D&D 4th Edition Proposal: Replace Expertise Related House Rule with Feat Slot




+ Log in or register to post
Results 1 to 10 of 95

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Proposal: Replace Expertise Related House Rule with Feat Slot

    As promised, it's the 16th so it's time to propose this. It came up as a counter-prososal to changing our houserule into a feat bonus. To see that debate the link is below.

    http://www.enworld.org/forum/living-...ouse-rule.html

    The proposal is a simple one. Instead of the current +1 to all attacks at 5th, we give characters a free slot that they must use on an expertise type feat. Examples are Versatile Expertise and Draconic Spellcaster. Basically any feat that gives a scaling feat bonus to attacks.

    The reason I think this would be the best way to deal with the new errata is that this keeps us as close to the original game as possible, as opposed to changing the universal bonus to a feat bonus that makes many feats useless. It preserves the expertise feats as is and we've already seen a feat that requires one of the feats, Weapon Master. There is also a paragon path that requires one of these feats, Ninefold Master. Who knows what will come next that has one of these feats as a requirement.

    EDIT: Option B. Instead of restricting the feat slot to just expertise feats, allow any feat.

    This allows players to pick flavor feats or other feats important to their character if they wish. Lets face it, a dagger weilding clever sneak (+4 dagger, +5 from 20 dex, +2 hidden = +11 at first vs ref) doesn't need an extra +1 to hit .
    Last edited by elecgraystone; Thursday, 18th March, 2010 at 06:36 AM.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)



    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Orange, CA
    Posts
    1,537

    Ignore Kalidrev
    As I said before, I like this. I am, however, going to hold off on my vote for a day or two while other judges give their input.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)

    evilbob's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,484

    Ignore evilbob
    Quote Originally Posted by elecgraystone View Post
    ...we've already seen a feat that requires one of the feats, Weapon Master. There is also a paragon path that requires one of these feats, Ninefold Master.
    I have to admit, none of the other arguments presented really sway me, but this one point is enough to completely change my opinion on this to be in favor of the proposal. If these feats are triggers for other stuff, it seems easier to allow an extra feat rather than having to house rule than prereqs are already met for a growing number of features.

    Frankly, it will also make CB files slightly easier to work with as well.

  4. #4
    Community Supporter COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    covaithe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    4,971

    Ignore covaithe
    Would we also disallow that collection of feats at other levels? Would it be legal to take Draconic Spellcaster at level 1? If so, what happens at level 5?

    (I think the answer to these questions is fairly obvious, but I want it spelled out in the proposal.)
    My games

    Check out Living 4th Edition, a community-run 4e D&D living world open to all. Now open for character and adventure submissions!

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)

    Dunamin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,149

    Ignore Dunamin
    I haven't been following the discussion more than very casually, but I would very much like some more specificity on what is encompassed by "expertise type" feats. As is, the proposal seems alright but just slightly too vague.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)



    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Orange, CA
    Posts
    1,537

    Ignore Kalidrev
    Personally, I have never seen a problem with being able to take the Expertise feats BEFORE level 5, in fact, in all of my RL games I tended to do so at 1st or 2nd level. I would suggest that although we give it away for free at 5th level, players are ALLOWED to take it earlier if they wish. If they do so, I would suggest that the feat at 5th level is available to anything they meet the prereq's for. I see no need to disallow a feat from availability simply because we're giving it away at a later period of time. I don't feel this would unbalance anything, since they would be giving up some other feat's utility/bonus to damage/etc for a 5% increase in accuracy before level 11. A fair trade I would think. This would also keep the spirit of the proposal, since the intention is to correct a math mistake, which this will do either way.

  7. #7
    I think the problem would be that 75-80% of the 1st/2nd level PC's here would have experise as +1 to hit is better than any other feat out there for most builds. Having such a flavourless feat and lack of diversity amongst the population is a bit disappointing. I'm leaning towards yes on the vote, but want to see elec's response to covaithe.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by covaithe View Post
    Would we also disallow that collection of feats at other levels?.
    Why? The 5th level feat was to fix a math error. If someone wants extra's then why not? They don't stack.

    Quote Originally Posted by covaithe View Post
    Would it be legal to take Draconic Spellcaster at level 1?
    Sure would.

    Quote Originally Posted by covaithe View Post
    If so, what happens at level 5?
    They can pick a second expertise feat or retrain Draconic Spellcaster to another feat and pick Draconic Spellcaster as their free one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin
    what is encompassed by "expertise type" feats.
    I thought I made that fairly clear in my first post. To quote myself 'Basically any feat that gives a scaling feat bonus to attacks'.

    Quote Originally Posted by renau1g
    I think the problem would be that 75-80% of the 1st/2nd level PC's here would have experise as +1 to hit is better than any other feat out there for most builds.
    As much as all of my characters would LOVE to take one of these feats, I do not have enough feats avalible to take one so I'd be in the 20-25% that wouldn't have them. I like to play strange and slightly off the wall characters and often NEED a bunch of feats to pull off what I want my character to do. Personally a foul mouthed flaming eye familiar was needed more than a +1 to hit, even though I DO miss way too often.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalidrev
    I would suggest that the feat at 5th level is available to anything they meet the prereq's for.
    To be honest, I'd rather have this myself. As I said to renau1g, my characters tend to be feat intensive so being able to get any extra feat at 5th would be a BIG help.

    Seeing that there are two people that also wouldn't mind an extra unrestricted feat slot slot, I think I'll add that to the proposal as an option B.

  9. #9
    Community Supporter COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    covaithe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    4,971

    Ignore covaithe
    Simply giving an unrestricted bonus feat at 5th level is certainly easier to keep track of than other alternatives presented so far.

    My only objection, really more of a nit-pick than anything else, is that this makes PCs more powerful from 1 to 4. L4W PCs are already slightly ahead of the power curve, just from our point buy. If people start taking feats with +1 to hit at level 1, well, us DMs are just gonna have to crank up the challenge level one more notch to compensate.

    Ok, maybe it was more of a warning than a nit-pick.
    My games

    Check out Living 4th Edition, a community-run 4e D&D living world open to all. Now open for character and adventure submissions!

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)

    evilbob's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,484

    Ignore evilbob
    Yeah, I think that's almost a separate issue: allowing a free feat slot at level 5 seems ok because of what I said above. Allowing a free feat slot at level 1 is problematic.

    For one thing, there's nothing stopping someone from taking a "free" feat at level 1 and then retraining it to something else when they can get the more advantageous expertise feat.

    I'd be in favor of "free expertise-style feat at level 5" but not more than that.

+ Log in or register to post

Similar Threads

  1. Proposal: Alter Expertise Related House Rule
    By Oni in forum Living 4th Edition
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: Thursday, 11th March, 2010, 04:45 AM
  2. Proposal: Repeal the house rule on Icy Sweep
    By JoeNotCharles in forum Living 4th Edition
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Saturday, 15th August, 2009, 06:53 AM
  3. Small House Rule to Combat Expertise
    By Stalker0 in forum D&D and Pathfinder
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Wednesday, 30th November, 2005, 11:59 AM
  4. Knowledge skills house rule - Planescape related
    By HeavyG in forum D&D and Pathfinder
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Sunday, 10th October, 2004, 07:30 PM
  5. House rule to Replace the flat DC15 for massive damage
    By IceBear in forum D&D and Pathfinder
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Friday, 13th December, 2002, 09:32 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
  •