Particle_Man
Explorer
Note: I am not talking about the NPC expert in the DMG. I am talking about the alternative character class called the generic expert in the Unearthed Arcana (not to be confused with Arcana Unearthed).
The generic classes in general increase flexibility at the cost of some power.
The warrior is like a fighter, but loses the heavy armour and tower shield proficiencies. In exchange, she can choose her good saving throw (it doesn't have to be Fortitude), choose up to 6 class skills (plus craft), and use her bonus feats for feats that are not on the "fighter only" list. A good trade, in my opinion.
The spellcaster is like a sorceror, but loses the auto-familiar, all but one simple weapon proficiency, and some spells cast/day (though keeps the same number of spells known). In exchange, she can choose her spells from the cleric or druid or sorceror/wizard list, she gets a feat at first level and every five levels that are not restricted to any wizard feat list (in fact, you could use a feat to get that familiar), can choose her good save, and can choose 4 class skills (plus gets craft, profession, and all knowledge skills as class skills). I think this is a good trade as well.
But the reason the above are good trades is that, traditionally, fighter-types and spellcaster-types had a limited range of "Good" class skills, and limited abilities not covered by their generic equivalents (spells in the one case, bonus feats in the other).
Now lets look at the expert. I model him on the bard. The expert is like a bard that gives up spellcasting abilities, bardic knowledge, all the "music-magic" abilities related to perform, shield proficiency, and a few weapon proficiencies (she keeps on martial of her choice, however). In exchange, she can choose which of her two saves are good, gains 12 class skills of her choice, plus craft and profession, and gains some bonus feats (one at 1st level, one at 2nd level, and one at every level evenly divisible by 4). Even taking into account that some of these feats can be spent to duplicate some class abilities, as per the generics rule set, what we have is a marked loss of power in exchange for some extra skill versatility. But the bard already has a large arrage of class skills, many of them useful. This is NOT a good trade. And the bard, traditionally, has not been the overwhelming powerhouse of the adventuring classes.
If you compare it to the rogue, the results are even worse. The rogue has more skill points, a larger number of good class skills, and a large number of rogue abilities. Is the extra good save really worth losing all that? Also, while some rogue abilities can be picked up with the bonus saves of the expert, the warrior can do this, and faster, because the warrior has more bonus feats.
The loss that the expert faces compared to his gains is disproportionate, when compared to the loss the other two generics face when compared to their gains. I think that the generic expert should be improved. Perhaps 2 more skill points/level would solve the problem. What do you think?
The generic classes in general increase flexibility at the cost of some power.
The warrior is like a fighter, but loses the heavy armour and tower shield proficiencies. In exchange, she can choose her good saving throw (it doesn't have to be Fortitude), choose up to 6 class skills (plus craft), and use her bonus feats for feats that are not on the "fighter only" list. A good trade, in my opinion.
The spellcaster is like a sorceror, but loses the auto-familiar, all but one simple weapon proficiency, and some spells cast/day (though keeps the same number of spells known). In exchange, she can choose her spells from the cleric or druid or sorceror/wizard list, she gets a feat at first level and every five levels that are not restricted to any wizard feat list (in fact, you could use a feat to get that familiar), can choose her good save, and can choose 4 class skills (plus gets craft, profession, and all knowledge skills as class skills). I think this is a good trade as well.
But the reason the above are good trades is that, traditionally, fighter-types and spellcaster-types had a limited range of "Good" class skills, and limited abilities not covered by their generic equivalents (spells in the one case, bonus feats in the other).
Now lets look at the expert. I model him on the bard. The expert is like a bard that gives up spellcasting abilities, bardic knowledge, all the "music-magic" abilities related to perform, shield proficiency, and a few weapon proficiencies (she keeps on martial of her choice, however). In exchange, she can choose which of her two saves are good, gains 12 class skills of her choice, plus craft and profession, and gains some bonus feats (one at 1st level, one at 2nd level, and one at every level evenly divisible by 4). Even taking into account that some of these feats can be spent to duplicate some class abilities, as per the generics rule set, what we have is a marked loss of power in exchange for some extra skill versatility. But the bard already has a large arrage of class skills, many of them useful. This is NOT a good trade. And the bard, traditionally, has not been the overwhelming powerhouse of the adventuring classes.
If you compare it to the rogue, the results are even worse. The rogue has more skill points, a larger number of good class skills, and a large number of rogue abilities. Is the extra good save really worth losing all that? Also, while some rogue abilities can be picked up with the bonus saves of the expert, the warrior can do this, and faster, because the warrior has more bonus feats.
The loss that the expert faces compared to his gains is disproportionate, when compared to the loss the other two generics face when compared to their gains. I think that the generic expert should be improved. Perhaps 2 more skill points/level would solve the problem. What do you think?
