For other rules which don’t stack bonuses, the rules say so. For example, the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat specifies that it only grants its bonus if you don’t already have it. So, RAW, they stack.
the thing with Expertise is that it’s a hard cap. Wizards can take proficiency+expertise in arcana to have 2xproficiency added to their Int for a maximum benefit of +17 until Epic Boons. Clerics and Druids don’t even need to multiclass because expertise if available through a feat, so they get that +17 if their INT is +0, and if they have higher Int then it counts 100%, so if you start out with high Wis and Int, it’s very possible to have a +22 without multiclassing for a cleric or Druid.
Ive tested this with the character creator, and it adds both when multiclassed, so I was able to get (using Point Buy and ASI) 20 Wis with 20 Int, with Magician and Thaumaturge cleric/Druid 1/16 for an Arcana of +27, and that’s before Epic Boon stat increases are considered.
im not saying that druids or clerics should be nerfed. I’m saying that it is supremely odd that Wizards don’t have any mechanic for increasing their INT abilities beyond the normal expertise when 2 other classes can do so. For a class whose entire identity is "I got good by studying/practicing/working hard", it’s bizarre to me that the priest classes will outshine them in the Wizards’ most iconic skill. It feels like someone decided, for no apparent reason, that Fighters could add their Strength modifier to their Stealth checks along with Dex.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol "Failure means you've tried." -RB
For other rules which don’t stack bonuses, the rules say so. For example, the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat specifies that it only grants its bonus if you don’t already have it. So, RAW, they stack.
the thing with Expertise is that it’s a hard cap. Wizards can take proficiency+expertise in arcana to have 2xproficiency added to their Int for a maximum benefit of +17 until Epic Boons. Clerics and Druids don’t even need to multiclass because expertise if available through a feat, so they get that +17 if their INT is +0, and if they have higher Int then it counts 100%, so if you start out with high Wis and Int, it’s very possible to have a +22 without multiclassing for a cleric or Druid.
Ive tested this with the character creator, and it adds both when multiclassed, so I was able to get (using Point Buy and ASI) 20 Wis with 20 Int, with Magician and Thaumaturge cleric/Druid 1/16 for an Arcana of +27, and that’s before Epic Boon stat increases are considered.
im not saying that druids or clerics should be nerfed. I’m saying that it is supremely odd that Wizards don’t have any mechanic for increasing their INT abilities beyond the normal expertise when 2 other classes can do so. For a class whose entire identity is "I got good by studying/practicing/working hard", it’s bizarre to me that the priest classes will outshine them in the Wizards’ most iconic skill. It feels like someone decided, for no apparent reason, that Fighters could add their Strength modifier to their Stealth checks along with Dex.
I think there's a huge difference between "priest classes will outshine them" and "priest classes can outshine them". Can they outshine them? Yes, they do. Will they? I think that, being very conservative, in at least 99% of games they won't. And that's being conservative, I think it's much less than 1% of tables that will have this "problem". If yours is one of those, well, then house rule something. But this is more of a "what if" problem than a real one. I already did the math for you, which you decided to ignore. At this point it sounds like you just want this to be a problem. Like I said before, this is a nonexistent issue. If you have the one table that actually has a problem with this, then house rule away. But the rules as written are fine, nobody has this problem.
Want to see something that is MUCH more realistic and will probably happen often? The wizard being better at Religion than Protector clerics and better at Nature than Warden druids. You whine about the class defined by Arcana being surpassed by other two, but you don't seem to mind that classes defined by Religion and Nature aren't the best at it, and often not even good at it. Very convenient. Like I said, you just want this to be a problem. The game is fine as it is, and almost all tables will never have this issue.
I don’t want you to feel like you have to respond Sookie, but I’ll answer your points because you’ve introduced new points.
First, I don’t address clerics or druids being worse at religion/nature because they get the same stay double-dip into their own skill. The issue you refer to existed in 2014 rules and was actually fixed by the same feature that makes them a Higher ceilings for arcana than wizards.
And for the record, I have to ongoing games, one in which I play a Druid, and one in which I DM. At both tables this change has caused friction which was sorted out in different ways. I’m not insisting it’s a problem just because I don’t like it. I started this post because it has a 100% incidence rate in my games.
In the one I’m playing in, the player that started as a wizard under 2014 rules has swapped to playing a bard because my Druid and our cleric have higher Arcana and this issue made wizards so much less appealing. They wanted to play a scholar, so they switched to Lore Bard to be able to get more expertise options, and to lean into History more since no class is particularly tied to that skill.
The game I DM, I have given our Wizard a homebrew perk for Arcana and History (adding Wisdom in addition to Intelligence), and it has broken absolutely 0 encounters, but the Wizard feels like their character reflects their able to study and get exceptionally good at their preferred subjects. They already had higher than average Wis for Perception/Insight, so this was a very simple boon which was easy to implement.
Again, I’m not here to argue. If you disagree with my concerns, that’s valid, but it doesn’t erase l, address, or resolve those concerns to dismiss them as “theoretical” when they aren’t
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol "Failure means you've tried." -RB
Want to see something that is MUCH more realistic and will probably happen often? The wizard being better at Religion than Protector clerics and better at Nature than Warden druids.
Like I said, you just want this to be a problem.
The game is fine as it is, and almost all tables will never have this issue.
Yo. Wiz being better at religion than fighting priest is not a problem its normal. And I would say an experienced wiz could be better than a dedicated cultist.
I could easily argue about it but you have proven you would not listen. Don't try to put it on a person level because you disagree. People think and do whatever they want with their table.
The game is of course not fine as it is, never. This is not a sculpture. Laws need to improve to reflect what experience has proven wrong.
IMO Double stats profiency is basically an expertise, and expertise can top of that which is a bit wrong to the average game mechanics. Also if people dont pick profiency, well they should not be good at it. You could give an other stats like the main casting one but :
That is just showing that people do not take profiency to take something else, and people are why arent you good at nature as a druid.Fighter takes athletism because they have use of it. Often. Druids do not have use of nature, or at least often. Some skills are more polyvalent than other.
So the remaining question or answer is, should niche skill mechanically supported to be higher than polyvalent one ?
I certainly am against stacking up stats on top of expertise. You can give expertise of profiency, its a bit forced but people who want to be good can, and other always default that profiency. Imo its not a good opton. I think giving advantage, to be said consistency reflects more that average knowledge than a straight flat bonus given by stats.
I kinda agree, as it is now its not good.
Also multiclassing into a wizard without the scholar skills taken, means you are ****ed up. I would give wizard scholar in any mental stats, and I dont imagine how this could be an issue. But thats another story.
Want to see something that is MUCH more realistic and will probably happen often? The wizard being better at Religion than Protector clerics and better at Nature than Warden druids.
Like I said, you just want this to be a problem.
The game is fine as it is, and almost all tables will never have this issue.
Yo. Wiz being better at religion than fighting priest is not a problem its normal. And I would say an experienced wiz could be better than a dedicated cultist.
I could easily argue about it but you have proven you would not listen. Don't try to put it on a person level because you disagree. People think and do whatever they want with their table.
The game is of course not fine as it is, never. This is not a sculpture. Laws need to improve to reflect what experience has proven wrong.
IMO Double stats profiency is basically an expertise, and expertise can top of that which is a bit wrong to the average game mechanics. Also if people dont pick profiency, well they should not be good at it. You could give an other stats like the main casting one but :
That is just showing that people do not take profiency to take something else, and people are why arent you good at nature as a druid.Fighter takes athletism because they have use of it. Often. Druids do not have use of nature, or at least often. Some skills are more polyvalent than other.
So the remaining question or answer is, should niche skill mechanically supported to be higher than polyvalent one ?
I certainly am against stacking up stats on top of expertise. You can give expertise of profiency, its a bit forced but people who want to be good can, and other always default that profiency. Imo its not a good opton. I think giving advantage, to be said consistency reflects more that average knowledge than a straight flat bonus given by stats.
I kinda agree, as it is now its not good.
Also multiclassing into a wizard without the scholar skills taken, means you are ****ed up. I would give wizard scholar in any mental stats, and I dont imagine how this could be an issue. But thats another story.
"People say and do whatever they want with their table." This is exactly what I said, multiple times. I said that if they had this problem at their table, then they should address it. By homebrewing, if they want. So I don't know where this is coming from, I've never said they shouldn't do whatever they want at their table, I actually encourage it.
I could keep arguing with everything else you said here, because most of it is wrong, but I won't because you either don't actually read my posts or you don't understand them. In either case it's just pointless to discuss with someone like you, so I'm just going to leave you guys to discuss among yourselves if you want. Have fun.
Nex_Ou brought up something I had not thought of. While I do not think a Druid/Clerics bonus would stack but not suing the already existing expertise model, it would stack with expertise giving outsized benefits if someone take a feat that grants expertise. And it would not take a brilliant cleric to pull it off. If you are going the scholar cleric route odd are you are not dump stating int, so 14ish is not crazy, 20 from Wisdom, so 7 from stats, and lets say +8from proficiency at level 9 +15 to a skill at level 9 on a full caster seems kind of crazy to me. I know they dropped the class classification thing of expert group, but the background idea does exist some classes are more skill focused. given how lame these skills(well almost all skills in general thanks to bounded accuracy) are I don't think it breaks the game. But it may cause some issues at a table.
They had a mechanic that didn't stack, expertise. They should have just stuck with it.
"They had a mechanic that didn't stack, expertise. They should have just stuck with it."
It is indeed a problem, cause it someway somehow change dc balance and dc building and dc meaning. The fact that cleric didnt take religion or druid nature, is an other problem that could have been adressed WITHOUT creating a new problem, there are ways to circle around things...
The 2024 nearly solved as much solution as they have created problems unfortunately ...
Someone else is not lazy to say I am wrong, but lazy to say where I am wrong, that same someone is not lazy to say people dont listen, but actually lazy to listen to people. Ok Ego child, goodbye.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderFor other rules which don’t stack bonuses, the rules say so. For example, the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat specifies that it only grants its bonus if you don’t already have it. So, RAW, they stack.
the thing with Expertise is that it’s a hard cap. Wizards can take proficiency+expertise in arcana to have 2xproficiency added to their Int for a maximum benefit of +17 until Epic Boons. Clerics and Druids don’t even need to multiclass because expertise if available through a feat, so they get that +17 if their INT is +0, and if they have higher Int then it counts 100%, so if you start out with high Wis and Int, it’s very possible to have a +22 without multiclassing for a cleric or Druid.
Ive tested this with the character creator, and it adds both when multiclassed, so I was able to get (using Point Buy and ASI) 20 Wis with 20 Int, with Magician and Thaumaturge cleric/Druid 1/16 for an Arcana of +27, and that’s before Epic Boon stat increases are considered.
im not saying that druids or clerics should be nerfed. I’m saying that it is supremely odd that Wizards don’t have any mechanic for increasing their INT abilities beyond the normal expertise when 2 other classes can do so. For a class whose entire identity is "I got good by studying/practicing/working hard", it’s bizarre to me that the priest classes will outshine them in the Wizards’ most iconic skill. It feels like someone decided, for no apparent reason, that Fighters could add their Strength modifier to their Stealth checks along with Dex.
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol
"Failure means you've tried." -RB
I think there's a huge difference between "priest classes will outshine them" and "priest classes can outshine them". Can they outshine them? Yes, they do. Will they? I think that, being very conservative, in at least 99% of games they won't. And that's being conservative, I think it's much less than 1% of tables that will have this "problem". If yours is one of those, well, then house rule something. But this is more of a "what if" problem than a real one. I already did the math for you, which you decided to ignore. At this point it sounds like you just want this to be a problem. Like I said before, this is a nonexistent issue. If you have the one table that actually has a problem with this, then house rule away. But the rules as written are fine, nobody has this problem.
Want to see something that is MUCH more realistic and will probably happen often? The wizard being better at Religion than Protector clerics and better at Nature than Warden druids. You whine about the class defined by Arcana being surpassed by other two, but you don't seem to mind that classes defined by Religion and Nature aren't the best at it, and often not even good at it. Very convenient. Like I said, you just want this to be a problem. The game is fine as it is, and almost all tables will never have this issue.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderI don’t want you to feel like you have to respond Sookie, but I’ll answer your points because you’ve introduced new points.
First, I don’t address clerics or druids being worse at religion/nature because they get the same stay double-dip into their own skill. The issue you refer to existed in 2014 rules and was actually fixed by the same feature that makes them a Higher ceilings for arcana than wizards.
And for the record, I have to ongoing games, one in which I play a Druid, and one in which I DM. At both tables this change has caused friction which was sorted out in different ways. I’m not insisting it’s a problem just because I don’t like it. I started this post because it has a 100% incidence rate in my games.
In the one I’m playing in, the player that started as a wizard under 2014 rules has swapped to playing a bard because my Druid and our cleric have higher Arcana and this issue made wizards so much less appealing. They wanted to play a scholar, so they switched to Lore Bard to be able to get more expertise options, and to lean into History more since no class is particularly tied to that skill.
The game I DM, I have given our Wizard a homebrew perk for Arcana and History (adding Wisdom in addition to Intelligence), and it has broken absolutely 0 encounters, but the Wizard feels like their character reflects their able to study and get exceptionally good at their preferred subjects. They already had higher than average Wis for Perception/Insight, so this was a very simple boon which was easy to implement.
Again, I’m not here to argue. If you disagree with my concerns, that’s valid, but it doesn’t erase l, address, or resolve those concerns to dismiss them as “theoretical” when they aren’t
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol
"Failure means you've tried." -RB
Yo.
Wiz being better at religion than fighting priest is not a problem its normal. And I would say an experienced wiz could be better than a dedicated cultist.
I could easily argue about it but you have proven you would not listen.
Don't try to put it on a person level because you disagree. People think and do whatever they want with their table.
The game is of course not fine as it is, never. This is not a sculpture. Laws need to improve to reflect what experience has proven wrong.
IMO
Double stats profiency is basically an expertise, and expertise can top of that which is a bit wrong to the average game mechanics.
Also if people dont pick profiency, well they should not be good at it. You could give an other stats like the main casting one but :
That is just showing that people do not take profiency to take something else, and people are why arent you good at nature as a druid.Fighter takes athletism because they have use of it. Often. Druids do not have use of nature, or at least often. Some skills are more polyvalent than other.
So the remaining question or answer is, should niche skill mechanically supported to be higher than polyvalent one ?
I certainly am against stacking up stats on top of expertise. You can give expertise of profiency, its a bit forced but people who want to be good can, and other always default that profiency.
Imo its not a good opton. I think giving advantage, to be said consistency reflects more that average knowledge than a straight flat bonus given by stats.
I kinda agree, as it is now its not good.
Also multiclassing into a wizard without the scholar skills taken, means you are ****ed up.
I would give wizard scholar in any mental stats, and I dont imagine how this could be an issue.
But thats another story.
"People say and do whatever they want with their table." This is exactly what I said, multiple times. I said that if they had this problem at their table, then they should address it. By homebrewing, if they want. So I don't know where this is coming from, I've never said they shouldn't do whatever they want at their table, I actually encourage it.
I could keep arguing with everything else you said here, because most of it is wrong, but I won't because you either don't actually read my posts or you don't understand them. In either case it's just pointless to discuss with someone like you, so I'm just going to leave you guys to discuss among yourselves if you want. Have fun.
Nex_Ou brought up something I had not thought of. While I do not think a Druid/Clerics bonus would stack but not suing the already existing expertise model, it would stack with expertise giving outsized benefits if someone take a feat that grants expertise. And it would not take a brilliant cleric to pull it off. If you are going the scholar cleric route odd are you are not dump stating int, so 14ish is not crazy, 20 from Wisdom, so 7 from stats, and lets say +8from proficiency at level 9 +15 to a skill at level 9 on a full caster seems kind of crazy to me. I know they dropped the class classification thing of expert group, but the background idea does exist some classes are more skill focused. given how lame these skills(well almost all skills in general thanks to bounded accuracy) are I don't think it breaks the game. But it may cause some issues at a table.
They had a mechanic that didn't stack, expertise. They should have just stuck with it.
"They had a mechanic that didn't stack, expertise. They should have just stuck with it."
It is indeed a problem, cause it someway somehow change dc balance and dc building and dc meaning.
The fact that cleric didnt take religion or druid nature, is an other problem that could have been adressed WITHOUT creating a new problem, there are ways to circle around things...
The 2024 nearly solved as much solution as they have created problems unfortunately ...
Someone else is not lazy to say I am wrong, but lazy to say where I am wrong, that same someone is not lazy to say people dont listen, but actually lazy to listen to people.
Ok Ego child, goodbye.