Which feats are "taxes"?

[AllisterH]

Fogriving? I was pretty happy knowing that a character would hit at least once in a round. This 4e notion that misses and hits hovering around the 55% mark with a give-and-take of about 10% is crazy when you combine it with a bunch of one-shot attacks that you're relying upon to do the majority of the damage.

Huh?

With dailies and their best encounter powers, players I find set themselves up for the most advantageous position possible, meaning they use their racial ability (eladrin, deva), crank up the attack bonus from possible sources and


Again, assuming we are dealing with the mythical 50% success rate, frankly, you should only be missing on a 5 or lower. IME, at-wills whiff a lot but encounter and dailies? Nope, unless the dice REALLY hates, a.k.a you need to roll a 6 or better and in that situation, at levels 1-15, expertise doesn't help.


re: Wizard
Heh,,,ok, any controller can potentially make up to 20 rolls in an encounter, which means that at levels 1-15, assuming you have a 50% hit chance, with expertise, you hit 11 times and without, 10 times. Of course, the fact that you're hitting MULTIPLE characters means that any single power is really unlikely to be totally wasted.

Now, here's my question. Is one extra attack going to significantly affect a typical encounter? IME, no.

Hell, even with 40 rolls per encounter, this means that you hit 22 times with Expertise and 20 times without it. There's no elite that even takes 20 hits to defeat at levels 1-15 with at-wills.

 

[AllisterH]

There's a great deal of truth in this. But none of it negates this basic advice: glom onto an across-the-board +1 bonus to hit if it's available. You don't need to notice it making it a difference in every battle. You just need to know beforehand that your base chance of hitting is as good as it can be.

But I thought the question is "is it essential"? At levels 1-15, No. Again, this is all IMO.

In a lot of ways, it is more psychological benefit than an actual benefit since at those levels, unless the encounter involves a significantly overlevellled solo, you are NOT going to even see the effects of Expertise.

Again, I consider it akin to Natural Spell. Is there a druid player who doesn't take Natural Spell as soon as possible. Sure, it doesn't even affect most battles, but just having it seems to make the player feel more confident/better about their character.

To me, an "essential" feat IMO is the 3.x WEapon Finesse Feat. Now THERE...there's a feat any rogue needs to grab by level 6 and without question by level 9.

Without it, many a rogue is looking at least a 3 pt swing between their dex and strength and unlike front line melee classes, they needed every plus they could get.

 

[Felon]

With dailies and their best encounter powers, players I find set themselves up for the most advantageous position possible, meaning they use their racial ability (eladrin, deva), crank up the attack bonus from possible sources

"Set themselves up for the most advantageous position possible"? Soooo....flank. Just saying "flank" saves a lot of effort.

Basically, you either have combat advantage or you don't. That's as deep as tactical bonuses tend to get in 4e. And for a lot of characters that requires the Distant Advantage feat. I think that "tax feat" been rather overlooked in this discussion.

Every other bonus is going to come from someone's powers, and that's not a given. Utilities that grant to-hit bonuses either have one-round durations or are dailies (or both). Attacks that grant to-hit bonuses are themselves subject to whiff factor. So there's big question of how much "setting yourself up" any given character can do from round-to-round or encounter-to-encounter. Sometimes you have to make do with squat. That's particularly true in the case of all these knucklehead leaders that load up on healing powers as if healing is hands-down the best possible kind of buffing there was (but I guess that's another discussion).

Again, assuming we are dealing with the mythical 50% success rate, frankly, you should only be missing on a 5 or lower. IME, at-wills whiff a lot but encounter and dailies? Nope, unless the dice REALLY hates, a.k.a you need to roll a 6 or better and in that situation, at levels 1-15, expertise doesn't help.

Stop the presses! I've encountered the mythi many times. Encounters and dailies don't enjoy any inherent bonus to hit that at-wills don't. They ought to, but they don't. That you consider large bonuses from external sources to be a given is peculiar to say the least. How many devas and elves are in your party exactly?

 

[Cadfan]

Yeah, the biggest problem with the "encounters and dailies are where you concentrate all your bonuses" issue is that at level 11 you have 4 encounter attacks and 3 dailies, meaning you'll probably be throwing down 4 or 5 special, important attacks per encounter per player. So... 23 as a ballpark? I've got no doubt that people time their attacks for the best moment they can, but be reasonable about these things. Miss chances are real.

 

[roguerouge]

so please explain to me what would happen if we both sat down at an LFR game, and played level 1-16, and I didn't take expertise, or a NAD increaser, and neatehr does 1 or 2 other players. Since you earlier said:


I have to ask would you complain we were 'makeing it harder for you'

As I also said, check in with the other players at the table and the DM about what kind of expectations they have. I not only wrote that; it's in my sig.

As for what I would do?

First, I would wonder why battles were becoming harder and harder, why it felt like we were fighting short-handed. I would start thinking about why it was suddenly harder for all of us to achieve narrative goals.

After a while, I'd presumably notice that your character was not hitting creatures, was absorbing more damage, and was requiring more frequent emergency measures to bail out. Then, I'd try to diagnose why this was occurring. Are you devoting resources to other things that equivalently help out the party? Then, that's fine, provided that you're making sure that other people know not to devote resources to that choice. Are you new to the game and need some help? Are you unhappy with how things are going? Well, then we can figure things out, pretty easily. Some people don't like the mechanics of the game; if I can lend a hand with that and let them shine in other areas, what's the big deal?

BUT: if you're taking magic items others should have to make up for these choices, that's a problem. That's a problem, because that's when your choices impacted someone else's fun.

And if someone's character dies because you can't hit the side of a barn or soaked up all the healing? That's a HUGE problem, because that's when your choices impacted someone else's fun. That's when I get angry.

So, yeah, if your choices are going to impact someone else's fun, the least you can do is let your fellow players know.

Understand my take on this now?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

so weapon focus is just as good as a feat which procs at a critical hit. you know in 1 of 20 rolls it makes a difference... great

 

[GMforPowergamers]

As for what I would do?

First, I would wonder why battles were becoming harder and harder, why it felt like we were fighting short-handed. I would start thinking about why it was suddenly harder for all of us to achieve narrative goals.

Ok, so what if that didn't happen? what if without htese feat I was still a powerhouse member of the team?

After a while, I'd presumably notice that your character was not hitting creatures, was absorbing more damage, and was requiring more frequent emergency measures to bail out.

what if without those feats none of that was true (Becuse it is not always...)

And if someone's character dies because you can't hit the side of a barn or soaked up all the healing? That's a HUGE problem, because that's when your choices impacted someone else's fun. That's when I get angry.

But my fun might have some feats in mind...but you don't mind messing with that by telling people what the have to take...

So, yeah, if your choices are going to impact someone else's fun, the least you can do is let your fellow players know.

Understand my take on this now?

not in the least...

 

[fuzzlewump]

so weapon focus is just as good as a feat which procs at a critical hit. you know in 1 of 20 rolls it makes a difference... great

Hitting with an attack is going to do more damage than 1d10, unless your a terribly built character at level 1. Weapon focus is better. Not sure if it was a joke, but there ya go anyway.

EDIT: Assumed you meant devastating critical... but I'm pretty sure there isn't much better than that anyway.

 

[keterys]

It is odd how much of a fervor gets thrown up by this concept every time it comes up.

I'm going to go a step further. Way further.

I think any feat which is inherently boring and just gives a passive benefit that is of a clear and notable mechanical nature is one that taxes the ability of characters to make more interesting and fun builds.

Cause, sure, you can put your guy who can shift on charges and quickdraw and throw his rarely-used weapons further and such against the guy with +2 attack, +2 damage, and high crit. And it'll go the same way every time. And that's not really what was promised from the game system. Or what's in the best interest of the fun of the system.

So, I'd happily see Expertise go. And paragon/epic defenses. And toughness, I guess. And Weapon Focus. Superior Weapon Proficiency. All that boring crap. Give me feat options that add play options, tactics, story. Not another bloody +1.

This stuff's not breaking the game, but from my porch I deem it crap and want it off my lawn.

P.S. If you're going to argue about expertise, try to argue about its effects at 15th at +2. That way you avoid the hyperbole of "But it's only +1, chances are it doesn't even have any effect at all on an average battle" _and_ the "At +3 it's more than three times as good as these lesser feats and gives +30% damage" and settle on something slightly closer to its average.

 

[Hellzon]

I think any feat which is inherently boring and just gives a passive benefit that is of a clear and notable mechanical nature is one that taxes the ability of characters to make more interesting and fun builds.

Word. Channel Divinity feats, Reaper's Touch, Linguist. Those are interesting feats. Improved Initiative is not.