What do I need to purchase if I were to get into 4e? Do I get essentials? If so, does that mean that the old books don't work with essentials?
How hard is it to learn compared to 3.5?
Are the classes all viable, or are there some that I should outright avoid? I generally prefer to play fighters or other melee classes (aside from rogues, for some reason). Is there a class that combines arcane magic and melee combat, like Dusk Blade from 3.5?
What are warlords like? Someone told me they're like bards, but that they also wear heavy armor and wade into melee. I think I could get behind that.
Any help on this would be very awesome.
What do I need to purchase if I were to get into 4e? Do I get essentials?
Yes, if you haven't tried 4e out already, I would start with Essentials.
If you are brand spanking new to roleplaying (you're probably not, so chances are this doesn't apply to you) or if you want to spend as little as possible trying the game out, purchase the "red box" Starter Set.
If you have experience roleplaying and want to be well-equipped to run 4e, purchase the DM's Kit boxed set and the Monster Vault boxed set. This will give you the rules, tons of monster tokens, adventures, maps, and a monster book. Your players (or you, if you're the one playing) will need either Heroes of the Fallen Lands or Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms, depending on what class they want to play. Once you've got this stuff under control, you can decide the direction in which you want to expand your game. My personal recommendation, if you feel you want more material, is to purchase a D&D Insider subscription. That alone gets you a truly tremendous wealth of new tools, adventures, monsters and player options to mess around with.
If so, does that mean that the old books don't work with essentials?
The old books work with Essentials just fine. The Essentials rules are the D&D 4e rules; they are one and the same, so you can sit down with a Fighter made from the first 4e Player's Handbook and a Fighter from Essentials at the same table, and both will play just fine.
How hard is it to learn compared to 3.5?
Easier in a number of respects. A number of mechanics are consolidated (skills, defenses, powers) into more easily-understood concepts. As with any new RPG, the best way to learn it is to find someone who already knows the system and is enthusiastic about it to run you through it.
Are the classes all viable, or are there some that I should outright avoid?
Yes, WotC has made sure that all classes contribute significantly to the party. While the case can be made that certain classes are better at their job than others, this is a matter of degrees. As long as you understand how your class works, you will feel like you are filling an important role.
I generally prefer to play fighters or other melee classes (aside from rogues, for some reason). Is there a class that combines arcane magic and melee combat, like Dusk Blade from 3.5?
Yes, the Swordmage is an arcane character focused on melee combat with a blade. You can find the Swordmage class presented in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, and new material for it presented in a number of sources. Frankly, however, if you're interested in playing a Swordmage I would get that D&D Insider subscription I mentioned above and just build one using their excellent Character Builder digital tool. This is a lot cheaper than buying another whole book, and it lets you create any character you want from any book ever released for 4e. The Character Builder will also hold your hand through the character creation process, ensuring that your character is built according to the rules.
As I said before, if you're a player, start by getting yourself either Heroes of the Fallen Lands or Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms. Even if you're not going to play a class from one of those books, they contain all the rules a player needs to know.
What are warlords like? Someone told me they're like bards, but that they also wear heavy armor and wade into melee. I think I could get behind that.
That's a good description. A Warlord is like the inspiring general who delivers that rousing speech just before the final charge. Warlords are Leaders, so they have the ability to heal (in the Warlord's case, they rally the party to fight on despite their wounds), and they provide all sorts of bonuses to attack, damage, defenses, and so on.
Any help on this would be very awesome.
Hope some of this was helpful. Feel free to ask any questions you may still have.
Very much appreciate the help, good sir! Thanks a lot!
I won't add much to Scott's analysis, since I disagree with none of it. I will add a couple of points.
Is there a class that combines arcane magic and melee combat, like Dusk Blade from 3.5?
The Hexblade from Heroes of the Fallen Kingdoms is a Warlock who can blast people from a distance but who can also make a blade for melee combat, and has a variety of useful abilities (Utility powers) that if you're sensible about selecting can be helpful in melee.
What are warlords like? Someone told me they're like bards, but that they also wear heavy armor and wade into melee. I think I could get behind that.
Warlords are 'Leaders'. The Sergeant in the war movie who screams at his men to get up and get moving, the heroic Captain who shouts "Follow me!" and goes charging into the breach in the walls. Or they can be. They're great if your tactically minded, since their best talents involve making other people fight harder and hit more often. Thus the saying, the barbarian hits people with his axe, the warlord hits people with her barbarian.
Warlords are 'Leaders'. The Sergeant in the war movie who screams at his men to get up and get moving, the heroic Captain who shouts "Follow me!" and goes charging into the breach in the walls. Or they can be. They're great if your tactically minded, since their best talents involve making other people fight harder and hit more often. Thus the saying, the barbarian hits people with his axe, the warlord hits people with her barbarian.
Agreed. I'm playing a Warforged Warlord and for me, there's nothing more satisfying than giving the Slayer in my party another attack which he then Crits for and add in all that beautiful Power Strike damage. Yes, Warlords really make you feel like a Marshal of battle on the field. The class provided a player with a number of tactical-placing powers which allow the Warlord to arrange the field as he sees fit. Warlords rarely allow their allies to go without Combat Advantage via Flanking for long. In addition, they decent healers and have the ability to dish out some good damage (more so than a lot of other Leaders).
Scott did an admirable job in describing what a person new to 4E might need or look into first. I'll also add that I've allowed Essential material in all my games and I've yet to really see a drastic effect of where one style is far superior than another. Yes, certain builds are often better at the job than others (like Scott said), but it's not as out-distanced as others might want to believe.
The Hexblade from Heroes of the Fallen Kingdoms is a Warlock who can blast people from a distance but who can also make a blade for melee combat, and has a variety of useful abilities (Utility powers) that if you're sensible about selecting can be helpful in melee.
Ah, good catch! I still have Warlock = ranged blaster firmly stamped on my brain.
|
Er, ditto with the above. One noticeable difference when comparing 3.5e is your role and job under 4e is obvious and the mechanics support you. Under 3.5e a few bad choices or feats or even multi-class dips and your character was next to useless compared with those who "did it right". 4e has optimums for sure, BUT, and it's a big but, the difference between you taking stuff because its seems right/cool and someone going optimization nuts isn't a game breaker. Any race/class/idea will still basically contribute during the game. For new players the descriptions like Striker class or Defender class are very nice ways to help them choose a class. Yes these existed in 3.5e but they were unwritten and in some classes unclear.
Essentials = yes from me too. For no other reasons than 'our group decided' we use 100% Essentials - if you have no 4e stuff it is by far the cheapest way into the game, excellent value for money. With the books Scott and others mentioned you have enough material to be playing for numerous years. In fact it is difficult to see where and what 5e will be if/when it comes out.
DDI subscription is nice and only one per group needed.
If a may add the mechanics work very well - I was playing a Warforged Warden (before Essentials) he could leap into a room and make it so it was in the monsters best interest to beat on me. The Leaders would keep me up and make the Stikers more effective while the Controller was keeping the hordes of minions at bay (my bane btw). The mechanics for terrain made battles interesting and varied. My Warforged hit like a wet piece of paper - but my role was to keep the nasties stuck to me like glue. The mechanics, again, support this very well.
My only comment against would be the lack of 'spells' that can influence matters out of combat. There are things called Rituals, but in all honesty they don't quite fill the same role that 'pure' magic spells did. Still not so bad that you wouldn't play 4e, just to need to think "THIS ISN'T 3.5e" and you will be fine.
2 cents, good luck,
S.
Thank you all very much! 4e sounds like good stuff. Can't wait to grab essentials and get started on this. Thanks again! ::bows::
I'm confused.
If I spend 35 bucks, I can get the PHB, which has Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Warlord, and Wizard. What's the incentive for buying essentials, which divides the classes up between two books? I can't even play a warlord if I got essentials!
I'd be spending more money on essentials than if I just went with the PHB. What does essentials do differently enough to justify buying both books? Is the point just to buy the book with the class(s) that you want to play?
(Also, is it true that they took away options from classes in essentials?)
(Also, is it true that they took away options from classes in essentials?)
Yes. Essentials is rather limited, which is one of the reasons I'm not it's biggest fan.
Personally, I recommend the original PHB and if you're going to DM, the DMG and MM3.
There are a couple 'trap' builds in the game (star pact warlock, several primal builds), and there are a couple feats (Expertise and Improved Defenses) that you're expected to take. But on the whole, 4e is much better balanced than 3e -- you almost have to intentionally frack up your PC to get something unplayable. And if you're a real fan of balance, like me, the C4 project fixes the few glaring problems that haven't been officially errataed.
I'm confused.
If I spend 35 bucks, I can get the PHB, which has Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Warlord, and Wizard. What's the incentive for buying essentials, which divides the classes up between two books? I can't even play a warlord if I got essentials!
I'd be spending more money on essentials than if I just went with the PHB. What does essentials do differently enough to justify buying both books? Is the point just to buy the book with the class(s) that you want to play?
(Also, is it true that they took away options from classes in essentials?)
As you have a basic knowledge of D&D 3.5, I would suggest you to buy only the following things:
- PHB1 OR one of the two essentials character books
- a subscription to DDI.
With DDI, you have
- access to any monster every released as a book (monster builder includes all Monster Manuals and the new Monster Vault)
- the character builder with all classes ever released, from PHB1-3 and the two essentials books, FR/Dark Sun/Eberron, ....
- access to all dragon and dungeon pdfs for 4E, which give you a few adventures and lots of additional stuff
- the compendium, an online searchable version of the rules compendium.
You can still use all your 3.5/PF stuff for fluff, but you have access to all the crunch stuff you need to play 4e.
If you later find out you do like 4E enough for a longer campaign, I'd also suggest the Rules Compendium and some of the Supplements such as Underdark, Demonomicon, Manual of the Planes or one of the campaign settings.
While the DDI has the rules the format they are in is practically impossible to utilize to actually learn them. I'd think you'd need the Rules Compendium for at least that. In fact I'd go so far as to say one example of each book makes using the DDI much easier.
Hence the Rule Compendium will give one the basic grasp of the rules. Understand that and you can more easily use the DDI. The DMG was a really good book in and of itself and I recommend it - it'll also help with understanding most of the basic DM only rules for 4E (like how encounters are set up for example). Some players book to explain how characters work - one of the new ones is probably a fine place to start. After you understand how they make characters in this book its easy to take that knowledge and apply it to other characters in the DDI. Finally same deal with monsters, here I would go with Monster Vault as its chock full of good monsters with some of the best monster design in 4E (historically inconsistent monster design has been a big problem in 4E).
I'm confused.
If I spend 35 bucks, I can get the PHB, which has Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Warlord, and Wizard. What's the incentive for buying essentials, which divides the classes up between two books? I can't even play a warlord if I got essentials!
I'd be spending more money on essentials than if I just went with the PHB. What does essentials do differently enough to justify buying both books? Is the point just to buy the book with the class(s) that you want to play?
(Also, is it true that they took away options from classes in essentials?)
It's true that if you buy every product in the Essentials line you will end up spending more than you would by just purchasing a set of 4E core books. As other posters have said, the idea is to give new players a cheaper point of entry - giving you less options than the full PHB, but at a lower price point.
Frankly, if you want to spend as little as possible on getting started as a 4E GM, but would rather have printed rules than a DDi subscription, I recommend one of two routes:
1: Buy a 4E Core Rulebook gift set from Amazon.com - they currently have them on sale for $66.12. The Monster Manual builds are less consistent in terms of difficulty by level than the ones presented in the new Monster Vault, as other posters have pointed out, but they still play just fine for the most part.
2: Get the Player's Handbook 1, Essentials Monster Vault, and Essentials Dungeon Master's Kit. Again, Amazon is your cheapest option - these three items together will cost you $64.58. In addition to the rules, you'll get some less-than-stellar adventure modules, some good maps, and some great counters for monsters and PCs. (You could even go cheaper than this and skip the DM Kit for a copy of the Rules Compendium, saving an additional 13 bucks, but the RC does leave a few gaps in game knowledge compared to the DM Kit, and you won't get the adventures and hero counters.)
If you find that you really want more class options down the road, you can always pick up PHB2 at less than retail from Amazon or the secondary market, or just get a DDi subscription. I personally am loathe to recommend DDi because the quality of the new cloud-based tools is inferior to the old offline ones, but there's no denying that you get a lot of content for your dollar - it's just that that content goes away when your subscription runs out.