things i like/dislike about PHB2 - a sort of review

[Runestar]

You have Weapon Expertise and Weapon Expertise, and you cannot add them together because you cannot stack the same thing with itself.

That was indeed the case for stacking in 3.5, but I am not sure if the same rules carry over to 4e...?

 

[Xris Robin]

Weapon Expertise does NOT stack, and is going to be errated. Check the PHB2 FAQ on the Wizards website, it's already be updated with two questions... including this one.

 

[Cadfan]

Reviewing the book, I have to concede. Nothing explicitly says that, if you are allowed to take the same feat twice with a different sub-choice, you can't stack it with itself.

 

[Jack99]

Weapon Expertise does NOT stack, and is going to be errated. Check the PHB2 FAQ on the Wizards website, it's already be updated with two questions... including this one.

I knew it! Can't find it though, any chance of a link?

Reviewing the book, I have to concede. Nothing explicitly says that, if you are allowed to take the same feat twice with a different sub-choice, you can't stack it with itself.

No but it makes great sense

 

[Nightson]

I knew it! Can't find it though, any chance of a link?

Answer

 

[Jack99]

Answer

Much obliged. I guess that settles that discussion.

 

[evilbob]

Well, this certainly counts for "quickly errata it" so Jack99's right: the designers did not intend for it to stack. Which is sadly hilarious because it means they really did not think it through. Man, I have lost all faith in the dev's reasoning for this feat: if they couldn't even defeat a simple and obvious rules-lawyering with clearer language, then they definitely didn't anticipate the community backlash. I am really starting to think the best houserule is the +1 to all attacks, instead of trying to fix this awful feat.

I'll update my OP with a few notes.

 

[Wolfspider]

That's how it's worked for 3e, too. PHB sells a lot more copies, so the margin can be smaller. 3e splats were smaller than the core books, too.

Just my pet peeve again and nothing personal toward you, Agamon, but...what does 3rd edition have to do with anything?

Can we stop using "that's how it was done in 3e, too" to defend 4th edition?

It's a new game. Let's start with a clean slate and judge it on its own merits. It's a great game, but it's not perfect.

I think it's a valid criticism to say that charging the same amount for 100 pages less seems odd, despite what was done in the past.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Just my pet peeve again and nothing personal toward you, Agamon, but...what does 3rd edition have to do with anything?

Can we stop using "that's how it was done in 3e, too" to defend 4th edition?

It's a new game. Let's start with a clean slate and judge it on its own merits. It's a great game, but it's not perfect.

I think it's a valid criticism to say that charging the same amount for 100 pages less seems odd, despite what was done in the past.

How about this then?:

It is WotC's policy to sell the PHB, DMG, and MM at a reduced margin in order to make the game accessible and attract players, postponing major profits until the supplements are released. This is done in a manner similar to the way that game console manufacturers often sell their consoles at or below cost in order to generate an installed base to which they can sell games at high margin, to make money on the game licenses.

The 3 core books are "loss leaders" that get you into the game and turn you into a possible purchaser of the supplement books. Someone without the 3 core books is not likely to be a potential customer, so it is vitally important to price the starter books in such a way that a new player will not feel like they're gambling a lot of money in order to get started with a game they aren't certain that they'll enjoy. This was the policy for 3rd edition books, and it remains the policy for 4th edition books, because WotC has determined that it is a productive strategy.

 

[Jack99]

I am really starting to think the best houserule is the +1 to all attacks, instead of trying to fix this awful feat.

See, now we agree 100%.

I have already done it in my campaign.