Mastery, we get Enchantment Mastery.

And they could in fact make it so the ability gets stronger at later levels - Arcane Implement Mastery does so automatically by being tied to stats. If the speciality powers aren't tied to stats, they could instead have more powerful versions at later levels without throwing off the class balance.

Overall, I think the Essentials classes will be strong, but I don't think they'll be outright better than ones that have come before them.

Once again, I'm not saying that Essentials is going to make the new classes mandatory. However, I do think that after they come out, there might be a couple "Why would you take the Great Weapon Fighter? The Scourge gets the same bonus at first level and gets another bonus to hit at 11 and 21. And it still gets all the same power choices as the Great Weapon Fighter." conversations.

Yeah, I don't think we'll see anything like that.

I think people will have the choice of playing a Great Weapon Fighter that gets +1 to hit with all two-handed weapons... vs playing a Scourge who instead gets some different benefits with, I don't know, a special school of weapons or the like. The chances of them just getting the same bonuses only bigger? Not gonna happen.

At most, I think we'll instead see debates like the ones we have seen in the past - that the Scourge's unique benefits are better than just +1 to hit. Which some have said about the Battlerager, and so forth. Whether that will be true? No idea. But I very much doubt we'll see anything that is simply numerically superior to the existent content.

 

[bowbe]

I wouldn't. But, then again, I know that Essentials is fully compatible, because they've said it a number of times.

So, your going with that then?

Good luck with that! They sort of have a track record or saying a lot of things a number of times that turn out to be askew to the reality that gamers/designers/developers/fans later find themselves in.

They said numerous times that 3.5 was "really no different" from 3.0. Merely an upgrade they said. Merely clearing up the kinks they said. That was true unless you were writing/developing adventures/monsters/stat blocks/spells or any other support material for the game because there were significant changes. Maybe not changes that affected players, but definitely ones that affected game masters and the d20 gaming community as a whole. So yes, from one point of view, no difference at all. From another point of view completely different and untrue.

When 4e was announced it was "said" that the difference between 4e and 3e would be significant but definitely NOT as significant a difference as the change between 2e and 3e (I was there, heard it said live, even had a pamphlet with such assertions printed on them. I think we can now agree its a sugnificantly and to some a shockingly different game. (I never said anything derogotory there btw) If we can't agree on that then the discussion ends and we all move along in mutual respect and understanding . Enough has been said about how 4e differs from any previous edition of D&D that I don't think we need to poke a stick at that hornets nest. You could literally start a brush war in parts of Oklahoma over harsh feelings between players of 4e Vs. those of Pathfinder LOL!

I am by no means calling anyone a liar either. I am simply saying that I think when companies, and hype men for companies, and designers affiliated with said companies get all excited about the amp up to a new product line, they MIGHT not be looking at all their exciting changes from the same perspective as everyone else. Thus be careful when towing anyone's "company" line.

 

[Scribble]

When 4e was announced it was "said" that the difference between 4e and 3e would be significant but definitely NOT as significant a difference as the change between 2e and 3e (I was there, heard it said live, even had a pamphlet with such assertions printed on them. I think we can now agree its a sugnificantly and to some a shockingly different game.

I don't- as I disagree with you.

I think the differences between 3e and 2e really do outweigh the differences between 3e and 4e... The 4e ones are just more noticeable. 3e, and the d20 system mad e a LOT of changes.

 

[bowbe]

To each their own. As I said, not gonna re-fight the edition wars. You are right because you say you are. I am right because I know I am! See what I mean ? Thats the de-evolution of any constructive conversation about gaming or game editions.

Again, I'm hoping essentials is a shocking success and gets people more involved and passionate about gaming. As I said before "Official" D&D is good for all gaming, not just D&D. When it's weak, gaming is weak. Just don't be surprised if its more of a change and slightly less compatible than you've been led to believe.

 

[Scribble]

To each their own. As I said, not gonna re-fight the edition wars. You are right because you say you are. I am right because I know I am! See what I mean ? Thats the de-evolution of any constructive conversation about gaming or game editions.

Umm... who said anything about edition wars?

I just disagree with your statement that we can all agree "its a sugnificantly and to some a shockingly different game."

 

[bowbe]

If we can't agree on that then the discussion ends and we all move along in mutual respect and understanding .

Hate to quote myself but I guess the discussion (or my part in it) ends here. Have a nice day.

 

[Vaeron]

Their level 1 specialty or domain abilities? I expect those will be the equivalent of most level 1 unique class features. So instead of Staff Mastery, we get Enchantment Mastery.

I agree... There's nothing in the preview to suggest mages' get the implement mastery feature. So we're seeing that their builds are viewing more and more stuff as 'optional'. Which I imagine could get confusing to those with access to all the source books in the long-run, but if those are the only options provided in the Essentials set it should be easier for newbies to keep a handle on.

Is the class system maybe becoming too versatile? I'm hoping they're already prepping the CB for this - the more different combinations of things that are possible the more opportunity for little bugs that only come into play with certain combos.

Next excerpt is a fighter build, which sounds like it wears heavier armor and is more defensive than other builds - so will be interesting to see what features it does (and doesn't) have.

I have to say, it doesn't seem that Essentials is actually aimed at 'new' players, it's shaping up to be aimed at player's of older editions who didn't like the move away from existing progression models. So, 'old' players, in other words.

 

[Scribble]

Hate to quote myself but I guess the discussion (or my part in it) ends here. Have a nice day.

You too!

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Umm you're still maiing a lot of jumps in logic, and ignoring the fact that the core rules of the game are not changing.

The thing is in 3.5 the "core" rules didn't really change either. The backbone of the system was still there, sure they changed a few things and added some.

It's like taking a standard Chevy S-10 pick up, adding a lift kit, big off-road tires, a roll cage, lights on top, a new paint job etc.. It is essentially still an S-10 pick up underneath.