I want hardcovers of the essentials books. At least the RC, MVs and the 2 Players Book (which should become one HC).
That's what I want.
Edit: and in the 6x9 format.
Even in hardcover I'm not willing to buy 4.5 material.
It is not 4.5, and no matter how many times you say it is will not make it so.
Essentials did not invalidate the previous material,it mearly adds more options to character creation.
Even in hardcover I'm not willing to buy 4.5 material.
Dude I've only come back to these forums in the past few days and it seems like you only have negative things to say, usually about essentials which would be fine in threads related to them. Not an "I prefer hardcovers" thread which is about as edition neutral as you could get.
Essentials did not invalidate the previous material,it mearly adds more options to character creation.
You havent read the cleric article have you?
I guess I need help with this one, how exactly did Essentials ruin the Cleric?
Essentials did not invalidate the previous material,it mearly adds more options to character creation.
You havent read the cleric article have you?
I guess I need help with this one, how exactly did Essentials ruin the Cleric?
Read the various threads about the nerfs.
Essentials did not invalidate the previous material,it mearly adds more options to character creation.
You havent read the cleric article have you?
I guess I need help with this one, how exactly did Essentials ruin the Cleric?
Read the various threads about the nerfs.
I have. But once again, how did Essentials ruin the cleric?
Why do you have to ask if you read them? They nerfed the non-E clerics to oblivion so that E-clerics would be more appealing to people.
So the designers have come out and said exactly this? I figured that would be in an article or something. Can you direct me to where they said that?
And seriously, on the Essential-hatebags, what exactly do you have to contribute to the discussion of wanting hardback versions of the Essentials books?
Personally, I would like them to combine HoFL and HoFK into one regular sized book with the standard PHB blue binding.
Why do you have to ask if you read them? They nerfed the non-E clerics to oblivion so that E-clerics would be more appealing to people.
So the designers have come out and said exactly this? I figured that would be in an article or something. Can you direct me to where they said that?
You can read it if you see behind their spins. The other reason is the Essentials paradigm that each class should only fulfil one role, so they wanted to kill the controller aspect of the old cleric.
Why do you have to ask if you read them? They nerfed the non-E clerics to oblivion so that E-clerics would be more appealing to people.
So the designers have come out and said exactly this? I figured that would be in an article or something. Can you direct me to where they said that?
And seriously, on the Essential-hatebags, what exactly do you have to contribute to the discussion of wanting hardback versions of the Essentials books?
Personally, I would like them to combine HoFL and HoFK into one regular sized book with the standard PHB blue binding.
PHBe, personally I quite like the digest sized books but that would be cool
Why do you have to ask if you read them? They nerfed the non-E clerics to oblivion so that E-clerics would be more appealing to people.
So the designers have come out and said exactly this? I figured that would be in an article or something. Can you direct me to where they said that?
You can read it if you see behind their spins. The other reason is the Essentials paradigm that each class should only fulfil one role, so they wanted to kill the controller aspect of the old cleric.
You are the one that said that is why they "nerfed" the cleric. It is on you to provide proof. Provide the quote where they say that they "nerfed" the cleric because of Essentials.
Even in hardcover I'm not willing to buy 4.5 material.
Dude I've only come back to these forums in the past few days and it seems like you only have negative things to say, usually about essentials which would be fine in threads related to them. Not an "I prefer hardcovers" thread which is about as edition neutral as you could get.
If you plan on sticking around, you'd better get used to the negativity. There's about a dozen people who do nothing but complain on these forums. Given the volume of posts they make, it must be a full time job.
Even in hardcover I'm not willing to buy 4.5 material.
It is not 4.5, and no matter how many times you say it is will not make it so.
"4.5" means something different to everyone. The changes between O4e and 4eE bear similarities to both AD&D vs Basic and 3e vs 3.5, but it also differs from both in key ways, notably that 4eE made an effort to remain compatible with O4e. However, it is, without a doubt, a mid-edition reboot attempt; it is 4th editions "3.5" in this sense.
You insist on one criteria for what does and does not constitute a reboot: whether it's backwards compatible or not. And that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion, but you should be aware that others are permitted to hold the opposing view: Essentials was a reboot, just like AD&D and 3.5 were.
So could someone explain how switching to softcover nerfed the cleric?
Thunder Dragonbane, sounds like you have an opinion about hardcovers and their relation to the cleric...
And sarcasum aside TheSpaceInvader, how are softcovers easier to store... they both just sit on a bookself right? I mean I have a lot of books, some D&D books, but a lof are just novels and non fiction books, comic books, school books, books of art, books of places Ive been or want to go... the bookshelves I own don't seem to discriminate hard or soft, they all just sit there.
As long as you are okay with "ruining" your books, you could always have them turned into hardbound books (there are do it yourself guides online too). That way, best of both worlds. Small digest-sized books, but with the durability of hardbound books.
I have thought about doing exactly this, but I would practice on a book I wouldn't mind destroying should I mess up. I still wish they would release a blue binding book with both the HoFL and HoFK info in them. Maybe pad it with some magic items or something. Call it the Essential Player's Handbook or something. It would probably fly off the shelves.
Why do you have to ask if you read them? They nerfed the non-E clerics to oblivion so that E-clerics would be more appealing to people.
So the designers have come out and said exactly this? I figured that would be in an article or something. Can you direct me to where they said that?
You can read it if you see behind their spins. The other reason is the Essentials paradigm that each class should only fulfil one role, so they wanted to kill the controller aspect of the old cleric.
You are the one that said that is why they "nerfed" the cleric. It is on you to provide proof. Provide the quote where they say that they "nerfed" the cleric because of Essentials.
The Character Compendium are being done because of Essentials according to WOTC, it was originally supposed to be in an actual book but is now a series of articles on the website. The Character Compendium article for the Cleric, Nerfs the class, thats the opinion of the majority who have posted about it. Given the issues they "fixed" in the cleric have existed since the PH1 came out in June of 2008 and the fact that WOTC says the articles in question are being put out because of the Essential books, why do you think the Cleric isnt being Nerfed because of the Essentials? Do you honestly think they just decided these were issues totally independent of the issues they cause with the Essentials version of the classes?
Why do you have to ask if you read them? They nerfed the non-E clerics to oblivion so that E-clerics would be more appealing to people.
So the designers have come out and said exactly this? I figured that would be in an article or something. Can you direct me to where they said that?
You can read it if you see behind their spins. The other reason is the Essentials paradigm that each class should only fulfil one role, so they wanted to kill the controller aspect of the old cleric.
You are the one that said that is why they "nerfed" the cleric. It is on you to provide proof. Provide the quote where they say that they "nerfed" the cleric because of Essentials.
The Character Compendium are being done because of Essentials according to WOTC, it was originally supposed to be in an actual book but is now a series of articles on the website. The Character Compendium article for the Cleric, Nerfs the class, thats the opinion of the majority who have posted about it. Given the issues they "fixed" in the cleric have existed since the PH1 came out in June of 2008 and the fact that WOTC says the articles in question are being put out because of the Essential books, why do you think the Cleric isnt being Nerfed because of the Essentials? Do you honestly think they just decided these were issues totally independent of the issues they cause with the Essentials version of the classes?
What does that have to do with hardcover vs softcover?
What does that have to do with hardcover vs softcover?
I think hardcovers nerfed the cleric and we're trying to work out if they're essential or not?!?
What does that have to do with hardcover vs softcover?
I think hardcovers nerfed the cleric and we're trying to work out if they're essential or not?!?
Yes the cleric change was a triggered action from Wizards, they said "if we start redesigning things and retooling the game, as a minor action I want to tweak the cleric for less controller ability"
but this thead in particular is about hardcover vs softcover. There are plenty of threads out there about 4e vs 4eE and plenty about hte cleric. Can't we keep this stuff where it belongs.
Every couple days D&D posts on its facebook page a little question, like "what magic item would you want in real life?" and every time, someone says "the magic item I want is for wizards to die so TRS can bring back my beloved 3e" and the posts all degrade into edition wars....
Crap now Im doing it, talking about something else, not Hard vs Soft.... Can't we just stay on topic....
It is not 4.5, and no matter how many times you say it is will not make it so.
Essentials did not invalidate the previous material,it mearly adds more options to character creation.
I could have agreed with you before they started "essentializing" the PHB classes. Now I can't make a fighter or a cleric, I have to make something called a "weaponmaster" or "templar." This is invalidation, not just additional options. It is 4.5 and no matter how many times you say it isn't, it still is.
To the OP, I own a copy of the Rule Compendium, and I wholeheartedly agree that I would much ratehr have seen it in a hardcover format. I seldom use it, but it looks like I carried in my back pocket through WWII... both theaters.
To the OP, I own a copy of the Rule Compendium, and I wholeheartedly agree that I would much ratehr have seen it in a hardcover format. I seldom use it, but it looks like I carried in my back pocket through WWII... both theaters.
I own the essentials books, and I've used them exactly once in play, and have consulted the two Heroes of Fulminant Regret books pretty frequently. I'm not obsessive about books - they're just things - but I'm not abusive. Still, after being used, the two player books look pretty beat up. Not really my favorite thing about them.
1. harder materials protect against conspiricy to nerf your character,
2. 4.223/2 is the current edition
3. soft covers are at war with hard covers
4. thunderdragonbane loves to incite argument
5. only a few people care to argue about it anymore
seriously, just get over it.
i like softcover, it lets me shove it in my backpack easier
well this is one thread that got the bottom of alot of things
1. harder materials protect against conspiricy to nerf your character,
2. 4.223/2 is the current edition
3. soft covers are at war with hard covers
4. thunderdragonbane loves to incite argument
5. only a few people care to argue about it anymore
seriously, just get over it.
i like softcover, it lets me shove it in my backpack easier
Is it the cover or the size that makes it easier to deposit in your bag? Because I could get behind digest sized hardbacks. But softcovers get destroyed way to easily.
Hail to 4.5!
+ 1
Yes, I 100% agree . . .
No more box sets and soft cover books. I hate them ! ! !
If the new Monster Vault was a hard cover I would have picked it up.
I have been spending my gaming money on products from other companies.
Who print rule books in hard cover.
( Paizo Publishing and Fantasy Flight Games )
Bring on 4.5E or 5E or just re-print 4E . . .
Just do it in a hard cover format please.
Thanks.
The only D&D books I've had any problems with falling apart are the original PHB1 and the two Dark Sun books, all of which are hardcover. My softcover Essentials books have seen plenty of use and are still in more or less the same condition as when I got them. The only damage is to one corner of the spine of the Rules Compendium, which was there when I received it (and was nowhere near bad enough for me to bother sending it back for a replacement copy) and has not gotten noticably worse in the nine months since.
And it's not as though I'm some saint when it comes to looking after my D&D books. About a third of them are currently in an untidy stack on my bedroom floor. The original core three rulebooks are bulging with little slips of paper with the first year or so's worth of official errata printed on them (which is largely why my PHB1's spine is straining). My copy of the Monster Vault book was left open on my DMing table, weighted down with a couple of metal miniatures, for the past month while I was away on holiday, and looks none the worse for the experience.
What on Earth are people doing to their books that their softcovers are looking noticeably battered this quickly?
I'm very careful with my books and my Heroes of the Fallen Lands books is very dirty and creased. The binding is holding up but the book is very bunged up. The other Essential soft backs are are getting creased and dirty but I use Heroes of the Fallen Lands almost daily in our delves.
Plain and simple.
That said, the soft cover books do have a place. They are less expensive, lighter weight, and smaller, thus making them more easily transported than hard cover books. I haven't bought anything since the Essentials books, even though I really want Gloomwrought and the new Monster Vault, because I'm waiting for more hard covers.
Given the choice, I prefer hard covers. The minor increase in expense is more than offset by the increased longevity. Hard Cover books just feel more important... and DnD is important! ;) I would love to spend my money on up-to-date Core books, but alas... [shrug]
My original softcover books from 2nd edition are still in near mint condition. My GURPS books (all softcover) are mostly in really good condition (minus ones that were damaged when purchesed).
My RC is in really good codition, though it does bulge a bit with all the stickies and papers inserted in.
But the corners of the covers are definitely rubbing raw, and the edges of the pages are a little gray. This is just from putting them into and pulling them out of bags for transportation.
Since the hard covers are more sturdy and stick out beyond the pages, they look closer to new for a much longer time than the soft cover books. Print more Hard covers!
I wish Wizards would release two versions: One with all the cards, tokens and whatnot in a boxed set and one as a simple hardcover book in the pre-Essentials style.
What I don't understand is why the The Shadowfell book wasn't hardcover, but the Heroes of Shadow was. It's a bit confusing to me, honestly.
That bugged me too, there was not a full switch from one format to the other, so these two books that go together look out of place when side by side, not to mention the Shadowfell book brought a 3rd format to the table with a larger softcover...