Math fixes; can you clarify?

[Herschel]

Yeah, I find them pretty dull. I've yet to take Weapon Focus, for example, because I don't miss the couple points of damage when I can take something more fun instead.

 

[DNH]

Okay, I am due to restart my 4e game soon and I want to implement this maths fix by granting free feats (we use a VTT so keeping things systematic will make things easier). I propose to give every player Improved Defenses as a free bonus feat, which will fix the NADs issue, but am unsure how best to proceed with the attacks (Expertise) part.

I could just give everyone Versatile Expertise and have it apply across the board; that should work. But firstly, my campaign is not going to get up to Level 25 but it will get past Level 21, so I would prefer something that uses 1/11/21. Secondly, I much prefer the more specific Expertise feats from Essentials with their additional benefits, and I know my players will appreciate that too.

Question is though, how do I manage that? Because these feats are so specific, how do I handle things when characters switch weapons (our rogue uses crossbow and daggers interchangeably)? Do I give a free Expertise feat for each weapon or implement the character uses? Do I just assume all characters have access to all these feats and the appropriate applies each time?

I am thinking maybe I am going to have to give Versatile Expertise and leave the Essentials feats for the players to choose (and pay for) themselves, but that's unlikely because the attack bonus won't stack.

Any thoughts?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes, that looks like a good solution.

 

[Pickles JG]

So this "math bug" extended to both attacks and defenses, right? So the simplest fix is to just add tier (+1 per tier) to attacks and defenses?

So Attack, for instance, would be 1/2 lvl + tier bonus + other bonuses.

This is the best fix then ban the expertise feats of course. It's a pain if you use the electronic tools as it needs manual adjustment. If you give out the feats then house ruling works on the old CB but the feats are out of date & doesn't work on the new one.

Note that "feature" attacks like Dragon breath & ones from paragon paths have may or may not have the bonus factored in. Old ones would be stat+2/+4/+6 by tier. New ones are Stat +3/+6/+9. These later ones do not need boosting.

 

[eamon]

The issue isn't the math really, it's the players and their choices. There are a lot of ways to get bonuses in the game, but that doesn't mean players will use them. Leaders are full of win on this front yet if you don't use them, or build away from bonuses and towards healing, for example, there can be a pretty wide disparity in the number a character is actually attacking at. Add in a weapon user with a post-racial 16 attack stat to start and there can be quite a large disparity in attack bonuses.

It's a math issue. Leaders don't in general fix the issue because they don't grant attack bonuses nearly frequently enough to compensate; and generally don't grant such bonuses when they miss. And of course, not all parties will have a twinked out specialist attack-bonus granting leader; some leaders grant very few attack bonuses, and often can't grant those to just anyone.

With the numerical change, the game plays better. It's not impossible to play without them, but the change certainly improves gameplay: it's fix for the math. If you don't look at these feats as math fixes, the alternative conclusion is that they're horribly overpowered, bland feats (and that grind is good).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

This is the best fix then ban the expertise feats of course. It's a pain if you use the electronic tools as it needs manual adjustment. If you give out the feats then house ruling works on the old CB but the feats are out of date & doesn't work on the new one.

Note that "feature" attacks like Dragon breath & ones from paragon paths have may or may not have the bonus factored in. Old ones would be stat+2/+4/+6 by tier. New ones are Stat +3/+6/+9. These later ones do not need boosting.

Note that the +3/6/9 attacks are vs AC. IIRC.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Okay, I am due to restart my 4e game soon and I want to implement this maths fix by granting free feats (we use a VTT so keeping things systematic will make things easier). I propose to give every player Improved Defenses as a free bonus feat, which will fix the NADs issue, but am unsure how best to proceed with the attacks (Expertise) part.

I could just give everyone Versatile Expertise and have it apply across the board; that should work. But firstly, my campaign is not going to get up to Level 25 but it will get past Level 21, so I would prefer something that uses 1/11/21. Secondly, I much prefer the more specific Expertise feats from Essentials with their additional benefits, and I know my players will appreciate that too.

Question is though, how do I manage that? Because these feats are so specific, how do I handle things when characters switch weapons (our rogue uses crossbow and daggers interchangeably)? Do I give a free Expertise feat for each weapon or implement the character uses? Do I just assume all characters have access to all these feats and the appropriate applies each time?

I am thinking maybe I am going to have to give Versatile Expertise and leave the Essentials feats for the players to choose (and pay for) themselves, but that's unlikely because the attack bonus won't stack.

Any thoughts?

If I were going to do this, I would give out vanilla expertise for free in any weapon or implement they can wield, but if they want the juicier feats with the riders, they still have to buy them.

AT MOST, I would consider giving Master of Arms if you like the improved progression (or if not using the builder, just houserule that everyone gets +1 per tier to all attacks). You would have to create a similar feat for the implement users, though most implement users stick to a single one, IME.

 

[eamon]

Note that the +3/6/9 attacks are vs AC. IIRC.

Yeah, +3/+6/+9 is still insufficient - such a weapon effectively loses +3 over its lifetime - i.e. expertise. I'd suggest that natural weapons are largely ignored as significant attacks: it's not just that they fall behind, they tend to be weak, and they don't scale smoothly at all (so their usefulness fluctuates wildly), and they tend to be hard to improve via feats, items & class abilities, further widening the gap. So while a math fix would be a necessary precondition to make them competitive, it is not sufficient. However, as niche tools they can occasionally be useful (e.g. for a fighter to mark) - the point is it's a small niche which shouldn't be a big deciding factor wrt the expertise issue.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

After all, they are minor actions.

 

[Aulirophile]

Note that the +3/6/9 attacks are vs AC. IIRC.

You recall incorrectly. They are 3/6/9 to account for Expertise not applying. Only a handful of inherently scaling powers have this though (Acid Surge for Genasi, couple of others). Some are vs AC...which is still wrong. Should be 5/8/11 (or just changed to not be vs AC).