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

[Aulirophile]

Versus a standard, you'll need 15+ to hit an Elite. Yeah, I'm sure no one notices missing 75% of the time. /eyeroll.

I really do find it fascinating that people can say their anecdotal experience is somehow relevant. If you don't even know the baseline assumptions for say, combat length, how do you know if you're going over them consistently? Answer: You don't. So whether the system is working as intended is a literally a question you cannot answer, no matter how much you've played.

Also if that were somehow relevant, I sincerely doubt there are many peopleon this board who have played more 4e then I have. I've played over 20 characters from 1-30, and an additional 30 from 11 to anywhere from 25-30. I did some of that pre-expertise (and if you haven't played epic pre-expertise, you really have no place to talk, but I digress). If amount of personal experience is somehow a deciding factor (which is retarded, so we're clear) I win. Oh, that was my home games, I'm not counting LFR characters or LFR I've DMed. Or home games I've DMed, actually. So... approaching 500 characters I've seen in play or, to put it more in perspective, something over 8,000 levels worth of 4e play.

 

[Fifth Element]

Have I mentioned that WotC actually hired professional statisticians early in development?

Do you have a source for this by any chance? If you need to make sure numbers adds up to 29, you don't need a statistician; you just need someone comfortable with fairly basic math. Adding up numbers is not what professional statisticians do.

 

[Umbran]

You are demonstrably incapable of separating fact from your biased opinion.

And you are addressing the personality of the poster, rather than the content of the post. Basically, ad hominem, making the argument personal, rather than about the topic.

This is rhetorically weak, kinda rude, and historically shows a tendency to start fights. We often see such in cases where posters are getting frustrated with each other - if that's what is happening here, I suggest you take a break, or stop responding to the people who are frustrating you, rather than engage on this level.

In other words, folks, please don't continue the discussion in this fashion. We expect everyone to show respect for their fellow posters, no matter how much you disagree with them. Thanks.

 

[renau1g]

Also if that were somehow relevant, I sincerely doubt there are many peopleon this board who have played more 4e then I have. I've played over 20 characters from 1-30, and an additional 30 from 11 to anywhere from 25-30. I did some of that pre-expertise (and if you haven't played epic pre-expertise, you really have no place to talk, but I digress). If amount of personal experience is somehow a deciding factor (which is retarded, so we're clear) I win. Oh, that was my home games, I'm not counting LFR characters or LFR I've DMed. Or home games I've DMed, actually. So... approaching 500 characters I've seen in play or, to put it more in perspective, something over 8,000 levels worth of 4e play.

Wow...that's amazing! How often do you play? The games been out around 3 years or so, so about 150 weeks and the 20 PC's is 600 levels + say 30 x 15 levels = another 450 levels, so you've leveled up well over 1000 times in 150 weeks?!?!?!

 

[Herschel]

Wow, that seems highly unusual. Honestly--why do you think that is? The style of game? Are the DMs dissuading folks from taking it? Are the players getting together and deciding not to take it?

Because at level 21, average monster AC is what? 35 or so? And NADs a few points lower? So a lvl 21 meleer with a +3 weapon, +2 proficiency, ...

I think there's a few things here. For one, swords are popular so there's a +3 proficiency more often than a +2. Secondly, there are +4 weapons starting in P2. Thirdly, mobility powers are big and combat advantage is gained a lot. Fourthly, full skill coverage and a lot of monster knowledge checks and items even for helping discern which defense for casters to attack. Fifthly, a lot of people take buff/de-buff powers and sometiimes there's a warlord. And sixthly, there isn't much rivalry to see who hits more and most build upon a theme and are more worried about "cool".

 

[Herschel]

Wow...that's amazing! How often do you play? The games been out around 3 years or so, so about 150 weeks and the 20 PC's is 600 levels + say 30 x 15 levels = another 450 levels, so you've leveled up well over 1000 times in 150 weeks?!?!?!

(for the Doctor Who Series 4 fans)

 

[MrGrenadine]

I think there's a few things here. For one, swords are popular so there's a +3 proficiency more often than a +2. Secondly, there are +4 weapons starting in P2. Thirdly, mobility powers are big and combat advantage is gained a lot. Fourthly, full skill coverage and a lot of monster knowledge checks and items even for helping discern which defense for casters to attack. Fifthly, a lot of people take buff/de-buff powers and sometiimes there's a warlord. And sixthly, there isn't much rivalry to see who hits more and most build upon a theme and are more worried about "cool".

I'll grant that using high prof weapons, using +4 weapons (if your DM drops them), using CA and knowledge checks and having a warlord in the party are all terrific ways to increase chances of hitting, and should all be utilized whenever possible.

Can you grant that perhaps for non-sword users without access to +4 weapons in parties without a warlord, Expertise is a must-have?

 

[TheUltramark]

I soooooooo don't wanna piss anyone off, but.....

[MENTION=86312]Aulirophile[/MENTION] = w/out expertise, but with all the bells and whistles that come with being 30th level, how often do you see characters hitting a 30th level elite

not what the math says...actual on table experience. Is it really only 25% of the time? Do fights not last the "predetermined length" (by the way - how long is a fight supposed to go anyway??????)

Again, not picking, I am inexperienced with 4e

another fix idea - a +1 to hit @ level 10, 20 & 30 ????? (or 6, 16, & 26 - or other predetermined level)

 

[TheUltramark]

Wow...that's amazing! How often do you play? The games been out around 3 years or so, so about 150 weeks and the 20 PC's is 600 levels + say 30 x 15 levels = another 450 levels, so you've leveled up well over 1000 times in 150 weeks?!?!?!

That is almost 1 level a day for 3 years

 

[Tony Vargas]

But the point is that in a practical sense is the only sense that matters. This isn't banking or medical data, the math can be a bit wonky and variable, that doesn't mean it's broken or doesn't work well enough. Heck, attack rolls are made with a random number generator. It's nice to have a way to "even it out" for gamers/groups who can't/won't use the other "modification" powers but doesn't make it mandatory or even necessary.

It can be both 'broken' (not performing to spec) and working well enough. Like a crappy car you can put up with because you can't afford a new one.

I think the bottom line is that Expertise isn't a problem if no one uses it (the math hole just isn't that big a hole, and everyone suffers from it equally), or if everyone gets it for free (the hole is plugged for everyone). It's when it's used as presented: as a feat that some players may take and others may not (or that everyone takes, thus everyone is down a 'real' feat), that it's actually problematic.

As a 'even it out' feat, it's worthless as presented. You'd have to use DM fiat to keep the already tuned-to-hit-well characters from taking it, and force it down the throats of the players who were a little too far behind.