Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5470912" data-attributes="member: 82106">I'm perfectly fine with Essentials style classes, they're options that some players like and that's great. I think the key point here has been missed though. It isn't about continued additional options supporting 'classic' 4e classes. It is about FORWARD compatibility with content that is to be released in the future.For example: When Heroes of Shadow is released will I have the option to play an Artful Dodger Rogue and use options from HoS? If not then I'm left with 2 equally unpalatable (to me) choices. Either HoS is useless/less useful to me or I'm forced to play a class that I don't want to play in order to get the other options that I want. Effectively any material going forward that requires Essentialized classes is basically a different and incompatible game from what I already own. I can't use the material the way I want. Yes, I know, people will jump in and say that "isn't any different from not being able to use some option for a Wizard that appears in Arcane Power with a rogue." But that is ignoring the obvious fact that the Essentials Thief is occupying EXACTLY the same conceptual space as my rogue. Wizard options are a whole different thing and their existence doesn't imply that I won't get to use relevant features of the game that will be released in the future. Content that is Thief-only on the other hand is doing exactly that, taking up the space that would have gone to support the rogue and balkanizing the game in a way that stops us from using that content with what we have now.Now, I don't know that HoS does or doesn't have provisions for the Rogue AND the Thief (or just all rogues in general) to use whatever is in there for that type of character. I do know I won't be picking up a copy until I find out because I'm just not interested in only being able to use it with Essentials classes. Actually the delay in releasing the book and its transition to hardcover kind of makes me think they may have decided to revise it in the direction of supporting classic 4e classes, but who knows? It will be interesting to see.</blockquote>

Verification