D&D 4E Inquiry: How do 4E fans feel about 4E Essentials?

[Garthanos]

5. They did creative stuff with the role and power source system (berserker).

That is considered post essentials and was right alongside other very interesting experiments. Some of the shadow powers for instance are intriguing. (transforming a defeated enemy into a minion)

 

[Charlaquin]

And the hexblade used weapon so you know what happened.

Hexblade was great, fae pact Hexblade was the easiest and most reliable way to play the frostcheese build.

 

[Charlaquin]

It was? Not IME. No one I knew felt that way about it. The only place I ever saw that sentiment was the wotc D&D forums, and even there it was contentious

That was my experience too. I was a supporter of essentials-only at the time and I got a ton of flak for it.

 

[Charlaquin]

What were the best classes on both ends of the spectrum: Pre-Essentials/Post-Essentials?

Well, pre-essentials, the game was incredibly well balanced. There basically was no best class - you could be better or worse at your class’s role based on your feats and power choices, but there wasn’t a hierarchy of some classes being better or worse at baseline than others. Post-essentials… well, most essentials classes were worse than their pre-essentials counterparts. I’m not sure what the best essentials class was, probably depends on what you were trying to do. But I’d say the essentials wizard and cleric were definitely top contenders. The essentials rogue was pretty damn strong in the early game if you built it right, but basically all of your feats and powers were locked-in if you wanted to play it optimally, and it did eventually fall off. The worst essentials class was undoubtedly the vampire. It was a meme how bad that class was on its own, though there were some charop builds that made good use of the vampire as a component of a hybrid class.

 

[Garthanos]

Well, pre-essentials, the game was incredibly well balanced. There basically was no best class - you could be better or worse at your class’s role based on your feats and power choices, but there wasn’t a hierarchy of some classes being better or worse at baseline than others.

Yes and within a role variations weren't always well that ?focused? a monk was maybe meh in comparison to other strikers sure but you may jaw drop on the amount of controller function they can bring to the table.

 

[Mannahnin]

Well, pre-essentials, the game was incredibly well balanced. There basically was no best class - you could be better or worse at your class’s role based on your feats and power choices, but there wasn’t a hierarchy of some classes being better or worse at baseline than others.

I largely agree, although I remember everyone I knew being shocked and sad at how poor the Seeker was, considering how pretty much every other class seemed to be good. No best class I agree, but there did seem to be a worst one.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

incorrect do you care what the change was that you liked but do not even remember correctly really was? (your spell book now included encounter powers)

I will look it up myself.
You neglected the thing that the mage does not unleanrn spells on level up too.

 

[Lord Shark]

I largely agree, although I remember everyone I knew being shocked and sad at how poor the Seeker was, considering how pretty much every other class seemed to be good. No best class I agree, but there did seem to be a worst one.

Yeah, the seeker and runepriest desperately needed more support that they never got. Some of the PHB1 classes were weak as originally created (paladin, star pact warlock, and I'd say wizard), but they eventually got improved through the Power books.

As for best pre-Essentials classes, that depended on the role you wanted to play and what aspects you wanted to emphasize. For instance, the cleric was definitely the best healer, but other leader classes brought stuff to the table that the cleric didn't have -- the warlord was better at granting extra actions and buffing the party, the bard was better at debuffing and forcing movement on the opposition, etc.

 

[Undrave]

I largely agree, although I remember everyone I knew being shocked and sad at how poor the Seeker was, considering how pretty much every other class seemed to be good. No best class I agree, but there did seem to be a worst one.

I don't know what they were trying to do with the Seeker. I guess it was an attempt at bringing back the magical Ranger and the Arcane Archer in some form? But the Controller role had always been the least well defined of the lot and the Seeker in particular was way too full of 'soft' control.

It's a shame we never got a Primal Power 2 to help it out though, cause I feel they could have done some cool things with zone 'trap-like' effects. I even had this concept I wanted to explore of a seeker who specialized in slings that would throw enchanted seeds and have enchanted plants grow all over the battlefield with various effects. I had this one power that created a carnivorous plant that could do opportunity attacks with a chance of knocking prone.

 

[Campbell]

The Avenger, particularly the pursuit Avenger is the most fun I have ever had playing D&D. It had a strong theme, fun mechanics, and great story hooks built into the class.