D&D essentials changes

[SporkMaster5000]

just a heads up for the 4e folks who like their errata: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/essentials

nothing that strikes me as a really big deal that wasn't already reported. rapiers not superior any more raised my eyebrow, but seems fine.  

[Lord of the Vine]

SporkMaster5000

just a heads up for the 4e folks who like their errata: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/essentials

nothing that strikes me as a really big deal that wasn't already reported. rapiers not superior any more raised my eyebrow, but seems fine.

I never did understand why it was superior to begin with. If I recall, Rapier was military in 3.5...

Otherwise, no paragon requirement for the defense buff feats? That seems a bit broken.  

[Keith Valken Lionheart]

Dion Necurat

SporkMaster5000

just a heads up for the 4e folks who like their errata: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/essentials

nothing that strikes me as a really big deal that wasn't already reported. rapiers not superior any more raised my eyebrow, but seems fine.

I never did understand why it was superior to begin with. If I recall, Rapier was military in 3.5...

Otherwise, no paragon requirement for the defense buff feats? That seems a bit broken.

This. The Rapier in 4th is mundane enough that it doesn't warrant it being on Superior.

The Weapon Training feat nerf makes no sense. Well, kinda, as it lets pure Str characters deal more damage, but still...

And HOORAY for characters now able to choose an alternate second stat boost!  

[SporkMaster5000]

Keith Valken Lionheart

Dion Necurat

SporkMaster5000

just a heads up for the 4e folks who like their errata: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/essentials

nothing that strikes me as a really big deal that wasn't already reported. rapiers not superior any more raised my eyebrow, but seems fine.

I never did understand why it was superior to begin with. If I recall, Rapier was military in 3.5...

Otherwise, no paragon requirement for the defense buff feats? That seems a bit broken.

This. The Rapier in 4th is mundane enough that it doesn't warrant it being on Superior.

The Weapon Training feat nerf makes no sense. Well, kinda, as it lets pure Str characters deal more damage, but still...

And HOORAY for characters now able to choose an alternate second stat boost!

it was stated in an article somewhere on their site that melee training was nerfed because of essentials classes that function purely of MBAs, so that there was some incentive to go with a Str base instead of just what the ******** ever stat you want. At the very least i think they should make an intelligent blademaster equivalent for battleminds to balance the change though.

also, i originally thought the rapier was superior because it compared so very favorably next to the short sword, which was the military +3 prof light blade of choice, but i dunno.  

[Keith Valken Lionheart]

SporkMaster5000

Keith Valken Lionheart

Dion Necurat

SporkMaster5000

just a heads up for the 4e folks who like their errata: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/essentials

nothing that strikes me as a really big deal that wasn't already reported. rapiers not superior any more raised my eyebrow, but seems fine.

I never did understand why it was superior to begin with. If I recall, Rapier was military in 3.5...

Otherwise, no paragon requirement for the defense buff feats? That seems a bit broken.

This. The Rapier in 4th is mundane enough that it doesn't warrant it being on Superior.

The Weapon Training feat nerf makes no sense. Well, kinda, as it lets pure Str characters deal more damage, but still...

And HOORAY for characters now able to choose an alternate second stat boost!

it was stated in an article somewhere on their site that melee training was nerfed because of essentials classes that function purely of MBAs, so that there was some incentive to go with a Str base instead of just what the ******** ever stat you want. At the very least i think they should make an intelligent blademaster equivalent for battleminds to balance the change though.

also, i originally thought the rapier was superior because it compared so very favorably next to the short sword, which was the military +3 prof light blade of choice, but i dunno.

A 2 in damage shouldn't put the Rapier into Superior. As it is, it's a lightweight Longsword with less (read, none) properties. Compare it to, say, the Katar in the Superior table, which deals 1d6 damage, is very lightweight, and has the Offhand and High Crit properties, and I can see it's rightfully on the Superior side of weapons. A rapier is a 1d8 light blade, and has no properties, whilst a Longsword has the SAME stats as a Rapier, costs less and has the Versatile property, which makes it overall more useful. Only different in both is price, weight and one is a Heavy Blade whilst the other is a Light Blade, but that shouldn't determine whether it should be Superior or Military. At least not in this case. It seems to me they were trying to keep the Rogue from doing massive damage, which is the role of the class, but restricting them of a 1d8 light blade weapon. But why choose a Rapier when you have a Katar with the High Crit property?

Forgive the wall of text.  

[Lord of the Vine]

I'm lovin the human racial power, though.  

[Keith Valken Lionheart]

Dion Necurat

I'm lovin the human racial power, though.

It is really nice, though I'd still pick the extra At-Will 75% of the time.  

[SporkMaster5000]

Keith Valken Lionheart

It seems to me they were trying to keep the Rogue from doing massive damage, which is the role of the class, but restricting them of a 1d8 light blade weapon. But why choose a Rapier when you have a Katar with the High Crit property?

this is actually irrelevant to the superior/military classification, as rogues don't get military weapon proficiency, or even simple, just specific named weapons, which the rapier is still not one of.

as for rapier not being worth being a superior weapon, in comparison to the longsword, no. But I didn't mean to compare it to the longsword, the rapier is to the short sword what the b*****d sword is to the longsword. same proficiency bonus, same class of weapon, bigger damage die. the only difference is that the rapier doesn't have the off-hand property.  

[Arc Vembris]

Keith Valken Lionheart

SporkMaster5000

Keith Valken Lionheart

Dion Necurat

SporkMaster5000

just a heads up for the 4e folks who like their errata: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/essentials

nothing that strikes me as a really big deal that wasn't already reported. rapiers not superior any more raised my eyebrow, but seems fine.

I never did understand why it was superior to begin with. If I recall, Rapier was military in 3.5...

Otherwise, no paragon requirement for the defense buff feats? That seems a bit broken.

This. The Rapier in 4th is mundane enough that it doesn't warrant it being on Superior.

The Weapon Training feat nerf makes no sense. Well, kinda, as it lets pure Str characters deal more damage, but still...

And HOORAY for characters now able to choose an alternate second stat boost!

it was stated in an article somewhere on their site that melee training was nerfed because of essentials classes that function purely of MBAs, so that there was some incentive to go with a Str base instead of just what the ******** ever stat you want. At the very least i think they should make an intelligent blademaster equivalent for battleminds to balance the change though.

also, i originally thought the rapier was superior because it compared so very favorably next to the short sword, which was the military +3 prof light blade of choice, but i dunno.

A 2 in damage shouldn't put the Rapier into Superior. As it is, it's a lightweight Longsword with less (read, none) properties. Compare it to, say, the Katar in the Superior table, which deals 1d6 damage, is very lightweight, and has the Offhand and High Crit properties, and I can see it's rightfully on the Superior side of weapons. A rapier is a 1d8 light blade, and has no properties, whilst a Longsword has the SAME stats as a Rapier, costs less and has the Versatile property, which makes it overall more useful. Only different in both is price, weight and one is a Heavy Blade whilst the other is a Light Blade, but that shouldn't determine whether it should be Superior or Military. At least not in this case. It seems to me they were trying to keep the Rogue from doing massive damage, which is the role of the class, but restricting them of a 1d8 light blade weapon. But why choose a Rapier when you have a Katar with the High Crit property?

Forgive the wall of text.

The true benefit of a non-versatile 1h weapon is its accessibility to small heroes. The scimitar still has high crit, but the rapier is now a fair choice for gnome fighters who wants the edge of a +3 prof bonus. Rogues still don't get it without a feat, as they're proficient with specific weapons and not groups like military melee. I'm just glad for the image of a swordmage using a rapier, it certainly wasn't worth a feat before.

I'm just thrilled that dwarves can choose Str as a bonus. I know I didn't see a Stone Fist monk rely on Str when my Dwarf gives me a Wis bonus.