LEB Discussion Thread '10 - Page 101





Closed Thread
Page 101 of 101 FirstFirst ... 51919293949596979899100101
Results 1,001 to 1,010 of 1010
  1. #1001
    Registered User
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)

    evilbob's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,671
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore evilbob
    KD, I don't understand your logic or your example (+1 to hit > +3 damage), but I think I might be getting your point...

    If we allowed expertise feats (currently forbidden), changed the +1/2/3 house rule bonus to a feat bonus (currently untyped), then people could take the expertise feats if they wanted to get the extra features - they just wouldn't stack. It's effectively the same as allowing the feats with no house rule, but it fixes the problem with people who have multiple weapons/implements/attacks (since they get the +1 feat bonus to everything), AND it doesn't force anyone to take the feats since they'll get the bonus anyway.

    Of all solutions, I hate this the least!

    The only sticky point is level 4. Currently, I'm pretty sure 100% of PCs made on LEB start at level 4. If we changed the house rules to exactly what I said above, someone could take an expertise feat before level 5 and get the +1 bonus for a single level before the auto-rule kicked in. Obviously this doesn't bother me (as stated above), but it might make others raise an eyebrow.

 

  • #1002
    Registered User
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)

    evilbob's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,671
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore evilbob
    Quote Originally Posted by stonegod View Post
    Right now, as written, only the PH2 Expertise feats are forbidden.
    Wow, I did not get that at all from the house rules; I read that all expertise feats are forbidden. It doesn't make much sense any other way, since they are spread out over multiple books. Anyway, it seems like the whole issue could stand some clarification.

  • #1003
    Registered User
    Lama (Lvl 13)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    11,550
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore KarinsDad
    Quote Originally Posted by evilbob View Post
    KD, I don't understand your logic or your example (+1 to hit > +3 damage), but I think I might be getting your point...

    If we allowed expertise feats (currently forbidden), changed the +1/2/3 house rule bonus to a feat bonus (currently untyped), then people could take the expertise feats if they wanted to get the extra features - they just wouldn't stack.
    Actually, I was unaware that the LEB house rule wasn't a feat bonus.

    I like it the way it is because feats like Draconic Spellcaster currently stack with the LEB house rule.

    I wouldn't want to change that. I don't want to throw out a bunch of "feat bonus" feats that currently work.

    So, the only two solutions I see are:

    1) Change the LEB rule from "untyped bonus" to "house rule bonus" and change the new Expertise feats from "feat bonus" to "house rule bonus".

    That way, people can take the new feats, but they will only get the +1 bonus to hit on a few specific levels. This might make them a "must take feat" at level 11, but we really don't have that many PCs at that level yet and we can revisit the issue if it becomes a problem.

    2) Disallow any of the Expertise feats. Do we really need to have these cool new feats from the Esentials line, or can we throw them out because they will be unbalanced, especially as PCs start getting up to level 11 and they become a must take feat.

    I am leaning towards #2. We have thousands of feats, do we really need a few extra ones here in LEB that are more or less must have at level 11 because they are so potent? I'm opposed to adding a flat +1 bonus to hit with these feats. That's worse.
    The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.

  • #1004
    Registered User
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)

    Velmont's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Montreal, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    14,813
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Velmont
    Personally, I would just like to have the LEB bonus to be a feta bonus. After that, if you still want the other effect from an expertise feat, you can always take it. I don't mind those feat become underpowered. Not every feat are equal and that's fine, but I just don't like the idea to see feat coming and growing in power.
    Characters
    Jarel-karn - Genasi Swordmage 12 [L4W]
    Gloom - Longtooth Shifter Paladin 11 [L4W]
    Eloan - Eladrin Warlord 7 [L4W]
    River - Longtooth Shifter Cleric 11 [LEB]
    Malehan - Elf Avenger 8 [LEB]
    Valeria - Human Witch 1

    "Experience is that great thing that allow you to see a mistake when you do it again."

  • #1005
    Registered User
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)



    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    South America
    Posts
    694
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Otakkun
    If I had a vote, I'd vote for allowing all expertise feats and making the LEB bonus a feat bonus as well.

    Seems easier to understand.
    L4W: Shrakk| L4W: Ianward Milner| LEB: Garrick d'Orien| LEB: Kaelan| LFP: Xan Millstone

  • #1006
    Registered User
    Lama (Lvl 13)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    11,550
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore KarinsDad
    Quote Originally Posted by Velmont View Post
    Personally, I would just like to have the LEB bonus to be a feta bonus. After that, if you still want the other effect from an expertise feat, you can always take it. I don't mind those feat become underpowered. Not every feat are equal and that's fine, but I just don't like the idea to see feat coming and growing in power.
    The problem with doing this is that you blow away a lot of feats that are currently legitimate in LEB such as Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, Diabolic Soul, etc.

    I think we should consider the Expertise capability in LEB to be a math fix and we should consider not allowing any of the Expertise feats, or minimally, not allowing the +1/+2/+3 of any of the Expertise feats, regardless of source.
    The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.

  • #1007
    Registered User
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)

    evilbob's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,671
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore evilbob
    That makes less sense to me because Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, Diabolic Soul, AND all the expertise feats are currently all feat bonuses.

    The game is already set up to make those feats you list all the same bonus as the expertise feats: they don't stack. Your suggestion actually undoes this to make a new special kind of feat out of all those feats. If that's what you're interested in, I'd say create a proposal to change Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, and Diabolic Soul to a different, stackable bonus type. That seems like a completely different argument.

    Throwing out all the new expertise feats that also give rider effects seems extreme to me, especially since some people have already expressed that they would take the feats just for the rider effects - even without gaining a +to hit from them.


    Also, just to clarify: the way the rules are written right now, you COULD take a new expertise feat from the essentials book AND get a +1/2/3 untyped bonus at level 5/15/25. Is that something that people like or dislike?

  • #1008
    Registered User
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)

    Velmont's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Montreal, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    14,813
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Velmont
    If Draconic Spellcaster (and other such feat) is not stackable with Expertise feat, I don't see why it should be stackable with the free LEB bonus. Stacking, is, in my opinion, just making the same problem that was before the Expertise feat appear, but in favor of the player.

    Anyway, I think there will be no solution that won't affect the efficiency of some feat.

    To answer EB, no the should NOT stack. As I said, it would bring back the problem, but this time, in favor of the player. Don't forget one thing, we are trying to find the most useful and elegant way to fix a math problem that D&D have introduce and have solve with a penalizing and not elegant way.
    Characters
    Jarel-karn - Genasi Swordmage 12 [L4W]
    Gloom - Longtooth Shifter Paladin 11 [L4W]
    Eloan - Eladrin Warlord 7 [L4W]
    River - Longtooth Shifter Cleric 11 [LEB]
    Malehan - Elf Avenger 8 [LEB]
    Valeria - Human Witch 1

    "Experience is that great thing that allow you to see a mistake when you do it again."

  • #1009
    Registered User
    Lama (Lvl 13)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    11,550
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore KarinsDad
    Quote Originally Posted by evilbob View Post
    That makes less sense to me because Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, Diabolic Soul, AND all the expertise feats are currently all feat bonuses.

    The game is already set up to make those feats you list all the same bonus as the expertise feats: they don't stack. Your suggestion actually undoes this to make a new special kind of feat out of all those feats. If that's what you're interested in, I'd say create a proposal to change Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, and Diabolic Soul to a different, stackable bonus type. That seems like a completely different argument.
    The core game is already set up that these 3 feats are viable. They don't stack with Expertise, but people are not required to take Expertise.

    The LEB game is already set up that these 3 feats are totally viable.

    By changing the LEB bonuses to attack rolls (which are a patch to the rules) to a feat bonus, you make these 3 (and several other) feats non-viable.

    My idea here is: Don't negate these feats in an effort to add in the new, sexier feats which are stronger than any of these feats.


    Just because the designers at WotC screwed up by making the math patch a bunch of feats instead of just fixing the darn game doesn't mean that we should do that here at LEB as well.

    By making the LEB house rule a non-feat bonus, the judges already decided to not screw it up like WotC did. They put the patch into the rules where it belongs, not into feats. By making the house rule a feat bonus, you negate a lot of conditional feats that were nice, but not overpowered like the new Essential feats are.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilbob View Post
    Throwing out all the new expertise feats that also give rider effects seems extreme to me, especially since some people have already expressed that they would take the feats just for the rider effects - even without gaining a +to hit from them.
    It's not excessive. Every single one of these new Expertise feats is a WotC bandaid for another Wotc bandaid (the original Expertise feats).

    We should throw out the +1/+2/+3 part of them since LEB already hands that out.

    That way, they are just feats with a specific effect. Not great, but not terrible either.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilbob View Post
    Also, just to clarify: the way the rules are written right now, you COULD take a new expertise feat from the essentials book AND get a +1/2/3 untyped bonus at level 5/15/25. Is that something that people like or dislike?
    Not until October 21 you cannot.


    And, we obviously do not want this, so we do need a house rule here.

    But throwing out the Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, and Diabolic Soul feats is questionable. We shouldn't change the LEB house rule to do that. Those feats are conditional bonuses already (although the GP one is totally under the control of the player).


    Explain to me why the new Essential feats should trump these and other feats. I don't think they should. They are a hack due to the fact that the last hack was so lame. These feats are already limiting. You have to be a Gnome and use illusion powers. You have to be a Dragonborn, etc. Not everyone can take them and the PCs that do take them, have a limit of some sort or other to their utillity. Unlike the new sexier feats that everyone will want to take.

    But if we change the house rule to a feat bonus, we throw a lot of other weaker limited feats out the door completely, just to put in a math fix that we already have in the house rules. The only problem here is the new sexier Essential feats AFAIKT, not the old ones.
    The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.

  • #1010
    Spawn of Khyber/LEB Judge
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)

    stonegod's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Starkville, MS
    Posts
    12,535
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Blog Entries
    10

    Ignore stonegod
    We're over our 1000 post limit, so I'm starting a new thread. Please continue discuss there.
    Last edited by stonegod; Friday, 8th October, 2010 at 09:00 PM.
    stonegod -- LEB judge and spawn of Khyber since 2005 (Blog)

    My many characters | LEB Games | EtCR |Rise of a Demon Prince Story Hour

    "You be evil stonegod" -- Bront

  • Closed Thread
    Page 101 of 101 FirstFirst ... 51919293949596979899100101

    Similar Threads

    1. Discussion - General Discussion Thread 2010-11
      By Living Enworld Judge in forum Living EN World
      Replies: 205
      Last Post: Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 05:03 PM
    2. Discussion - General Discussion Thread '09
      By Phoenix8008 in forum Living EN World
      Replies: 336
      Last Post: Thursday, 13th January, 2011, 02:55 PM
    3. Discussion - General Discussion Thread '08
      By Bront in forum Living EN World
      Replies: 368
      Last Post: Sunday, 8th February, 2009, 05:14 PM
    4. Discussion - General Discussion Thread XI
      By Bront in forum Living EN World
      Replies: 761
      Last Post: Tuesday, 1st January, 2008, 09:55 PM
    5. (IR) The 3rd IR -Thread 2.5 (Holding thread -discussion and actions)
      By William Ronald in forum Playing the Game
      Replies: 41
      Last Post: Sunday, 7th April, 2002, 08:32 PM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •