Ablity boost or feats

[Grayson01]

Which do you think will get more play the out the box *no feats* or will the variant game *with feats*?

I know it's a little early to tell but just kinda want gut reactions.

[Rfkannen]

In my opinion feats are awesome and I can not think of why anyone woudnt pick one.

[Totema]

I'd imagine most players would want feats, but would only end up taking one or two. Feats aren't as complicated as in 3.5 days, and fewer are necessary for most builds. It's also important to keep pace with your ability score increases.

[Daishain]

Unless you have good reason to do so, never limit options. That is rule #1 for DMs so far as I am concerned. Let them take feats as they wish.

[Strill]

I'd imagine most players would want feats, but would only end up taking one or two. Feats aren't as complicated as in 3.5 days, and fewer are necessary for most builds. It's also important to keep pace with your ability score increases.

This is one thing I don't like. I think that feats are way more fun than ability score increases, and I'm a little disappointed that you're better off with just plain old stat boosts instead of the cool stuff feats give you.

[Grayson01]

This is one thing I don't like. I think that feats are way more fun than ability score increases, and I'm a little disappointed that you're better off with just plain old stat boosts instead of the cool stuff feats give you.

I am not quite sure what you are saying here. Is it that you don't like the out the box rule or that you don't like that ability boosts are better some how?

[Daishain]

I am not quite sure what you are saying here. Is it that you don't like the out the box rule or that you don't like that ability boosts are better some how?
If I'm reading him correctly, he's disappointed that he's often forced to give up on taking feats in order to keep ability progression up. A feeling I can certainly sympathize with.

[Grayson01]

If I'm reading him correctly, he's disappointed that he's often forced to give up on taking feats in order to keep ability progression up. A feeling I can certainly sympathize with.

Yeah that's what I was thinking but wasn't sure.

[Totema]

This is one thing I don't like. I think that feats are way more fun than ability score increases, and I'm a little disappointed that you're better off with just plain old stat boosts instead of the cool stuff feats give you.

Luckily most classes won't need all of the score increases that are given to them, so that extra wiggle room would let them pick up interesting feats instead.

[TheCrowing1432]

Considering a lot of feats give you an ability score increase anyway, it could lead to some interesting builds.

I for one am looking forward to tavern brawler monks.

[Riston]

I believe feats will share the fate of prestige classes from 3.5 - in theory they're optional, but eventually it will be difficult to find a group that doesn't use them.

[OldTrees1]

I believe feats will share the fate of prestige classes from 3.5 - in theory they're optional, but eventually it will be difficult to find a group that doesn't use them.

Yeah.
Similarly, I expect the average Feat/Ability Boosts ratio of a character to increase as more feats are printed. Currently I can make both a Warrior and a Sneak that only ask for 2 feats before diving into Ability Boosts. But as more feats are printed, I suspect more feats to be added to those characters.

[MustacheFart]

I can't see any reason not to pick ONLY feats. Unless you're playing a very MAD character build you probably only need 1 or 2 stats high. They've already mentioned numerous magic items that will raise a specific stat to a set amount such as str to 19 for example or whatever. I understand magic items are not that common but if you're already rocking a 16 in your primary stat is it really worth it to knock it up to an 18 rather than get a feat?

In my case I have the following stats on my lvl 3 barbarian:

18 STR
18 DEX
18 CON
12 INT
17 WIS
15 CHA

I can't see any reason to both getting either my strength or dex or con to a 20. Big deal....one more point of damage or AC or intitiave or saves. Yeah that sounds like a lot. I could aso take the following three feats instead and be much more deadly: Mage Slayer + Polearm Master + Sentinel. Extra attacks all the time seem to beat out a 1 increase to my modifiers.

[Daishain]

Luckily most classes won't need all of the score increases that are given to them, so that extra wiggle room would let them pick up interesting feats instead.

True, but the classes that tend to work that way (SAD spellcasters), also tend to be the ones that need the feats less.

[Daishain]

In my case I have the following stats on my lvl 3 barbarian:

18 STR
18 DEX
18 CON
12 INT
17 WIS
15 CHA

Uh, how? I'd kill for that kind of beginning level stat array.

I'm going to assume you've got mountain dwarf for the +2 str&con

If that's the result of rolling out abilities, people can't depend on doing nearly that well. The average value for 4d6 drop lowest is after all 12.24

If that's the result of a point buy, after the dwarf stats are discounted you've got 63 points spent (assuming that your DM let you buy more than fifteen without increasing the penalty even further), while the standard point buy rules suggest a limit of 27. Even if you ignored the penalty for buying more than a 13 entirely, you've still got 46 points in there.

If that's the result of magic items, you've got an incredibly generous DM, again people can't count on it.

[MustacheFart]

Uh, how? I'd kill for that kind of beginning level stat array.

I'm going to assume you've got mountain dwarf for the +2 str&con

If that's the result of rolling out abilities, people can't depend on doing nearly that well. The average value for 4d6 drop lowest is after all 12.24

If that's the result of a point buy, after the dwarf stats are discounted you've got 63 points spent (assuming that your DM let you buy more than fifteen without increasing the penalty even further), while the standard point buy rules suggest a limit of 27. Even if you ignored the penalty for buying more than a 13 entirely, you've still got 46 points in there.

If that's the result of magic items, you've got an incredibly generous DM, again people can't count on it.

Nah I am a Half Orc. I rolled pretty well. We also do roll 4d6 drop the lowest, reroll 1s. We do that 7 times and then drop the lowest total to get the 6 stats.

Even using the Standard array though I think I could make a rogue/fighter that could get nothing but feats to be really deadly. My initial impression is that at least for doing damage it's not about the modifier, it's about the extra dice in this edition.

[Person_Man]

My opinion is that limiting players to Ability Score Increases screws non-casters, especially the Fighter.

The Fighter gets more Ability Score Increases then other classes, but really only needs 20 Str, mediocre Dex, and 20 Con. So any Ability Score increase beyond that will rarely be used and is basically wasted.

And by default, many non-caster builds have nothing useful to do with their Bonus Action and Reaction most turns, unless they have a Feat or subclass option that uses it. So by removing Feats (which add useful options for the Bonus Action and Reaction) you're giving spellcasters a back-door to a superior action economy in many games.

[WickerNipple]

Without some sort of baseline like point-buy, all such discussions break down.

Of course the guy who rolled 63 points isn't going to care that much about stat increases.

[Mr.Moron]

I like most of the feats from an options stand point others either feel like duds or just awkward mechanically. Generally though I don't think I like them as simple alternative advancements.

I'm not using feats baseline in my game but I'll be giving players a chance to earn them via some in-game action, maybe meeting a famous warrior and learning their technique, or finding ancient manual of lost martial arts, or having hidden potential manifest after exposure to some magic artifact.

I like that they exist, but I'm very glad that they're partitioned off in an optional section. I generally find the fewer fiddly parts there are to book-dive through initially the smoother things run.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

We also do roll 4d6 drop the lowest, reroll 1s. We do that 7 times and then drop the lowest total to get the 6 stats.

This is bit generous for starting stats. If you're re-rolling 1s after eliminating the lowest this method gives an average starting array that looks like 15.9, 14.6, 13.6, 12.7, 11.7 and 10.6 (Assuming I'm reading this correctly: http://anydice.com/program/4769). Rounding, that's a 32-38 point buy.

If you're re-rolling 1s before the elimination, it gets even higher (http://anydice.com/program/476a): 16.3, 15.2, 14.2, 13.4, 12.5, and 11.4; that's about equivalent to a 40 point buy.

[Kurald Galain]

I believe feats will share the fate of prestige classes from 3.5 - in theory they're optional, but evenually it will be difficult to find a group that doesn't use them.
Yes, or 2E's proficiency rules (i.e. a chapter in the middle of the PHB marked "optional" that as far as I know everybody used).


I can't see any reason not to pick ONLY feats.
I agree. Any decent feat is going to be better than getting a +5% to something you could already do. Looking over the feats currently printed (and the fact that most campaigns never get to level 15+ anyway) any character is going to have enough good options before it has to resort to getting a minor numerical bonus.

[squashmaster]

I highly doubt any table will play without using feats. Unless they're going for nostalgia or hardcore mode or something. I certainly ain't playing without feats.

I wouldn't take them every time, though. Getting your main ability score at least to 18 is too valuable overall.

[MustacheFart]

Of course the guy who rolled 63 points isn't going to care that much about stat increases.

Well, that's a very short-sighted statement.


As I had said, even with the standard array depicted in the PHB I still can't see why I would pick stat boosts over feat selection. The fact is there is bounded accuracy and there are other members in the party to help balance you out so I don't necessarily think not having a stat at 18 or 20 is a big deal. Feats on the other hand have the potential to make your character more well rounded. For me it's like, "Oh my character does the same thing but a tiny bit better! Yay!" or "Hey look what my character can do now!"

[Kurald Galain]

For me it's like, "Oh my character does the same thing but a tiny bit better! Yay!" or "Hey look what my character can do now!"

Precisely.

With point buy, you're guaranteed a 16 in your primary. With rolling for stats, you have good odds at getting an 18 or more. If you don't boost this, you're at most 5% behind your teammates, and that's not a big deal. Ability scores that are not your primary are really not worth raising ever, if you're given a choice in the matter.

And this will only get more skewed, as it's pretty obvious that WOTC will print more feats within a year.

[Daishain]

Nah I am a Half Orc. I rolled pretty well. We also do roll 4d6 drop the lowest, reroll 1s. We do that 7 times and then drop the lowest total to get the 6 stats.

Even using the Standard array though I think I could make a rogue/fighter that could get nothing but feats to be really deadly. My initial impression is that at least for doing damage it's not about the modifier, it's about the extra dice in this edition.
Well, that certainly helps, rerolling the 1s boosts the EAV up to 13.43 and boosts your odds of getting an 18 by 67%

For anyone curious, head to anydice.com and copy in the code below to see how that plays out:
output 3d6 named "3d6"
output [highest 3 of 4d6] named "4d6 drop lowest"
output [highest 3 of 4d{2,3,4,5,6}] named "4d6 reroll ones and drop lowest"

You still rolled exceptionally well, and I don't think you can really expect to use your character as a baseline for this issue.

Yeah, the flat bonuses for damage probably don't matter so much in the long run, but the 20 HP per con bonus certainly do, even more so now than in previous editions. As do any and all bonuses that increase your probability of hitting (whether via attack roll or spell save), as do any and all bonuses that increase your probability of not being hit (whether via AC or spell save) 5% per point adds up pretty damn fast in the long run.


Precisely.

With point buy, you're guaranteed a 16 in your primary. With rolling for stats, you have good odds at getting an 18 or more. If you don't boost this, you're at most 5% behind your teammates, and that's not a big deal. Ability scores that are not your primary are really not worth raising ever, if you're given a choice in the matter.

And this will only get more skewed, as it's pretty obvious that WOTC will print more feats within a year.Uh, good odds? If you aren't screwing with the probability like MF's group has been, thats a 9.34% chance of getting just one 18 out of six rolls, and the probability of getting two 18s for those characters that aren't SAD drops all the way down to 0.38%

[MustacheFart]

Well, that certainly helps, rerolling the 1s boosts the EAV up to 13.43 and boosts your odds of getting an 18 by 67%

For anyone curious, head to anydice.com and copy in the code below to see how that plays out:
output 3d6 named "3d6"
output [highest 3 of 4d6] named "4d6 drop lowest"
output [highest 3 of 4d{2,3,4,5,6}] named "4d6 reroll ones and drop lowest"

You still rolled exceptionally well, and I don't think you can really expect to use your character as a baseline for this issue.

Yeah, the flat bonuses for damage probably don't matter so much in the long run, but the 20 HP per con bonus certainly do, even more so now than in previous editions. As do any and all bonuses that increase your probability of hitting (whether via attack roll or spell save), as do any and all bonuses that increase your probability of not being hit (whether via AC or spell save) 5% per point adds up pretty damn fast in the long run.

Uh, good odds? If you aren't screwing with the probability like MF's group has been, thats a 9.34% chance of getting just one 18 out of six rolls, and the probability of getting two 18s for those characters that aren't SAD drops all the way down to 0.38%

I agree that the rolling we used is generous. Had it been standard I would've just taken the standard array/point buy.

That said, you're making one mistake here that others have made. I am not using my character as a baseline. I never said I was. My character is the Half-Orc equivalent of Conan lol. Of course he's not a good baseline. I realize I might of implied that I was using him for the base but that wasn't my intention and I thought my subsequent line of "even with the standard array" or whatever it was, clarified that. Apparently it did not.

All I am really trying to say is that given how powerful a lot of the feats are I see them outweighing an ability boost. Some of them change the dynamic of the character for pete's sake. Heck in some cases you can get a feat that gives an ability boost! That's just another reason to go feats.

I am in agreement with those that said they wouldn't play in a game without feats. It's cool that one poster said he plans to give them out through RPing but damn from a player's standpoint that kind of sucks. You're taking a good element of character building and stripping it down to a watered down version with hopes that I could one day get one I wanted all along. They've simplified the character building process enough that I think removing the option of feats is overkill.

FWIW, I know I could totally make a Wood Elf or Half Elf or whatever ranged character using the standard array, making dex my highest stat, pick nothing but feats (ie. crossbow expert and sharpshooter) and be just as effective as that guy with the 20 stats.

[Demonic Spoon]

If your character concept does not revolve around a particular feat, I think there's a very strong argument to be made for ability score increases. Specifically, ability score increases invariably make you better at a lot of stuff. +2 to DEX is a +1 to:

ranged attack and damage rolls
AC
Initiative
DEX saves
Stealth
Sleight of hand
Acrobatics
Misc. Dex checks.


Which is not to say that feats also aren't strong, but they very frequently are somewhat limited in scope and/or cost you the use of a bonus action, which depending on class, may be quite valuable.

[OldTrees1]

All I am really trying to say is that given how powerful a lot of the feats are I see them outweighing an ability boost. Some of them change the dynamic of the character for pete's sake. Heck in some cases you can get a feat that gives an ability boost! That's just another reason to go feats.

Consider this:
Obviously your first feat is worth more than "+1 to all saves for everyone"(Paladin). Even your second and third?. But when we are talking about your last feat/ability boost, can you really say your worst feat choice is still better than an increase to your primary stat?

Obviously the Feat optional rule should be included, but until more feats are printed, characters can run out of feats worthy of taking over +2 to one of their scores.

[MustacheFart]

If your character concept does not revolve around a particular feat, I think there's a very strong argument to be made for ability score increases. Specifically, ability score increases invariably make you better at a lot of stuff. +2 to DEX is a +1 to:

ranged attack and damage rolls
AC
Initiative
DEX saves
Stealth
Sleight of hand
Acrobatics
Misc. Dex checks.


Which is not to say that feats also aren't strong, but they very frequently are somewhat limited in scope and/or cost you the use of a bonus action, which depending on class, may be quite valuable.

I simply think stats are being over-valued thus far in this edition.



Consider this:
Obviously your first feat is worth more than "+1 to all saves for everyone"(Paladin). Even your second and third?. But when we are talking about your last feat/ability boost, can you really say your worst feat choice is still better than an increase to your primary stat?

Obviously the Feat optional rule should be included, but until more feats are printed, characters can run out of feats worthy of taking over +2 to one of their scores.


I am not sure I follow on the paladin angle. If you're comparing a feat to a 1 level dip that's a whole other ball of wax. I would agree that you can run out of feats to pick and thus opt for ability boosts. I simply stated I think feats are better when directly compared.

[Kurald Galain]

+2 to DEX is a +1 to:

ranged attack and damage rolls
AC
Initiative
DEX saves
Stealth
Sleight of hand
Acrobatics
Misc. Dex checks.

However, most characters don't do ranged attacks, sleight, acro, or misc dex checks; and a number of them don't use dex for AC either. So that means that they only get +5% bonus (mind you, this is the very smallest bonus that exists in the game) to init and dex saves, and it's pretty easy to see that a character-appropriate feat has a much greater impact on them.

[Demonic Spoon]

I simply think stats are being over-valued thus far in this edition.


Why? There are a lot of things that you can only really increase by improving your abilities. Stats in 5e are a big deal.

[Demonic Spoon]

However, most characters don't do ranged attacks, sleight, acro, or misc dex checks; and a number of them don't use dex for AC either. So that means that they only get +5% bonus (mind you, this is the very smallest bonus that exists in the game) to init and dex saves, and it's pretty easy to see that a character-appropriate feat has a much greater impact on them.


You get to choose which stat gets the +2. Those characters can choose an attribute that makes more sense for them. Furthermore, it's not like acrobatics and misc. dex checks are ever just not used.

or, if you have 2 stats at an odd value, you can get +1 to your mod for two stats.

[Kurald Galain]

You get to choose which stat gets the +2. Those characters can choose an attribute that makes more sense for them. Furthermore, it's not like acrobatics and misc. dex checks are ever just not used.

or, if you have 2 stats at an odd value, you can get +1 to your mod for two stats.

Yes, I know what the rule is. That doesn't change the fact that a +1 bonus is the very smallest bonus that exists in the game, and that you have to make quite a lot of rolls on that ability before this makes a difference. For example, if you make an average of five dexterity checks in a session (which is quite a reasonable number unless that's your primary attack stat) then this much-vaunted ability boost will make a difference once every four sessions. That's hardly even noticeable - whereas a good feat is noticeable much more often than that.

[OldTrees1]

I am not sure I follow on the paladin angle. If you're comparing a feat to a 1 level dip that's a whole other ball of wax. I would agree that you can run out of feats to pick and thus opt for ability boosts. I simply stated I think feats are better when directly compared.
I was saying:

A straight Paladin really likes Charisma. Their first +2 ability boost includes +1 to everyone's saves.

Ability boosts and feats both suffer from diminishing returns. Your first feat is your favorite, your second is your second favorite ...

Therefore it is highly likely (with only the PHB's feats) that at some point the returns from +1 feat drop below the returns from +2 to an ability score.

However you seem to be agreeing(it was hard to tell before). The best feat is indeed better than the best ability boost.

[Demonic Spoon]

Yes, I know what the rule is. That doesn't change the fact that a +1 bonus is the very smallest bonus that exists in the game, and that you have to make quite a lot of rolls on that ability before this makes a difference. For example, if you make an average of five dexterity checks in a session (which is quite a reasonable number unless that's your primary attack stat) then this much-vaunted ability boost will make a difference once every four sessions. That's hardly even noticeable - whereas a good feat is noticeable much more often than that.


Five is not a reasonable number. Unless you're wearing full plate, you'll be using that dex every time you are attacked and every time you need to make a DEX save. And every time you enter combat (initiative)

Furthermore, you're focusing on the case where DEX is not the most important stat for you. That's great. For each character class, there is at least one stat that is in fact very important.

[MustacheFart]

Why? There are a lot of things that you can only really increase by improving your abilities. Stats in 5e are a big deal.

Because I don't see +1 to a stat making that much of a difference in this edition with limits in place on AC and the like.

[Demonic Spoon]

Because I don't see +1 to a stat making that much of a difference in this edition with limits in place on AC and the like.

the only limits to bonuses from ability scores is the ability score limit of 20. Small bonuses to stats mean more in 5e because there are so few sources of them.

[archaeo]

Five is not a reasonable number. Unless you're wearing full plate, you'll be using that dex every time you are attacked and every time you need to make a DEX save. And every time you enter combat (initiative)

Furthermore, you're focusing on the case where DEX is not the most important stat for you. That's great. For each character class, there is at least one stat that is in fact very important.

I think I'm inclined to agree with Kurald, actually. Given that any half-decent character build is going to involve picking a race that gives you a bonus to your character's stat, you'll almost always have a 17 at 1st level, assuming the standard array. This almost has to be a purposeful decision; it incentivizes taking a +1 feat instead of a straight ability boost, meaning level 4 is a very productive boost to power for lots of characters.

Otherwise, things seem to basically make sense here. MAD-ish classes are given far more robust ability sets, from what I can see, whereas SAD classes have slightly less stringent stat requirements and more opportunity for feats in exchange for slightly less robust class features. We'll see how it shakes out though; lots of moving parts in this edition, for all its vaunted simplicity.

EDIT: oh, and let's not forget about those magic items. The magic mart might be closed, but the random items chart certainly won't be, and I have a feeling the DMG will outright encourage DMs to let players go on quests for items of a certain type. If I was a Wizard, I'd definitely be asking around town for something that gives me a nice Constitution bonus.

[Kurald Galain]

Small bonuses to stats mean more in 5e because there are so few sources of them.

http://i.imgur.com/kbGNcUp.jpg

[DrLemniscate]

If I was playing in a game without feats, I would definitely try to get the highest all around stats.

Start at 12,12,12,13,13,13

Human gets you to 13,13,13,14,14,14

Fighter 12 / Rogue 8 (iirc), gets you 8 ability score increases.

This can take you to 16,16,16,16,16,17.

Alternatively, you can get 14,14,14,15,20,20 to be more useful.

[Santra]

Well I did notice this. Say you point buy and start as a human wizard. You will most likely have a 16 or 17 int. This means a mod of +3. Now you can only prepare a number of spells equal to your wizard level plus your int mod. Now lets say you are level 5 and you decided to take a feat at level 4.

This means at level 5 you have a total of 9 slots (4 first level, 3 second level, 2 third level). Now to prepare all these slots you need a minimum of a +4 ability modifier. So that means if you didn't take the stat increase at level four you cannot prepare all your spell slots. A similar thing happens after every stat increase.

[Demonic Spoon]

Well I did notice this. Say you point buy and start as a human wizard. You will most likely have a 16 or 17 int. This means a mod of +3. Now you can only prepare a number of spells equal to your wizard level plus your int mod. Now lets say you are level 5 and you decided to take a feat at level 4.

This means at level 5 you have a total of 9 slots (4 first level, 3 second level, 2 third level). Now to prepare all these slots you need a minimum of a +4 ability modifier. So that means if you didn't take the stat increase at level four you cannot prepare all your spell slots. A similar thing happens after every stat increase.

But you don't prepare slots, you prepare spells. That just means that one of those spells you'll end up casting more than once.


http://i.imgur.com/kbGNcUp.jpg

Fair point. Regardless, attribute increases are useful in a broad variety of situations whereas feats are useful in a very specific subset of situations.

[Daishain]

Well I did notice this. Say you point buy and start as a human wizard. You will most likely have a 16 or 17 int. This means a mod of +3. Now you can only prepare a number of spells equal to your wizard level plus your int mod. Now lets say you are level 5 and you decided to take a feat at level 4.

This means at level 5 you have a total of 9 slots (4 first level, 3 second level, 2 third level). Now to prepare all these slots you need a minimum of a +4 ability modifier. So that means if you didn't take the stat increase at level four you cannot prepare all your spell slots. A similar thing happens after every stat increase.
Doesn't work that way. Frankly, the designer's choice to keep the term spell slot was a poor one, since it can be quite confusing given the old meaning of the term.

The spell slots are there no matter what your Int modifier. You could be a Wizard with an Int of 8, and still have all 9 spell slots fully available for use. That's actually kind of weird now that I think about it...

Regardless, where the Int modifier comes into play is in terms of spells prepared. You get your Wizard level + Int modifier's worth (min 1) Our level 5 wizard with 8 Int would therefore only be able to prepare 4 spells of any spell level between 1 and 3.

From this point on, until he chooses to prepare a different list of spells, the Wizard casts like a 3.5e sorcerer. He expends spell slots, but the spells themselves stay prepared and ready for use. He could spend all nine slots casting one single spell nine different times, or spread it out a bit more evenly.

In other words, our mentally handicapped wizard has less in the way of versatility than his more adept bretheren, but on a number of spells casted per day basis is not behind the others at all

(Note: idiot wizard wouldn't actually be able to cast spells at all due to minimum attribute reqs. The above is only to make a point concerning spell slots vs spells prepared.)

[Gnomes2169]

Actually, the idiot wizard does not have the int to cast spells if he has 8 int (they kept the minimum ability scores thing for what spells a caster can know/ prepair). So a caster actually needs to boost their primary casting stat somehow (easiest through a feat with the appropriate stat boost, and most effective through the use of an ability score increase).

So actually, SAD classes seem to be the ones that don't have as many options feats-wise (at least, after they take the one feat that actually does anything useful for their primary stat and War Caster, they then have 2 more feats to take and only ~17 in their primary stat with the point buy array...), and the MAD martial classes (besides the paladin) don't seem to need any one primary stat more than the bonus most feats could net them. Maybe the Eldrich Knight and Arcane Trickster could use a few points in int, but beyond that...

[Daishain]

Actually, the idiot wizard does not have the int to cast spells if he has 8 int (they kept the minimum ability scores thing for what spells a caster can know/ prepair). So a caster actually needs to boost their primary casting stat somehow (easiest through a feat with the appropriate stat boost, and most effective through the use of an ability score increase).

I know, I was speaking strictly from the perspective of spells prepared vs spell slots. And using an extreme, though obviously unworkable, example to illustrate the point.

On second thought I probably should have made that clear, let me take care of that.