I've managed to avoid Essentials, until now...

[Katana_Geldar]

A friend and I are tag teaming DMing and I'm currently playing at the moment, though as it's a shared campaign we collaborate on allowed content. So far both of us have managed to avoid having anything to do with Essentials in the game.

Until now.

Last night one of the players, a funny guy we both like, said that he'd like to play an Enchanter mage.

Now I have always held the opinion that players are responsible for creating their own characters, barring anything that I specifically don't want in my game story, think doesn't work or that I don't think a player is ready for. And this is the reason why I think I might even change my mind.

However, I've been against Essentials from the beginning mainly from a $$$ and management aspect. The money side: I've spent quite a bit of money on books, and it seems a bit much to fork out more dough again. The management side: I keep back ups of my players characters in case their are accidents (like when a player's computer crashed) as well as a way to look in detail at a player's sheet and make suggestions, often while I am online with them.

I also stopped my subscritpion, mostly due to the fact that when I tried the new builder, my computer couldn't run it properly.

I am willing to compromise with him, but the long and short of it is that he may be bringing a character that I have no clue how it runs, particularly the feats which are not always explained in the limited space on the sheet.

So should I let him? My fellow DM is of a similar mind that I am. I am willing to swallow my pride so a player can have the character that he wants, it's the book keeping that worries me.

 

[smtwtfs]

Have you asked to borrow their book so you can review the class/build?

Another option as this is a shared campaign is to ask the player to copy/paste the character information you are not familiar with from the D&D Compendium and have it emailed to both DM's. At the same time have them include the export file and a PDF version (maybe just the power card section). I'd also request the text summary of the character as seen from the CB Classic.

 

[Katana_Geldar]

He doesn't have the books, just powercards and he's a subscriber.

 

[Pickles JG]

There is a bit of power creep in essentials in that the expertise feats & defence boosting feats are rather better - appropriately so IMO. If you let one player use these then you probably need to let them all.

Otherwise the essentials classes are simpler* than the main ones & you ought to be able to get a grip one what they do if the player loans you the book they are using.

I DMed a bit of LFR & I never knew what half of the players could do, there are just so many builds now, & it did not seem to matter - made it more fun in some ways.

So I would suggest the decision falls on whether you are happy to have everyone access the slightly better feats as unless there is some thematic reason the classes themselves should be easy to assimilate.

(*not mage or cleric but these are not far from the PHB one ones)

 

[Katana_Geldar]

So I would suggest the decision falls on whether you are happy to have everyone access the slightly better feats as unless there is some thematic reason the classes themselves should be easy to assimilate.

That sounds more like a group decision, actually.

 

[Jhaelen]

Well, when I'm the DM I generally don't allow anything from books I have not read. It's something I take extra care to tell the players right away, though.

In the OP's case not even the player has access to the book. Imho, that makes it a definite no-go. Who knows what important info may be missing from the Character Builder or be implemented wrong?

 

[Pickles JG]

That sounds more like a group decision, actually.

It's the sort of group decision in which the DM usually has the final say.

But your players could easily self deny those feats & still use the essentials classes.

Now I have actually read properly the guy wants to use an Enchanter that should be fine & can be taken independently of the feats &c. They ain't much different from wizards.

 

[twilsemail]

IMHO (which is what this thread is really about, opinion), as the guy who's usually behind the screen out this way, the feats in HotF* aren't "OP'ed better" they're just plain better.

The defense feats let players shore up holes in their defenses earlier. That's a feature, not a bug. They save players from retraining in Paragon and Epic tiers. It's just a matter of bookkeeping, really.

The new Expertise feats entirely obsolete the old ones. This... I hated the old "band-aid" feats anyway. At least this way if a player is going to take one, they get some other benefit as well. Nothing major (except Staff Expertise). But they get something for that otherwise wasted feat. (I'm a huge proponent of houseruling in the math fix, thus wasted feat).

So the book obsoletes some older feats. Most of those feats were underpowered to begin with (excepting the expertise feats which are a must for pretty much any character that doesn't get them free).

The books are well balanced and the characters made from it play well with others. In the end, that's what the game is about, neh?

 

[Destil]

So should I let him? My fellow DM is of a similar mind that I am. I am willing to swallow my pride so a player can have the character that he wants, it's the book keeping that worries me.

The mage, specifically, is so much like the wizard you'll barely even notice the difference. No real harm there.

 

[KarinsDad]

This is a tough call.

On the one hand, the DM wants to go out of his way to make the gaming experience unique and fun for the player.

On the other hand, the DM does not have the material and will only be able to acquire a subset of the material without spending more money, and even the best of players are notorious for missing something in the rules and playing a rule incorrectly unless the DM and other players have access to the same rules where they can spot any mistakes or omissions.


One of the problems I have with Essentials is the amount of additional power creep within it (sometimes minor, sometimes not so minor). I'm not just talking about the Expertise feats (which are a minor power creep and I think all PCs should get Expertise for free, so I don't mind them), but the combination of class features and powers that go above and beyond.

In the case of an Enchanter Mage, there are At Will powers like Beguiling Strands. Int damage + 3 square push. It doesn't sound bad. Except it is enemy only, close blast 5, and for an Enchanter Mage, it pushes the foes 5 squares instead of 3. What this allows the Mage to do is to push a group of foes into a small concentrated area away from other PCs so that he can then use an Action Point to attack them with a more potent or controlling Encounter or Daily area power. Another PC can often then throw another area power on top of the foes if that PC's initiative is shortly after the Mages.

And if there is a pit (or other fall), the Wizard can have multiple foes either knocked into the pit, or prone in a bunch. The previous "enemy only" At Will power winner was Winged Horde and it did less damage and the foes couldn't do OAs (nice, but not as potent as a multitarget enemy only push that sets up PC area effect powers). Chilling Cloud was the same damage and a -2 penalty to hit.

Beguiling Strands effectively gives "enemy only" to the Mage's (and other PC's) other area spells on occasion. On the surface, Beguiling Strands doesn't sound bad at all, but in practice, the Mage is going to be a lot more potent than a normal 4E mage with control and damage because he and other PCs can target more foes per round.

It's not so much what the powers and class features directly do for Essential PCs (although that is sometimes the case like for Thiefs and Slayers), but the increased synergies of what they do that seriously increase the effectiveness of the group as a whole.


Just as a test, someone should run a 5 PC Essentials only group and a 5 PC 4E only group with the same basic classes through a gauntlet of the same encounters (10 or so) and see which group gets further before dying or running out of surges. My money is on the Essentials PCs to get at least 2 encounters further because they wipe out their foes so much faster than normal 4E PCs.