Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living 4th Edition
Proposal: Replace Expertise Related House Rule with Feat Slot
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TwoHeadsBarking" data-source="post: 5129781" data-attributes="member: 82251"><p>Who doesn't want to hit on a 2? Seriously though, I don't feel like I'm taking anything away from people. Before the proposal, at level 5 you got a +1 to hit. If #10 passes, then after the proposal, at level 5 you will get a +1 to hit with the majority of your attacks.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Yes. I can't deny that I am voting to give people a feat. I'd rather not. I'd rather have #4 win, with some modifications. I liked the old house rule, but I see that it's going to cause problems down the line. So I voted for the choice that a) is most like what we have right now, and b) has a chance of passing. </p><p> </p><p> I don't vote for third parties in politics either <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" />.</p><p> </p><p> By the way, personal experiences mean very little to me with regards to probability. For example, I know of at least three times when Haruka has missed an attack by exactly 1, and two of those were with encounter powers (yes, I finally missed with Vampiric Embrace. Hurray for Sacrifice to Caiphon). So if I were using that as my only sample, I would say that a +1 to hit would in fact be extremely useful. However, I still believe that IC is random, and that some people are rather unlucky. If you believe IC is out to get you, why not use a different roller?</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> The downside is that it doesn't solve the problem as I see it. By the time you hit level 5, you've already chosen a few feats. Expertise isn't going to ruin diversity at that point. That being said, I wouldn't take Expertise at level 5. If given a choice, I wouldn't take it until it jumps to a +2 to hit, even though my "empirical evidence" shows that +1 to hit would be super good. I'd rather have a familiar, or Bravo, or the d8 curse feat.</p><p></p><p>But the problem, in my view, isn't that characters don't get enough feats. It's the attacks not properly scaling with defenses issue. I think #10 solves it better than #6. I think #6 also solves the issue, don't get me wrong. I just like #10 more. As a judge. As a player, I'd prefer the restriction-less feat.</p><p></p><p>Argh, I feel like I'm splitting hairs for no reason. They both solve the problem, what does it matter. <span style="color: teal">Yes</span> to #6. And #10. Now #6 is winning. Yay #6.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TwoHeadsBarking, post: 5129781, member: 82251"] Who doesn't want to hit on a 2? Seriously though, I don't feel like I'm taking anything away from people. Before the proposal, at level 5 you got a +1 to hit. If #10 passes, then after the proposal, at level 5 you will get a +1 to hit with the majority of your attacks. Yes. I can't deny that I am voting to give people a feat. I'd rather not. I'd rather have #4 win, with some modifications. I liked the old house rule, but I see that it's going to cause problems down the line. So I voted for the choice that a) is most like what we have right now, and b) has a chance of passing. I don't vote for third parties in politics either :p. By the way, personal experiences mean very little to me with regards to probability. For example, I know of at least three times when Haruka has missed an attack by exactly 1, and two of those were with encounter powers (yes, I finally missed with Vampiric Embrace. Hurray for Sacrifice to Caiphon). So if I were using that as my only sample, I would say that a +1 to hit would in fact be extremely useful. However, I still believe that IC is random, and that some people are rather unlucky. If you believe IC is out to get you, why not use a different roller? The downside is that it doesn't solve the problem as I see it. By the time you hit level 5, you've already chosen a few feats. Expertise isn't going to ruin diversity at that point. That being said, I wouldn't take Expertise at level 5. If given a choice, I wouldn't take it until it jumps to a +2 to hit, even though my "empirical evidence" shows that +1 to hit would be super good. I'd rather have a familiar, or Bravo, or the d8 curse feat. But the problem, in my view, isn't that characters don't get enough feats. It's the attacks not properly scaling with defenses issue. I think #10 solves it better than #6. I think #6 also solves the issue, don't get me wrong. I just like #10 more. As a judge. As a player, I'd prefer the restriction-less feat. Argh, I feel like I'm splitting hairs for no reason. They both solve the problem, what does it matter. [COLOR=teal]Yes[/COLOR] to #6. And #10. Now #6 is winning. Yay #6. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living 4th Edition
Proposal: Replace Expertise Related House Rule with Feat Slot
Top