D&D 4E Is Essentials the answer to E6 for 4E?

[Scurvy_Platypus]

So, I'm a big fan of E6. If you're not familiar with the premise, you can find it here:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/206323-e6-game-inside-d-d.html

Now, before you go clicking the "reply" button, take a second to read the background so that the question (and therefore your answer) makes sense...

Background: While a large chunk of folks dig E6 because they want to lock down magic/magic items, it's not the appeal for me. I dig E6 because it puts a ceiling on things and stops what I consider to be pointless inflations within the game (magic, HP, etc). You go along and level for a certain point and then you stop. The only character change that happens is a broadening of character capability through feats that are gained over time (xp).

Ever since 4E has come about, people have talked about how to do E6 for 4E. My own personal answer has usually been, "Pick a level as the last one and then stop. Congratulations, you've done E6 for 4e. Pretty much the same as for 3.x".

And by and large I still feel that's true.

Idea: Of course, there's still an rather large element of the whole character building game that goes on in 4E and messing around with picking powers and what-not. I'm a pretty big fan of the "get in and go" style of games, where it takes a minimal amount of time to make a character (less than half an hour), doesn't rely on a computer (I don't care how "useful" DDI stuff is) and allows for characters that can be interesting and have some perks or whatnot given to them over time, without having to worry about the constant grind of levelling.

I don't like Zero-to-Hero style play. I like characters showing up that are competent right off the bat, they rock hard, and they continue rocking hard. The question in my games is not "can your character succeed", but "how are you going to kick ass?"

Now, I happen to be of the opinion that Essentials is the 4e version of 3.5. I don't care that others don't agree with me, that's my opinion and I'm not changing it. I mention this because up until now, I've considered Essentials to not be worth my time whatsoever; mainly targetted at getting lapsed 3.xers to try and give 4E a shot again.

However, as I've been thinking about it, it occured to me that _maybe_ Essentials did have a point... it might be the first step towards slimming down some of the metagamey/minigamey elements of 4E and running a lower-capped set of rules. I do dig a number of aspects of 4E, but the rules-intensive nature of D&D for the past decade has been a turn-off. I won't run D&D without houserules.

Question one: Is Essentials the starting point to hit 4E with the E6 bat? Not from the perspective of, "OMFG!!1!1! Characters are so over-powered and must be leashed!!1!". Instead from the perspective of, "OMFG, I'm sick of dealing with level-grind and all that other crap and just want to run cool stories about people kicking ass."

So stuff like the Vlad Taltos series or Hawk & Fisher, or any number of other stories and media where the protaganists aren't necessarily out "saving the world", they're just kicking ass in their own respective ways. The characters don't change significantly in terms of their capabilities (leveling up), they just sort of kick ass at a constant level and maybe change the _style_ of ass-kicking over time.

Question two: If the answer to question one is "yes", then once you cap the level (regardless of what that level might be) what is the "fill in" for stuff afterwards. E6's main thing was get a feat after [x amount of XP]. Feats are a huge deal in 3.x and a major source of customisation and character capability expansion. A chunk of the E6 folks have gone off all wild and crazy about "capstone" feats and whatnot, but I personally feel it just complicates things unnecessarily.

In the case of 4E though, an awful lot of the customisation is in the form of the powers. Yeah there's feats there (and probably the usual D&D feat bloat too) but powers seem to be more where it's at. If that's the case, then what's a viable approach to handling powers (especially within the Essentials framework) that's not going to result in "breaking" the game, but still give players some toys to mess around with and tweak their characters as they go on one ass-kicking adventure after another?

 

[korjik]

You do know that there are other fantasy game systems other than D&D, dont you? Quite a few of them dont have the scaling that D&D has always had.

To put it bluntly, No, essentials is not the answer to E6 for 4e. Buying a different game system is.

E6 is the equvalent to trying to turn a car into a speedboat. It is much easier to just go buy a speedboat.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I do not think essentials will have any effect like E6 did on 3.5.

It was a good point that with 4E and Ewhatever, just pick a level and stop there, perhaps giving out more feats occasionally. I mostly agree.

But how does essentials fit into the E6ification of 4E? It makes no change, IMO. If you want a less varied E64E, then use essentiasl, you want more options then use essentials.

 

[Gadget]

I'll try to answer your questions as best I can, but it may be that you or I are laboring under some misconceptions about a few things.

Background: While a large chunk of folks dig E6 because they want to lock down magic/magic items, it's not the appeal for me. I dig E6 because it puts a ceiling on things and stops what I consider to be pointless inflations within the game (magic, HP, etc). You go along and level for a certain point and then you stop. The only character change that happens is a broadening of character capability through feats that are gained over time (xp).

I believe that while a lot of people play E6 to reduce the absolute reliance on Magic Items and doohickies as the game progresses toward higher levels, many people don't like the increased complexity and absolute wha whoo-ness that tend to rise with levels as well. 4E has curbed this somewhat by having a flatter power curve and moving much of the magical wha-whoo into rituals and having monsters (and most NPCs) use different rules than the PCs. You don't have to worry about scry, buff, teleport in 4E (unless the DM specifically designs some monster/NPC/site that allows it.)

Ever since 4E has come about, people have talked about how to do E6 for 4E. My own personal answer has usually been, "Pick a level as the last one and then stop. Congratulations, you've done E6 for 4e. Pretty much the same as for 3.x".

And by and large I still feel that's true.

Agreed. Many people have suggested the built in tier system as a good point; i.e. "just play heroic tier". Although, as mentioned above, 4E does go some way to obviate the need for E6 YMMV, of course.

Idea: Of course, there's still an rather large element of the whole character building game that goes on in 4E and messing around with picking powers and what-not. I'm a pretty big fan of the "get in and go" style of games, where it takes a minimal amount of time to make a character (less than half an hour), doesn't rely on a computer (I don't care how "useful" DDI stuff is) and allows for characters that can be interesting and have some perks or whatnot given to them over time, without having to worry about the constant grind of levelling.

There is always that dichotomy between simplicity and ease of play with (perceived) depth and flexibility. Also, everyone (well obviously not everyone, but most) wants or likes to have the "cookie" that leveling and obtaining new abilities and powers bring. It has always been in the game in one form or another. I sympathize that after a while it can become meaningless and repetitive though.

I don't like Zero-to-Hero style play. I like characters showing up that are competent right off the bat, they rock hard, and they continue rocking hard. The question in my games is not "can your character succeed", but "how are you going to kick ass?"

Well, as already mentioned, 4e does bring more of this to the table with it's flatter power curve. 1st level characters start out kicking tail and taking names gaining a couple of levels does not really seem to make as dramatic a difference in power (although it does give more options).

Now, I happen to be of the opinion that Essentials is the 4e version of 3.5. I don't care that others don't agree with me, that's my opinion and I'm not changing it. I mention this because up until now, I've considered Essentials to not be worth my time whatsoever; mainly targetted at getting lapsed 3.xers to try and give 4E a shot again.

I'm a little confused here. You seem to have a tightly held opinion of what Essentials is and yet come here ask questions about it's suitability to E6? It may be like 3.5 in that it is intended to rejuvenate and refresh the D&D line and change the direction a bit, but mechanically, it is very different from 3.5. Essentials does not change or replace the 4e releases preceding it, other than the usual errata that 4e is known for (some of the more cynical may argue that some of the errata was made to facilitate Essentials, but that is neither here nor there). In this sense it is no more a "4.5" than Arcane Power, Players Handbook III and the like were.

However, as I've been thinking about it, it occured to me that _maybe_ Essentials did have a point... it might be the first step towards slimming down some of the metagamey/minigamey elements of 4E and running a lower-capped set of rules. I do dig a number of aspects of 4E, but the rules-intensive nature of D&D for the past decade has been a turn-off. I won't run D&D without houserules.

Well, I do think Essentials simplifies and eliminates many of these things for the martial classes (or presents them in a more flavorful and palatable manner). Even the Cleric & Wizard builds presented therein have, IMHO, been made more flavorful and playable with the domain and school system, despite still having the at will, encounter, daily system.

Question one: Is Essentials the starting point to hit 4E with the E6 bat? Not from the perspective of, "OMFG!!1!1! Characters are so over-powered and must be leashed!!1!". Instead from the perspective of, "OMFG, I'm sick of dealing with level-grind and all that other crap and just want to run cool stories about people kicking ass."

On the one hand, Essentials still goes up the level 30, so the "level grind", as you put it, is still there. At some point, your character is still pretty much a Demi-god, and 4e realizes this and makes this more explicit with the tier system. That said, it may be more suitable for E6 to those who prefer a reduction in complexity with certain classes; even the more complex mage & battle cleric builds have many options "built-in" for ease of play (though the player is free to swap out the pre-built options for pre-essentials options).

Question two: If the answer to question one is "yes", then once you cap the level (regardless of what that level might be) what is the "fill in" for stuff afterwards. E6's main thing was get a feat after [x amount of XP]. Feats are a huge deal in 3.x and a major source of customisation and character capability expansion. A chunk of the E6 folks have gone off all wild and crazy about "capstone" feats and whatnot, but I personally feel it just complicates things unnecessarily.

Well, One could still use feats, though feats, as you know, don't carry the same juice they did in 3e. Some of the Essential feats are more broadly useful and scalable than base 4e feats are. No doubt the 4e designers were initially mindful for the massive feat stacking bloat of late 3e and wanted to make certain it did not happen again.

There is also ability score increases (which would qualify for more feats).

But you are right when you say powers are where it's at in 4e. Yet the use of a higher level power may not be as bad as it seems. Sometimes the main difference is merely the [w] damage offered by higher level powers, while others grant more bonuses or inflict harsher conditions. One could conceivably stop advancing yet still swap out powers for higher level ones, on a case by case bases, maybe with the [w] damage toned down. It isn't like the difference between 1st level spells and 6th level spells of previous editions.

Lastly, some Essentials characters get better or more use of class abilities when leveling up that may apply to E6. The slayer fighter, for example, gets more uses of "power strike" as they level. I can easily see a game that stops at level x still granting further uses of power strike for y xp. Or the Battle Cleric gets a resurrection class ability at level x but you can gain this ability even though you stop advancing at level x - 2.

 

[lutecius]

Is Essentials the answer to E6 for 4E?

no.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

You do know that there are other fantasy game systems other than D&D, dont you? Quite a few of them dont have the scaling that D&D has always had.

To put it bluntly, No, essentials is not the answer to E6 for 4e. Buying a different game system is.

E6 is the equvalent to trying to turn a car into a speedboat. It is much easier to just go buy a speedboat.

*sigh* look, I'm going to guess you mean well, but yeah... I do know there's other games out there. I play them, I run them, and I've been doing it for the past 20 years. "Play a different game" isn't an especially useful answer. It mainly come across as "OMG!! You're BadTouching my game! Go away!" I spent my money on the rulebooks, it's my game. If there's going to be issues with what I'm doing/trying to do, then it's nice to get specifics.

I'll try to answer your questions as best I can, but it may be that you or I are laboring under some misconceptions about a few things.

Thanks. I've certainly been wrong about plenty of stuff in the past, so I'm open to the possibility that this is another one of those things.

I believe that while a lot of people play E6 to reduce the absolute reliance on Magic Items and doohickies as the game progresses toward higher levels, many people don't like the increased complexity and absolute wha whoo-ness that tend to rise with levels as well. 4E has curbed this somewhat by having a flatter power curve and moving much of the magical wha-whoo into rituals and having monsters (and most NPCs) use different rules than the PCs. You don't have to worry about scry, buff, teleport in 4E (unless the DM specifically designs some monster/NPC/site that allows it.)

The wah00 factor isn't so much an issue for me; I've run games where characters are teleporting at 3rd level. The overall complexity of the game as it progresses is the main reason I dig E6 type stuff... less book-keeping, more ass-kicking.

I'm a little confused here. You seem to have a tightly held opinion of what Essentials is and yet come here ask questions about it's suitability to E6? It may be like 3.5 in that it is intended to rejuvenate and refresh the D&D line and change the direction a bit, but mechanically, it is very different from 3.5. Essentials does not change or replace the 4e releases preceding it, other than the usual errata that 4e is known for (some of the more cynical may argue that some of the errata was made to facilitate Essentials, but that is neither here nor there). In this sense it is no more a "4.5" than Arcane Power, Players Handbook III and the like were.

heh. I get that I'm almost completely alone in that I both like 4E and also happen to feel Essentials is the new ".5 edition". It's no biggie. So, from that perspective, yeah I've got a tightly held idea of what Essentials is/is about. Still, I thought I'd show up and ask fans of Essentials if it's going to do anything special for me. There was always the chance that someone would be all, "Dude, totally! You do [ this, this, and that which Essentials has and baseline 4e doesn't] and you're totally golden".

Well, I do think Essentials simplifies and eliminates many of these things for the martial classes (or presents them in a more flavorful and palatable manner). Even the Cleric & Wizard builds presented therein have, IMHO, been made more flavorful and playable with the domain and school system, despite still having the at will, encounter, daily system.

See, to me... Those 3 types of powers are perfectly fine. Easy enough to understand and all that. It's other supporting rules and stuff that clutters up the game I feel.

On the one hand, Essentials still goes up the level 30, so the "level grind", as you put it, is still there. At some point, your character is still pretty much a Demi-god, and 4e realizes this and makes this more explicit with the tier system. That said, it may be more suitable for E6 to those who prefer a reduction in complexity with certain classes; even the more complex mage & battle cleric builds have many options "built-in" for ease of play (though the player is free to swap out the pre-built options for pre-essentials options).

See, this sounds sorta promising.

Thanks for your time man. It sounds like Essentials isn't really going to do anything for me, despite possibly having some nifty bits here and there. At the end of the day, I don't think _characters_ or classes are necessarily too complicated, it's more about all the other stuff, some of which happens to show up in characters. I'll just save my money and keep doin' my thing then.

 

[DracoSuave]

What's this E6 thing?

It sounds like something four people play and claim it's popular because they asked each other, while the rest of the community doesn't know or care what it is.

To give a sort of perspective... rpg.net generally reviews pretty much anything. Web-based, hard-cover, pretty much any system that someone is playing has a review on there.

e6 is not on there.

I doubt e6 is informing wizard's decisions on anything.

 

[Neonchameleon]

What's this E6 thing?

It sounds like something four people play and claim it's popular because they asked each other, while the rest of the community doesn't know or care what it is.

To give a sort of perspective... rpg.net generally reviews pretty much anything. Web-based, hard-cover, pretty much any system that someone is playing has a review on there.

e6 is not on there.

I doubt e6 is informing wizard's decisions on anything.

For the record, E6 is a variant of 3e where PCs stop levelling at 6th level and instead can only spend experience points on more minor things like feats. It's a relatively well known set or house rules that blocks 4th level spells and such things almost entirely (or the gamebreaking third level Bard spell known as Glibness) in an effort to keep the game where it is manageable.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I believe DracoSuave was being sarcastic.

 

[nnms]

Another design goal of E6 is the emphasis on epic (in story terms) creatures, magical powers, etc., is best measured in comparison with an average person. That higher levels are largely pointless as "kills a normal person with a flick of it's wrist" is the same whether it's done by a level 6 monsters or a level 20 monster.

4E already has this. The minion rules provide a pretty clear delineation between the powerful and the normal.

If you want an E6 version of 4E, simply get rid of all the +1/2 level bonuses for PCs completely and all the +1/level bonuses for monsters after level 4 or 6 or so. The PCs still get powers, feats, etc., but just don't get the bonuses to hit, defenses, skills, etc., unless they get a power, class feature or feat that gives them that. It also makes items more valuable because their enhancement bonus is still a way of getting a plus.