Expertise justification?

[Fundin Strongarm]

Every group I'm a part of (DM 2 RPGA-LFR groups, DM a home game and play in two other games) sees the Expertise Feats as something their character will take (or has already taken). They outshine most feats (and certainly the +1 attack roll feats that are circumstantial).

 

[keterys]

Actually, I am all for them figuring out the actual problems and fixing them. I don't think they're going to get good data out of the expertise feat, however. At high levels it's better than every feat. It doesn't matter if you think the game needs help at that level, you're going to end up taking it because it's twice (or more) as effective as any other feat you can get at 15th+

Though, I'm still seeing at least 80% buyin on 6th+ level characters amongst the couple dozen gamers I play with regularly which seems excessive. Then again, mathematically speaking at just +1 to hit it's more valuable than almost every combat feat in the heroic tier.

 

[KarinsDad]

Actually, I am all for them figuring out the actual problems and fixing them.

Agreed.

I don't think they're going to get good data out of the expertise feat, however.

Also agreed.

At high levels it's better than every feat. It doesn't matter if you think the game needs help at that level, you're going to end up taking it because it's twice (or more) as effective as any other feat you can get at 15th+

The other side of that coin is, how is WotC going to find out how many people actually take the feat, how many people houserule the feat in automatically, etc.? Reading the forums? A poll?

And even if they acquire that data somehow, what percentage is so high (for one of the best feats in the game system) that it should have its own rule? 60%? 70%? 90%? What part of that usage percentage is the feat is too good ("gotta have this" white noise) and what part of that usage percentage is the feat is required for balance / fun / speed up play (the actual information they are trying to find out)?


I think the best way for them to find information of this nature out is to have WotC employees (or even volunteers) playtest a series of Heroic, Paragon, and Epic level encounters both with and without Expertise with the exact same PCs and the exact same encounters (for many types of PCs and many types of encounters) and record the exact outcomes of every single attack from both sides. This gives them statistical data on how often the PCs hit; how many rounds the encounters last; do these encounters work at different levels with minions, with solos, with elites; how do conditions affect the outcome, etc.

They're not going to find out anything accurate from vague notions of how many people take the Expertise feats.

 

[Nail]

I cast rais thread...

the tomb

check out about 14, 15 mins in when Expertise comes up...these feats are tests to see what group is more prevalent A(have to have it) B(Don't want it forced on them)

Thanks, GMforPowergamers, but....uggg. I do NOT want to listen to 14 minutes of drivel to get to a passing reference of something I'm interested in. I want them [WotC] to issue a clear (typed!) reason behind these feats that I can read.

 

[Regicide]

Now, they are backpedaling to say that they intended for the feats to be temporary and replaced by a more comprehensive solution if a large part of the gaming community takes them.

I can think of exactly 1 way to make a feat temporary. Publish an even better feat so no one takes the old one.

 

[keterys]

Thanks, GMforPowergamers, but....uggg. I do NOT want to listen to 14 minutes of drivel to get to a passing reference of something I'm interested in. I want them [WotC] to issue a clear (typed!) reason behind these feats that I can read.

Can always fast forward (or mute play) to the right point. At any rate, Mike Mearls wrote up a bit on Expertise weeks ago and Chris Perkins actually mentions that he has no idea how this didn't get posted yet so he's going to track it down so it does. So... soon.

 

[ki11erDM]

They didn't explicitly say.

From what I can tell from your other posts if they did say explicitly... you would just say they were lying.

 

[KarinsDad]

Thanks, GMforPowergamers, but....uggg. I do NOT want to listen to 14 minutes of drivel to get to a passing reference of something I'm interested in. I want them [WotC] to issue a clear (typed!) reason behind these feats that I can read.

I typed the relevant section in post #328 for people so that they would not have to listen to it.

 

[Nail]

Can always fast forward (or mute play) to the right point. At any rate, Mike Mearls wrote up a bit on Expertise weeks ago and Chris Perkins actually mentions that he has no idea how this didn't get posted yet so he's going to track it down so it does. So... soon.

Oooo...that would be good.

 

[Nail]

I typed the relevant section in post #328 for people so that they would not have to listen to it.

No offense meant, KarinsDad, but you were paraphrasing what Chris Perkins said. That's cool an' all, but: I want to know *exactly* what he said.

Actually, I want to know *exactly* what WotC officially says about their (group) reasoning behind the Expertise line of feats. One guy (say, Chris Perkins) on one web-cast call-in show (say, The Tome Show), isn't all that informative or useful, since one guy can say pretty much anything and later say "I didn't quite mean that".

FWIW, I fast-forwarded to 14:21 to get to what's asked and what's answered.

What's asked is "What sort of mechanical changes can we expect to see over the next year to speed up combats, especially in paragon and epic tier."

A WotC guy answers that (I'm gonna paraphrase a bit too! ) "one example of that sort of thing" is the Expertise feats in PH2. He goes on to say that "we've implemented those feats as a kind of a stop-gap", and that if the feats become something everyone must take, then they'll come up with a "more comprehensive solution".

Eeerm. I really don't like the sound of any of that.