Proposal: Modify the Expertise House Rule (E.g., give bonus feat)

[KarinsDad]

Actually my argument boils down to "There were lots of spiffy feats supporting character concepts before Essentials came out. Making the LEB bonus a Feat Bonus elminates them."

Yes. Making it a feat bonus will make Draconic Spellcaster, Feyborn Charm, and Gnome Phantasmist less attractive.

Course, for a Gnome who dedicates himself to illusion powers, Gnome Phantasmist was already Weapon Focus and Expertise rolled up into one. Making the LEB bonus a feat bonus means that such a Gnome taking Gnome Phantasmist is similar to a normal Fighter taking Weapon Focus. It's still about as attractive as it is for the Fighter. It's just not as potent as Gnome Phantasmist previously was.

One of the reasons to make the LEB bonus a feat bonus is so that the PC doesn't get the equivalent of +2 to hit and +1 damage with the Gnome Phantasmist feat here at LEB.

I originally thought the same as you did. After some more thought on the matter, I no longer do. Making the LEB bonus a feat bonus does not destroy any PC concepts and does not wipe out a ton of feats. It does water down a few feats, but affecting about a dozen feats out of the 3000+ feats in the game system, that's hardly restricting people like you claim. The player is still able to take Feyborn Charm and he still gains something for doing so. This rule merely prevents someone from double dipping on the bonus to hit. Feyborn Charm is still a viable feat on its own, it's just not as potent as it was here.

Were players handcuffed and unable to create good PC concepts for their Feyborn PCs before the Arcane Power book came out because they didn't have access to Feyborn Charm? Is Feyborn Charm and similar feats so crucial to the game that handing out half of their power for free makes the game undesirable to play? I hardly think so.

 

[twilsemail]

One of the reasons to make the LEB bonus a feat bonus is so that the PC doesn't get the equivalent of +2 to hit and +1 damage with the Gnome Phantasmist feat here at LEB.

You can't argue from both sides of the "Math Error" argument and expect to be taken seriously. You either rant that PCs are at an inherent -1 due to the math error or all of a sudden they're at a +1 due to the LEB fix. You can't have both.

There is an error in the games math. It's been fixed. The math went from -1 to +0. A PC with Gnome Phantasmist is at a +1 to Hit and +1 damage after taking that feat.

 

[KarinsDad]

You can't argue from both sides of the "Math Error" argument and expect to be taken seriously. You either rant that PCs are at an inherent -1 due to the math error or all of a sudden they're at a +1 due to the LEB fix. You can't have both.

There is an error in the games math. It's been fixed. The math went from -1 to +0. A PC with Gnome Phantasmist is at a +1 to Hit and +1 damage after taking that feat.

The reason Gnome Phantasmist is even in the game system at all is because WotC wanted some feats to both fix the math bug AND give the players something for their feat. They did the same with the Essentials feats. Both of these types of feats came out after PHB 2 when they tried to fix the math bug with just the Expertise feats and they immediately got complaints that the Expertise feats were a feat tax.

I'm not arguing from both sides of the "Math Error" argument, that's just your spin on what I wrote. Do you honestly think it is fair and balanced for a Gnome Phantasmist PC to have +1 to hit and +1 damage over everyone else with a single feat? Or was the original intent of this feat just a way to have someone get more than just the Expertise feat by WotC? Heck, WotC even got rid of Weapon Focus for many spellcasters because it was too easy to stack too many different bonuses for damage. That's the same problem with to hit and the LEB house rule.

You not considering the fact the the normal WotC rules do not have the free LEB feat. Here at LEB, we have that. Here at LEB, the math bug is fixed. Because it is fixed here, it interfers with some of the WotC feats where it is not fixed. Gnome Expertise is balanced if one does not have a house rule fix (i.e. like the core rules), especially against other feats like the new Essentials feats. Gnome Expertise is overly potent, almost to the point of being broken, if you have a house rule fix.

That's why we are even discussing this. We have a fix that the normal rules do not and hence, it interfers with some of those feats, especially the new Essentials feats. The LEB fix now has an interference problem in that WotC is now introducing Expertise+ feats: Expertise feats that have an additional benefit that makes Expertise+ feats less useful here.

As stewards of balance here at LEB, the judges shouldn't allow the LEB house rule to stack with Gnome Phantasmist although technically today, it does. Nor should we allow it to stack with the Expertise+ feats.

WotC doesn't have this issue. By creating Expertise+ feats, they have found their solution. Give out Expertise to everyone AND give everyone a little extra bennie so that it is perceived as not so much a feat tax. Problem solved for WotC.

I am not married to the "make the LEB bonus a feat bonus" solution. If you have a better solution, I am willing to hear it. I just see nothing better yet. The suggestion to give everyone a free feat and they can use it for whatever they want, though, is a power creep. The purpose of such a suggestion is not solely to fix the math bug.

And the only reason to make the LEB bonus a feat bonus is so that we do not have to modify the house rule, every single time an Expertise-like rule comes out.

If WotC had a lot of Expertise+ feats floating around, we might even be able to get rid of the LEB house rule. But for now, I don't think they have enough of those, it's still a feat tax, and so I think we still need the LEB house rule. But if we could find a more elegant solution that just fixes the math, I'd vote to get rid of the LEB house rule.

In the meantime, I think we need to do something so that the LEB house rule does not stack with the Expertise+ feats.

 

[Luinnar]

What about making it so the bonus feat has to be used to take a +1 to hit/tier feat? That would stop a power creep for those who don't need it, but allow people to take the feat that they want.

The Man at Arms feat (+1/tier for all weapons, minor to sheath/draw weapons) would help those who use various weapons. The only ones who would be left out would be builds that use multiple weapons and implements (I don't know how common those would be).

 

[Antithetist]

Any character who is trying to maintain a good hit chance with melee powers and ranged powers and implement powers is surely already gimping themselves with MAD? I don't think we need to bend over backwards to avoid discriminating against character concepts which are already so left-field and mechanically awkward that nobody is using them.

A bonus +1 hit/tier feat of the player's choice seems like the neatest solution to me.

 

[KarinsDad]

Any character who is trying to maintain a good hit chance with melee powers and ranged powers and implement powers is surely already gimping themselves with MAD? I don't think we need to bend over backwards to avoid discriminating against character concepts which are already so left-field and mechanically awkward that nobody is using them.

A bonus +1 hit/tier feat of the player's choice seems like the neatest solution to me.

You mean like a melee/ranged Ranger straight out of the Players Handbook?

Or, a Cleric who has both Strength and Wisdom and does both weapon and implement attacks?

You don't need all 3 before it becomes an issue. I do think all 3 is rare, but 2 out of 3 is not so rare.

There are a couple of V shaped PC classes in the PHB who rely on two different types of weapons/implements. Not everyone is a Fighter whose ranged weapon is a Javelin or plays a specialized PC with one weapon or implement.

Hybrid PCs can also run into this.

The house rule today allows for these two of the three types of classes. This proposed free + per tier feat would discourage those types of classes.

 

[drothgery]

Any character who is trying to maintain a good hit chance with melee powers and ranged powers and implement powers is surely already gimping themselves with MAD? I don't think we need to bend over backwards to avoid discriminating against character concepts which are already so left-field and mechanically awkward that nobody is using them.

A bonus +1 hit/tier feat of the player's choice seems like the neatest solution to me.

There's not really good feats for non-staff weapliment users, though. I mean, without the LEB House Rule, a swordmage almost always takes Versatile Expertise (Heavy Blades, Light Blades), but all that's doing is giving the Expertise to-hit bonus to all of his attacks; it's not adding any nice side effects.

 

[TwoHeadsBarking]

Any character who is trying to maintain a good hit chance with melee powers and ranged powers and implement powers is surely already gimping themselves with MAD? I don't think we need to bend over backwards to avoid discriminating against character concepts which are already so left-field and mechanically awkward that nobody is using them.

Right, those crazy artificers. Nobody plays them, especially not in an Eberron setting.

Anyway, I think the LEB bonus should become a feat bonus, and then the expertise style feats should be unbanned. If you want the extra stuff, spend the feat, but you don't need it if all you want is to maintain your accuracy.

 

[KarinsDad]

There's not really good feats for non-staff weapliment users, though. I mean, without the LEB House Rule, a swordmage almost always takes Versatile Expertise (Heavy Blades, Light Blades), but all that's doing is giving the Expertise to-hit bonus to all of his attacks; it's not adding any nice side effects.

Agreed.

This most recent proposal seems to be a case of giving some classes the additional benefits of the Expertise+ feats for free (e.g. the gain of Wand Expertise where the PC ignores partial cover and superior cover on implement attacks he makes with a wand) at the expense of some other classes (like a melee/ranged Ranger) who only gets the Expertise for free on one of his two different types of attacks.

The purpose of the LEB house rule is to fix the math bug for every class, not to give additional benefits to a few select builds and take away the math bug fix for half of the attacks of some other builds.


The "a bonus +1 hit/tier feat of the player's choice" suggestion is a terrible idea when looked at for the big picture.

And the more generous "a bonus feat that can be used for anything" is even worse since it is more power creep than bonus +1 hit/tier feat suggestion.


So far, the "LEB house rule becomes a feat bonus" suggestion is the only good suggestion since it gives Expertise to every class for every type of attack, it prevents stacking, and it doesn't introduce minor power creep by giving extra bennies to a select few classes just to fix the math bug.

 

[KarinsDad]

Right, those crazy artificers. Nobody plays them, especially not in an Eberron setting.

Anyway, I think the LEB bonus should become a feat bonus, and then the expertise style feats should be unbanned. If you want the extra stuff, spend the feat, but you don't need it if all you want is to maintain your accuracy.

I vote YES on this.