Expertise justification?

[KarinsDad]

Right.

I'd like to know: Why create these feats?

The reasons I can think of:

• Original designers canned --> it's the economy, stupid!
• Designers have decided that giving bonuses to hit is no big deal, and that PH1 feats are too weak.
• Math hole discovered; original math is off and this is steath errata.
• Designers realized high level team-tactics don't compensate for poorer to hit.
• Powercreep to sell books.
• Hitting is fun, so more hitting is more fun! This game is about fun maximization!!
• The feats are a mistake.

I choose:

[*]Math hole discovered; original math is off and this is steath errata.

This is beyond obvious to me. This is WotC shouting:

Opps, sorry. Nevermind.

Two things convince me of this:

1) The plethora of discussion pre-4E on minimizing bonuses to hit so that power creep would not get to the levels that it did in 3E/3.5. During that timeframe, the designers were purposely talking about avoiding the mistakes of the past.

2) The stealth errata for masterwork armor. With AV and PHB II, there no longer is a heavy armor AC sag in Paragon levels. Stealth errata has been done before for 4E.

The math is straightforward (all aspects of it: monster and PC chances to hit, defenses, damage, number of actions, number of hit points, and riders/conditions) and the fact that many bonus to hit powers require that the first power hits before the bonus is given illustrates the math curves and the flaw in the "synergy bonuses make up for it" theory.

There is no way WotC would have released feats that are +3 (expertise) or +4 (epic defense feats) on a D20 curve with zero conditions attached when the vast majority of the game system is +1 or +2 conditionally on a D20 curve unless they had a compelling game mechanics reason to do so. Anything else is beyond powergaming.

It is a totally different game design philosophy and mathematical model when one does this. It can only be to fix the math bugs. I find any other explanation to be customer wishful thinking that WotC knew what they were doing with the original math.

 

[robsenworldaccount]

"Then the question would be, "Why release a feat that effectively supercedes all of the previous ones, that have conditional bonuses?"

The poster above hit the nail on the head with this question. This is the truly frustrating part of the "expertise" feat.

I have seen people argue that expertise "Is NOT a FEAT BONUS" alas, this is all but conjecture.

However; it is a bonus granted by a FEAT.

Regardless:

If it is a feat bonus, its simply > than 90% of the feats in existence, and removes all urge to take them.

For example why take oncomming storm (+1 to hit with thunder after using a lightning keyword power until end of next turn) if I can just have +1 to hit all the time!?

The situation is disheartening.
Anyone have official content that would determine the above issue of whether or not it's a feat bonus or not?

 

[CapnZapp]

It is emphatically not a feat bonus.

If it were, it would say so.

There's a difference between "a +1 bonus" and a "+1 feat bonus". In fact, that's the only difference - so if you're waiting from a confirmatory rules language elsewhere, you're not going to get it.

 

[KidSnide]

It is emphatically not a feat bonus.

If it were, it would say so.

There's a difference between "a +1 bonus" and a "+1 feat bonus". In fact, that's the only difference - so if you're waiting from a confirmatory rules language elsewhere, you're not going to get it.

This is correct.

-KS

 

[Nail]

I have seen people argue that expertise "Is NOT a FEAT BONUS" alas, this is all but conjecture.

Huh. I really don't understand why you think it's "all conjecture".

In any case, that's irrelevant to this thread. It's a large bonus, which scales with tier, that is better than all other feats.

 

[DrSpunj]

It's a large bonus, which scales with tier, that is better than all other feats.

<puts on bullseye suit>

I'm Nail's DM in this instance (though he's involved in a couple other games and we haven't discussed what might be happening in those).

Now, the party is only 4th level and leveling only every couple months or so (we only get a chance to play every other Wednesday night ). As such I'm not really interested in what happens with the math at Paragon & Epic. When I'm regularly involved in games at those levels I'll revisit this issue.

My concerns are that at level 5:

• it seems like a feat tax, and a bad one at that since if it's there to fix the math it only does so for one weapon group, focus or implement, leaving a lot of PC's attacks in the same lurch they were in without the feat
• it's not clear that it's necessary at all even with the math being off given that those in higher level paragon & epic games aren't always seeing a lot of problems (besides the grind, hopefully Stalker0's analysis helps with that when real life gets out of his way ) so at level 5 it's pretty hard to justify that every PC needs a +1 math fix bonus on all attacks (or even most of them) all the time
• I simply don't like the "it's better than all other feats out there" aspect of it, it really bothers me, I guess I just bought into the 4e hype about "we started with the math as our baseline and everything grows from there, balance is a lot easier to maintain now"
• I think giving all players a +1 actually discourages cooperative, strategic play since it's easier for PCs to hit things just by running up and taking a swing at something, and that doing so at level 5 will have a negative impact on play & fun at higher levels
• We're having a lot of fun with our sessions and trying out different things with each encounter, no one is complaining of any grinding, so I don't feel we need it to improve the fun factor around our table (either using the feat or giving it out automatically)

Now, I was reading the "So, about expertise..." thread when it was really active over a month ago but pulled it up again recently and am slowly reading through it again (up to page 13!). I think it was KarinsDad who stated he might go with an automatic +1 at Paragon and +2 at Epic which is what I'm leaning towards currently, but I'm trying to keep an open mind about things at this point. I was really hoping WotC was going to open up about this and print a Designer's Diary article or something on this topic, I thought they mentioned something like that and I want to understand what they're thinking was between PHB1 & PHB2 to merit these Expertise feats and the Defense feats at Paragon & Epic.

Thanks for starting this thread, Nail!

 

[Ryujin]

It is emphatically not a feat bonus.

If it were, it would say so.

There's a difference between "a +1 bonus" and a "+1 feat bonus". In fact, that's the only difference - so if you're waiting from a confirmatory rules language elsewhere, you're not going to get it.

No, it's not a feat bonus and therefore stacks with feat bonuses. That's too good not to take, making it for all appearances to be a 'mandatory' feat if your character wants to keep hitting like the Joneses.

This is the reason that my GM made it a house ruled auto addition for our main attack type.

 

[Tilenas]

It is emphatically not a feat bonus.

If it were, it would say so.

Imagine it were a feat bonus and you had already spent a couple of feats on circumstantial +1 attack boons. Boy would you be mad...
I really wonder why expertise had to be a heroic tier feat, especially vis-a-vis the NAD-boosts in PHB1. As was said before, the math can't possibly be that broken on low levels and the accumulated bonus (+2 on paragon, +3 on epic) is simply too über.
My guess is that we're experiencing a mixture of power creep and "stealth errata" (not to be confused with the errata for the stealth skill, which was an early dent in WotC's shining armour).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Ok we have a major problem becuse people do not listen to each other in these threads.

We have seen and herd form group who played through all three teirs of play H,P,E and never found themselves in this slump of "I can't hit" lets call them group A
We have seen and herd from groups who played to paragon and felt the defences went up to much and the game watered down...lets call them group B
We have seen and herd form groups who in epci felt the monsters got to tough. we will call them group C.
We have seen people complain (I may be bias but I give this group the least amount of slack) that right from day one 1st level the game is too hard. we will call them group D.


I have no dubt WotC has herd from all 4 of these groups, and heck they might even have people in office in diffrent groups.

So now lets say they errata +1 to NADS and Attack at 5,15,and 25th...group A will feel it is too easy, group B will feel 5 levesl are too easy, group C will think 20 levels are too easy...group D will most likely prefer this...or they might complain it is still to 'late in the game'
So put yourself in there shoes...how do you work with the most number of people...make it a choice...infact break it down to a few choices.

We right now have atleast 4 diffrent ways to boost attack (Gnome illussion feat, Fey charm feat, Dragon born arcane feat, and the expertise feats) we have a few diffrent Nads boosting feats (some to all three some to just one but more...or those epic ones) So what does that do...
It means every player now gets to decide "What do I want to focus on?" I have a PC in my tuesday night game who is a swordmage going for maxed out defences, and took toughness. He seams to hit just fine at paragon levels with out expertise, so he will save his feats for the ones he wants...on the other hand our warlord can't hit to save his life, and is very rearly hit, so expertise was a good choice for him, but the NADs uppers not so much.

people who claim they are non choices fail to realize that they are the ultimate choice. (I even have a post in the errata board to up Helfire blood to +1, +2 at 15, +3 at 25th to give another option and another choice to the group)


Edit: since my tuesday night paragon level game has a warlord/battle captian with a level +5 sword, and expertise, and a 20 str, and he often goes to flank...he hits a good amount of times...then gives bonuses to others...who have lower weapons and no expertise...but then still hit often...it means those 'feat taxes' are avoided...

 

[Regicide]

As such I'm not really interested in what happens with the math at Paragon & Epic.

The feat is only really remarkable at paragon and epic. If you're only concerned about heroic then it's pretty much a non-issue where it's a very nice feat, but you're not shooting yourself in the foot if you don't take it.