poll on Expertise...Forked Thread: Expertise justification?

[DarkMagician]

He would need to roll a 16 or higher (included is +2 weapon prof and a +6 weapon)

dude hitting on 16+ is not fun. We are the heros of the story 25% hit sucks. What we really neeed is to errata the basic mth of the game.

3/4 level as bounus instead of half level

1 =0
2 =1
3 =2
4 =3
5 =3
6 =4
7 =5
8 =6
9 =6
10=7
11=8
12=9
13=9
14=10
15=11

16=12
17=12
18=13
19=14
20=15
21=15
22=16
23=17
24=18
25=18
26=19
27=20
28=21
29=21
30=22

same as theif progression of BaB in 3e...it makes the whole thing work. Add it to defs too and the whole game works out perfect

 

[keterys]

I'm not sure this poll really actually tells us anything useful. After all, it's asking a couple different questions:
1) Is there a disparity in the math that the feats address?
2) Do you want _some source_ of extra to hit for characters, be it through errata or this feat?
3) Do you think this feat is desirable for your characters to have
4) Do you think this feat should go away?
5) Do you think the feat is balanced?

Fwiw, as far as I can tell from what wotc has said, the actions they've taken in the MM2 and DMG2, and the spreadsheets have shown...
1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) I can't imagine not having it on all of my characters, though not necessarily at very low level when I want feats more directly important to the concept of the character.
4) I think the feat should go away, though only if there's some other fix in place.
5) It is factually imbalanced compared to all other feats once you hit 15th level. It's just uncomfortably imbalanced compared to most other feats (Nimble Blade, Weapon Focus, Backstabber, etc) before that.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm not sure this poll really actually tells us anything useful. After all, it's asking a couple different questions:
1) Is there a disparity in the math that the feats address?
2) Do you want _some source_ of extra to hit for characters, be it through errata or this feat?
3) Do you think this feat is desirable for your characters to have
4) Do you think this feat should go away?
5) Do you think the feat is balanced?

Fwiw, as far as I can tell from what wotc has said, the actions they've taken in the MM2 and DMG2, and the spreadsheets have shown...
1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) I can't imagine not having it on all of my characters, though not necessarily at very low level when I want feats more directly important to the concept of the character.
4) I think the feat should go away, though only if there's some other fix in place.
5) It is factually imbalanced compared to all other feats once you hit 15th level. It's just uncomfortably imbalanced compared to most other feats (Nimble Blade, Weapon Focus, Backstabber, etc) before that.

This.

All of this. Every single word.

 

[Fundin Strongarm]

This.

All of this. Every single word.

Agreed. For 4. my home fix is free +1 at Paragon and +2 at Epic on all attack rolls and no Expertise Feat.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yes, but you are ignoring all bonuses form allies, which is a bi part of 4E.

I jsut do not see it as that bleak. Characters should not be hitting on 5s and 6s regularly.

No, they should not hit on 5s or 6s. How exactly does +3 to hit transform a 16 or higher (on a same level foe, higher than that on higher level foes) into a 5 or 6?

And, please tell us which other powers and feats give bonuses from allies for the entire encounter.

This is the important thing. Sure, an ally might give a PC +2 or even more for a single attack or a single round.

But where are these synergies of powers that allow for the math delta of 4 (the delta at level 30) for an entire encounter?

For the most part (Bless being a +1 exception and it doesn't stack with the majority of the rest of buff powers), they don't exist.

Trust me. This has been debated long and hard. We are not ignoring the other bonuses. We just see them as not adding up for 20 round encounters. Add them all up and they come nowhere near the +4 per PC for 5 level 30 PCs * 20 rounds * 5 encounters per day or a grand total of +2000 combined over a day of encounters.


Yes, there are some "power gamer" optimizations like the one RangerWicket pointed out of "the bard has vicious mockery and psychic lock and an ability that lets him roll twice for every attack" (in this case, a debuff trick). No doubt about it. There are combos like this that can exist if a DM is not smart enough to disallow them. WotC made a mistake. No PC should be able to roll two attack rolls every single attack in an encounter. That's stronger than Expertise right off the bat (two attack rolls is +3.325 to hit on average) at Paragon level (i.e. level 12 in this case) without taking any other bonuses into account. When combined with mega-debuffing, it gets nuts real quick. If people think Expertise is bad with +3 at level 25, how bad is +3.325 at level 12 (and for 2 PCs)? The vast majority of PCs do not have anywhere near this level of bonus ability.

 

[keterys]

For what it's worth, it would be possible to address a potential slowdown at higher levels by reducing hit points or increasing damage, rather than increasing hit bonus.

For example, if every character dealt an ability score damage when they missed (like Hammer Rhythm) and monsters lost 2*(1+level) hp. The lowered number of rounds would also allow bonuses to attack and penalties to defense to exist for a greater percentage of the rounds of combat.

 

[Elric]

Yes, there are some "power gamer" optimizations like the one RangerWicket pointed out of "the bard has vicious mockery and psychic lock and an ability that lets him roll twice for every attack" (in this case, a debuff trick). No doubt about it. There are combos like this that can exist if a DM is not smart enough to disallow them. WotC made a mistake. No PC should be able to roll two attack rolls every single attack in an encounter. That's stronger than Expertise right off the bat (two attack rolls is +3.325 to hit on average) at Paragon level (i.e. level 12 in this case) without taking any other bonuses into account. When combined with mega-debuffing, it gets nuts real quick. If people think Expertise is bad with +3 at level 25, how bad is +3.325 at level 12 (and for 2 PCs)? The vast majority of PCs do not have anywhere near this level of bonus ability.

The "roll twice" ability in question is the level 12 (Daily) power of the Twiceborn Leader (MP, Warlord) Paragon Path. It's an incredible ability, but it's a daily power, not something that's always active. Besides that ability, Twiceborn Leader is a weak Paragon Path.

I also agree with everything keterys said about Expertise. His 5 questions and answers are a very throrough take on the issue.

 

[Cadfan]

I selected "needed at heroic tier," even though I'm not comfortable with the word "needed." "Needed" is very subjective, particularly at the point where its just a +1 to hit. Once its a +3 to hit, though, I just get frustrated listening to people try to tell me it isn't necessary. If you're hitting about half the time, an additional +3 to hit is a 30% increase in your round by round damage. That's not optional, or at least if everyone in the group has it except you, you will be able to visibly see the results at the game table.

I hate the feat for two reasons.

First, I hate that I spend so many of my feats these days on boring stuff. This happened in 3e as well, and I hoped it wouldn't happen in 4e, but it did. Until paragon tier your feat choices for certain classes can be pretty locked up. Our group's Avenger, for example, is spending his feats as follows (though not in this order): Toughness, Weapon Expertise, Weapon Focus, Leather Armor Proficiency, Armor of Faith, Superior Weapon Proficiency. Rogues are in a similar position, as are Rangers. In our group, without my prompting, it has become a matter of rote procedure to take Expertise and Toughness at the very least.

I think this makes the game less fun. I feel like I'll get a lot more enjoyment out of a feat like Long Jumper or Skill Training: Stealth than I do out of Expertise. But I understand math and understand to hit bonuses and know that if I do not take it then behind the scenes my lower to hit bonus will be reducing the fun I get from my character.

The second reason I hate Expertise is because it widens the gap between experienced and inexperienced players. There's already a gap, and a certain amount of gap is inevitable, but this is a situation where the gap can be clearly identified. To give you an example from my game, we have a Warden and a Paladin. Both players started the game completely new, and both created their own characters, but through different processes. The Warden was created at level 1, and leveled up organically, meaning that decisions made at 4 and 5 were made with a degree of experience. The Paladin was created at level 5 by a new player joining the game. The Warden, as a result, Greatspear (+3 proficiency superior weapon) while the Paladin has a Glaive. The Warden has Expertise while the Paladin does not. And for the final nail in the coffin, the Warden has a +2 weapon while the Paladin, who chose her weapon because she felt it was cool, has a +1 weapon with a neat effect.

This means that there's a difference of +3 between the two character's attack bonuses. This was noticed in the very first game session with both characters, not through examination of the numbers, but through actual combat outcomes.

I don't like that sort of thing.

 

[KarinsDad]

The "roll twice" ability in question is the level 12 (Daily) power of the Twiceborn Leader (MP, Warlord) Paragon Path. It's an incredible ability, but it's a daily power, not something that's always active. Besides that ability, Twiceborn Leader is a weak Paragon Path.

If encounters tended to be four n+3 encounters per day, then yes, no big deal. One boss fight in four would have this big ability.

But, encounters often tend to be three n to n+1 encounters and one n+3 or n+4 encounter (give or take, YMMV based on DM). In those situations, which are probably fairly typical, it's a lot more useful and potent ability. It's not really needed in the weaker encounters and more or less turns the tide drastically in the tough encounter, seriously increasing the chances of Encounter and Daily powers to hit for two PCs.


Also, effectively doubling the number of Inspiring Words is not exactly weaksauce.

 

[Elric]

The second reason I hate Expertise is because it widens the gap between experienced and inexperienced players.

This is also true. Expertise has the further problems that it helps some builds more than others. Builds that don't benefit as much from Expertise (compared to a flat to-hit bonus in the rules) include: a Cleric with weapon and implement powers, a Dragonborn, or a ranger who wants to use Bows and a melee weapon. It generally encourages characters to be more one-track.

If encounters tended to be four n+3 encounters per day, then yes, no big deal. One boss fight in four would have this big ability.

But, encounters often tend to be three n to n+1 encounters and one n+3 or n+4 encounter (give or take, YMMV based on DM). In those situations, which are probably fairly typical, it's a lot more useful and potent ability. It's not really needed in the weaker encounters and more or less turns the tide drastically in the tough encounter, seriously increasing the chances of Encounter and Daily powers to hit for two PCs.

That ability is clearly above the power level for a level 12 ability. It's probably better than Perfect Front, the level 29 Warlord Daily power (even for Taclords who get the most out of Perfect Front). However, what you're describing is a problem with encounter design common to a lot of the strong daily powers.

Also, effectively doubling the number of Inspiring Words is not exactly weaksauce.

I didn't say every ability of the Paragon Path was weak.