What is, by consensus opinion, obviously broken?

[Stalker0]

In the category of broken, my current punching bag is healing. Now that my group is in the upper paragon I'm starting to really see the power of healing. Its not that it just makes the group powerful, it also reduces the thrill of combat. When a player can go from dying on the group to completely full several times a combat it takes a bit of the sting out of it.

I actually really like how epic destinies can let players come back when they die. That's....epic! But frankly I wonder how often those powers would actually get used due to super healing.


On my "I would like to see changes", my biggest two are:

1) Changes to conditions.
2) Return of buff spells (effects).


4e made a great move with conditions in that it cleaned up the 30+ conditions into a nice condensed list with very clean, clear mechanics. But I find conditions are too plentiful in the game. I have had the combats where literally I am adding and removing 6+ different conditions on a monster every round. I wish conditions were less frequent....or conditions were something that was easier to keep track of.

Forced movement is great. My power hits, I do the forced movement, I'm done don't have to think about it. If there were more of those kinds of effects, I would be a fan.


My second are buff spells, and what I mean by that are more effect based powers. I don't miss the hour long buff fests from 3e. What I do miss is a cleric who focuses his spells on making himself a badass. A miss spells (powers) where I don't have to worry about hitting, I'm casting this effect so that I'm cooler for the following rounds.

Right now I think there is too much reliance on hitting to get powers to activate. I don't mind that hitting gives an effect, but something I want to use a power not for the damage...but just to activate some effect. I think adding back buff powers would also reduce some of the emphasize on a classes primary stat.

 

[Glyfair]

I'm going to guess that skill challenges will actually be largely the same - they'll just be presented differently. In the long run, they aren't so much a mechanic as a way to work with non-combat skills in a structured way.

I agree. When I saw the initial reaction to Skill Challenges, I decided that this was something that would last, but that it would undergo a lot of experimentation as it develops. I think that process is still ongoing.

I believe Skill Challenges will be in a 5E, but they will be a bit more mature of a game concept then.

As for what is "broken" enough to change...? I agree with the amount of bookkeeping. In someways 4E was designed to reduce some of the bookkeeping. For example, in the number of bonus types that don't stack. I think the number of conditions, bonuses, powers, etc. will be reduced. I do think it will be a lot of 4E, but much more streamlined.

 

[Cadfan]

In my opinion:

1. Stacking save penalties. This one is pretty obvious.

2. The fact that an attack that is "until save ends" is often weaker than attack that lasts "until the end of your next turn." The former is clearly intended to be a powered up version of the latter, except that it stops being so when faced with powers that grant out of turn saves, and breaks completely when used as an interrupt during your target's turn.

3. In four editions, or more depending on how you count, they still haven't got "holding things" right. Juggling your gear should not be a minigame. The swordmage hand jive is a travesty.

4. Giving everyone an attack item works wonders in terms of balance, but interacts poorly with multiclassing. If you want to play a fighter/wizard, you need three hands, skill at juggling items, or special feats or gear.

5. When giving advice to new players, do not give advice that is flavorful. Give advice that is good. If good advice is not flavorful, ask yourself why not, and consider revising the mechanics such that it is.

6. Please don't include must-have feats.

 

[tuxgeo]

Re: consensus "broken"

I doubt there will be any clear consensus even among people who find things that they think 4e could do better.
The things that are already starting to appear in this thread are mostly various people's lists of pet peeves. This is alright by me, so let me add my own two cents' worth:

(1) Domains, especially the Domain Power feats. The selection is limited!
Example: Say you want to make a Cleric of Sehanine, with the Domains of Love, Moon, and Trickery: the associated At-Will Cleric Powers are "Recovery Strike" and "Righteous Brand" and "Recovery Strike" again. This fits a Battle Cleric, but is unsuitable to a Devoted Cleric, who would not typically take those Powers because they are Melee Weapon instead of Ranged Implement.
There are other examples.

(2) Magic Item Daily Powers. Bleargh. When reading lists of items, I tend to skip over most magic items that don't have "Property:" listings or Encounter powers. I have seen comments by others who feel the same way. And it is not because the powers are awful, at all; instead, it is the confining limit of only one magic item daily power use per day per Tier. Yes, this is to avoid power creep, but what is the effect? Some players would rather take a weaker Encounter power that they can actually use at need than to have a whole raft of shiny, wonderful Daily powers that just sit there unused, because their PC has already used one item's Daily power that day.
(Even if it could be changed to "one item Daily power per slot per day," that would be an improvement.)

(3) Not enough Utility Powers. These are currently available to most characters in the quantity of one each at Levels 2, 6, 10, 12 (Paragon Path), 16, 22, and 26 (Epic Destiny). Wizards have it slightly better: they get to select from two or more Daily and Utility powers of each level they attain.
Could the Utility powers perhaps be split into separate buckets, Combat Only and Miscellaneous? Then all of the Utility Powers that say "grants combat advantage" or "gains a +2 bonus to AC" or similar things would go into one bucket, while things such as Levitate or Dimension Door that do not directly affect attack rolls, damage rolls, Saving Throws, Hit Points, or Conditions (dazed? unconscious? immobilized?) could go into the other bucket. The 4th Edition already has At-Will and Encounter and Daily and Utility powers; maybe it also has room for Versatility powers as well. (However, there would still be the problem of fitting those into the level-up schedule.)

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Orbizards: overpowered yes.

Expertise is considered broken, one way or the other, by most anyone who's aware of it.

The possible range in skill bonuses has gotten nearly as bad as it was in 3e. Which generally isn't a problem, except when combined with the wonky Inimidate-in-combat mechanic -- which, like 3e grapple, manages to be under- and overpowered at the same time.

There's a few things which I think are broken -- like bear shamans and feylocks -- but unfortunately too many gamers are complacent about them.

Rituals
Magic Items
Skill Challenges

Remind me why these things are broken?

Not to be contrary, but what's wrong with rituals being purely out-of-combat effects with a monetary cost?

I've honestly never heard anyone complain about 4e magic items in general -- except that they still have enhancement bonuses, but I don't see that changing in 5e. (Well I've heard a few complain that 4e items suck, but that's not a problem unless you like items being awesomely important to character survival.)

And other than the skill challenge DCs being apparently chosen by die rolls -- instead of a few simple N + 1/2 level DCs -- what's inherently wrong with skill challenges? Every time I read about it, my eyes end up glazing over halfway through the first post.

 

[Rechan]

I wouldn't say these are "Broken", but certainly in need of an overhaul:

Warlord and Warlock.

While some do like the Warlord, I think that it is fairly clunky. Especially compared to the PHB2 classes. The melee bard out warlords the warlord, I say. The Warlord depends so heavily on hitting, and he gives all his allies the beenies, while not giving him anything sexy to enjoy. The Warlock just needs a bit of rejiggering.

Well I've heard a few complain that 4e items suck, but that's not a problem unless you like items being awesomely important to character survival.

That's the problem.

It's nto a matter of "Being awesomely important". The issue is that the items are boring as dirt. Sure, magical items shouldn't make the character. Nor should they be as exciting as a used pair of socks. Magical items should be, well, magical damnit.

 

[ScottS]

Does grindspace count as "broken" or "working as intended"?

 

[Sadrik]

Things I didn't like:
1. Forced grid
2. Forced roles
3. Inflexible design
4. Square circles and running diagonally is the same as running straight on the grid
6. Poorly thought out and last minute multi-classing rules
7. Everything is core
8. 15 levels of attack powers of which some lower level are better than higher level
9. Every player is playing a caster
10. At-will first level attack powers
11. Combat that becomes dry and stale
12. Combat too long
13. Powers on cards to speed up play
14. Funky unique races in first book
15. Daily martial powers
16. WIS having little focus
17. Too many feat requirements
18. Extremely structured power selection
19. Master work armor
20. Hyperbolic economy and astral diamonds
21. High level characters never get good at what they do, they just ride a treadmill that keeps them equal to their opponents.
22. two weapon fighting
23. minions
24. neck slot
25. 1/2 elf +2 con
26. 1/2 orc +2 dex
27. Astral Fire, Burning Blizzard, Dark Fury and Raging Storm
28. Characters feel cookie cut because of their reliance on their prime stat
29. Paladin, Cleric, Warlock and Ranger two stat power structure
30. Inability to make it my own through customization on DDI
31. Using my INT to dodge your blows but with heavy armor I am not smart enough
32. Core splat book weapons
33. 1/2lings cannot wield a quarterstaff
34. Combat focus first, role play focus second
35. Rolling to hit your willpower
36. Some conditions are off
37. Stealth skill and stealth errata
38. Teleporting elves
39. Action economy especially with regard to summons and animal companions etc.
40. Siloing and the afterthought that rituals are

There are some good things though, they are just buried so deeply that they don't shine.

 

[Wik]

Honestly, my biggest problems with the game are the reliance on magical items (blegh), and the duration of so-called balanced combats. It seems there are so many "how can I speed up play?" threads out there.

Granted, 3e had this problem too. But I really wish it would go away. As a point of comparison, during our 3e years we switched to d6 space, and ran an entire adventure in around three hours - which would have taken about four equally-long sessions to do in 3e. Something similar happened when we stopped a 4e game to play Savage Worlds a while back.

But that's just a personal opinion, there. A good chunk of my players are purely in it for the fights, after all.

 

[Stormonu]

For me, these were the things that turned me off to the game

- essentially 3 stats (Str/Con,Int/Dex,Wis/Cha), all 6 should have some purpose both in and out of combat for the same character.

- fights that last too long, often due to monsters having too many HP

- the entire ritual system is borked and uninteresting in actual play.

- all money is good for is more powerful magic items, and magic items have ludicrous costs. A system wherein you invest magic points or some other resource besides gold to acquire/activate magic items (perhaps something as simple as level) I think would be less stressing to my suspension of disbelief. Money should be used for more mundane things and not as a magic enabler.

- mundane equipment that matters. After the first few levels, mundane items are a joke.

- less reliance on powers. "Basic/At-will" attacks should be interesting enough that pulling out an encounter or daily should really feel like an "ooh, ahhh" moment instead of implemented in a way so that everybody reaches first for dailies & encounters. Let encounter/dailies do unusual things instead of "more damage" - something to make folks actually take a moment to weigh whether a basic/at-will would be more helpful in a given situation than an encounter/daily ("If I hit with my basic attack, I can do a lot of damage - if I hit. But my daily won't miss, so I'd be guaranteed to get some damage in - maybe also put a negative effect on him. Whaddya think - accuracy or damage potential?")