D&D 5E What if Expertise were a simple +2?

Shiroiken · Oct 3, 2018

Remember, when you multi-class (especially at higher levels), there is the opportunity cost of what you could have gotten had you remained in your class. Most of the time, higher level class abilities are going to be much better than the first level class abilities (even though most classes are front loaded).

I have not yet seen this particular example occur, so I don't really know how much of a "problem" it really is. If you're especially worried about it, change rogue expertise to read "add 1+ 1/4 your Rouge level, rounded up." This mimics the standard proficiency, but limits the benefits for multi-classing.

Guest 6801328 · Oct 3, 2018

Ristamar said:
I find it interesting that a lot of people are bothered by Expertise supposedly "breaking" bounded accuracy at high levels, yet I don't see many complaints about huge ability score bonuses that are easily attainable at the lowest levels.

??

I'm certainly not bothered by Expertise, but I find your argument unpersuasive. At first level, with a 16 score, a Rogue has +6 in an Expertise skill. The highest to-hit you can get at 1st level is +5.

That goes up to +17 vs. +11 at high level.

Ristamar · Oct 3, 2018

Elfcrusher said:
??

I'm certainly not bothered by Expertise, but I find your argument unpersuasive. At first level, with a 16 score, a Rogue has +6 in an Expertise skill. The highest to-hit you can get at 1st level is +5.

That goes up to +17 vs. +11 at high level.

It's not about totals, it's about comparable bonuses. Even if you are limited to the 15 point cap in the standard point buy method, hitting 18 or 19 (+4 bonus) in a score by level 4 is fairly easy given racial bonuses, feats, and ASIs. If stats are rolled, it's not uncommon to hit 20 (+5 bonus) in your main stat by level 4.

The additional bonus from Expertise won't provide a +4 bonus until level 9, +5 at level 13, and finally surpassing most ability caps at level 17 with +6.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think it's unreasonable for a 13th level Expert to see a comparable benefit from Expertise relative to the phenomenal natural talent of a 4th level counterpart.

The Crimson Binome · Oct 3, 2018

Attack and damage rolls are things that you make a dozen times every combat. Any given skill check is something that you'll make maybe one or twice per session. If Expertise (or Proficiency) was much smaller, then it would be negligible compared to other factors. A bonus needs to be large enough that it will actually make a difference, over the course of typical usage, in order to justify that bonus existing.

The exceptions - Perception, and Athletics if you want it to be - are the only real places where Expertise seems overpowered. But if you make the bonus large enough that it will matter for skills that are used infrequently, then it becomes too large for skills that you use very frequently. This points to deeper problems within the skill system, beyond what can be addressed through Expertise.

Mistwell · Oct 3, 2018

Giltonio_Santos said:
It would make single-classed rogues worse just to avoid a multiclass dip that I have never seen in actual play. I don't think that's necessary or even worth it.

Yeah I've never once seen anyone dip rogue just for expertise. It's worrying about a problem that I don't think exists. I don't think anyone is actually bothered that rogues get double proficiency either.

Quartz said:
This is just theorising.

Thought so.

BookBarbarian · Oct 3, 2018

You know. I often encounter Automatic Success and Automatic Failure in scenarios that could call for a skill check, but I rarely, never actually, encounter Automatic Success and Automatic Failure when making attacks.

Perhaps that influences why one is scaling and the other static.

Mistwell · Oct 3, 2018

Elfcrusher said:
??

I'm certainly not bothered by Expertise, but I find your argument unpersuasive. At first level, with a 16 score, a Rogue has +6 in an Expertise skill. The highest to-hit you can get at 1st level is +5.

That goes up to +17 vs. +11 at high level.

I am curious about your math. 16 score is +3. Proficiency at first level is +2. Double that proficiency makes it another +2. 3+2+2= +7 at first level, not +6.

Quartz · Oct 3, 2018

Ristamar said:
The additional bonus from Expertise won't provide a +4 bonus until level 9, +5 at level 13, and finally surpassing most ability caps at level 17 with +6.

Except it's an additional - cumulative - bonus; the PC gets both. And a high level PC with levels in Rogue can get +20 to their roll: +14 from +6 Proficiency Bonus with a +1 PB Ioun stone and +6 from a 22 stat (+2 Book of whatever) versus +13 without levels in Rogue.

Again, look at the Fighter. Their Combat Styles don't improve; instead they get to choose another.

Satyrn · Oct 3, 2018

I don't know how often Expertise gets used to shore up a weakness (like taking Perception when your Wisdom is only 10), but that option would become less appealing to me if Expertise was just +2.

ad_hoc · Oct 3, 2018

Quartz said:
This is just theorising.

So it's a solution in search of a problem then?

D&D 5E What if Expertise were a simple +2?

Shiroiken

Legend

Guest 6801328

Guest

Ristamar

Adventurer

The Crimson Binome

Hero

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

BookBarbarian

Expert Long Rester

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

Quartz

Hero

Satyrn

First Post

ad_hoc

(they/them)

Similar Threads