Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7640740" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Even with expertise a flat +2, the will be likely as good or better than the non-rogues at things that are important to them. Our current +2 to +4 expertise rule works okay, I was thinking more of a flat bonus to keep it simple. I toyed with half proficiency but if I boost proficiency to +11, then expertise would max at +5... I am not sure about that.We played for a while that expertise gave you advantage on checks instead of a bonus. The rogues in the group revolted. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> (Except myself, I wasn't a rogue then...)This is old-school and I was mistaken about it in 5E myself at first. Ability scores represent some natural talent and can also be some training. Funny, huh? I never liked the idea and thought that being the case, "proficiency" should have been relabeled "specialization".Our house-rule does this sort of. When you create your character you can sack one of your background skills to gain expertise in the other.Nice for you, but for me proficiency (i.e. experience) should definitely out-pace the others.</blockquote>