Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7643300" data-attributes="member: 6987520">We are getting somewhere, just maybe not where you want to be. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The idea of allowing expertise to match your better contribution from proficiency or ability isn't making the classes worse IMO, it is bringing them back within bounded accuracy. And as I said before, with RAW, expertise contributes (over again) the same benefit as proficiency. Even with 2d10, the same issue remains that (for only the sake of a class feature), rogues and bards have the potential to be better at things than other classes which would naturally excel at those skills.I like the idea (and it might warrant a rename) that expertise can be used by rogues and bards to shore up skills where ability is lacking (the aforementioned STR/athletics and WIS/perception examples). This could be a big boon to those skills, after all. Also, with the +1 when proficiency and ability are the same, those classes still have to potential to be better (albeit only slightly) than other classes. A rogue, for instance, with DEX 20 and proficiency +5 would have a total of +11, while a similar ranger would be +10. As soon as they both make proficiency +6, the rogue would be +12 and the ranger +11... so the rogue is still better. Considering they can do this with four skills, it is still a nice feature IMO.Or maybe just cap the total modifier for RAW at +13 or so, regardless of how you got there. It will require more thought...Oddly enough, your High proficiency is nearly identical to our standard. Something along these lines might work, but I have to think about it. Thanks for it and it reminds me in some ways of D20 SW, which I always liked.Nice. I will have to consider this as well and check some numbers. I am not keen on the passive 10 part since to me "passive" is really more like a 5 LOL.</blockquote>

Verification