Will WotC ever get it right?

[Jack99]

If we talk about broken powers, there are really only a few. Mostly those that grant a penalty to the enemy until the encounter, some even on a miss ><

Those are retarded imo, and will be nerfed in my campaigns.

 

[Nail]

I'd like to see someone model statistically all the powers, feats, and monsters to see if the combat system is balanced because I ahve never seen anyone's head actually explode before.

You might get that chance.

Stalker0 said he might try to model Epic tier combat, including encounter and Daily powers, and magic items.

Wish him luck!

 

[Marshall]

One note:

The main damage of the first one is acid, then does thundering ongoing. The main damage of the second is thunder, then does fire ongoing. While fire is resisted a lot by monsters ... acid resistance is more common than thunder resistance. Thus the first hit of damage for the 29th level power is less likely to be resisted than the 25th level power.

Actually, no. The first one is Acid & Thunder with ongoing Acid. Almost no chance of resisting the initial damage and a push on resistance vs. vulnerability against the ongoing.

 

[Marshall]

M
....but all of that is far from the subject of this thread: "Does WotC balance class powers correctly?"

The evidence suggests that for most powers, the answer is: Yes.

Is it really?

I think the answer for most powers is "Debatable" Which means that they are situationally over or under powered. Or you can at least argue that "dazed" is the equivalent of "slowed"

Some are definitely "Yes". Obvious scaling, counting attributes, greater range or area make it easy to see which powers are "the next step" up from one another.
Even some of these are debatable when you compare them across roles or objectives(ie single target vs. AoE vs. condition)

A significant minority are absolutely "No"
Any time a lower level power is strictly better than a higher level power, its a screw up. Any time a lower level power in another role is strictly better than a higher level power in a classes "shtick" its still a screw up.

 

[Saeviomagy]

4e is about 100 times more balanced than any other edition of D&D - have their been mistakes? Sure, but not nearly enough to justify that kind of anger you are presenting in this thread.

I think that's what makes people so angry. You can clearly see that for huge chunks of the game, they got it right. It's upsetting to see the good stuff marred (or wrecked in certain cases) by stuff that's absolutely awful, and it's frustrating when people claim that such items were intended, or that there's no problem with them.

 

[Stalker0]

You might get that chance.

Stalker0 said he might try to model Epic tier combat, including encounter and Daily powers, and magic items.

Wish him luck!

Hehe just got to take care of that pesky real life first!

 

[Nifft]

I think that's what makes people so angry. You can clearly see that for huge chunks of the game, they got it right. It's upsetting to see the good stuff marred (or wrecked in certain cases) by stuff that's absolutely awful, and it's frustrating when people claim that such items were intended, or that there's no problem with them.

To be fair, some things don't impact some games, and it's perfectly acceptable to assert that such things work fine -- or at least aren't a problem -- in one particular game. It's only when we hear reports back from many different games that we can start to talk about the impact things actually have.

It's also the best way -- and possibly the only way -- to discover how fun something is. Thus far, I've seen little evidence that fun can be modeled with conventional mathematical models.

Hehe just got to take care of that pesky real life first!

Don't spend too much time on it. It's got very little replay value.

"... and I can't seem to find any more save points ...", -- N

 

[DracoSuave]

also the best way -- and possibly the only way -- to discover how fun something is. Thus far, I've seen little evidence that fun can be modeled with conventional mathematical models.

-This.-

A lot of powers and feats and class features have had people go 'Why is this good?' If your DM never sends monsters that give conditions or ongoing damage at you, then you might wonder why Warden's Font of Life is so good? If you never plan on playing a 'Jedi'-expy, you're less likely understand why Swordmages have sword-throwing powers and Swordbond are actually pretty good. It's not always about having the maximum damage/status effects.

Sometimes, some players create characters to maximise The Rule of Awesome, where they want everything to ooze flavor. Not every player wants to push every number as far as it can go.

Plus, not every optimizer actually knows how to optimize, ymmv, and other caveats. Without understanding the basic core criteria Wizards uses to plot out, level, and balance their powers, it's hard to say if they screwed up or not. It's -not- that simple, no matter how much people claim it is.

The -first- consideration is if the player can reasonably make the character they want, and if the character can do it's job; not necessarily if it's pushing the damage envelope. If the power list doesn't address this concern first and formost, then no amount of number crunching or power-escalation rule-adherance will change the fact the power list has failed it's job.

 

[Nail]

You might get that chance.

Stalker0 said he might try to model Epic tier combat, including encounter and Daily powers, and magic items.

Wish him luck!

Hehe just got to take care of that pesky real life first!

FWIW< I would love to see what you come up with...after Real Life(tm) gets outta th' way.

 

[Nail]

A significant minority are absolutely "No"
Any time a lower level power is strictly better than a higher level power, its a screw up. Any time a lower level power in another role is strictly better than a higher level power in a classes "shtick" its still a screw up.

..and I think you'll find that some of the powers you find "screwed up" others do not have any problem with. <=Which suggests significant subjectivity in the analysis.

(FWIW, I'm not suggesting the powers are perfectly balanced. Far from it. We are all aware of the mis-cues and pitfalls of game design.)

You seem to be particularly hot-under-the-collar about this. Perhaps you could use that energy to make a list of powers you think have the wrong level? That would be helpful.

Citing only one example and then calling the whole work poorly done is ....