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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Danceofmasks" data-source="post: 4720682" data-attributes="member: 70765">I posted a rant elsewhere, and I figured I'll post it here, too.Apologies if most of the points have already been made, as the rant was meant to sum up the power creep issue. So <Weapon/Implement> Expertise.Ok, +1 to hit means a lot.Much more than most players think, but I'll leave them to their delusions at heroic tier, and focus on epic tier.+3 hitroll is a 15% swing in the odds of inflicting status conditions, up to and including the ideal "dead" condition.It's huge. It's so huge that having players with and without on the same table is a catalyst for disgust at the necessity of retraining.Perhaps it's to compensate for PCs getting +26 hitroll over 29 level gains, whilst their foes get +29 to all defenses over those same 29 level gains.They stuffed up the maths, and rather than admit their mistake and apply errata, they're trying to do the same thing with a feat.In a book that costs money.If it's a computer game, it'd be tantamount to "charging me $40 to <a href="mailto:un@#$%">un@#$%</a>! my game." So it widens the gap between haves and have-nots, the very definition of power creep and unbalanced supplementary material.What was it WotC said about 4e, sweet spots, and fundamental game mechanics?Now, I usually despise house-ruling but right now, the rather common "I'll just give all my players that boost to all their attacks" is a great idea.Irregardless, in campaigns, tournaments, and in other by-the-book settings, PCs will have to have these feats at least once.At least. And that there is the other problem.The feat doesn't apply to all your possible attack rolls. Rather than the supplement providing options for being cooler at what you do, it becomes more of a chokehold on builds.So we have twice as many feats to choose from, but having a half dozen nigh-necessary feats make these choices moot. Maybe my point isn't immediately apparent, so I'll use a classic example: the cha paladin. Used to be, they already had issues having to invest in holy symbols as well as weapons. Why, now it's not just an investment in gear, it's an investment in feats, too. Ok, fine ... so they always had that issue with their damroll, but 3 points of damroll at epic tier is a small slice of total damage output, whilst 3 points of hitroll is an enormous gap in effectiveness ... partly because total potential damage output is so much higher.Used to be, they had problems doing melee basic attacks. You now have a feat to .. use cha instead.Throw in a few other choice feats based on race or class, such as healing hands, and what happens?The available pool of "feats your character wants" ends up being smaller than before the release of PHB2.I reiterate. Smaller pool of desired feats.That is a sign of unbalance, don't you think? Not that I'm surprised at the way it's turning out, the very fact that material in PHB1 is unbalanced against other material in PHB1 means it was always going to happen.But no feat should ever be so disgustingly overpowered that it's a case of "have it or be sub-optimal."</blockquote>

Verification