Inherent Bonuses and magic

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Has anyone has experience with using the Inherent Bonus system in ADDITION to the standard magic item/treasure system?

Do the bonuses reduce or eliminate the need for the Expertise/Improved Defense feats? 
So many PCs, so little time...
Has anyone has experience with using the Inherent Bonus system in ADDITION to the standard magic item/treasure system?

Do the bonuses reduce or eliminate the need for the Expertise/Improved Defense feats? 

No, they don't eliminate the use of those feats because Inherent bonuses are Enhancement bonuses, and as a result they don't stack with magical armor, weapons, neck slot items, etc which all give Enhancement bonuses to defenses, attack and damage.
It opens up using a relatively more expensive enchant that is a tier behind, which makes it more affordable. The Enhancement bonus from Inherent Bonuses would overwrite, but you'd still get properties/powers from the Magic item. Useful.

Basically no difference though. Barring very odd corner cases.
Well, it means that you'll fill up the xmas tree faster.  The usual system sorta assumes that you get around one new item a level, but that some of the items are upgrades to the big-3... so you typically only get 2 "utility" (head/foot/arms/hands/tattoo/wonderous/etc) items every 5 levels.

Using inherent bonuses means that you can likely stop shortly upgrading your weapon and neck slots, except possibly for tier bonuses.  Which means all your other newly found items will go to utility stuff.

Eh.  Roughly equivilent to giving all the PCs +1 to hit and defenses (because otherwise they'd let the big-3 items slip a bit in order to find other things they wanted).  Not a huge change.  No, doesn't make up for the lack of a +2/+3 feat bonus to *. 

"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima

Thanks for the answers, all. I was just wondering if it would horribly unbalance the game if I used the two together. It appears not, though I might houserule that the inherent bonuses are an "untyped" bonus, and let them stack.

My goal is to allow the PCs a bit more freedom in the magic items they get by eliminating SOME of the need to constantly be upgrading weapons, armor or neck pieces. If it's simply a matter of the characters being "somewhat" more competent, I can handle that. If it turns them into Heroic tier demi-gods, I do NOT want that!
So many PCs, so little time...
Thanks for the answers, all. I was just wondering if it would horribly unbalance the game if I used the two together. It appears not, though I might houserule that the inherent bonuses are an "untyped" bonus, and let them stack.

That would horribly unbalance the game. For the record.
Thanks for the answers, all. I was just wondering if it would horribly unbalance the game if I used the two together. It appears not, though I might houserule that the inherent bonuses are an "untyped" bonus, and let them stack.

My goal is to allow the PCs a bit more freedom in the magic items they get by eliminating SOME of the need to constantly be upgrading weapons, armor or neck pieces. If it's simply a matter of the characters being "somewhat" more competent, I can handle that. If it turns them into Heroic tier demi-gods, I do NOT want that!

Allowing inherent bonuses to stack with enhancement bonuses will unbalance the game without adding any freedom, as the clearly optimal choice will once again be to upgrade weapon/armor/neck.

If you meant allowing inherent bonuses to stack with feat bonuses - they already do.
Bleh. I was hoping for a nice, neat fix to the constant arms races to upgrade weapon/armor and the need for Expertise/Improved Defense feats.

Thanks again, folks. I imagine I'll just play it as is. 
So many PCs, so little time...
then just use inherent bonuses and give all the players free feats to cover expertise/defenses
Or you could replace the standard Inherent enhancement bonuses with inherent feat typed bonuses per tier, but the character builder doesn't have any way of supporting that so you'd have to do all the math on paper.  You would then effectively be giving the players the expertise, focus, and defense feats for free.
then just use inherent bonuses and give all the players free feats to cover expertise/defenses


Yes. This.

On more than one occasion I've given my players a free Expertise and Focus feat along side Inherent bonuses.

Basically I toss them the "obligagtory" feats so they have room to actually go for the build they want.
Bleh. I was hoping for a nice, neat fix to the constant arms races to upgrade weapon/armor and the need for Expertise/Improved Defense feats.

Thanks again, folks. I imagine I'll just play it as is. 

Well, the real secret is the arms race is unnecessary if you just use the core books because the math works out fine, despite a few folks getting hung up on a difference of a few statistically insignifiant points in Epic tier. (Actually, the math works out fine in the same way even with lots of the additional books.)  But unfortunately, WoTC introduced Expertise/Improved Defense feats and other unncecessary items after the community demanded them, and then the community complained that monsters were too easy so WoTC reacted by making monsters harder and tougher ... the ironic thing is that the community demanded the arms race, and then complains about it.

But I've said enough.  The "the math doesn't lie" crowd will probably be along shortly to miss the point again entirely.

OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player. 3E challenged the character, not the player. Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM. That's why I love 4E.

"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."

"People treat their lack of imagination as if it's the measure of what's silly. Which is silly." - Noon

"Challenge" is overrated.  "Immersion" is usually just a more pretentious way of saying "having fun playing D&D."

"Falling down is how you grow.  Staying down is how you die.  It's not what happens to you, it's what you do after it happens.”

The most common alpha used in stats is .05. Since +-1 on a d20 is automatically .05, Expertise and Improved defenses become statistically significant at level 5. Level 5 is 16 levels short of Epic. So for 26 levels the math is off by a statistically significant amount or 86.6% of the game.

The math does not work out. Masterwork weapons and necks were removed late in development and would have precisely covered the discrepancy. This was assumed "not to matter" (because the dev team has people as bad at math as you appear to be), except it did. They didn't realize it mattered because they didn't do any extensive play testing in Paragon or Epic. They barely did any in late Heroic, for that matter. However the players did, after release, and complained that said tiers were dysfunctional. As they were. PHB2 released expertise feats to fix the attack math.

No ever complained that encounters were too easy. People complained they were a boring grind, which yes also means they were easy, but that wasn't the point of the complaining. Which had various causes, but monsters not being very threatening in terms of damage output while being sacks of HP was the primary mechanical issue. Part of that is a certain resistance to optimization on player's parts, but 4e requires a certain level of optimization to maintain baseline with the expected power curve, i.e., people were doing less damage than they were supposed to be doing. The monster math changes increased damage to make monsters more threatening, removed the silly defense boosts some monster types got (effectively increasing PC damage), and did some other minor things so combats didn't drag and monsters were a threat. This actually has very little do with the issues in PC math. Not nothing, there is some overlap, but monsters simply were not designed well initially. Note: all the complaints about boring grindy combats happened before math feat fixes existed. And after. But the math fix feats are not the problem, or they complaints wouldn't have happened on both sides of the change.

[content removed - baiting is against the Code of Conduct. company.wizards.com/conduct   ]
Yeah, DaBugBear, don't worry about the math of the game.  There are so many factors people don't take into account with their basic statistics that a few points really don't matter.  Nothing is broken.  Like you said, just play it as is, with a normal party that works together, as the game was meant to be played, and play it with or without expertise feats or inherent bonuses (or enhancement bonus items, but not both) and you'll be just fine.

Good gaming!

OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player. 3E challenged the character, not the player. Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM. That's why I love 4E.

"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."

"People treat their lack of imagination as if it's the measure of what's silly. Which is silly." - Noon

"Challenge" is overrated.  "Immersion" is usually just a more pretentious way of saying "having fun playing D&D."

"Falling down is how you grow.  Staying down is how you die.  It's not what happens to you, it's what you do after it happens.”

Yeah, DaBugBear, don't worry about the math of the game.  There are so many factors people don't take into account with their basic statistics that a few points really don't matter.  Nothing is broken.  Like you said, just play it as is, with a normal party that works together, as the game was meant to be played, and play it with or without expertise feats or inherent bonuses (or enhancement bonus items, but not both) and you'll be just fine.

Good gaming!

You really don't understand how statistics works.

Also the game meant to be played with the math working. Developers have made that very clear. So that isn't a valid argument, either.
It is perfectly possible to have fun playing the game with wonky maths* (i.e. without expertise/improved defenses). However, it is my experience that fixing the maths (with the aforementioned feats) significantly improves the game and makes it more fun. Higher-level play can be (though is by no means guaranteed to be) somewhat frustrating without the maths-fix feats.

I would certainly not recommend you take the advice of someone who thinks a difference between a 50% hit rate (missing half the time) and a 65% hit rate (missing only one attack in three) is "statistically insignificant". That, BTW, is the difference between an epic-tier character that does not have Expertise and one who does.

From experience, I have found even the +1 to attack rolls given by Expertise in the heroic tier is a very obvious boost for most characters. The only exceptions have been characters such as dagger-wielding rogues from a +Dex race who are already very accurate. For one particular 17 Str fighter with a +2 proficiency weapon, Expertise literally made the difference between a character that felt like dead weight, whose frustrated player had started wishing the character would just die, to one he actually enjoyed playing.

* I'm British, so I spell 'maths' with an 's'. 'Math' without the 's' is a mythological Welsh wizard.

"My flying carpet is full of elves."