Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 8723102" data-attributes="member: 6877472">Friend of mine wanted to run a one-shot adventure he'd gone on at a convention.&nbsp; One of our friends was on board, but was suffering from 4e burnout after playing many sessions of Scales of War with his Pacifist Cleric, and wanted to play something simple.He was introduced to the Slayer.&nbsp; Others in the group felt that the Slayer couldn't really hang with the other 4e classes, so I had this idea.&nbsp; &quot;Hey, let's all play Essentials classes!&quot;The DM looked alarmed for some reason, but everyone was soon on board.&nbsp; And there we were, Knight, Slayer, Thief, Cleric, and Wizard.The adventure was....interesting, to say the least.&nbsp; Actually, it was dirty, mean, and unfair (I believe it was called &quot;Beyond the Door&quot;), and included one fight where the group was teleported into the eye laser range of a Beholder, forcing us all to suffer it's effects on turn one.My Thief was a nuisance, and the DM tried with all his might to pin me down, but I wasn't having it.&nbsp; The Knight's ability to &quot;mark&quot; any enemy that got near him proved effective in some fights.&nbsp; The Slayer...went down a lot.&nbsp; And of course, the Cleric and Wizard were basically indistinguishable from their non-Essentials counterparts.But we made it to the end, and while we had fun overall (save for some truly messed up encounter design, like the Beholder fight), afterwards, all the DM could say from that point on about Essentials was &quot;I hate it&quot;.&nbsp; And hate it he did, with all the fury of a dying star.He couldn't articulate why he hated it (sure, most of the classes were dumbed down nonsense, and regular 4e was certainly better, but it wasn't irredeemable, IMO).&nbsp; He just did.&nbsp; And he said that the way we &quot;ruined&quot; his adventure was part of it.Though he refused to elaborate exactly what we'd done, so to this day, I have no idea what earned his ire.&nbsp; Unless it was just our success?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James Gasik, post: 8723102, member: 6877472"] Friend of mine wanted to run a one-shot adventure he'd gone on at a convention. One of our friends was on board, but was suffering from 4e burnout after playing many sessions of [B]Scales of War [/B]with his Pacifist Cleric, and wanted to play something simple. He was introduced to the Slayer. Others in the group felt that the Slayer couldn't really hang with the other 4e classes, so I had this idea. "Hey, let's [B]all[/B] play Essentials classes!" The DM looked alarmed for some reason, but everyone was soon on board. And there we were, Knight, Slayer, Thief, Cleric, and Wizard. The adventure was....interesting, to say the least. Actually, it was dirty, mean, and unfair (I believe it was called "[B]Beyond the Door[/B]"), and included one fight where the group was teleported into the eye laser range of a Beholder, forcing us all to suffer it's effects on turn one. My Thief was a nuisance, and the DM tried with all his might to pin me down, but I wasn't having it. The Knight's ability to "mark" any enemy that got near him proved effective in some fights. The Slayer...went down a lot. And of course, the Cleric and Wizard were basically indistinguishable from their non-Essentials counterparts. But we made it to the end, and while we had fun overall (save for some truly messed up encounter design, like the Beholder fight), afterwards, all the DM could say from that point on about Essentials was "I hate it". And hate it he did, with all the fury of a dying star. He couldn't articulate [B]why [/B]he hated it (sure, most of the classes were dumbed down nonsense, and regular 4e was certainly better, but it wasn't irredeemable, IMO). He just did. And he said that the way we "ruined" his adventure was part of it. Though he refused to elaborate exactly what we'd done, so to this day, I have no idea what earned his ire. Unless it was just our success? [/QUOTE]

Verification