Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CovertOps" data-source="post: 5195109" data-attributes="member: 65152">To all those who claim Expertise isn't needed:I did a very long post detailing not so much why Expertise is or isn't needed, but that the feats presence breaks the game by increasing the variance between the "haves" and "have nots".  There are only 20 possible results on a d20.  If you have PC attacks at some baseline number +/- 3 (build/optimizations) and monster defenses at some baseline number +/- 3 (creature type - artillery, brute, etc. and individual flavor) then you have the core system allowing rolls from 4-16 depending on PC build and monster defense.  Adding Expertise to this mix makes the range 1-16, but in reality by the time you hit level 30 the range is more like 5-20.  The mid-range attack has shifted from ~10 on the die to ~13 on the die.  This level of variation in PC power breaks 4e badly.  At the same table you can have a poorly optimized PC needing a 20 to hit and another PC needing a 5.  Do you perhaps think that will cause a problem at your table?  I can't think of a single one of my players that likes missing every round, but in reality with 4e's target audience it ought to be difficult to build a PC that bad.Can the system survive the shift from ~10 to ~13 on the die to hit?  Yes.Should you be able to build two different PCs with a variance of 16 to hit?  No.Note:  Please don't call me out if my numbers are off ...I ball-parked them from memory.  If need be I can recreate the numbers and they won't be far off what I've posted.Summary:  Expertise was a HORRIBLE game element to add in so to make sure my table variance is kept to a minimum I give it to all players by adjusting monster defenses down and disallowing Expertise to be taken.  Is it needed?  I don't really care.  Does it reduce grind?  Yes.</blockquote>

Verification