Wow, that's terribad. It's not like swordmages are so powerful they need that penalty...
well in there defence...swordmage and avanger are currently tied for 2nd best AC in game in theory...so a swordmage that focuses can be better (not as good better) then a plate and sheild paliden...
[sblock=who does number 2 work for?]who or what you may ask is #1 best armor...well the Swordmage/Avanger Hybrid/paragon hybrid that has both features (armor of faith and warding) and can walk around with a 60+AC...I belive the opt board got the defs (all 4) to where no demon lord can hit on better then a 19 againts any def...and still a good offence, and lets not forget the roll 2d20 attacks, and negate damage if at someone else...[/sblock]
[sblock=for room]1. I'm hoping to create as close to a control as possible when collecting this data. I am doing this to show the base trend in a void.
2. Ability Stat: I am assuming your wanting your character to be successful at their given role, so I am also assuming she has an 18 in her primary stat and that she will increase it at every level possible.
3. I am also assuming your character is using a weapon and attacking AC. I am assuming that your proficiency bonus is a +2. I am making both of these assumptions because they are the most likely scenarios. In the event that you are not using a weapon then you are probably not attacking AC either. This would mean that the defense rating is about 2 lower than the target's AC (and thus the loss of the +2 from proficiency is moot). I am also assuming the +2 proficiency because most weapons give you a +2.
4. I am assuming that the monster's AC is a moderate AC (Level +14). I came to this by looking at the average of the 6 monster roles and coming to the conclusion that the moderate difficulty will normally be the one used most often.
5. Except at 1st level I am assuming a best case scenario when it comes to an enchantment bonus on your weapons. So starting at 2nd level the enhancement bonus increases at the minimum level necessary to create said weapon (2nd, 6th, 11th, 16th, 21st, 26th).
6. Therefore the PC's total to hit is assumed to be Level/2 + Ability Mod + Proficiency + Item.[/sblock]
I agree with 99% and the only thing I would do diffrent (and this is not me nit picking just giving some advice ignore me if you wish) use a 16 attack stat, it appears to me to be the min WotC set 16 + every up...
[sblock=excel suggestion]by the way to moddfy the excel sheet to do att mods right use this form... =ROUNDDOWN((B2-10)/2,0) it will tell it to round down 0 decmil places... also you have expertise wrong see below...[/sblock]
You seam to have your numbers slightly off You have expertise scaleing at 11 and 21 instead of 15 and 25...
Fact #1: There is a negative trend when it comes to hit success as you level up. Your basic chance to successfully hit your target decreases due to a differentiation in the progress of monsters versus PCs.
agree
Fact #2: Adding Weapon/Implement Expertise does not remove this trend. It does, however, modify it. It reduces the slope of the trend but does not eliminate it.
agree
now I want to take a moment to point out this is where you and I differ, I see that the powers of the game change as you level...you see more dailys (all have effect or miss line) and you see some enconters with miss and/or effect lines...and sustains become more common, and auto hit, auto damage...yes hit chance goes down, but the rest of the system compansates....
So the initial question at hand is simple enough:
"Is Weapon/Implement Expertise a broken feat that should not be allowed."
The answer, however, is no where near as simple.
In standard WotC Keyword style we must first define "broken."
ok...lets start
Possible Definitions:
1. Unbalancing to game mechanics.
2. Better then any other feat.
These are the two most common that I've seen and I will use the above information to refute them. To the best of my ability.
not unreasnalbe...
A simple look a the numbers will show that it is the opposite of unbalancing but in fact more game balancing. Considering there should be little to no PvP in your 4.0 game the only comparison of stats that you should be truly worried about is the PCs versus the Monsters. Therefor one player having a Expertise doesn't directly negatively affect another player.
very well stated, and 100% agree...
I have heard the argument from both developers and other DMs that the growing "miss gap" is filled with synergistic bonuses from various party members, items and effects. Though I can understand the want for these factors to become more important as you level up and your party becomes more accustomed to how the game plays as well as have more tricks up your sleeve. The simple fact is that most those bonuses and effects only occur on successful hits. Reducing the percent chance to hit to a base 35% (in extreme cases) makes it highly unlikely they'll ever get that extra 5% chance to hit.
Ok I have to stop you there...Warlord hands out att bonus like candy... with utlity powers (no hit needed) extra attacks as effects (more rolls more chance to hit), and there biggest buff has a miss rider for said buff... two of the builds also give bonuses to hit with action points...Bard is shaping up to look the same... Clerics have atleast two diffrent utlity bonus to hit powers...
and that is just off the top of my head...if your group wants to hit stack up on bonuses isn't trival, but it isn't impossble eaither...
Even if the synergy does begin to build it is unlikely that it will meet the success rate established at lower levels, let alone exceed it. Looking at the hit chance with Weapon/Implement Expertise actually shows a much smaller (but still existant) gap that needs to be filled with party tactics. Your looking at a difference between a 35% degredation incomparison to a 10% degredation. That 10% loss is a whole lot more managable.
see above where I talk about miss effects and effects and more options...
As far as better then any other feat out there. This I will not refute, but cause that's more of a fact then opinion. My only arguement is that is better then most other feats out of necessity. I have a gut feeling that it's introduction to the game was more of a stealth patch then a power creep.
I some what agree, it was put there becuse SOME people felt there needed to be a latch, others did not, making it a feat made it an optional patch...each player to weigh it on there own...
When designing powers, feats and the like I have always had three questions I asked to try and ensure game balance: Why would I take this? Why wouldn't I take this? What previously unfilled purpose does it serve? When I put most of the base feats through these (before ever reading PHB2) questions I came up with the simple feeling that most of the basic feats suck. Now my only meter stick to this was 3.5 stuff. After I got used to the idea that +Hit was crazy "expensive" it became even more obnoxious that my +Hit was going to become less useful with ever level.
well I did find some PHBI feats that I loved, I can see where you are going with this...
Many people have complained about it feeling like a Feat Tax, meaning a feat that a character MUST take to able to participate. I tend to feel the same way, I'm just not bitter about it. My initial thought on feats was that they were next to useless. There are number of other PHB1 Feats that I think are extremely underpowered even without having that mean other "power creep" books out to compare to.
I said it before and I will say it again, they were WAY to consevative with the attack bonus feats in PHBI, and I think they realized that now...I do think they went too far, but hey I can live with it (I would rather expertise scale to +2 at 21st....and the race feats from arcan have been paragon +1 scale also at 21st...but not the point)
As such I feel that it is not only a good addition to the game but a necessary one. It balances out the basic math of the game while not reducing the effeciency or necessity for other aspects of the game (i.e. team work and tactics). It helps your players feel that their character is cool and effective at it's role. It lessons the necessity of your characters having an 18 in their primary stat. And it reduces the amount of tweaking the DM has to do each monster s/he puts the party against.
Ok...I thank you for being very well spoken...well written, and explaning your stance...
Since the conversation has moved towards that. The Swordmage is one of the worst designed classes I've ever seen (in any system).
and here I thought we were going be friends...
no way I love the swordmage...I think it is what has been missing since 1e...paliden is to cleric as ranger is to druid as swordmage is to wizard....
There was obviously little forethought into what the idea, options or niche of this class would be. There are very few character design or personalization options that are available and those that are don't seem worth taking.
I do think the diff between sheidling and assalt is a joke, but with ensnareing you now have a choice to make...although I do think sheilding is just way too awsome
While on the other hand they receive a handful of deceptively overpowered features that make the design even more wonky. A melee mini-fireball that makes cleave look like waste of time combined with up to a free 10 Teleport ever round is nuts.
Ok I missed that teleport, but I assume you mean swordburst...close burst 1 implment attack at will...or do you mean green flame blade?? I like both...
The "fandom" feel of the sword implement and other factors makes me wonder what slash fiction site the lead designer of that class cut his teeth on.
I see no reason to insult rich baker...he made the class and is a pretty col guy..
After a six pack and jam session some of my players and I bashed out a few ideas that would make it far more playable, but after the realization that they'll never rework or reprint the class we put the notes in our campaign binder and moved on.
I am glad you made some fun house rules, but I think the class was AOK on it's own...
Which reminds me... what horrible publishing behavior of WotC. You shouldn't refer to a non core book in your core expansion. Shame on you.
FRPG was core...Arcane power was CORE....so it was core expanding on core...
this is one of the greatest things of 4e, I know that everything is lumped togather (easier to remove something then intergrate it)
