Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Expertise justification?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tiornys" data-source="post: 4812501" data-attributes="member: 17633"><p>How so? If I have Weapon Expertise only, that makes me reluctant to use Implement attacks, and vice versa. If I'm spending two feats to acquire both, that's clearly more obnoxious than only spending one.</p><p></p><p>I'm arguing that one of two things is true: either a) hit chances are balanced without Expertise, in which case Expertise is ridiculously overpowered, or b) hit chances need Expertise to be balanced, in which case Expertise is ridiculously poorly implemented.</p><p></p><p>But no other feat is as powerful and as global as Expertise is.</p><p></p><p>That works for a home game, but does nothing for an official one. And, it only exacerbates the feat tax issue.</p><p></p><p>It's also the nature of feats that taking one is supposed to be comparable to taking another. Feats with more powerful effects are supposed to also be more situational. Expertise defines its own power class among feats: it is extremely powerful and (for most characters) not situational at all.</p><p></p><p>It's only penalizing him relative to the free Expertise feat that you're giving the Fighter. You're boosting all of the Fighter's powers for free, but only half of the Paladin's powers for free.</p><p></p><p>Ok, I need to know what you mean by "hybrid classes". "Hybrid" is a term that refers to a new type of multiclassing that will be introduced in the PHB3, which has nothing to do with the points I'm making. I refer to the Warlock, Cleric, Ranger, and Paladin as dual-primary classes, but these classes are also not what I'm concerned with. One of my areas of concern is classes that have both weapon and implement powers, which includes the Swordmage, Monk, Bard, and Avenger in addition to the Paladin and Cleric.</p><p></p><p>I agree that this trend is bad, and should be fixed.</p><p></p><p>See my above explanation of my two-pronged argument. The <em>effect</em> that Weapon and Implement Expertise are attempting to have is, IMO, positive. The <em>implementation</em> through feats is horribly flawed. Personally, I favor a house rule of eliminating the feats entirely and adding +1 to all character attacks at level 5, scaling to +2 at 15 and +3 at 25.</p><p></p><p>Those feats are sufficiently situational that their power level is fine. One applies to approximately one attack per 1 1/2 encounters. The other applies to basic level attacks that you have no control over obtaining. Expertise is nothing like situational; it applies to every attack that most characters make. </p><p></p><p>t~</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tiornys, post: 4812501, member: 17633"] How so? If I have Weapon Expertise only, that makes me reluctant to use Implement attacks, and vice versa. If I'm spending two feats to acquire both, that's clearly more obnoxious than only spending one. I'm arguing that one of two things is true: either a) hit chances are balanced without Expertise, in which case Expertise is ridiculously overpowered, or b) hit chances need Expertise to be balanced, in which case Expertise is ridiculously poorly implemented. But no other feat is as powerful and as global as Expertise is. That works for a home game, but does nothing for an official one. And, it only exacerbates the feat tax issue. It's also the nature of feats that taking one is supposed to be comparable to taking another. Feats with more powerful effects are supposed to also be more situational. Expertise defines its own power class among feats: it is extremely powerful and (for most characters) not situational at all. It's only penalizing him relative to the free Expertise feat that you're giving the Fighter. You're boosting all of the Fighter's powers for free, but only half of the Paladin's powers for free. Ok, I need to know what you mean by "hybrid classes". "Hybrid" is a term that refers to a new type of multiclassing that will be introduced in the PHB3, which has nothing to do with the points I'm making. I refer to the Warlock, Cleric, Ranger, and Paladin as dual-primary classes, but these classes are also not what I'm concerned with. One of my areas of concern is classes that have both weapon and implement powers, which includes the Swordmage, Monk, Bard, and Avenger in addition to the Paladin and Cleric. I agree that this trend is bad, and should be fixed. See my above explanation of my two-pronged argument. The [i]effect[/i] that Weapon and Implement Expertise are attempting to have is, IMO, positive. The [i]implementation[/i] through feats is horribly flawed. Personally, I favor a house rule of eliminating the feats entirely and adding +1 to all character attacks at level 5, scaling to +2 at 15 and +3 at 25. Those feats are sufficiently situational that their power level is fine. One applies to approximately one attack per 1 1/2 encounters. The other applies to basic level attacks that you have no control over obtaining. Expertise is nothing like situational; it applies to every attack that most characters make. t~ [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Expertise justification?
Top