What's the big deal with "feat taxes?"

[keterys]

Well into house rule territory, but it would be very interesting if expertise instead gave you a minimum base attack bonus - which would primarily make up for low stats, multiclassing oddness, and lack of enhancement bonus.

Benefit: When you make an attack, your attack bonus without applying any penalties is a minimum of level + 5 vs. AC or level + 3 vs. another defense. If your normal attack bonus is higher than that, there is no change.

(or similar - 1 higher for example, to match that other book)

Edit: Slight iteration - probably better to be level + 5 for _weapon_ attacks and level + 3 for any other attack. (or +6/+4, more likely)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I would like that minimum attack bonus implemented as default option... it kills any "i get more benefits" if i miss builds

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Assuming we're talking about a taclord and not a lazylord... a +3 to hit with hail of steel, thunderous fury... is a massive difference in damage for the group as a whole.

You know I am sick to death of hearing this... my warlord gives attacks, gives bonuses, and heals well... I hit more often then I miss... so witch ever feat I take is ON TOP of healing the party...so I choose to add my Int to damage on action points...and my Int to my inspireing word, and any number of other benfits BEFORE I prioritize attack.

Any leader whose benefits trigger on a hit, should care about hitting.

You know there is a big diff between not careing and thinking you are doing fine... I started my half elf tac lord with a 16 str and 16 COn, My Eladrin one started with a 16 and a 18... my artaficer started with an 18 Int, my two warlords both had +3 prof weapons, my artaficer had a +2 prof weapon...

To be honest my half elf tac lord had a luck blade longdword... so I had a reroll once per day to fall back on too... but I never needed expertise on any of them, so I took other feats... the half elf made it to epic the eladrin to low paragon, the artaficer to 8th level...

It's extremely hard to argue that a +3 to hit is not a big deal to a character. Any attempt to do so will only devalue any argument you might have. It's easy to argue that the feat isn't needed, or isn't a good idea (or vice versa), but I suspect both arguments have already been well tread.

How about this argument... I like the bonus, but do not NEED it, I can contribute with out it... infact I do so all the time. If you did not see my sheet or know my build you would love having me at your table... but if you look at the sheet it is far from perfect optimized...

Basically, people who give them out for free, or implement a more "inherent bonus" like feat bonus to attack and/or defense and/or damage, do so cause they muddy up the feat choices, and are at the moment designed particularly well for certain characters and not others (Ex: Swordmage vs. Rogue). Other people ban them entirely, because they don't like how they impact the game.

And I do neather...I let people choose them. I even tell people "If you feel you don't hit enough take an ezpertise feat" but I never force nor allow others to force them to take them to take any feat.

There's a wide range between those points that different games might be served, too.

Ding ding ding we have a winner... when we make them feats we let everyone play how they want... I take or dont take baised on my character want and or need...and so does everyone else.







so again my challenge is this...if you acept that my group would like it to be a player choice weather to have it or not...and that some groups want everyone to have them, and that some groups want no one to have it... how better then a set of feat to make the most amount of poeple happy???

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I would like that minimum attack bonus implemented as default option... it kills any "i get more benefits" if i miss builds

but what do we set the min to?

the equvlant of 16 stat and +2 prof?

18 stat and _3 prof?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

as a minimum, i guess 16 stat +2 proficiency seems appropriate... otherwise it seems abusable from dwarven fighters...

so it is 4+level on weapon attacks and 2+level on implement attacks...

("against equal level standard monsters you hit with a 10" is the benchmark, as 55% is the magic number!)

 

[GMforPowergamers]

("against equal level standard monsters you hit with a 10" is the benchmark, as 55% is the magic number!)

ok what about monsters that have 4 diffrent numbers in there 4 diffrent defs...

is I hit AC on a 11, Fort on a 16, Ref on a 9, and Will on a 5 exceptable?


what about I hit AC on a 13, Fort on a 13, ref on a 1o, and will on a 5?


how about I hit his AC on a 8, fort on a 9, ref on a 8 and will on a 15??

 

[keterys]

Except, the feat is there to help people with the poor attack bonuses "catch up" under that theory, so you're probably fine letting a 16 stat +2 prof character get something out of it.

P.S. Nobody "needs" anything in most 4e games. The minimum bar for most characters is _very_ low. I can only think of a couple players I've seen bring characters that actively harmed the party in their inclusion (among other things cause the game got harder with them there) - and one had an optimized build, they just played it so badly it was laughable, and the other... well, was a leader who spent more time second winding than anything else I remember him doing. That and he missed a (non-penalized) attack when rolling a 15 on the die once, so presumably he was doing something nuts with his character (oh, I think he was the lazy lord who wasn't good at helping his allies, and kept being in the wrong place)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Hmm... maybe just give an additional +1 feat bonus on top of it... I don´t know if it is wise to allow a certain unoptimal spread to catch up... it may allow for other optimized builds...

but i guess, with normal players, you really can´t do wrong... (i chose 55% as this is what some people claim the Devs had in mind when they designed 4e)

 

[MrMyth]

If you start with an 18 post-racial attack stat and boost at every opportunity and a +3 proficiency weapon, then have a +6 enhancement, leader bonuses, Epic Destiny primary stat boost, stances, combat advantage, controller de-buffs, miss effects, etc. you reach a point of diminishing returns. That +3 from the expertise is still a +3 but when you're already hitting on a ridiculously low number, it becomes kind of pointless, or even worse, boring.

I'm someone who is of the opinion that you certainly don't need Expertise to have a good hit chance at Epic levels. And yet, that doesn't mean the bonus is ignoreable. A well-built character with all those benefits isn't guaranteed to be hitting on a 2+ all the time. Against a DM who is presenting appropriate encounters, I'm guessing that player typically hits on an 8+ or so, and might get that down to a 5+ when everything lines up.

Expertise kicks that all the way down to a 2+, a very good place to be in. Especially since that well-built character also likely has access to rerolls, which become more effective the better your hit chance is.

If you are in a game where you have enough bonuses that a +3 bonus to hit from a single feat is irrelevant... there may already be a problem at hand, namely the DM not presenting appropriate challenges. I certainly don't believe Expertise is needed to stay viable at Epic levels, but I also don't think your average character - even your average optimized character - will automatically find all encounters trivial, either.

Finally, even if you have stacked the deck so you hit reasonably often... Expertise is still there, making other feats look bad. Why take an Epic feat that gives a conditional +2 bonus to hit when you do something iconic and character defining... when you can instead take a +3 bonus to hit all the time?

I'm sorry, but arguing that +3 to hit is irrelevant, at any level in the game, is simply wrong.

 

[Herschel]

I find that players complaining when they miss when they roll a 5 or under annoying. Going "Crap, I rolled a 5" is fine but when you expect to hit by rolling a 5? That's not the game's fault, that's an entitled player whine.