monk preview: another expertise feat - talk about stealth errata!

[Nail]

I'm not a subscriber, so I've haven't read the articles in detail, but there were skills grouped by role and ability score (to make it easier to pick an even spread rather than have the rogue rolling Bluff, Diplomacy and Streetwise while everyone else waits for him to finish), advice about aiding (since, as the article admits, aiding completely wrecks the whole idea), stuff like that. Mostly (very insightful) advice on how to run the game when non-combat challenges are concerned, rather than the new subsystem that seemed to be promised before the books came out.

I should see if I can't find those articles. They are very recent?

 

[jasin]

I should see if I can't find those articles. They are very recent?

The series is still running, having started some six months.

Dungeon: Ruling Skill Challenges Archive

 

[GMforPowergamers]

WotC explain? When was the last time WotC explained anything?

the same moment the playtest that revaled that monks where psionic they put up a design and development in order to explain what happened to ki...that was this week.

does that count?

Mike merls also said they were writeing an articule on expertise and attack upping feats for later this year...so just wait

 

[DrSpunj]

Mike merls also said they were writeing an articule on expertise and attack upping feats for later this year...so just wait (many sics!)

I'm not going to hold my breath, but I, too, am anxiously waiting to read articles such as these!

Do we even have a ballpark guess on when they'll be published? This month? next? the fall?

Thanks

 

[KarinsDad]

the same moment the playtest that revaled that monks where psionic they put up a design and development in order to explain what happened to ki...that was this week.

does that count?

No. For people like myself, rules are more important than fluff. I can build my own fluff. I expect the rules to be playtested and with few weaknesses.

Mike merls also said they were writeing an articule on expertise and attack upping feats for later this year...so just wait

He said that a week or two after PHB II came out. That was about 6 weeks ago.

On something this controversial, I do not consider it good customer service to wait months for a reply.

Maybe you feel differently.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

No. For people like myself, rules are more important than fluff. I can build my own fluff. I expect the rules to be playtested and with few weaknesses.

yea...I should guessed it didn't count, but had they said nothing I am sure it would have been evadance of lack of communcation...beutiful thing about already makeing up your mind is anything that dissagrees doesn't count...

He said that a week or two after PHB II came out. That was about 6 weeks ago.

On something this controversial, I do not consider it good customer service to wait months for a reply.

Maybe you feel differently.

I do...you see he said it to me (my post asked for it) about a week before this months calander was due up...so I NEVER expected it before next month. I also realize that there are reasons to delay it...like to answer more quastions they know are comeing (Like they had to know about the monk feat back then) like maybe things in divine and primal power that work like the ones in arcane power (race + type attack prereq +1/2 at 15/3 at 25th) and want to wait to say "see here are multi options for you and here is why"

as I have said in another post as we see more and more we mayb realize it is just a new type of feat...and yes maybe everyone will someday have one of them...but the choice makes you diffrent

(Example: My orb wizard always uses an ord I have expertise in it....Jim's wiazard has a couple of tombs, an orb, and a whole bunch of wands he switchs between but they are all fire based, so he has the dragonborn arcane feat...Lisa her gnome has a orb and a staff but mostly illusions, she took the illusion gonem feat...Mike's swordmage took the new feat form the monk playtest becuse he has half implment half weapon attacks, but ...Jack's swordmage multi classed into wizard and so has abunch of implments, so he didn't take any)

 

[KarinsDad]

yea...I should guessed it didn't count, but had they said nothing I am sure it would have been evadance of lack of communcation...beutiful thing about already makeing up your mind is anything that dissagrees doesn't count...

I already stated in my original post that you responded to that WotC has no problem discussing new products. I do not disagree with you on that.

The people here are talking about WotC discussing stealth game design and philosophy changes, not future monk features.

So, I think your example does not disprove my point in any way, rather it supports my POV.

Care to try again with an example about core game mechanic changes where WotC came out and talked about why they changed them? The only one I can think of is the Skill Challenge errata that really didn't fix the problem.

 

[Pickles JG]

The people here are talking about WotC discussing stealth game design and philosophy changes, not future monk features.

I am not sure WOTC see it like that. There was a comment from Mr Mearls ages ago (post release design article?) how one of the great things about 4e modularity was the ease with which it could be patched. I assumed they might mean feats & hoped for thing like the 1/2 elf paragon feat for its diletante power, or a really strong feat that made tieflings good infernal warlocks, or a couple of powers that made the Star pact paragon path fear save penalty have some actual effect, for examples. This last dead end reminds me of CCG design where a weak inital theme is left to wither rather than being developed. At least jank powers take up less space than jank cards.

I was not expecting these horrible, stupid OP (or are they maths fix?) expertise feats.

 

[Solodan]

Meh. Nice feat. Very nice for level 15 swordmages I guess, meh all around otherwise.

 

[Artoomis]

In this case, the sentiment remains the same. "The best way to interprete the rules is to let a computer program do it?" Yikes!

Off-topic, but...

Yes, using the tool wherein the game designers have implemented their interpretations of the rules can be a great way to interpret the rules. Since many rules interpretations might not get posted anywere else, this can be a great way to find out the "offical" rules.

On the other hand, you must take things in the Character Builder with a grain of salt because sometimes there are errors and they may not get corrected for a month or two (or possibly longer). On the other, other hand (the third hand?) those items get noted in the Character Builder FAQ.