|
3 years ago ::
Sep 29, 2010 - 6:01AM
#801
|
|
|
But don't forget that the actual goal is to remove Expertise, fill in the math gap, and then rebalance the game around that now properly filled in gap, rather than building the entire system on a cracked foundation. Getting rid of "feat taxes" is only step 1.
why is step one the removeing of the feat? Should not step one be to fix the (in your opionon) broken foundation... then correct around the new foundation?
step 1 for me to rework the system would be have items scale from 1-35 by defualt, and up to 42 with the artaficer feats... that opens up at level 26 finding a level 31 +7 weapon or armor.
((((quick note an artaficer with the right 2 feats can draft items of his level + Int mod+2, and he can at 30th level have a +10 int mod)))
maybe add in the masterwork weapons idea...
then I would take the current expertise+ feats and make them prereq 15th level... make them just +1, and scale to +2 at 25th...
now with these changes a party of 5 will find 15 items between level 31 and 35 above level 30 (aka +7 itmes) witch means not every character can have neck, weapon, and armor inless that is the only thing you find... making these items not madatory but extra assa tot he coolness. the masterwork weapon/implments could come into play at level 11, and eaither be +1 to hit or made out of a special metal/wood ect... then at level 21 you can get two bonuses...
in a 3.5 3rd party book there where masterwork, suppioror, lamanated, and serated weapons... I imagin we could come up with a bunch of bonuses...
This is all assuming that there is a problem. I have seen theories on some math problems but in game there doesn't seem to be a problem.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 30, 2010 - 8:42PM
#802
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2005
|
By my last post, I was indicating that I, for one, am perfectly fine with expertise exactly the way it is. Even as a "feat tax", remember that we get about 33% more feats in 4E than in 3rd. Even if the math was "fixed", expertise would still be one of those feats that most if not all characters would want to eventually end up with.
Now there are combos like the Lasting Frost + Wintertouched and just tons of ways of getting combat advantage. So at level 21+ expertise gives +3 to hit, well permanent CA gives +2... I think that does soften the sting of not having expertise but hell why not have both advantages and be really ridiculous?
D&D has always been a part of my life and I've always enjoyed it. Now I never said the game should not be balanced only that it would be close to impossible to remove every possibility of something broken creeping in. Being as D&D is played primarily at home with the DM in charge and not competitively, fixes can be found without the need to ban or change or errata powers all the time!
Who doesn't remember how much martial classes sucked in 2E? People still loved them. Who doesn't remember spells like Wish and Contingency and Permanency and Teleport and Creeping Doom? High level casters were just ridiculous. This didn't change much in 3E.
I built an Assassin in 3E with a Ring of Blinking who could Sneak Attack on every hit, 2 attacks a turn who did roughly 20d6 a round and was only like level 12 or 13 or something like that. It practically solo'ed the whole adventure but was still outshone by the Necromancer with Spell Focus whose DC against Control Undead and Death magic was nearly impossible to beat. I don't remember anything getting errata'ed but then I wasn't online much back then. What I can say, is that we, as players, in charge of our OWN game, dealt with it and the optimizers enjoyed the challenge of making the next character that the DM would have to nerf - Wizards need not take this power out of players' hands because we are quite capable of dealing with it on our own.
So, in summary: whatever you consider expertise feats, you have the options at your disposal to deal with it in house, yourselves, without crying to the company to add more errata to a game that already has a ton just because you have to spend 1 of your 33% more feats on a something that is quite less ridiculous than options available in older versions of the game.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 30, 2010 - 10:31PM
#803
|
|
|
The point of continuous minor fixes is to prevent them building up to the point where stuff is so entangled you have to reboot the whole game to fix it.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:42AM
#804
|
Date Joined:
Jul 22, 2001
|
That would be nice, however most of the time that's not the case.
They fix as much that has no issues as does.
Sergent at arms of the house of trolls.
Est Solarus oth Mithas
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:51AM
#805
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2006
|
That would be nice, however most of the time that's not the case.
They fix as much that has no issues as does.
other then magic missle (the one I agree there was no reason for) what eas fixed that had no issue?
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:52AM
#806
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
The point of continuous minor fixes is to prevent them building up to the point where stuff is so entangled you have to reboot the whole game to fix it.
What's worse, if you do too many patches (temporary ad hoc fixes....like expertise) rather than tearning the system apart and fundamentally repairing the underlying flaws, you get a system that is less and less robust and flexible because of the cumulative effect of so many minor changes many of which interact unpredictably with each other.
Eventually you have an unweildly kludge that has to be blown up and done over.
-Polaris
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:54AM
#807
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Eventually you have an unweildly kludge that has to be blown up and done over.
I'd argue this is inevitable whether you errata or not, and as such isn't really grounds for making a decision either way.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:55AM
#808
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
That would be nice, however most of the time that's not the case.
They fix as much that has no issues as does.
other then magic missle (the one I agree there was no reason for) what eas fixed that had no issue?
Melee training. The addition of the Knight, Slayer, and Thief.....just to name four (inter-releated ones). There was no great hue-and-cry against the Melee training feat, yet it was "pre-errataed" to make it fit with material yet to be published instead of the new material being adjusted to fit how the system currently was. Likewise there was no great hue and cry for the three classes I mentioned and certainly not in this form....this IMHO was the Dev team feeding their nostalgia bug and then selling the solution for a problem that didn't exist (and we didn't need).
There's more but that's enough.
-Polaris
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:56AM
#809
|
|
|
That's just natural entropy, Polaris.
Also, the Essentials Fighter and Rogue spinoffs aren't a "fix" to anything, and not applicable here..
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Oct 01, 2010 - 7:57AM
#810
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
Eventually you have an unweildly kludge that has to be blown up and done over.
I'd argue this is inevitable whether you errata or not, and as such isn't really grounds for making a decision either way.
True! All games have a finite effective lifespan as an active supported game. However, the more you do it and the more you patch, the faster it happens.
-Polaris
|
|
|
