D&D 4E Reply if you love 4e

[Dragonblade]

I gave look overs of books from all of the mentioned editions, especially BECMI, which was my original favorite choice (bought a Rules Cyclopedia as well, which I've since sold for what I had in it, $50... it was mint too). I actually played a few games of BECMI and enjoyed it, but really didn't like the limitations on some classes at early levels, nor the lack of limit on them later on.

PF Core Rulebook I just read, and read, and read, and read, and read and... I felt like I would never be able to master that to the level I would like in a reasonable time frame, and also knew that my son (presently 10) wouldn't want to have to read such a vast amount of complex info to learn it for not only playing our games, but ultimately DMing for his friends.

4E... loved that the classes were each more capable starting out, and none seemed to rule the roost at later levels. Loved the relatively simple, and sensible rules. Loved that I could more easily grasp how to create adventures / encounters with the levels and creatures and whatnot. I could definitely see my son being able to handle this. Loved the monster tokens... totally solved the issue of not having any kind of budget for minis. Loved that I could get the Essentials books and kits, plus a battle grid, for about $130 and have everything we needed to go from then on, with anything else being supplemental that's awesome, but not necessary to have... though I spent every $ of Christmas money on Core hardcovers... just wanted it to satisfy curiosity and round out some fluff and settings.

Awesome! A friend of mine plays with his kids too and he loves 4e. Its very kid friendly. My son is only 1 so he is still too young to play.

Pathfinder has its strengths, I play both it and 4e, but I definitely prefer 4e for many reasons, especially its balanced class structure, ease of prep and encounter design, and so on.

I think the Essentials book are needed, but I prefer the original 4e core myself. I like to have more complex class options and find Essentials a little too streamlined for myself. But its perfect for kids to be sure.

I only wish that WotC had released Essentials in a single standalone book ala the classic BECMI Rules Cyclopedia (which I also own by the way). With larger pages and a smaller font, you could fit both "Heroes of..." books (since a lot of content is duplicated), the DM Kit book, and the Rules Compendium content all in one hardcover for say $29.95 or $34.95. Though I wouldn't go much higher than that in price.

Then sell Monster Vault and the tile sets separately. So really each player only needs one product, and the DM only needs two (the core book and Monster Vault, tiles are always optional since you can play with a battlemat).

But I'm not WotC. Apparently their marketing guys felt like having ten(?!) different Essentials oriented starter products, including 4 directed at players, would be an easier sell...

 

[EnigmaRamus]

I think the Essentials book are needed, but I prefer the original 4e core myself.

Well, I probably would prefer core as well, but it's such a mess. I've already gone through and penciled in the errata for DMGs 1 and 2, but am just getting started with PHB and I'm under the impression that even if I can squeeze all of those edits into it that it's still not fully kosher with Essentials rules. And then... the MMs 1 and 2 math being out of whack... it's just kind of depressing facing dealing with all of that. I like that Essentials is all up to date and very little of it tweaks my OCD. Might as well not even bring up DDI, because I ain't payin it... I want books that work right. It really pisses me off that they aren't printing updated versions of some of these.

Other than relying on DDI, how do you cope with errata?

 

[Dragonblade]

Well, I probably would prefer core as well, but it's such a mess. I've already gone through and penciled in the errata for DMGs 1 and 2, but am just getting started with PHB and I'm under the impression that even if I can squeeze all of those edits into it that it's still not fully kosher with Essentials rules. And then... the MMs 1 and 2 math being out of whack... it's just kind of depressing facing dealing with all of that. I like that Essentials is all up to date and very little of it tweaks my OCD. Might as well not even bring up DDI, because I ain't payin it... I want books that work right. It really pisses me off that they aren't printing updated versions of some of these.

Other than relying on DDI, how do you cope with errata?

DDI does have the benefit of being up to date, so I encourage my players to use it if they have a sub. However, we don't really worry too much about the errata. I have found that players using original core and Essentials at the same table have no issues playing together.

We only look at the errata if a particular power or item just seems too good, not good enough, or the description is missing something important like when the power ends. I find that it rarely has come up in play, and those I game with who like to powergame know that I will question a power that seems too good, so they often look up the errata themselves before the game even starts.

That brings up another strength of 4e. Unlike in PF where I feel like I have to vet every feat and spell combination for balance before play, WotC has done such a fantastic job at balancing, that I often don't even look at my player's characters or worry about what books they are using. I just worry about my plot and the monsters, and I take enjoyment and pride from my players surprising me with some cool power combo or teamwork.

But going back to the original topic, generally, some of the Essentials feats are better than original core ones since they scale across tiers whereas some of the older feats did not. But I haven't run into any issues by mixing the two and sometimes a player prefers the older feat.

For monsters that are published pre-MM3 or Pre-Essentials, I use a quick rule of thumb to update their damage by +5 per attack per tier of the monster. Works great and I can add it on the fly without having to redo the stat block with the new damage expressions. I also sometimes drop the defenses of earlier monsters by 1 or 2 points and their HP to reduce grind by making them a little easier to take down. Original 4e solos and soldier type monsters are the ones I modify the most.

But its easy on the fly changes, for the most part.

 

[EnigmaRamus]

That's good to hear, that much of it works fine and much of it can be adjusted on the fly. I know that the Difficulty Class table in DMG 1 really did need the updates though... it would have been pretty tough to succeed as written!

Also, regarding the Essentials vs Core feats, one thing right off the bat is that with Essentials my fighter is more robust in the damage dealing dept than what I can get him to do with a core build. But, it seems (haven't played him as core yet) that that gets balanced by the daily, maybe.

 

[Dragonblade]

That's good to hear, that much of it works fine and much of it can be adjusted on the fly. I know that the Difficulty Class table in DMG 1 really did need the updates though... it would have been pretty tough to succeed as written!

Right. I have the newer Deluxe DM screen which is has most of the errata for that stuff built into it, so I forgot about that.

Also, regarding the Essentials vs Core feats, one thing right off the bat is that with Essentials my fighter is more robust in the damage dealing dept than what I can get him to do with a core build. But, it seems (haven't played him as core yet) that that gets balanced by the daily, maybe.

Don't forget the Slayer is a Striker class, not a Defender role like the Knight or the original Fighter. So it will do more damage by design. But yeah, with Dailies and the original Fighter's Encounter attack powers, it should be comparable. But its been a long time since I have had a straightup PHB 1 Fighter in a game. My players all tend to go for the more exotic classes from PHB 2 or 3, with some Essentials sprinkled here and there.

 

[Colmarr]

I love 4e.

It's really that simple.

 

[Wormwood]

I'd just like to say how happy this thread has made me.

 

[fba827]

It's fine to love 4e, just not love it (if you know what i mean )

But, yeah, i do love me some 4e for a bunch of reasons.... but i won't bore you all with that list of reasons why, as the bottom line is simple: i like it.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I'd just like to say how happy this thread has made me.

Okay. Go ahead and say it. How happy has this thread made you?

 

[Wormwood]

Okay. Go ahead and say it. How happy has this thread made you?

This happy.

squee.jpg