Implement/Weapon Expertise/Focus - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Implement/Weapon Expertise/Focus

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Tzepish
May 26, 2009 14:36:55 How much of a game-killer would it be for me to allow these feats to handle weapons-as-implements as well as weapons-as-weapons? That is, if a Bard is wielding a songblade and has Weapon Expertise, I'd allow him to apply the Expertise bonus to Implement powers used through the songblade without having to take Implement Expertise. I suspect this would affect balance in only a minor way, and in fact might be more balanced than the RAW.

Mostly, I believe it should have been designed this way to begin with for these reasons:

1.) Classes that use both Implements and Weapons will not be double feat-taxed. A fighter gets to apply his Weapon Expertise bonus to all of his attacks - why does the Bard have to take two feats for the same effect?

2.) A common opinion is that these Expertise feats are "patch feats" that simply fix some bad math at higher encounter levels. Maybe this is simply repeating the above point, but if this is the case, why is the patch more expensive for classes like the Bard? Are these classes more powerful than classes like the Fighter, and does reducing the number of feats they get fix the imbalance? These characters are already paying a tax in GP for their versatility (either in having to purchase both an Implement and a Weapon, or in having to pay the extra GP for an item like a songblade).

3.) Most importantly, it makes intuitive sense and uses up less of the player's (and the GM's) brain-space. It's also more fun, because the player doesn't have to choose between three mutually unpalatable options:
* A.) Pick one feat, and simply decide which of the attack types you'd like to improve.
* B.) Pick both feats, and spend two feat slots on this.
* C.) Pick neither of the feats, despite how powerful they are.
#2
baudelaire
May 26, 2009 17:30:20 As far as i understand, a songblade is a weapon (not sure if light or heavy) that if wield by a bard it also counts as an implement. If the character takes light/heavy blade expertise feat, then he/she should be getting the bonus for using the songblade as weapon and the songblade as implement, because it'll still count as a weapon... and the weapon gets the bonus.
#3
surbrus
May 27, 2009 12:59:25 Our group treats them as a bad way of implementing errata, so we house rule the fix where all characters receive all expertise feats for free.

It does get noticeable once you reach higher levels. We're at level 17 and that does help the PC's actually hit level appropriate monsters. Now we are just annoyed with the monsters hitting non-AC defenses... as the level appropriate monsters generally add as much to those attack rolls as PC's have defense.
#4
gadren
May 27, 2009 13:34:00 According to the monk playtest, we're already gonna get a feat that basically does that.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Tzepish May 26, 2009 14:36:55	How much of a game-killer would it be for me to allow these feats to handle weapons-as-implements as well as weapons-as-weapons? That is, if a Bard is wielding a songblade and has Weapon Expertise, I'd allow him to apply the Expertise bonus to Implement powers used through the songblade without having to take Implement Expertise. I suspect this would affect balance in only a minor way, and in fact might be more balanced than the RAW. Mostly, I believe it should have been designed this way to begin with for these reasons: 1.) Classes that use both Implements and Weapons will not be double feat-taxed. A fighter gets to apply his Weapon Expertise bonus to all of his attacks - why does the Bard have to take two feats for the same effect? 2.) A common opinion is that these Expertise feats are "patch feats" that simply fix some bad math at higher encounter levels. Maybe this is simply repeating the above point, but if this is the case, why is the patch more expensive for classes like the Bard? Are these classes more powerful than classes like the Fighter, and does reducing the number of feats they get fix the imbalance? These characters are already paying a tax in GP for their versatility (either in having to purchase both an Implement and a Weapon, or in having to pay the extra GP for an item like a songblade). 3.) Most importantly, it makes intuitive sense and uses up less of the player's (and the GM's) brain-space. It's also more fun, because the player doesn't have to choose between three mutually unpalatable options: * A.) Pick one feat, and simply decide which of the attack types you'd like to improve. * B.) Pick both feats, and spend two feat slots on this. * C.) Pick neither of the feats, despite how powerful they are.
#2 baudelaire May 26, 2009 17:30:20	As far as i understand, a songblade is a weapon (not sure if light or heavy) that if wield by a bard it also counts as an implement. If the character takes light/heavy blade expertise feat, then he/she should be getting the bonus for using the songblade as weapon and the songblade as implement, because it'll still count as a weapon... and the weapon gets the bonus.
#3 surbrus May 27, 2009 12:59:25	Our group treats them as a bad way of implementing errata, so we house rule the fix where all characters receive all expertise feats for free. It does get noticeable once you reach higher levels. We're at level 17 and that does help the PC's actually hit level appropriate monsters. Now we are just annoyed with the monsters hitting non-AC defenses... as the level appropriate monsters generally add as much to those attack rolls as PC's have defense.
#4 gadren May 27, 2009 13:34:00	According to the monk playtest, we're already gonna get a feat that basically does that.