D&D (2024) Expertise too good?

[CleverNickName]

Well, let's see what happens when we break it.
Halfling rogue (thief) with 20 Dex and +6 proficiency bonus, Expertise in Thieves' Tools, Lucky feat.
Total bonus: +17, automatically rerolls a nat-1s, Lucky feat to reroll again if necessary.

Effect on the math of the game:
Very Easy (DC 5): automatic success
Easy (DC 10): automatic success
Medium (DC 15): automatic success
Hard (DC 20): succeed 95% of the time
Very Hard (DC 25): succeed 70% of the time
Nearly Impossible (DC 30): succeed 45% of the time

Effect on the way the game is played:
Most locks are no longer challenging, so most locks will be hand-waved: no rolls will be made for lockpicking except for the most challenging ones in the game (DC 25 or 30). So unless everyone in the game world suddenly installs high-security locks on their jewelry boxes and cellar doors, the player may never be asked to make the check ever again. Expertise and high level has effectively rendered this skill obsolete for the character.

Same exercise, different skill: let's say the halfling rogue also has expertise in Stealth. That's a +17 to stealth checks.

Effect on the math of the game:
Most monsters have a Passive Perception between 10 or 15. The rogue automatically hides from them.
The highest PP in the game so far is Tiamat, with a PP of 36. The rogue can never hide from Tiamat.

Effect on the way the game is played:
The rogue effectively gains invisibility at will, as a bonus action. Most creatures now have to spend an Action or a spell slot to have a chance at spotting the rogue.

The rogue automatically hides from everyone in the party, including the cleric who needs to see him in order to target him with healing, the bard who needs to target him with buffs, and the wizard who might accidentally drop a prismatic wall through his space.

Conclusion: In my opinion, Expertise doesn't break the game...but it does change it.

 

[Raith5]

Without expertise it would have still been +7. Expertise at level 4 is only adding +2. If +9 is such a problem, it's hard to imagine +7 not being one.

That rogue still would fail stealth checks at that level. Low chance but not guaranteed success. That same trend continues as the rogue levels because higher tier enemies tend to have higher passive perception scores.

I do not think expertise is the biggest problem in 5e, but I do think a bigger chance to fail now and again would add a bit more danger to the game.

I like the idea of expert classes but I just wonder if there are other things that can be done to show expertise rather than add numbers.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Conclusion: In my opinion, Expertise doesn't break the game...but it does change it.

...at level 20? You would hope so.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Omg an extra +6 to an ability check will break the game... No. Don't take away the rogue something that he is really good at: skills. We want to compete with magic, so let him compete with magic.

Reliable talent gives a base of 20? Yes, the rogue is that good. He can reliably open the door.

 

[DEFCON 1]

You're adding a 20-sided die to every roll. Which means while you might have a +0-9 spread due to your ability score / proficiency... you're adding a +0-20 spread from the die. So it ain't the bonus from the ability score / proficiency that is breaking anything, it's the die roll.

You want a smaller spread of numbers for skill checks? Use a d10 rather than a d20. Or if you want more average scores, use a 2d10 rather than a d20. But so long as you add a +0-20 to any check, then whatever your bonus is ends up being like 50% less important to the total. Thus eliminating Expertise is only making the matter worse.

 

[TwoSix]

A level 17 rogue with Expertise in Thieves' Tools should be able to look at a lock, and the lock simply opens in fear. That's the class fantasy that Expertise is trying to provide!

 

[Krachek]

The problem is not bound accuracy.
In first edition base chance to open lock start at 25% and finish at 99% ( level 17) , not adding racial and ability bonus.
Nothing new in 5ed for that.