Proposal: Replace Expertise Related House Rule with Feat Slot

renau1g · Mar 18, 2010

yup, that's why I voted against Option B. I'm still leaning towards yes on A as it's not a big divergence from the rationale for including the free feat in the first place.

garyh · Mar 19, 2010

I've always seen the L4W 25 point buy more as "You have no idea what party you'll be in and what your DM will be like, so here's a small boost to make up for not be able to make a cohesive party geared for your DM's style like you would in a normal tabletop game" insurance.

I'm leaning in favor of an unrestricted free feat at level 5 and allowing expertise-style feats to be taken whenever. I feel a free feat at level 1 would dilute some of the main draw of playing a human.

elecgraystone · Mar 19, 2010

renau1g said:
Adding the +1 to hit at the low levels is problematic enough, that's why I liked the +1 at 5th/15th/25th, not at 1st. As I said elec, there's a smaller portion who would rather use their feats for other purposes, but like the Iron Armbands of Power/Bracers of Archery, this flavorless feat is the best bang for your buck for most PC's.

Well maybe they do have more 'bang, but most of my non-themed characters (IE fire mage) don't have these kind of feats until late heroic or paragon. I know if we change this to a free feat, Ts'iri's 5th level one wouldn't be an expertise feat. Maybe I'm just wierd.

Let me ask this. Since several people have issues with expertise type feats at lower levels(1st-4th), what if we added a requirement to them of 5th level? That way the first time you could pick them would be 5th when you got your free feat slot. Would that compromise work for you guys? It'd make me happy that I could pick a feat that fits my character and it'd make you guys happy because everyone had to pick 'flavorful' feats from 1st-4th.

renau1g · Mar 19, 2010

This I'd be happier with. It lets players play the first few levels and get a feel for their PC. Maybe they would rather take something besides expertise at 5th if they're happy with their to hit ratio (like the +11 vs ref cunning sneak mentioned earlier, who hits most monsters at 1st on a 3 or up)

evilbob · Mar 19, 2010

Hilariously, I'd be less in favor of that option.

Seriously: now that I realize expertise feats work at level 1 (how did I miss that?!?) just about every single character I make from now on will have that feat at level 1. It's too good. Not having it at level 1 now feels like you're being punished / missing out.

Just to be clear: I am firmly in the "call it a feat tax" camp; I extremely dislike how WotC decided to fix their "math problem". I am always in favor of the free +1 - or, since those feats are now firmly ingrained, maybe a free expertise feat - and it only makes sense that you could take it at level 1.

Guys, people taking expertise feats leading to "less diverse characters" is just a fact. It's not a problem that is solved by giving a new feat: the problem is the expertise feats. Regardless of your character, you will be more effective in battle with one of those feats. This issue will be the exact same no matter how you give out feats: people will still gravitate toward something that is always better than any other option. Check out any melee character's arm slot, for example.

If you are looking for less cheese and more diversity, or if in general the whole "what feat can we take" makes you squeamish, then I would suggest an Option C: everyone gets a +1 feat bonus to all attacks at level 1, and everyone qualifies (at level 2, except humans qualify at level 1) for any feat for which an expertise feat is required. That is basically solving the problem the same way we solved the problem before: give the effect for free and don't call it a feat.

Oh and for those who say getting a free feat at level 1 diminishes being human: I disagree completely. Humans still get ANOTHER feat. That's still a great racial trait!

covaithe · Mar 19, 2010

I feel slightly dirty for doing this, but I'm having trouble keeping it all straight.

Does this seem fairly accurate?

By "power creep" I mean, does the option allow for characters more powerful than standard characters by the normal, unmodified rules.

Based on this, I'm kind of leaning towards line 10: give a free feat at level 5 that must be an expertise feat, and ban expertise feats before level 5.

renau1g · Mar 19, 2010

evilbob said:
Guys, people taking expertise feats leading to "less diverse characters" is just a fact. It's not a problem that is solved by giving a new feat: the problem is the expertise feats. Regardless of your character, you will be more effective in battle with one of those feats. This issue will be the exact same no matter how you give out feats: people will still gravitate toward something that is always better than any other option. Check out any melee character's arm slot, for example.

Hence why we instituted the free 5th level bonus in the first place as PbP will likely spend most of it's lifetime around the heroic tier.

If that's the case though I expect every rogue & sorcerer to take daggermaster as it's substantially better than any PP for either class. The 18-20 crit on your multi-attacking power is a no-brainer. Every fighter and ranger should be Pit fighters (or possibly Stormwardens).

evilbob · Mar 19, 2010

No, r1, I think that's a different situation. PP are substantially different; it is harder to call those "definitely" better than any other PP, because they encompass a wide range of powers and abilities, and they mesh with all different types of builds differently.

By contrast, the expertise feats are much more narrow in scope, which is why they are able to be simply better. Yes: there will be character builds that don't take those feats at level 1 because they are trying real hard to get to something else. But taking those feats at some point is still a no-brainer.

As stated above, I would be against banning expertise feats until level 5 because that effectively means that level 1-4 characters have -1 to hit. I also disagree with some of the characterizations in that spreadsheet.

For example: like I said, "penalize humans" is completely untrue for any option. If all starting characters got 5 feats and humans got 6, that's STILL a great racial trait. And "more diverse characters" is a strawman: as long as expertise feats exist, that's not going to be solved by giving more feats.

Velmont · Mar 19, 2010

After reading everyone argument, I must tell I think the best option would be:

Free feat at level 5 (human will still get their advantage)
Expertise-style feat accessible at level 5 and more. (Could be 1 as RAW, but I favor 5)

covaithe · Mar 19, 2010

evilbob said:
As stated above, I would be against banning expertise feats until level 5 because that effectively means that level 1-4 characters have -1 to hit. I also disagree with some of the characterizations in that spreadsheet.

Right now, every PC in L4W, with a small handful of exceptions who have reached level 5, has that "-1 to hit". We seem to be doing okay. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that most L4W PCs are well ahead of WotC's expected power curve, despite not being allowed +1 from expertise.