|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 9:49AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2006
|
A dog ate my post.
Here are the cliff notes.
If you don't think expertise is an issue, you belong to one group, lets call it group 1.
The other group who thinks that it is a problem are in another group (group 2).
People in group 1 don't much care about expertise, so why are they so militant in proving it is unnecessary to take it?
IF group 2 wants a fix for the feat, and group 1 does not care much for the feat, why not fix it?
Becuse you are forgetting group 3 (me) we like having the option of having or not haveing to take the feat...
in my group we have players who take expertise every time, and we have people who never take it, and we have people who take it sometimes...
if it was given for free then everyone would have it...some of us don't think we need it
Good point.
To see my campaign world visit http://dnd.chrisnye.net
My music -> www.myspace.com/Incarna
My music videos -> www.youtube.com/Auticusx
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 10:07AM
#52
|
|
|
But looking at the new feats. Why are the made better then expertise. Just makes me wonder
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 10:38AM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2010
|
Wider appeal, plain and simple... which just illustrates how different people choose feats in different ways. They are now mathematically superior to what they were, but according to the logic that says they were already the best feat going and you had no reason to pick anything else in place of them this doesn't change anything.
What changes is that they now add more distinctive flavor to characters, and they can be used to optimize towards specific ends (forced movement, opportunity attacks, etc.) other than the most straightforward measurements of combat efficiency. Now more people have a reason to consider them.
...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 10:47AM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
Wider appeal, plain and simple... which just illustrates how different people choose feats in different ways. They are now mathematically superior to what they were, but according to the logic that says they were already the best feat going and you had no reason to pick anything else in place of them this doesn't change anything.
What changes is that they now add more distinctive flavor to characters, and they can be used to optimize towards specific ends (forced movement, opportunity attacks, etc.) other than the most straightforward measurements of combat efficiency. Now more people have a reason to consider them.
Nice contradiction.
But yeah, new expertise feats are designed so more people will take them. Why? So that less people notice the math hole.
Seriously, if anyone had posted a feat with a +1/2/3 bonus to hit on the Homebrew boards before PHB2, the poster would have been highly critized and generally told you dont make scaling hit bonuses because its not needed.
That all said, I do like that they are atleast making them more interesting and flavorful. But just because bad tasting icecream comes in different flavors doesn't change the fact it tastes bad.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 10:53AM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2009
|
I can bet that the people who thinks is not needed don't play high level (or have a rogue, avenger...), till half paragon you really not need it. But with my wizard i have times i have to roll a 16 to hit with expertise.
Needed? of course not, recommended, yes. If you feel comfortable hitting only 20 to 40 % of time good for you. In my house games we have one feat free for it.
Dara
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 10:56AM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2006
|
Wider appeal, plain and simple... which just illustrates how different people choose feats in different ways. They are now mathematically superior to what they were, but according to the logic that says they were already the best feat going and you had no reason to pick anything else in place of them this doesn't change anything.
What changes is that they now add more distinctive flavor to characters, and they can be used to optimize towards specific ends (forced movement, opportunity attacks, etc.) other than the most straightforward measurements of combat efficiency. Now more people have a reason to consider them.
Right... somehow, Expertise feats are a 'tax', even though no one is actually required to 'pay' and you can get by without paying... and now people are complaining because the 'tax' just got a whole lot cheaper, inasmuch as you now have more 'payment options' each of which provide diverse mechanical benefits as a bonus.
Good thing the devs didn't mail everybody a free case of champagne or else people would be angrily quitting D&D forever.
Haiku Police
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 10:57AM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
Wider appeal, plain and simple... which just illustrates how different people choose feats in different ways. They are now mathematically superior to what they were, but according to the logic that says they were already the best feat going and you had no reason to pick anything else in place of them this doesn't change anything.
What changes is that they now add more distinctive flavor to characters, and they can be used to optimize towards specific ends (forced movement, opportunity attacks, etc.) other than the most straightforward measurements of combat efficiency. Now more people have a reason to consider them.
Nice contradiction.
But yeah, new expertise feats are designed so more people will take them. Why? So that less people notice the math hole.
Seriously, if anyone had posted a feat with a +1/2/3 bonus to hit on the Homebrew boards before PHB2, the poster would have been highly critized and generally told you dont make scaling hit bonuses because its not needed.
That all said, I do like that they are atleast making them more interesting and flavorful. But just because bad tasting icecream comes in different flavors doesn't change the fact it tastes bad.
What's your solution to this 'math hole'?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 11:06AM
#58
|
|
|
But looking at the new feats. Why are the made better then expertise. Just makes me wonder
power creep, just like the defensive feats, how can anyone dispute it
i basically gasped looking at how overpowered the feats are
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 11:08AM
#59
|
|
|
Maybe if your players had more imagination, every last one of them wouldn't be single. 
and maybe one day youll be able to hit the broad side of a barn and roleplay at the same time
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 13, 2010 - 11:09AM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Jun 18, 2003
|
Average gamers get along fine without.
Again, not in my experience. The newbies who are just choosing random Feats they think look cool but are highly situational see a remarkable difference from what I've seen (though generally, of course, only past Paragon at the very least). I've definitely helped Op some of my team-mates Characters with basic stuff like Expertise, and they notice it almost immediately.
The "Solution" is to make the thing inherent at levels 5/15/25, no matter what Weapons, Implements, or Powers your Character is using. That way, Racial Powers with Attack Rolls won't lose out and people won't feel bad for trying to wield both a Hammer and a Sword at the same time (since you'd need seperate Feats for all of your different Weapon Types) or for tryin to have both a Weapon and an Implement instead of just defaulting to a Weapliment to save yourself the trouble.
It's really just a sentence-long Errata to the basic math of the game that hurts no one and helps everyone who makes Attack Rolls.
Resident Logic Cannon
|
|
|
