• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Essentials: Its not 4.5, its BECMI 2.0!

Remathilis

Legend
So I've done a lot of thinking, and reading, about Essentials. While a lot of people have screamed "4.5" around here and elsewhere, I finally realized why it wasn't.

Its Basic/Expert/Companion/Master/Immortal sets, redux; BECMI 2.0.

BECMI was its own sub-game of D&D built on the same premise but easier to use and less complex. It was a complete game in-and-of itself; using just the box-sets you had all the spells, magic items, and monsters to go from levels 1 to 36. It focused on the classics (fighter, magic-user, cleric, thief, elf, dwarf, halfling, human) but as it developed added its own unique twists (many of the odd monsters of D&D get their birth in Basic). The game was even cross compatible with AD&D to a degree; modules spells or magic items worked from one system to the other (monsters needed a bit more work, and PCs needed a lot of converting).

Essentials recaptures a lot of that. Its self-contained (you don't need the PHB/DMG/MM to play), it focuses on the classics and its less complex than the "Core". The core difference between BECMI and Essentials is that the latter was built with compatibility in mind (it runs on the same chasis as regular 4e) and thus there is a lot less converting than BD&D -> AD&D.

Now, the core 4e experience will change at bit to reflect the Essentials "errata" (like melee weapon training or magic missile), the price of the inter-compatibility. However, Essentials could literally be the next "Basic" D&D set for those not interested in the complexities of regular 4e and eventually supported like BECMI was, with the added benefit of being compatible with regular 4e games if people so chose.

Best of both worlds.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Scribble

First Post
I know there have been posts by more then one person whom have said 4e as a whole reminds them of basic to a degree...

I wonder if they decided to take that feeling and run with it.
 

nookiemonster

First Post
Yeah, I think that's what they are trying to do.

The big, big difference between Basic Set D&D/old AD&D and Essentials/4e D&D is that Essentials is a proper subset of D&D 4e. Just as you can play 4e with the three core books and never use anything from any other book or resource, you can play Essentials without ever venturing beyond it if you like. By contrast, D&D and AD&D were two different games. Also, people are getting confused about the revisions/errata that's coming out. Essentials is not affecting the errata; the errata is affecting Essentials.
 


TerraDave

5ever, or until 2024
Ya, but its as if you could play your "elf 3" alongside someones "dwarf fighter 3" AND they took all the stream lining and some of the better ideas in BECMI, and incorporate those into AD&D....





....which would have been awesome!





:uhoh:
 
Last edited:

Remathilis; said:
So I've done a lot of thinking, and reading, about Essentials. While a lot of people have screamed "4.5" around here and elsewhere, I finally realized why it wasn't.

Its Basic/Expert/Companion/Master/Immortal sets, redux; BECMI 2.0.

BECMI was its own sub-game of D&D built on the same premise but easier to use and less complex. It was a complete game in-and-of itself; using just the box-sets you had all the spells, magic items, and monsters to go from levels 1 to 36. It focused on the classics (fighter, magic-user, cleric, thief, elf, dwarf, halfling, human) but as it developed added its own unique twists (many of the odd monsters of D&D get their birth in Basic). The game was even cross compatible with AD&D to a degree; modules spells or magic items worked from one system to the other (monsters needed a bit more work, and PCs needed a lot of converting).

Errr... You're wrong. BECMI (D&D) predated AD&D. AD&D came along years after D&D was already out there. While it took time for all of BECMI (and the eventual Rules Cyclopedia) to show up, they were 2 seperate game lines that were related.

Essentials is going about that backwards.

As well, everything I've heard indicates that while Essentials itself might be a limited product line, the design philosophies behind it will power 4e moving forward. So instead of maintaing 2 different gamelines (like before), you've got a set of side product and the main product will continue that way, even though the side product is limited it terms of total number produced under that line.

The main relation "Essentials" has to old stuff, is WotC's successful attempt to cash in on nostalgia. Linking it to the tried and true BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia was apparently smart (it could have blown up in their face).

Unless WotC changes its tune and declares the Essentials line so successful that they're going to continue churning out product for it. In which case they then have competing gamelines (like before) and it gets even harder to believe (most) 4e fans claim that Essentials isn't another edition.
 
Last edited:

DracoSuave

First Post
Errr... You're wrong. BECMI (D&D) predated AD&D. AD&D came along years after D&D was already out there. While it took time for all of BECMI (and the eventual Rules Cyclopedia) to show up, they were 2 seperate game lines that were related.

AD&D was printed between 1977 and 1979.

Red Box came out in 1981 as well as Expert. The CMI parts of BECMI didn't come out until 1983-1985.

The D&D that AD&D advanced wasn't Basic D&D, it was just a proto-D&D that was an add-on to the wargame Chainmail. AD&D wasn't built off of BECMI, it was simply a more advanced version of this proto-D&D. It wasn't until after AD&D was in development that the B part of BECMI was developed by a different team. Expert then appeared well after AD&D was already out there.

Red Box (the Basic D&D that formed the first part of BECMI) was not a reprint of the original D&D, it was its own seperate divergent offshoot, in the same way that AD&D was. The difference is that while AD&D went for complexity, Red Box went for simplicity.

Ironically, Rules Cylcopedia D&D is in some ways more complex than AD&D 2nd edition...
 

MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
AD&D was printed between 1977 and 1979.

Red Box came out in 1981 as well as Expert. The CMI parts of BECMI didn't come out until 1983-1985.

Err...

1974: Original Dungeons & Dragons (supplements follow which drastically change the game, especially Supplement I: Greyhawk)

1977: Dungeons & Dragons Basic - Holmes edition - an introduction to original D&D, written by someone only familiar with oD&D. Gary Gygax threw a few AD&D concepts in (he was working on AD&D at the time). Uses a few concepts from Supplement I, but is based mainly on the original 3-booklet set.

1977-1979: Advanced Dungeons & Dragons is released, based on oD&D with substantial additions from the supplements, The Strategic Review and The Dragon. Does some important changes (like AC now starts at 10, not 9).

1981: Dungeons & Dragons Basic - Moldvay edition (not the Red Box). Complete rewriting of D&D Basic, putting down the form it would follow for the next 20 years. Also released an Expert set (Cook).

1983: Dungeons & Dragons Basic - Mentzer edition (Red Box). Re-editing of the Moldvay edition with a choose-your-own adventure and splitting of material into players and DM books. Expert, Companion, Master and Immortal sets would follow.

1989: Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition.

1990: Dungeons & Dragons Rules Compendium - putting all the rules from the BECM set into one book. A complete rewrite of the Immortal set was released as "Wrath of the Immortals".

Cheers!
 

xechnao

First Post
As well, everything I've heard indicates that while Essentials itself might be a limited product line, the design philosophies behind it will power 4e moving forward. So instead of maintaing 2 different gamelines (like before), you've got a set of side product and the main product will continue that way, even though the side product is limited it terms of total number produced under that line.
...
Unless WotC changes its tune and declares the Essentials line so successful that they're going to continue churning out product for it. In which case they then have competing gamelines (like before) and it gets even harder to believe (most) 4e fans claim that Essentials isn't another edition.

Essentials is the new core from now on. At least in retail. If someone enters a shop and asks to buy the core products of D&D he would be directed towards the ten "Essentials" products.
 

shamsael

First Post
Errr... You're wrong. BECMI (D&D) predated AD&D. AD&D came along years after D&D was already out there. While it took time for all of BECMI (and the eventual Rules Cyclopedia) to show up, they were 2 seperate game lines that were related.

You're confusing OD&D and BX for BECMI. BECMI came after AD&D 1e by about 3 years.
 
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top