Just how compatible is Essentials?

[Kzach]

I think your memory is deceiving you. 3.5 classes had more in common with 3.0 classes than Essentials builds have in common with 'classic' builds.

Really? I just played a Mage last night and someone commented off-hand that it was an Essentials class. I replied, "Oh, I didn't realise."

No you can't. A Slayer is not a PHB Fighter. So you can't freely pick powers between them any more than you can freely pick powers between Paladin and Fighter.

Before Essentials builds were entirely optional and you could mix and match powers in whatever way you wanted. You can't play an Essentials class without using an Essentials build and you cannot freely pick powers from classic builds and Essential builds.

No offence guys but this is seriously showcasing your ignorance on the subject. The Character Builder has an option, "Show All", in every Essentials build which allows you to pick any power from the list for that class. A Fighter, therefore, is still a Fighter, no matter what it's otherwise called. In essence, all the Essential's classes are, are different builds within the same class. They're more 'sub-classes' than classes unto themselves.

 

[Argyle King]

As I said in a previous post, I think the best way to compare Essentials to 3.5 would be to do the following:

First, compare and contrast 3.0's core books with 3.5's core books.

Second, compare and contrast the first round of 4E books (PHB1, MM1, DMG1) with Essentials -without using anything between the two to bridge the gap.

I feel that is a more fair comparison because I feel the shift from 4E to 4E.E is something which has been done gradually with each new round of books. It was a more gradual change.



As I also said in a previous post, I am in no way defending 3.5. It was a new edition; it was meant to replace 3.0. However; even though Essentials was not designed to serve the same purpose, I do believe that going from PHB1 to Essentials without any knowledge of anything between would be a somewhat significant shift for someone to make.

 

[Dannager]

As I also said in a previous post, I am in no way defending 3.5. It was a new edition; it was meant to replace 3.0. However; even though Essentials was not designed to serve the same purpose, I do believe that going from PHB1 to Essentials without any knowledge of anything between would be a somewhat significant shift for someone to make.

Sort of like the shift going from PHB1 to PHB3, I'd imagine.

 

[Argyle King]

Sort of like the shift going from PHB1 to PHB3, I'd imagine.

Sort of, but the shift from PHB1 to PHB3 -IMO- would be less extreme. Even though some of the psionic classes broke from the traditional mold, they were still presented in the same basic way with the same general 4E layout.

 

[the Jester]

So wait, is the assumption "Any changes to the format, design or execution of rules used in the PH is a new edition!"?

Because that seems like an awfully broad way to describe edition changes.

By that thinking:

-The release of 1e DMG was a new edition (it significantly altered a lot of stuff from the PH, including instituting "die at -10" and lots of spell changes).
-The release of 1e Unearthed Arcana was a new edition (new ways to generate ability scores, new types of classes that RAISED YOUR STATS!!, revising the paladin to a cavalier subclass).
-The release of 1e Oriental Adventures was another one (honor).
-The Survival Guides were another (still officially 1e though!) (nonweapon proficiencies come to the west).
-Then the 2e PH was ACTUALLY 6e!
-Then the Complete Guides to... were 7e.
-Then the Skills & Powers book was 8e...
-Then Spells & Magic came along and gave us 9e...
-Then the 3e PH came out, which must have actually been 10e...
-Then 3e Oriental Adventures, which was 11e...
-Then the 3.5 PH, which (apparently) was 12e...
-Then the "Complete X" books changed a bunch of stuff up, so that must have been 13e...
-Tome of Magic: 14e?
-The Book of Nine Swords: 15e?
-Then the 4e PH, which is 16e...
-Followed by the 4e PH3 (PH2 stuck to the formulae pretty closely) was 17e...
-...the Red Box for 4e, which is 18e...
-Heroes of the XXX XXX must then be 19e.

 

[Jhaelen]

No offence guys but this is seriously showcasing your ignorance on the subject. The Character Builder has an option, "Show All", in every Essentials build which allows you to pick any power from the list for that class. A Fighter, therefore, is still a Fighter, no matter what it's otherwise called. In essence, all the Essential's classes are, are different builds within the same class. They're more 'sub-classes' than classes unto themselves.

No offence Kzach but you need to work on your reading comprehension.
THe PHB1 fighter introduced two builds which were entirely optional, since all they did was suggest what class features to pick and which powers and feats synergized well.

You could totally ignore the builds. Now tell me how to create an Essentials fighter without using either the slayer or the knight build.

Similarly, how can my poor slayer pick any of the neat Encounter powers available to PHB1 fighters?
Or is there a way to replace Essentials class features? If so, I freely admit my ignorance. Note, that I don't have the HotF*** books. I'm basically working from what I learned on this forum and what I've seen in the Heroes of Shadow book.

 

[Jhaelen]

So wait, is the assumption "Any changes to the format, design or execution of rules used in the PH is a new edition!"?

Actually _I_ don't consider 3.0 and 3.5 to be different editions. The version numbers already indicate this: 3.5 is an update on 3.0.

I'd even argue that 1e and 2e were so similar to each other they might as well be called a single edition. Just like we played with a mix of 3.0 and 3.5 sources in my 3e campaign, we played with a mix of 1e and 2e sources in my 2e campaign.
As you already mentioned even things that are usually attributed to 2e had already been introduced to 1e in various supplements, e.g. non-weapon proficiencies.

Other rpg systems remain almost unchanged despite having gone through several editions, e.g. Call of Cthulhu.

Anyway, this discussion wasn't about editions, it was about compatibility. I don't care if anyone considers Essentials a new edition or not. I'm just saying the amount of changes is comparable to the changes between previous 'rulesets'. Hence, Essentials is about as compatible with classic 4e as 3.5 was with 3.0.

 

[Scribble]

Essentials basically combines two things into one.

It provides a new format that is supposed to be easier for new players to understand, along with new ideas that expand the scope of possible characters.

As a whole all classes are designed to be mathematically equivalent to the original classes, so that side by side in a game they should be doing "roughly" the same, and using them together won't cause any issues.

Some classes follow closer to the older class design, and have an easier time using stuff already available (ie the mage.)

Others are a departure from the original design, and offer a new play experience and more options at the table, but sacrifice the ability to choose from a lot of the already developed powers.

Either style functions perfectly well next to each other.

In my experience it only serves to offer classes for various play styles.

If you want to call it a new edition be my guest I guess... But it seems kind of odd to me. By intention the two are designed to be used together, so it seems like you're creating an artificial new edition, but only in the same way someone who says Only PHB2 classes and races is...

 

[the Jester]

Similarly, how can my poor slayer pick any of the neat Encounter powers available to PHB1 fighters?
Or is there a way to replace Essentials class features? If so, I freely admit my ignorance. Note, that I don't have the HotF*** books. I'm basically working from what I learned on this forum and what I've seen in the Heroes of Shadow book.

Yeah, that's the problem... you're taking the word of other people who haven't tried the mix-n-match either.

In fact, you can swap classic and E-class stuff, even features in many cases, given the right feats. Yes, the subclasses are farther from the PH versions than the PH versions are from each other; that is intentional. But that doesn't mean that they make a new edition. That's like saying that it's a new edition each time a new class is released.

Again, I ask:

Has anyone mixed "Classic" and "Essentials" stuff in their game and had any problems with it, or are all the objections based on "But I heard that..." and "It looks to me like..."?

So far- unless I have missed it- I have asked this two or three times and not one poster has raised their hand and said "That's me!"

 

[MrMyth]

Similarly, how can my poor slayer pick any of the neat Encounter powers available to PHB1 fighters?

You take the feat Martial Cross-Training, giving up one use of Power Strike in exchange for an encounter attack power of your level or lower.

The interchangeability may leave a bit to be desired and may not have been present when the Essentials material first came out. But they have been addressing it, and even without it, the various builds can certainly be played alongside one another without the inconsistencies one could easily run into when trying to run 3.0 characters alongside 3.5 characters.