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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catsclaw227" data-source="post: 5000613" data-attributes="member: 14197">EDIT:  This is a bit rambling....There have been numerous threads out there about "fixing the math" and if the Expertise class of feats are a feat tax or not.I hypothesize that it may not matter as much as people complain.  Now, I agree that the Expertise feats, especially by 15th level, are awesome and REALLY hard to pass up, and once you get to 25th, the +3 is borderline critical.This isn't what I am talking about.  I am questioning whether the "cost" matters as much as people claim that it does.IMHO, the "tax" of a single feat out of EIGHTEEN (over the course of a 1-30 progression) isn't really a tax. If the math had been smoothed over from the very start (with a built in +1/+2/+3 at 5/15/25) and there was one less feat gained on the leveling chart, would people be complaining? I doubt it. Having seventeen feats is really quite a lot, and I believe that very few would have batted an eyelash.So essentially, it's the same scenario. One less feat, math fixed. I think the BIG question we should be looking at..... Is that 18th feat really going to make a difference in how the game is played?Assuming Expertise didn't exist and the math was already fixed, how much more powerful will 9 feats be over 8 feats at 15th level (where the +2 for expertise starts to matter) or how much more powerful will 15 feats be than 14 feats at 25th level?Is it really a tax?  The question we should be asking is "How much does a single feat affect the math of the game?"If that can be quantified, we might begin to understand why some people just don't care about the feat tax.</blockquote>

Verification