Actually hitting became much less important for controllers after essentials came out, most things do the control part on a miss now...
KarinsDad in the old thread said:The core game is already set up that these 3 feats are viable. They don't stack with Expertise, but people are not required to take Expertise.
The LEB game is already set up that these 3 feats are totally viable.
By changing the LEB bonuses to attack rolls (which are a patch to the rules) to a feat bonus, you make these 3 (and several other) feats non-viable.
My idea here is: Don't negate these feats in an effort to add in the new, sexier feats which are stronger than any of these feats.
Just because the designers at WotC screwed up by making the math patch a bunch of feats instead of just fixing the darn game doesn't mean that we should do that here at LEB as well.
By making the LEB house rule a non-feat bonus, the judges already decided to not screw it up like WotC did. They put the patch into the rules where it belongs, not into feats. By making the house rule a feat bonus, you negate a lot of conditional feats that were nice, but not overpowered like the new Essential feats are.
Originally Posted by evilbob
Throwing out all the new expertise feats that also give rider effects seems extreme to me, especially since some people have already expressed that they would take the feats just for the rider effects - even without gaining a +to hit from them.
It's not excessive. Every single one of these new Expertise feats is a WotC bandaid for another Wotc bandaid (the original Expertise feats).
We should throw out the +1/+2/+3 part of them since LEB already hands that out.
That way, they are just feats with a specific effect. Not great, but not terrible either.
Originally Posted by evilbob
Also, just to clarify: the way the rules are written right now, you COULD take a new expertise feat from the essentials book AND get a +1/2/3 untyped bonus at level 5/15/25. Is that something that people like or dislike?
Not until October 21 you cannot.
And, we obviously do not want this, so we do need a house rule here.
But throwing out the Draconic Spellcaster, Gnome Phantasmist, and Diabolic Soul feats is questionable. We shouldn't change the LEB house rule to do that. Those feats are conditional bonuses already (although the GP one is totally under the control of the player).
Explain to me why the new Essential feats should trump these and other feats. I don't think they should. They are a hack due to the fact that the last hack was so lame. These feats are already limiting. You have to be a Gnome and use illusion powers. You have to be a Dragonborn, etc. Not everyone can take them and the PCs that do take them, have a limit of some sort or other to their utillity. Unlike the new sexier feats that everyone will want to take.
But if we change the house rule to a feat bonus, we throw a lot of other weaker limited feats out the door completely, just to put in a math fix that we already have in the house rules. The only problem here is the new sexier Essential feats AFAIKT, not the old ones.
Just popping to declare an imminent return of me and my shifter.
Might be a while, just getting my first look at 4e.
How's everything going?
LEB bonus becomes a feat bonus and the 3 above feats become a fixed +1 bonus (untyped), like Hellfire Blood, the most similar core feat that stacks with the WotC bandaid.
Why not just leave them all as a feat bonus? I think that way we prevent any misuse.
To complicate things more, the essentials Ranger gets the new Expertise for free with bows or crossbows.
Speaking of another thing, the Essentials changes to races are included in the October errata, so that means that new characters can use those options. Am I wrong?
Someone said:Speaking of another thing, the Essentials changes to races are included in the October errata, so that means that new characters can use those options. Am I wrong?
Yeah, this is all kinds of weirdness. We're probably just splitting hairs, since it should be ok in two weeks, but WotC doing something outside of their normal set ways has definitely confused a lot of folks, myself included.The Essentials changes that were a separate document and not part of the normal errata are not included. So, those changes come into effect October 25th. I don't think there were any Essentials changes in the normal October update.
in the meantime, if you'd like to use something from Essentials I'd suggest just running it through this discussion thread first.