Explain the Essentials to me

[Argyle King]

I think what is unclear is whether or not you can mix and match pieces like you can with the current classes. Yes, I understand that an Essentials Fighter and a PHB1 Fighter can both be in the same game without any problems. However, can an Essentials fighter take a paragon class which was designed for the PHB1 fighter? What happens when an Essentials character wants to multiclass into a non-Essentials class or vice versa?


It would be really nice to know what you get in exchange for giving up Daily Powers. It would also be nice to know how well balanced the new option (whatever it may be) is compared to the current options because there is some debate about whether or not the power point structure of Psionic classes is at the same level as the non-Psionic classes; I imagine this same debate has the potential to bleed over into the Essentials classes if they use different mechanics.

 

[Gort]

Could it be something as simple as how Utility powers are handled now? So for instance, your Essentials Fighter starts with two at-wills, and can pick two greater powers from a list of encounter powers and dailies?

So while it might be possible to pick no dailies at all, it might equally be possible to pick no encounter powers, while the optimal choice would be to mix and match depending on how your campaign goes?

 

[Wrathamon]

Here:

new builds is what I would liken the crunchy bits in the Essentials players books to.

Relevant part:

Liken isnt the same as...

if its a new build then just say its the same... but he says Liken to

which to me is similar but not the same

Hopefully, its just a build

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think what is unclear is whether or not you can mix and match pieces like you can with the current classes. Yes, I understand that an Essentials Fighter and a PHB1 Fighter can both be in the same game without any problems. However, can an Essentials fighter take a paragon class which was designed for the PHB1 fighter? What happens when an Essentials character wants to multiclass into a non-Essentials class or vice versa?


It would be really nice to know what you get in exchange for giving up Daily Powers. It would also be nice to know how well balanced the new option (whatever it may be) is compared to the current options because there is some debate about whether or not the power point structure of Psionic classes is at the same level as the non-Psionic classes; I imagine this same debate has the potential to bleed over into the Essentials classes if they use different mechanics.

Yeah, this is bothersome. What happens for instance when an Essentials fighter decides to use a Salve of Power? If he's got no daily powers then he's GOT to have better encounter powers than the existing fighter builds do or else some completely other mechanism. In either case that Salve of Power is not likely to work the same as it does for existing character classes. This is just a small example too. What about MC feats? PMC? EDs? Once you start thinking about it there is actually a lot of 'stuff' in 4e that supposes a specific way that characters work. Its just NOT going to be seamless. I'm sure it will work OK at some level, but that isn't the same as "Oh, its just a different build".

 

[Dungeoneer]

It really sounds as though the thrust of the new builds is to make the classes simpler. So Essentials Fighter is the Fighter on Easy Mode.

Based on that, I think maybe there will be less mix-n-match allowed because that would complicate things for new players. What you DON'T want to do is introduce a new player to the current fighter, who has like six major builds and over a dozen powers to pick from at every level.

I honestly think they're trying to accomplish some conflicting goals here (bring in new players, but have crazy new stuff for old players!) which is why there is a lot of confusion for everyone. Hopefully they can pull it off.

I'm very curious to see the simplified mechanics of these new old classes.

 

[Kingreaper]

I'm sick of this whole "keep up with the Joneses" mentality with D&D anymore. I know that no one is coming to burn my 4E books, but I like playing with the widest variety of options and the most current rules.

I suppose that what I really want is a player experience like Pathfinder/3.x and a DM experience (especially monsters!) like 4E. Is that so much to ask for?

Given as I build my 3.5 monsters using a set of 4E style principles, I don't think so.

But then, before I started playing 4e I built my monsters even simpler than that (which is to say: I didn't )

 

[Istar]

I'll try, from what I read in the announcements and replies:

- D&D Essentials will be a series of products that will remain in print;
- D&D Essentials is aimed primarily at folks new to RPGs and D&D;
- The new Red Box will have rules for the "classic" races and classes, for levels 1 & 2;
- The new Rules Compendium will have rules for levels 1-30;
- Several classes will gain additional "builds" (like those we got in the "Power" books) that change the basic power structure (at will/encounter/daily), but these will be compatible with exisiting builds, so you could have a party with an Archer Ranger and an Essentials Ranger.
- The core line of books will continue alongside the Essentials line.

Can a current Character use feats from this essentials line.

Say like our group we have a standard Rogue, Cleric in the group.

 

[WanderingMonster]

Liken isnt the same as...

if its a new build then just say its the same... but he says Liken to

which to me is similar but not the same

Hopefully, its just a build

I think it's a simplification. What is it simplifying? Resource management. At Will/Encounter/Daily isn't too hard to wrap your head around. But if you're a new DM or player, At Will/Encounter is a whole lot easier. Now you don't have to worry about what powers you can use going into the next fight. Since the Essentials line is aimed at new players, simpler is better.

Ans why is an Essentials character like a new build, but not a new build? They altered the mechanics. New builds of a certain class all use the same mechanics but are differentiated by power selection and key attributes. My understanding is that Essentials characters will have ONE build. It is different from its 4e equivalent by the fact that it uses different mechanics.

The example people have been using comparing Essentials characters with psionics is a good one. Psionic classes are mechanically different from non-psionic classes, but they can play along side those other classes with no problem.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think what is unclear is whether or not you can mix and match pieces like you can with the current classes. Yes, I understand that an Essentials Fighter and a PHB1 Fighter can both be in the same game without any problems. However, can an Essentials fighter take a paragon class which was designed for the PHB1 fighter? What happens when an Essentials character wants to multiclass into a non-Essentials class or vice versa?

If it works essentially like a build, then the answer is...

it depends.

Some paragon paths require certain class features. Some items require certain class features.

It might be possible that some things are just redefined, like "Daily Powers are a class feature many classes have". Just like "Combat Superiority" is no longer a class feature for every fighter since Agile Superiority (or whats-his-name) from Martial Power 2.

 

[Klaus]

Can a current Character use feats from this essentials line.

Say like our group we have a standard Rogue, Cleric in the group.

Since the two are compatible, as per Trevor Kidd's replies, I'd say "yes".