Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 5599556" data-attributes="member: 11821">OK.  I think you've basically recapped most everything I've read, and I'm not going to get into quote war territory.  So...I think it's more fair to say that Essentials expanded the kinds of classes we have in 4e.  It didn't replace the AEDU structure, it kept AEDU and stretched it outwards.  The only consistent new thing in Essentials classes is that they get class features at some levels.  Many, but not all, classes have restricted choices at some levels.  Some have no Daily attack powers.  A normal AEDU class fits just as well into the new philosophy as any of the other classes.On to your list...1. I kinda think this sounds like a personal problem.  When you bring in cognitive dissonance, you're going in a weird direction.  I don't think in play that you can tell the difference between a Hexblade or Blackguard and a normal AEDU class, though.  Slayers and Knights play a bit differently, for sure, but those are hardly all of Essentials.2. I personally think they are a great new addition.  I like having a spectrum of class complexity for new players.  You disagree; that's fine.3. This is one of those parts again where I'm going to say, "Then don't play one" and you're going to say, "You don't understand."  We can skip that part. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  You're right - I don't understand.  Can you explain it?  I mean, when you say, "Essentials changed it," I just don't get it; it didn't change the PHB Fighter at all.  It added a Knight and a Slayer, which are other options.4. I'm in agreement that the nomenclature is silly, but I'm content just to call it silly and leave it.  But I think it's completely reasonable for a Build to be "hidden" under the Weaponmaster or what have you - that's where builds belong.  Subclasses and classes are a level above it.5. You think I'm fooling myself for thinking it's not an edition.  Is it okay for me to think you're fooling yourself for thinking it is?  This isn't any more productive than the stuff you're protesting.6. If there's one thing I know about the 4e WotC team it's that they're often bad at public relations.  Thank goodness the past few months have been better.  Essentials was released during a low point where information was confusing and often absent.  So yeah, they mishandled the launch.  At the same time, they said "It's a new starting point and an expansion."  That's exactly what we got.  It's not their fault we didn't believe them. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I don't think that disliking or disallowing classes is stupid.  Different tastes.I also don't think it's insane to be dissatisfied with how you see the future of the game, but I think it's too early to predict.  We've had all of one player-centric book released since HotFK, which was mostly a collection of powers, races, feats, and some (new-style) classes.  We've had plenty of Dragon content, though, and it's either been mostly geared to increasing multiclassing and switching class features between subclasses, giving content useful to all sorts of classes, or helping out PHB-style classes.  There hasn't been any E-only Dragon content this year that I can remember.  It looks like WotC is going to continue to support all of it, which is great by me.I do take issue with calling Essentials incompatible, an "obviously" new edition, or that it's somehow invalidated everything before it.  Those are just ... not really honest.  It's edition-war-style nonsense, as far as I'm concerned.-O</blockquote>

Verification