combat expertise love

[sephiroth1084]

true, but how much is that opinionated.
*remember there is something called abshais piece and more other ac gear items.. and swapping out gear for when healing & soloing...

The fact is that Combat Expertise isn't making or breaking such characters, and I don't see many casters at all running around with AC, mid-game or late. Suddenly making CE not totally suck won't spike those figures dramatically.

Meanwhile, it is punishing the characters who should be gaining a lot of use from the feat.

[voodoogroves]

The only thing I see about CE is that the penalty applies to all attack rolls, even opposed ones. I don't see anything that says you can activate it while making any sort of attack roll.

The example given is on opposed rolls, such as for Disarm. The assumption there is that you've used CE for an attack sometime that round, and are subject to a Disarm, or perform a Disarm as one of your attacks during a full-attack, or as an attack of opportunity, and you suffer the -5 penalty on that roll.

CE, fighting defensively (NOT casting on the defensive) and Power Attack all have different language, but the concept remains. I can dream up ways to make an attack with a spellcaster that are not-uncommon and apply the various feats (PA, CE, etc.) and normal actions (fighting defensively). Holding the charge on a touch attack. Any of the channeled-spell options. Similar with precision damage (Sneak, Sudden Strike, Skirmish), different language but you can apply them to spells in the right situations. Fighting Defensively (which is more liberal than CE) also ends if you cast a spell in DDO - it doesn't carry that restriction at all in PNP either.

(and maybe my mind wandered - I know the ray guys used Fighting Defensively, but maybe it's only the touch-channellers who could optimize using CE ... I'm getting older, it can happen)



But ... The current implementation in DDO is not consistent with any of them is more my point, so since we've wandered away there's no reason not to continue to tweak it for balance within DDO.

In reality, to hit the top end AC as you say, you need to invest in gear, etc. That's the balance in opportunity cost in building for AC. You won't have the AP, etc.

[Aesop]

The fact is that Combat Expertise isn't making or breaking such characters, and I don't see many casters at all running around with AC, mid-game or late. Suddenly making CE not totally suck won't spike those figures dramatically.

Meanwhile, it is punishing the characters who should be gaining a lot of use from the feat.

Ok Seph I'm not totally opposed to removing the penalty honestly. I will play better I think that way. I just put forth the +10sp to apply a compromise. The current implementation is too harsh in my view. I would not be opposed to the suggestion about the Short duration buff on attack either.

I do think that CE could use more benefit than it currently has.

an Extra 5% mitigation seems reasonable. I might like Shields gaining double the bonus even better kinda of like the S&B answer to the THF gaining double benefit from PA.

Aesop

[sephiroth1084]

CE, fighting defensively (NOT casting on the defensive) and Power Attack all have different language, but the concept remains. I can dream up ways to make an attack with a spellcaster that are not-uncommon and apply the various feats (PA, CE, etc.) and normal actions (fighting defensively). Holding the charge on a touch attack. Any of the channeled-spell options. Similar with precision damage (Sneak, Sudden Strike, Skirmish), different language but you can apply them to spells in the right situations. Fighting Defensively (which is more liberal than CE) also ends if you cast a spell in DDO - it doesn't carry that restriction at all in PNP either.

That's less applying CE to a spell that uses an attack and more carrying a spell on an attack, which is an important distinction--you are no longer casting a spell, you did that already, but making an attack that happens to have a spell connected to it, so CE applies.

In reality, to hit the top end AC as you say, you need to invest in gear, etc. That's the balance in opportunity cost in building for AC. You won't have the AP, etc.

Agreed.

Ok Seph I'm not totally opposed to removing the penalty honestly. I will play better I think that way. I just put forth the +10sp to apply a compromise. The current implementation is too harsh in my view. I would not be opposed to the suggestion about the Short duration buff on attack either.

I do think that CE could use more benefit than it currently has.

an Extra 5% mitigation seems reasonable. I might like Shields gaining double the bonus even better kinda of like the S&B answer to the THF gaining double benefit from PA.

Aesop

Agreed. I wouldn't be outraged by CE being treated like a metamagic and getting +10 SP per spell being tacked onto it, but I still think that it's an unnecessary cost, and still punishes the characters who should be using it too heavily in an attempt to prevent it from being abused by the people less likely to bother with it in the first place. That doesn't feel like good game design.

[chodelord]

Another alternative would be to have CE give a -5 ac debuff for 3 seconds each time a spell is cast, maybe have quicken negate the penalty. Heavy casters don't benefit except against occasional archers, heavy melee aren't penalized, and it also fits the flavor that either the user is concentrating entirely on their melee abilities or they are concentrating on casting.

But IMO feats shouldn't have penalties. The penalty is that it costs a feat slot that could be potentially spent on something else.

And while we are at it Fighters should gain a CE enhancement line on par with the Barbarian power attack line. +1 ac, -1 hit/level, costs 1/2/3.