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
*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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Essentials missing simple casters
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5346957" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Honestly I think what people are suggesting is that making a simpler fighter is something with precedent, every previous-e fighter was a lot simpler than the 4e version. There was a concept there to fall back on for the Essentials fighters and other martial classes. There has never really been a simple spell caster in any edition. Nobody really knows HOW to make such a thing. </p><p></p><p>Truthfully I personally have no idea how you would make such a thing myself. I mean yeah, you could make a class that has nothing but 3 powers. I don't think it would be all that entertaining myself. It might work in the same way that Slayer WORKS, but then it is already arguable that the Slayer isn't that much easier to run, if any, than the 4e GW Fighter he's basically emulating. I just think it would be extremely hard to capture the essence of the erudite wizard who shapes magic to his bidding with 3 powers, a single 'booster' power, a couple utilities and cantrips. Either the powers he gets are going to be EXTREMELY open-ended or else he's going to be a bow ranger with different fluff basically. Since they also ditched rituals in Essentials there's not even THAT as a fallback for doing more interesting wizardly stuff.</p><p></p><p>More than that I don't feel like power selection per-se is the main point of complexity with 4e to start with. I think it arises from a number of places. There are tons of feats, tons of ways feats, power selection, implement selection, ability score allocation, etc all interact that make build choices complex. On top of that there's the issue with the tactical complexity of the game and the plethora of different conditions and creative ways all these moving parts can interact to make things complicated. </p><p></p><p>In short I'm just not sure there is ever going to be something like a 'simple wizard' that in any sense captures the flavor of wizards very well. Maybe someone will come along and prove that incorrect, but I'm skeptical. Even the 4e Sorcerer still has a lot of choices and ways to use his abilities that gives him a magical feel and that's really about as simple as it gets.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5346957, member: 82106"] Honestly I think what people are suggesting is that making a simpler fighter is something with precedent, every previous-e fighter was a lot simpler than the 4e version. There was a concept there to fall back on for the Essentials fighters and other martial classes. There has never really been a simple spell caster in any edition. Nobody really knows HOW to make such a thing. Truthfully I personally have no idea how you would make such a thing myself. I mean yeah, you could make a class that has nothing but 3 powers. I don't think it would be all that entertaining myself. It might work in the same way that Slayer WORKS, but then it is already arguable that the Slayer isn't that much easier to run, if any, than the 4e GW Fighter he's basically emulating. I just think it would be extremely hard to capture the essence of the erudite wizard who shapes magic to his bidding with 3 powers, a single 'booster' power, a couple utilities and cantrips. Either the powers he gets are going to be EXTREMELY open-ended or else he's going to be a bow ranger with different fluff basically. Since they also ditched rituals in Essentials there's not even THAT as a fallback for doing more interesting wizardly stuff. More than that I don't feel like power selection per-se is the main point of complexity with 4e to start with. I think it arises from a number of places. There are tons of feats, tons of ways feats, power selection, implement selection, ability score allocation, etc all interact that make build choices complex. On top of that there's the issue with the tactical complexity of the game and the plethora of different conditions and creative ways all these moving parts can interact to make things complicated. In short I'm just not sure there is ever going to be something like a 'simple wizard' that in any sense captures the flavor of wizards very well. Maybe someone will come along and prove that incorrect, but I'm skeptical. Even the 4e Sorcerer still has a lot of choices and ways to use his abilities that gives him a magical feel and that's really about as simple as it gets. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Essentials missing simple casters
Top