So, how many are avoiding Essentials?

[Sunseeker]

Classes with no decisions to make about resource expenditure are boring. 4E actually convinced me that it could be fun to play "martial" characters, and now Essentials wants to take that away with new characters? No thanks. I've read over Essentials, and while there are some interesting ideas that would have been cool to add to core 4E, for the most part they're just boring.

I play the Knight in encounters, and I gotta say, it's NOT resource short. The resources are just different. Yes, I will mainly be "basic melee" attacking every attack, but I have different stances to pick from, which make a huge difference in what happens WHEN I hit. I also have different "auras" that add to that effect.

Yeah, I may not have the "Push 'em one square" attack, but I have a stance that makes every attack do this.

It's not resource short, the resources are just different.

 

[Stormtower]

My group and I are avoiding Essentials. The apparent lack of support for "legacy" 4E (i.e. 2007-Aug. 2010 edition) going forward in Essentials and the stupidity of the new online CB were the last straws.

I am happily preparing my first Pathfinder campaign after spending 2007 thru 2010 supporting both 3.5/OGL and 4E. We're leaving 4E and Wizards of the Coast behind entirely when our "legacy" 4E campaign concludes in the next few weeks.

So long, Dungeons & Dragons Brand. You've been a good pal since 1982 when we first met. In my opinion -- and that's all it is, haters -- the soul of D&D lives on in the OGL and Pathfinder.

I'm no edition warrior, so save your flames. I've run 4E at the last three GenCons, since it was launched (LFR in 2008-09, D&D Open Championship this year 2010). Done now, and going happily to join the other grognards in the back of the room with my Trailblazer, Pathfinder, and other 3.5-based OGL stuff to tinker and create stuff in my game system of choice.

I hope Essentials works out for those of you sticking with the 4E/WotC line, and that they eventually squash the myriad bugs from CB, which had become quite a useful little application until the re-launch today.

Whatever game you play, remember that if we want our TTRPG hobby to survive, we must enthusiastically recruit younger gamers and especially younger potential GMs. Regardless of system, without new GM blood our hobby will fade.

 

[TheHand]

While I really liked the tidiness of the new Rules Compendium (and picked up a copy), our group didn't much appeal from the Essentials classes. Some of my players were even a little annoyed that the new classes didn't follow the previously established 4E At-Will/Encounter/Daily architecture.

However, I haven't "banned" the materials in my games. If someone came to my table really wanting to play an Essentials class I wouldn't stop 'em, but we're not going out of our way to grab the books.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Good point, but what about the weaponmaster? Will he not replace the PH1 fighter? Is he not a reprint?

From what was shown in the preview section, it is a reprint. But it's not a replacement, because it is reprinting the exact build information from PHB1. You would still be able to use your original PHB to build that fighter, but for new players who already have the Rules Compendium and the Heroes of the Fallen Lands, they don't need to buy the PHB, which will have redundant rules info (some of which is out of date) in order to play this version of the fighter, they can instead by the new book. Now, I don't know how many powers are being reprinted, but the weaponmaster build is the same build you find in PHB1. It's a reprint of the original fighter, not a replacement.

A replacement, for example, would be the new assassin article posted today which replaces the original "playtest" version of the Essential assassin. The old version is no longer considered legal for play (when the new assassin is added to the character builder, which is the approach for most organized play, each group decides how to implement their own changes).

 

[Walking Dad]

I was answering to this:

Originally Posted by WalterKovacs
...

3.5 obsoleted the 3.0 material, and what happened afterwards was a reprinting of most of the old content so that it was compatible with 3.5.
...

Where he declared reprinting as a sign of a 'new' edition. And the weaponmaster replaces the 'fighter without conversion document / errata'.

They called it themselves 'Changes coming with Essentials' and then put it into the Compiled errata.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It seems my adoption of Essentials material will take some extra time, since the new character builder disappoints me. But in theory, I think I'll use material, if I like it, like usual. It's just like PHB III. Some stuff I might use, some stuff I might not.

 

[Jhaelen]

My group and I are avoiding Essentials. The apparent lack of support for "legacy" 4E (i.e. 2007-Aug. 2010 edition) going forward in Essentials and the stupidity of the new online CB were the last straws.

I am happily preparing my first Pathfinder campaign after spending 2007 thru 2010 supporting both 3.5/OGL and 4E. We're leaving 4E and Wizards of the Coast behind entirely when our "legacy" 4E campaign concludes in the next few weeks.

While I dislike most of the Essentials stuff, going back to Pathfinder/3.5 is not something I would ever contemplate.

I'll just freeze my "legacy 4e" material and maybe add the occasional option I happen to like in forthcoming products. The only problem: I basically cannot use a character builder any more. I think, I'll survive it.

 

[nerfherder]

I've noticed all the Essentials threads on here and I am wondering how many of us are still playing ordinary 4th Ed with no intention of going over.

I play a mix of games and currently my players are only part way through H2. 4e straight from the original 3 books (plus some of the power books I bought) seems to work fine for us. I bought a 1 month DDI subscription about 6 months back and downloaded the original CB & content. We will use that and the books we currently own for our game. Our ruleset is now fixed (barring houserules). No need for us to buy Essentials, and keep applying errata.

We also stuck with 3e for years after 3.5 was available.

 

[igniz13]

Some threads and arguements should simply be ignored because their premise is so obviously maligned from the truth and essentially nonsense.

 

[nerfherder]

Some threads and arguements should simply be ignored because their premise is so obviously maligned from the truth and essentially nonsense.

True. I make a point of not posting in them.