Is 4e Essentials the same?

[HauntWrigs]

What are the differences between 4e Essentials and regular 4e?

BACKGROUND: I'm new to RPGs in general and D&D specifically.

[NecroRebel]

The main difference is in how the various character creation options were made and are presented.

For example, all of the non-psionic classes from the Player's Handbooks get powers, which represent what they can do (mostly in battle) at particular intervals of their development, and each of those classes gets the same type of power at each of those intervals. That is, at level 1, a Fighter, Warlock, Wizard, Rogue, and all other PHB classes get 2 level 1 at-will attack powers, 1 level 1 encounter attack power, and 1 level 1 daily attack power. At level 2, they gain a level 2 utility power. At level 3, they gain a level 1 or 3 encounter attack power. And so forth. What's more, they get to choose each of those powers from a list of several (at least 4).

On the other hand, the classes in the Essentials books don't have a set pattern like that. They might get new powers in that pattern, or they might not. They also tend to get no choice of what power they get, and when they do they get very limited choices (like, they choose one of two).

The result is that Essentials characters are much simpler to build and play at the cost of pretty much any two Essentials characters of the same class being identical.



Otherwise, once out of the character creation and leveling up phases, the game uses the same rules whether you're playing Essentials or not. The Essentials books do have more up-to-date rules, however - there has been extensive errata done to the system, and the Essentials books have that written in to them (at least to the point when those books were published).

[Kurald Galain]

What are the differences between 4e Essentials and regular 4e?

BACKGROUND: I'm new to RPGs in general and D&D specifically.

We just had this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=301204) :)

Generally speaking,

4.0 classes focus on customizability, 4.4 classes focus on being easy to play. Thus, while all 4.0 classes have at-will/encounter/daily/utility powers (or psionic power points) to pick from each round, most 4.4 classes have a Basic Attack that they use pretty much every round, with slight modifications.
4.0 is about character progression from heroic to paragon to epic tier, whereas 4.4 is mostly about heroic tier and pays only lip service to the other tiers.
As the result of the above two, 4.0 books contain substantially more content for your money than their 4.4 equivalents.
Individual options from 4.0 (powers, feats, items, races) tend to be stronger than in 4.4.
As the result of the first and fourth point, a poorly-built 4.0 character is weaker than a 4.4 character, whereas a well-built 4.0 character is stronger, and an optimized 4.0 character is much stronger. And also, 4.4 classes benefit from taking as many 4.0 options as possible (e.g. swapping a class feature for a true encounter power) whereas 4.0 classes generally want to avoid 4.4 powers and feats (with certain exceptions, notably expertise and defense feats).
4.0 puts more power in the rules, whereas 4.4 puts more power in the hands of the DM. For instance, 4.0 suggests the player charactes are entitled to the magic items they want, whereas 4.4 leaves this to random chance; also, 4.4 is more comfortable with "open ended" powers like Charm Person.
4.0 is very well playtested and balanced overall, whereas 4.4 is markedly less so.
Numerous rules are subtly different. Not all of these differences are found in errata.

[Yakk]

Most importantly, some people call the 4E essentials line "4.4", and others treat it as being just another set of new books in the 4E line.

The essentials line (Heroes and the DM's kit and the Compendium) does contain enough rules to play 4E D&D, unlike most non-PHB1 DMG 4E books: the goal was to provide a set of "ever-green" books with errata-included rules.

Style-wise, in the Essentials like WotC played around with creating "simpler" classes, like the Slayer, for people who found PHB1 style melee characters overly complex. Not all of the classes are like that: the Mage, the Wizard subclass, is basically a PHB1 Wizard with a different specialization system, and better written spellbook rules.

[obryn]

The classes mix and match together seamlessly, from my experience. Essentials is best taken as just a collection of classes, mostly for players who value more simplicity.

-O

[masteraleph]

I'm also one in agreement with obryn- it's the same system, though most of the characters in those books are more simple (Mage being an obvious exception).

Note that the official rules are updated in Essentials; if a rules in one of the Essentials books contradicts one in the PHB, Essentials is correct. This is particularly true of the Rules Compendium, which is technically part of the Essentials line. There are a few rules that were added after it, but all rules in the RC are correct (that is, there is no errata).

[obryn]

Yeah, the most important part is that by and large, Essentials contains the errata'd rules from the rest of the game, but doesn't invalidate anything that came before it... With one big exception, and that's monsters.

The MM1 is ... well, I'll come out and say it ... it's awful. It has a lot of really great ideas, but the execution is uneven at best. Monster Vault should be thought of as a complete replacement of MM1, and MM1 should be ... I dunno, burned or something.

There's some other bits, but these are minor and mostly give the DM latitude about what kind of game they want to run. Magic items are the only other significant part; you can either use the PHB system of daily item use limits with broad item creation (though you still shouldn't let players make Rare items), or you use the HotFL system without daily item use limits, but with restricted item creation and higher item sale prices.

So, when it comes down to it, you can run PHB-only, Essentials-only, or a grand mixing bowl. I use the last; I think it's incredibly helpful to have a broad range of class complexity for my players to pick from. Everything plays well together at least up through 18th level, where we are right now.

-O

[Kurald Galain]

I think we can agree that you'll have a different experience whether you (A) base your game on the PHB1, make characters mostly from there (and the PHB2), and treat every other book as an expansion to that, or (B) base your game on HOFL, make characters mostly from there (and HOFK), and treat every other book as an expansion to that.

Obviously, most 4E fans are doing the former, because the PHB1 came first and people have no reason to stop using those classes/feats/powers they're already familiar with. Based on WOTC marketing material, they apparently hoped the fans would do the latter (because it would allow them to sell more books, such as Champions Of The Heroic Tier), but the sharply negative reaction to this approach made them cut it down in the later "Heroes Of" books (and cancel several books that would essentially reprint the PHB1). Mind you, the negative reaction was not so much to the content of HOFL, but to WOTC's notion of "throw out your PHB1, HOFL is its replacement now!". And then there was a different negative reaction to Heroes Of Shadow (and to a lesser extent, Of The Feywild) because much of the content therein is not very well written.

Confusingly, the "Heroes Of" line is not the same thing as the "Essentials" line, which in itself is different from the "Essentials" articles in Dragon magazine :smallamused:
Of course, none of this is "essential" to play; I think if you ask players what books are truly "essential", reactions will vary, but a common one is PHB1+RulCom+Monster Vault+DDI subscription.

[BlckDv]

My answer is that the Player's Handbook 4e and the "Heroes of" 4e two different thematic approaches to how to use the underlying rules engine.

With very few exceptions, one could pluck a PC from a game which had been running from day 1 of PHB 1, and drop it into a campaign which had stated with HoFL, and the character would be able to interact with his new party and new world using the rules and powers he already knew.

The changes are fuzzier, as they did not magically start with a hard line with Essentials, but were extensions of what they had been doing in the 4e line. They steadily shifted away from the "universal mechanic" in which all PC would have an equal number of At-will/Encounter/Daily/Utility powers, and the interaction of selecting those powers with feats and class features would make each PC unique. By the time of Essentials they were actively trying to restore a clear break that different classes had different power progressions and mechanics, and which class you selected directly impacted not just how your PC was played, but how many choices you had to make.

Likewise shifts in the way the rules talked about the world and rewards changed, with the most obvious being the major overhaul of Magic Items, going from a fixed number of "daily" uses and a strong suggestion to tailor treasure so that PCs were equipped with the specific gear they desired for their builds, to a rarity system in which PCs could only readily acquire Common items, and had less control and access to Uncommon and Rare items, but no in game limit to their use. Rituals are another major shift, having been a heavily promoted but not entirely popular part of the PHB-era 4e rules, and all but vanishing from the Essentials products.

The Essentials products that exist are also very heavily weighted in favor of content for the Heroic tier, whether this was a planned shift in focus away from full 30 level arcs, or the economic realities curtailed the later production of more Paragon and Epic tier content is not entirely clear. But, this does mean that once you cross 11th level, the pre-Essentials products will be informing more and more of the options available to PCs. Conversely, a number of Essentials options for level 1-10 are just flat out better than their older counter parts, such as the Expertise feats, and some argue this was an effort at planned obsolescence to move folks away from older material, some claim it was power creep, and others claim it was just an effort to fix earlier bad design.

It also is worth mentioning that the transition to Essentials occurred at about the same time that the offline Character Builder was sunset, and so many parties which make use of the offline builder have a defacto restriction against almost all Essentials material.

[HauntWrigs]

The main difference is in how the various character creation options were made and are presented....

Thanks for the info!

[HauntWrigs]

We just had this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=301204) :)

That's too funny! Thanks for the link.

(It would be that my first post is on a topic that was already covered!)

[kidnicky]

If you really are new to D&D and rpgs in general, just get the red starter box, and if your group likes it, buy the book Heroes of the Fallen Lands (8 bucks used on Amazon). This way you're getting basically the same experiance you would with the full version because:

D&D is the most complex confusing thing I have ever looked at in my life. Even with the Essentials version, there's going to be stuff you just houserule over or ignore, and that's fine,but it does mean that IMO buying the big books is just wasting money on info you'll never really USE.

Don't get me wrong, I play D&D almost every week and we love it. But to me (and my group) it's like a car. I like having my car because I like being able to go places in it. If I pop the hood, I can tell you where the oil goes and why, where the water goes and why, but if J got on a car forum, I have no idea what half of the things they're discussing even ARE, nor do I need to to enjoy driving my car.

[Kurald Galain]

If you really are new to D&D and rpgs in general, just get the red starter box,
I would strongly recommend against that, because it's not fully compatible with either the PHB or the Heroes Of series.

It's a fair point though that Heroes Of is easier to play with than the PHB, although the latter technically offers more powers/feats/items for your money.

[kidnicky]

I would strongly recommend against that, because it's not fully compatible with either the PHB or the Heroes Of series.

It's a fair point though that Heroes Of is easier to play with than the PHB, although the latter technically offers more powers/feats/items for your money.

Are the inconsistancies something they're ever going to notice as novice players? We got the red box, then when people started leveling up, we got the Heroes Of book to see how to level higher than 2 (shameless cashgrab btw) and we've been playing with no problems. I'm sure if you get "under the hood" far enough there are inconsistencies but I think the red box /heroes of combo is the best way for this guy and his 3 buddies to have fun TONIGHT over a couple beers and bags of chips. Later on if they want to be super roleplayer guys they can buy the Encyclopedia set WotC wants you to buy.

[Kurald Galain]

Are the inconsistancies something they're ever going to notice as novice players?
Yes, because the rogue works completely differently.

And, as you say, the box is a shameless cashgrab, so it's just a better idea to start with HOFL.

[kidnicky]

What I meant was splitting up the products is a shameless cashgrab. The HOTFL or an abridged version should come with the red box since the red box says nothing about needing to buy other prodects to play it more than a couple nights.

With that said,if he doesn't get the red box,he either needs the DM box or the Monster Vault. The maps and tokens are worth the money.

[ScrivenerofDoom]

(snip) The MM1 is ... well, I'll come out and say it ... it's awful. It has a lot of really great ideas, but the execution is uneven at best. Monster Vault should be thought of as a complete replacement of MM1, and MM1 should be ... I dunno, burned or something. (snip)

Part of the problem with MM1 is that it was designed around three different versions of the monster building rules. Rather than go back and edit the monsters to be consistent, it was simply rushed out the door.

And, yes, it does make sense to burn it.


Yes, because the rogue works completely differently.

And, as you say, the box is a shameless cashgrab, so it's just a better idea to start with HOFL.

I don't think it was a cash grab but simply pure and unadulterated stupidity by the same team that were responsible for the edition-killing Keep on the Shadowfell and Pyramid of Shadows.

Think about it: the hard data behind the creation of the d20 and OGL licences was to drive sales of PHBs as that was where the profit - and the long tail - in D&D was. So what did these clowns do? They cranked out a starter set that didn't mesh with either 4E or 4.4E and further confused the market by ditching the idea of a PHB for a couple of mini-books.

Cash grab? Nahhh, edition-killing stupidity.

[CombatOwl]

What are the differences between 4e Essentials and regular 4e?

BACKGROUND: I'm new to RPGs in general and D&D specifically.

Essentials features the latest version of the 4e ruleset--all of the errata issued over the years was edited into the printing of the Rules Compendium (which is worth it for any 4e player, even if you're not using essentials for classes).

Other than that, they rebuilt the core classes that everyone's accustomed to playing from earlier editions following a notably different design philosophy. One of the big complaints that people had about 4e (as incorrect as it was) was that it made classes seem too similar to each other. This was in large part due to the standardized format for describing powers, but it was also in part due to the lack of unique mechanics in the design of classes. Essentials classes are more obviously different from one another--while they kept the standardized language, they made the class powers all function off different mechanics and play styles.

Essentials is, in my opinion, a much better version of 4e than the original was. It is what 4e should have been released as originally.