Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kaomera" data-source="post: 5530585" data-attributes="member: 38357">In practice I've found this not to be entirely true - I wish it was and I have argued (and will continue to argue) that the &quot;math fix&quot; was not actually absolutely needed (but the customers that WotC was responding to felt it was, so that's kind of a moot point), that expertise feats etc. did not actually address the actual problem at hand, and that the mathematical disparity across 30 levels of play could just as easily be of some benefit as it could be a flaw. However, in a very real practical sense in the games that I have actually experienced, it's not an issue of if a given character will take an expertise feat and at least one defense-boosting feat (and there are a few others that are nearly in the same category) but when, unless you specifically and deliberately avoid them just for the sake of avoiding them. And I really don't think that last option is any better than taking them.I would note that this discovery has led me to decide not to implement any kind of &quot;bonus expertise&quot; house-rules in the future. Players are going to take the feats anyway, and they're going to take them because they want them more than anything else. Giving them their &quot;second choice&quot; (or 5th or 6th choice, really) doesn't really improve things, IMO. If a player really wants a feat at 1st level for their character concept, IME, they're going to take it and put off expertise, etc. for a level or two. and IMO it's not going to hurt anything.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kaomera, post: 5530585, member: 38357"] In practice I've found this not to be entirely true - I wish it was and I have argued (and will continue to argue) that the "math fix" was not actually absolutely needed (but the customers that WotC was responding to felt it was, so that's kind of a moot point), that expertise feats etc. did not actually address the actual problem at hand, and that the mathematical disparity across 30 levels of play could just as easily be of some benefit as it could be a flaw. However, in a very real practical sense in the games that I have actually experienced, it's not an issue of [i]if[/i] a given character will take an expertise feat and at least one defense-boosting feat (and there are a few others that are nearly in the same category) but [i]when[/i], unless you specifically and deliberately avoid them just for the sake of avoiding them. And I really don't think that last option is any better than taking them. I would note that this discovery has led me to decide not to implement any kind of "bonus expertise" house-rules in the future. Players are going to take the feats anyway, and they're going to take them because they want them more than anything else. Giving them their "second choice" (or 5th or 6th choice, really) doesn't really improve things, IMO. If a player really wants a feat at 1st level for their character concept, IME, they're going to take it and put off expertise, etc. for a level or two. and IMO it's not going to hurt anything. [/QUOTE]

Verification