Feat Taxes, or, It's That Time of the Week Again

[UngeheuerLich]

giving tem out for free woul not be the worst idea... actually i would give out 2 of them for free... think of it like weapon proficiencies...

 

[Aulirophile]

There's a basic error at work here: 55% vs even level is a minimum. There isn't a maximum (barring 95%, miss on 1). Not designed into the system by intent, at least. So it doesn't matter if one guy is 18+3 and the other is 16+2. They've both achieved the minimum, combats will not go longer then they are supposed to on average. Which was the only objective Wizards had, they didn't want grindy 14+ round combats (which happened to often at 50% during playtesting apparently). The players, to use an analogy, are The House in Vegas. They are always supposed to win, so they have a very minor edge to make sure that, on average, that happens.

Now if you want to argue there is a psychological component to one player hitting more then another one does, fine... but baking in Expertise to the system would make the gap identical, as well, so the argument is contradictory. In fact by baking in Expertise one player can no longer get as far ahead by making better choices, so the psychological gap cannot happen even if you build characters poorly. This is a good argument against Expertise feats, but is a very poor argument against fixing the math.

[MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]: This whole thing happened almost right after the real release. You could dig it up no doubt, but I don't have a link handy. It was three years ago, almost.

 

[mudlock]

Heavy Blade Expertise
Prerequisite: Must be wielding a heavy blade with an initial post-racial primary ability score of less than 18 and/or use of a weapon with a proficiency bonus of less than +3. etc. etc.

"Initial post-racial primary ability score" is cumbersome, yes. How about:

"Heavy Blade Expertise
You have overcome your lack of innate ability through diligent practice.

When wielding a heavy blade, if the attack bonus from your attribute is less than 4, you gain a +1 feat bonus to hit.

Level 11: If the attack bonus from your attribute is less than 6, you gain +2 feat bonus to hit.
Level 21: If the attack bonus from your attribute is less than 8, you gain +3 feat bonus to hit."

 

[mneme]

mudlock: As stated, a 16 primary would lose the bonus at 14th and 18th level, and never have it in epic unless they took really bad paragon paths--if you're catering it to 16 stat, you want 4/6/8 as your thresholds.

 

[Herschel]

"Initial post-racial primary ability score" is cumbersome, yes. How about:

"Heavy Blade Expertise
You have overcome your lack of innate ability through diligent practice.

When wielding a heavy blade, if the attack bonus from your attribute is less than 4, you gain a +1 feat bonus to hit.

Level 11: If the attack bonus from your attribute is less than 6, you gain +2 feat bonus to hit.
Level 21: If the attack bonus from your attribute is less than 8, you gain +3 feat bonus to hit."

That's still really awful, although slightly better.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

You have overcome your lack of innate ability through diligent practice.

How about, simply:
"Your practice with these weapons has improved your skill with them."

 

[Fifth Element]

How about, simply:
"Your practice with these weapons has improved your skill with them."

You're not gonna get the big bucks writing simple stuff like that.

 

[pemerton]

This is a good argument against Expertise feats, but is a very poor argument against fixing the math.

I agree with this - I just recently posted the same thing on another thread.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

You're not gonna get the big bucks writing simple stuff like that.

I'm a lawyer.

My Wills prof, Stanley Johanssen (an Ichabod Crane body double) gave us a wonderful lesson on the evils of "legalese"*, and promised that if he ever heard of our work being like his "bad" example, he would hunt us down. Even if he were dead...

I believe him.



* he gave us a 10 page document and told us to read it. After 4 minutes, he had us stop and started asking questions about what we read. Then he handed out another piece of paper with a single 8-sentence paragraph on it. That paragraph was what he had boiled that 10-pager down to.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

How about, simply:
"Your practice with these weapons has improved your skill with them."

But doesn't that flavor text imply anyone should be able to take the feat?