New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 121 to 149 of 149
  1. - Top - End - #121
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    pwykersotz's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Western Washington
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    There is no skill system in 5e, and giving Rogues spells as capstone is just going "look, we all know martials can't really do anything special, so give them magic."
    You continue to polarize this, and doing so is robbing you of perspective. Spells are nothing more than modular class features, just like anything else. Depending on circumstance and the other abilities that a class can bring to bear, a relatively innocuous spell might be incredibly powerful, or vice versa.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre View Post
    I still don't really see the problem, but in the interests of trying to be helpful, let me propose one numerical compromise and one non-numerical compromise. Tell me if you think that either (or both) solve the problem, even if they're inelegant.

    Numerical shift: Each skill you choose for expertise no longer uses the associated modifier--instead the bonus is calculated as 5 + proficiency.
    Discussion: This retains the "no need for ability scores" feature of expertise, but reduces the maximum bonus to that of any other player with proficiency and a maxed score. In some ways, this is more powerful [since if the DM calls for a WIS (Stealth) check, the rogue now has the same modifier as for a DEX (stealth) check], but generally it's less powerful than regular expertise. Even so, when combined with Reliable Talent the rogue can still routinely reach minimum rolls of 20/21 which removes 90% of the checks encountered for that skill. Thus, it seems the system-breaker (for rogues) is Reliable Talent, not expertise.

    Non-numerical shift X times per rest (short vs long would depend on X) you can declare "I got this" and auto-succeed on a single check to which you apply proficiency.
    Discussion: This is an active ability and provides a resource. X would have to scale with level, or dips would be super powerful. This provides the "I can do certain things better than others can," but doesn't really help with most checks. It does make the Skilled feat (or being a half-elf/variant human) more powerful though. Still, rogues with Reliable Talent are succeeding on every single stealth check (and any other DEX-based proficient skill) since they have a minimum of 20 with a maxed DEX. Even a skill in which they have proficiency and no ability modifier is still an auto-success on DC 15 and below checks.

    Realization: If the issue is that rogues are succeeding too much (breaking the ability check system through high numbers), then the system breaker is Reliable Talent, not Expertise, although Expertise aggravates the issue. At level 11 (when you get Reliable Talent), the minimum roll for any proficient skill is 15 (assuming a non-negative ability modifier). That alone removes fully 2/3 of all proficient checks automatically (since 99% are in the range 10-20 if you're following the DMG's guidance). Combined with expertise (and a 0 modifier), you're looking at all checks of DC 20 or below are automatically passed. With a maxed ability score + expertise, any check DC <= 25 is an automatic success. At level 11.

    Bards on the other hand still struggle even with expertise except in CHA things. The table lists the minimum non-auto-success DC given a maxed ability score: 5 + X + 2, the +2 is 1 from rolling a 1 and 1 from being the next step up (since a tie goes to the roller):

    Proficiency Not Proficient Minimum Proficient Minimum Expertise Minimum
    3 8 10 13
    4 9 11 15
    5 9 12 17
    6 10 13 19

    Interesting.
    Interesting ideas. From my perspective, the Numerical shift offers a cool option to mitigate low ability scores. That is a great ability. However, the lack of anything for skills with already high ability scores is less than desirable. As I said, I want Rogues to have their cool toys. Having more versatility is cool, but it could be upset by a magical tome increasing your stats or a later build choice that turns your great bonus into something kind of depressing. These aren't inherently deal-breakers, but they are a detriment. So your experiment here is a success, I think this is too much of a nerf.

    The non-numerical shift option is solid. A little boring, but solid. I would want it to need to be chosen before the roll is made so that it doesn't feel like a re-roll power. The downside is in flavor, of course. Not the first time D&D runs afoul of this, but it's preferable not to have that downside if possible.

    Another way to approach this jumps out at me. In World of Warcraft, Blizzard reskinned the xp bar in beta. Originally it provided an xp penalty for playing too long. People HATED it. So they reskinned it, changing no mechanics, and made what had been 'normal xp' into 'rested xp' and turned the penalty into normal. People loved it.

    Maybe a Rogue could, by having the appropriate tools, decrease the DC of a check in which they have expertise by their proficiency bonus. And if we're really feeling generous, maybe this could apply to the whole team as well. So if swinging across that rope onto a rickety bridge and diving past the crocodiles is a DC 20 Acrobatics check, well that top level Rogue cries "Follow me," and demonstrates that it's easier than it looks at a now DC 14 (wrapping a leather strap around the hands to prevent rope burn, landing just as the bridge swings towards the rope, and tossing a pouch of sand into the eyes of the crocodiles, for example), and lets the rest of the party follow at the same DC. It's probably far from perfect, but on first pass I like this idea.

    Edit: The idea could be manipulated further. Subtract proficiency for just the rogue, subtract half proficiency if it's the entire party. Or either/or. Just throwing thoughts around.
    Last edited by pwykersotz; 2017-09-24 at 08:06 PM.
    Attacking the darkness since 2009.

    Spoiler: Quotes I like
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by icefractal regarding What would a Cat Lord want? View Post
    She wants the renegade Red Dot brought to her court in chains.
    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz regarding randomly rolling edgelord backstories View Post
    Huh...Apparently I'm Agony Blood Blood, Half-orc Shadow Sorcerer. I killed a Dragons. I'm Chaotic Good, probably racist.

  2. - Top - End - #122
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    thereaper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Why would anyone want to nerf expertise, when Guidance and Peerless Skill are already better?
    Wolfen Houndog - The World in Revolt (4e)
    The Mythic Warrior, a 3.5 base class that severs limbs and sunders armor
    The Nameless One, converted to 3.5 and 5e

  3. - Top - End - #123
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MadBear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    This may be way too fiddly, but what if we took a cue from the BM fighter here. They start with 4 superiority dice that work their way up from d6 to d12 over the course of the game. Unlike the BM instead of choosing powers they chose which skills get this bonus. They may add the dice to a proficient skill check, or they can choose to expend 2 dice to add a dice after a roll has been made, but before success is known.

    The d6-d12 mimic the +3 to +6 bonus that expertise provides, but the limited quantity ensures that it's a limited resource to be used. Being able to spend 2 dice to add it to a roll after the fact also allow that rogue who rolled well, but not great to push themselves over a close check.

    As far as I can see here are some pro's/con's

    Pro's:
    - Mimics the system helping keep relative balance (it hopefully isn't breaking the game)
    - The random nature of the roll means that it doesn't lead to autosuccess as often (you could still roll a 1)
    - Rogues still get to feel awesome at their chosen skills

    Con's:
    - It's fiddly
    - It's very similar to what the bard does making it not feel as unique (although the bards is more party focused while this is self focused).

  4. - Top - End - #124
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    pwykersotz's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Western Washington
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    My idea doesn't work. I played a bit with it and reducing the DC is just too fussy. Oh well.
    Attacking the darkness since 2009.

    Spoiler: Quotes I like
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by icefractal regarding What would a Cat Lord want? View Post
    She wants the renegade Red Dot brought to her court in chains.
    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz regarding randomly rolling edgelord backstories View Post
    Huh...Apparently I'm Agony Blood Blood, Half-orc Shadow Sorcerer. I killed a Dragons. I'm Chaotic Good, probably racist.

  5. - Top - End - #125
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by thereaper View Post
    Why would anyone want to nerf expertise, when Guidance and Peerless Skill are already better?
    Guidance is great at 1st level (barring all the times when you can't use it because of time or subterfuge/need-for-silence reasons) but does not improve. Peerless Skill is a SR limited, starts-at-level-14 ability. Adding much of anything to skill checks is up for discussion, to be certain, but I'm not exactly sure how you think this negates the concern over expertise.

  6. - Top - End - #126
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    I like the skill expertise feats, because if I want to play a character who is an expert in ________, I don't necessarily also want to play someone who a: is a sneak attacker , or b: is a primary spellcaster. Why is it beyond the pale for a paladin to be an expert in religion, or a barbarian to be an expert in survival?

  7. - Top - End - #127
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by alchahest View Post
    I like the skill expertise feats, because if I want to play a character who is an expert in ________, I don't necessarily also want to play someone who a: is a sneak attacker , or b: is a primary spellcaster. Why is it beyond the pale for a paladin to be an expert in religion, or a barbarian to be an expert in survival?
    I long ago suggested expertise as a half feat. I'm not the only one to do so. But it sparks debate because some feel that steps on Bards' and Rogues' toes. They're assumed to be the best skill monkeys, which presumably means having the best skill Checks.
    Breaking BM: Revised - an updated look at the beast-mounted halfling ranger based on the Revised Ranger: Beast Conclave.

  8. - Top - End - #128
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Bard and Rogue already got a couple of advantages over other (especially martial) classes;
    1: the number of and options for skills they get to learn just by virtue of their class
    2: great class and subclass features that boost their skills (thief rogue can interact as a bonus action, bards can give their opponent disadvantage, etc)
    3: They expertise without taking a feat. and if expertise feats are available to everyone, they also have the option to take expertise feats - which means they're still streets ahead
    Last edited by alchahest; 2017-09-25 at 02:43 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #129
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by alchahest View Post
    I like the skill expertise feats, because if I want to play a character who is an expert in ________, I don't necessarily also want to play someone who a: is a sneak attacker , or b: is a primary spellcaster. Why is it beyond the pale for a paladin to be an expert in religion, or a barbarian to be an expert in survival?
    Not saying anyone has to agree with me but I equate this to if there were a feat you could take to get extra attack.
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  10. - Top - End - #130
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    or a feat to be able to cast a spell and some cantrips, or a feat to be able to use superiority dice, or a feat to gain proficiency in a save you don't already have, or a feat to gain extra skills from any list...

  11. - Top - End - #131
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    Not saying anyone has to agree with me but I equate this to if there were a feat you could take to get extra attack.
    I would pin it closer to Magic Initiate or Ritual Caster (which are designed to allow you to step on others toes), but the point is well made.

    I think what we have here, is a bit of a dichotomy. We don't want people stepping on the rogues toes, but we do what to be able to make a 'good at sneaking' fighter or something similar if that's our character concept, and it's hard to do both.

  12. - Top - End - #132
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    a fighter won't ever (outside of multiclassing, which negates this whole thing anyways) be able to hide as a bonus action, or do sneak attack damage by attacking out of hiding, nor will they ever get assassin or thief subclass abilities. The sneaky martial side of things is still very firmly a rogue thing, I think.

  13. - Top - End - #133
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by alchahest View Post
    a fighter won't ever (outside of multiclassing, which negates this whole thing anyways) be able to hide as a bonus action, or do sneak attack damage by attacking out of hiding, nor will they ever get assassin or thief subclass abilities. The sneaky martial side of things is still very firmly a rogue thing, I think.
    It was just an example. But yes, there are things other than the flat skill total + that makes a rogue the class to do rogue-y things. My point is that we want to have rogues have a niche, yet if you have a character concept (<class> that surprisingly is a really good <skill>), you want to be able to do it. At least I think that's why the UA skill feats are there.

  14. - Top - End - #134
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    me too!

    My current character has the investigation feat, and a previous one had the insight feat. Neither was even remotely thiefy, but they fit the character (the investigation character is a former city guard / detective who is an eldritch knight, and the previous is a hexblade who was a second son, doomed to diplomatic duty, the insight feat was representative of his manner of studying people, he was a very patient listener, despite not having a huge wisdom score (which meant his perception was still fairly poor)

  15. - Top - End - #135
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie the Duck View Post
    It was just an example. But yes, there are things other than the flat skill total + that makes a rogue the class to do rogue-y things. My point is that we want to have rogues have a niche, yet if you have a character concept (<class> that surprisingly is a really good <skill>), you want to be able to do it. At least I think that's why the UA skill feats are there.
    I consider expertise and reliable talent the defining features of rogue. The one thing that makes them special. There's no feat for a paladin aura. There's no feat for metamagic. While I don't expect to change anyone's mind, I hope at least you can see the ground I'm standing on.
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  16. - Top - End - #136
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    For many people, rogues are defined by sneak attack and their array of bonus action options, along with the number of and variety of skills they can learn

  17. - Top - End - #137
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by alchahest View Post
    For many people, rogues are defined by sneak attack and their array of bonus action options, along with the number of and variety of skills they can learn
    Discounting crits, I think 1 attack with sneak attack is just another way of doing about what all martial do. Skills are thankfully not walled off in this edition (in 3.x the real way they screwed the fighter was by giving it few and only terrible skills). As I said, I like that the rogue is the class to be legendary for doing almost magical things with skill alone. I also think it wasn't the best idea to give that to bards as well.
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  18. - Top - End - #138
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Vinland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    I consider expertise and reliable talent the defining features of rogue. The one thing that makes them special. There's no feat for a paladin aura. There's no feat for metamagic. While I don't expect to change anyone's mind, I hope at least you can see the ground I'm standing on.
    Interesting. i would have pegged the "identity" of Rogues as Sneak attack & Cunning action in the same way for Barbarians I think it's Rage & Reckless Attack and Fighters it's Actions Surge & additional Extra Attacks. It never hurts to read different perspectives though.

    Part of my problem with Expertise is I think there is little narrative reason to tie it to Thieve's Cant. Like why does my character have to know Thieve's Cant to an expert at Survival if he was raised by wolves? Admittedly this specific problem is fixed by moving Thieve's Cant to the Thief subclass.

  19. - Top - End - #139
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by GlenSmash! View Post
    Interesting. i would have pegged the "identity" of Rogues as Sneak attack & Cunning action in the same way for Barbarians I think it's Rage & Reckless Attack and Fighters it's Actions Surge & additional Extra Attacks. It never hurts to read different perspectives though.

    Part of my problem with Expertise is I think there is little narrative reason to tie it to Thieve's Cant. Like why does my character have to know Thieve's Cant to an expert at Survival if he was raised by wolves? Admittedly this specific problem is fixed by moving Thieve's Cant to the Thief subclass.
    Can't say I've played in a 5e game that makes use of thieves cant at all.
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  20. - Top - End - #140
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Vinland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    Can't say I've played in a 5e game that makes use of thieves cant at all.
    True for me too. Funny how it bothers me so much.

  21. - Top - End - #141
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Corvallis, OR
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by GlenSmash! View Post
    True for me too. Funny how it bothers me so much.
    Yeah, same with Druidic. Although I kinda forced the issue with that one in my last session. Didn't really matter because there was a) a druid, and b) a 14th level monk, so languages were covered. That group can speak with/read anything--monk + warlock with the language invocation = bases covered.
    Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
    Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
    5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
    NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
    NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.

  22. - Top - End - #142
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre View Post
    Yeah, same with Druidic. Although I kinda forced the issue with that one in my last session. Didn't really matter because there was a) a druid, and b) a 14th level monk, so languages were covered. That group can speak with/read anything--monk + warlock with the language invocation = bases covered.
    Yeah, I'm with you on druidic. If I were them I think I would have dropped that language all together and gone with druids knowing primordial. I think that would be pretty thematic for them.

    And I really appreciate this being a thread with different viewpoints that at least so far hasn't degenerated into a mindless argument.
    I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!

  23. - Top - End - #143
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Vinland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    And I really appreciate this being a thread with different viewpoints that at least so far hasn't degenerated into a mindless argument.
    Indeed. i was just thinking: Pretty good day on the forums.

  24. - Top - End - #144
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    well done, everyone!

  25. - Top - End - #145
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    I consider expertise and reliable talent the defining features of rogue. The one thing that makes them special. There's no feat for a paladin aura. There's no feat for metamagic. While I don't expect to change anyone's mind, I hope at least you can see the ground I'm standing on.
    I kinda agree with this. As I said earlier in the thread, my only real problem with expertise was its auto scaling, which lets other classes dip and get the full effect of what I see as a core rogue feature. While I certainly would have no problem with a feat that gives you a bonus to certain skills, straight up expertise would be too much, imo. People can point to Martial Adept of Magic Initiate, but both of those give only a limited version of the thing they are based on. Martial Adept gives you only 1d6 superiority die. That is a smaller size and a quarter of the number the battlemaster gets, and it never scales. Magic Initiate on the other hand, is based off of spellcasting, and it gives you a single spell per day, and two cantrips. Most classes get more cantrips, and the number they get scales with level. They also know more spells, and, even at level one, get more every day. A feat that straight up gives expertise would be giving the full power rogue feature out as a feat. Maybe in lower number, but far greater a fraction of the real feature than any other feat, and it does scale fully.

    Now, a feat that was something like.... "choose a skill with which you are proficient and add 2 to any roll you make with it" would be much more in line with these other feats. Lesser in quantity and unscaling. I'd almost even be willing to give out two skills in one feat. But straight up expertise... not something I will ever want from a feat.

    With all this said, I do actually have one other problem with Expertise, and that is that Bards get it. They have enough good stuff going for them as is. They don't need it and it takes away from the rogue's identity.

  26. - Top - End - #146
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    I guess the real reason I like the expertise feats is, I feel that you don't need to be a thieves' cant speaking, sneak-attacking, evasion-having assassin, trickster or second story man to be an expert in a thing. Rogues are "skill monkeys" because in the earliest editions they were the only ones who had access to moving silently, hiding in shadows, climbing and lockpicking, and other thiefly things. Now, that's tied into "Stealth" and "acrobatics" and "athletics" which, while everyone can do, rogues can do really well (because of expertise without spending ASIs on it, and things like the thief rogue being able to be more acrobatic, and interact with objects as a bonus action). They also get to be dodgier because of evasion, and are more able to utilise their skills because of reliable talent.

    They're skill monkeys because at their inception, skills were something not everyone could have, there was a much less defined way of dealing with abilities beyond spells and fighting - As skills became a thing everyone could have (hurray!) they were moved more into a specialist role for combat, but maintained a wide breadth of skills. Even in 3.5, the closest thing to "expertise" they had was that they had the option to essentially take reliable talent but only for three of their skills. This idea of rogues being the only ones who can be experts in skills is new, and I think perhaps it isn't fully intentional.

  27. - Top - End - #147
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    thereaper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie the Duck View Post
    Guidance is great at 1st level (barring all the times when you can't use it because of time or subterfuge/need-for-silence reasons) but does not improve. Peerless Skill is a SR limited, starts-at-level-14 ability. Adding much of anything to skill checks is up for discussion, to be certain, but I'm not exactly sure how you think this negates the concern over expertise.
    Point is, the Rogue is, if anything, not good enough at skills. All it really has going for it when it comes to skills is 2 extra proficiencies (3, counting Thieves' Tools), expertise, and Reliable Talent (which is an average of +2.75 to any skill the Rogue is proficient in). Meanwhile, Guidance alone is an average of +2.5 to any ability check you want, and Knowledge Domain is two proficiencies and expertise in them (let's not even get into what the Bard gets). Wanting to nerf expertise, therefore, seems misguided at best to me. There's nothing wrong with a Rogue having permission to succeed at something. Spellcasters get to do that sort of thing all the time.
    Wolfen Houndog - The World in Revolt (4e)
    The Mythic Warrior, a 3.5 base class that severs limbs and sunders armor
    The Nameless One, converted to 3.5 and 5e

  28. - Top - End - #148
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Quote Originally Posted by thereaper View Post
    Point is, the Rogue is, if anything, not good enough at skills. All it really has going for it when it comes to skills is 2 extra proficiencies (3, counting Thieves' Tools), expertise, and Reliable Talent (which is an average of +2.75 to any skill the Rogue is proficient in).
    If this boils down to an accounting game of what everyone 'gets,' I really don't see the point of the discussion. 'Rogues don't get enough,' to me, is not really an argument for or against whether the mechanical implementation of the expertise base-concept is a good system or not. It's a genuinely orthogonal issue. If you want to argue that the OP should house rule more good things for the rogue, frankly I'll help brainstorm ideas. But that has very little to do with the implementation of expertise.

    Meanwhile, Guidance alone is an average of +2.5 to any ability check you want, and Knowledge Domain is two proficiencies and expertise in them (let's not even get into what the Bard gets).
    +2.5... when you can spend an action ahead of time, and maintain concentration, and satisfy v and s spell components, and not arise suspicion by casting a spell. However, yes, I agree. Guidance is insanely good at 1st level. But another example of all too easy bonuses isn't an argument for expertise, it's another example of the skill system breaking down (IMO).

    As to the bard, all I got is the designers clearly thought the bard needed part of the rogues' role, because they got some of the rogues stuff. On paper, they clearly seem like a class that got EVERYTHING. My experience with them in play is that they do not dominate the game, so I am of two minds on it. It would be interesting to ask what the designers had in mind or what their thought process was.

    Wanting to nerf expertise, therefore, seems misguided at best to me.
    As has been mentioned massively multiply numerous times, people ARE NOT wanting to nerf expertise. They are arguing that the current implementation does not fit their preferences. If you want to keep arguing against nerfing expertise, feel free, but since no one on the opposing side thinks that's what they are doing, it will be a lonely hill to fight upon.

    There's nothing wrong with a Rogue having permission to succeed at something. Spellcasters get to do that sort of thing all the time.
    So is this just another 'spellcasters get all the goodies' thing?

  29. - Top - End - #149
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    thereaper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Is there a better way to balance expertise?

    Ah. I humbly apologize for jumping to conclusions, then.

    I don't actually consider there to be anything wrong with Expertise, so I'll just bow out now.
    Wolfen Houndog - The World in Revolt (4e)
    The Mythic Warrior, a 3.5 base class that severs limbs and sunders armor
    The Nameless One, converted to 3.5 and 5e

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •