Expertise: When Can You Use It?

Clefton Twain

First Post
This came up in our game last night and I allowed it. One of the characters made three attacks and killed his opponent. He then declared (having just thought of this idea) that he would use Expertise against another opponent.

Nowhere in the feat does it say that it must be declared before any attacks are made like, say, Power Attack does. I allowed it because there seemed to be no restrictions.

Was this overpowering or just how the feat was meant to work?

--CT
 

log in or register to remove this ad


From the SRD:

The changes to attack rolls and Armor Class last until the character's next action.

"character's next action" essentially means your next round. Why? Because you can only use Expertise with the Attack action or the Full-Attack action. With either of these, you can only use 1 of them in any given round (besides, haste, weapons of speed, etc.). The feat applies to the entire action. If you take a full-attack action, the feat applies to every attack in the action, as well as your AC, until your next turn.
 

You make the decision on whether or not to use Expertise when you decided to take the attack or full attack action.

The bonuses and penalties would apply to all attacks made during that action, and last until your next action.

You can't start the attack action, make an attack, and then choose to use Expertise, because the time to decide has already passed. The decision point was when you decided to use the attack or full attack action.
 

Either these boards are located in the Grand Canyon, thus the echoes, or I'm not wording my replies very well 'cause I already said that. ;)
 

kreynolds said:
Either these boards are located in the Grand Canyon, thus the echoes, or I'm not wording my replies very well 'cause I already said that. ;)

People don't listen to us. They want the real rules guru Caliban!
 




Thanks guys (yes you too, kreynolds) :) .

That's pretty much the way I thought it worked but, unlike Power Attack, the feat never specified, so I couldn't really find a good argument. The only way I could argue against it was "wow, that sounds really munchkinesque" but that doesn't hold too much water.

--CT
 

Remove ads

Top