The new, shiny "Stuff I Have/Would Ban" thread!

[keterys]

I find it more sad that all magic sheilds are worse to people then +2 to melee damage.

*shrug* Then you don't buy into the implicit premise that magic items are supposed to be but one of many facets of your character, not the overriding one. A premise stated and promised by the designers of 4e and... striven for in many places... with some obvious failings.

At which point the ideal is not to keep the +2 melee damage bracer, but to make a lot of _other_ interesting treasure instead.

Or you take out the bracers and suddenly Recoil Shields, Throwing Shields, and Storm Shields are very real options.

 

[SteveC]

In looking at the braciers, I wonder if the people who are talking about banning them are also concerned about the grind in a typical battle. Are we really that concerned about +2 or +4 damage on an attack (and the +4 damage is a level _16_ item)? If a lot of people pick them, perhaps it's because they haven't found anything more interesting or useful to replace them with. More interesting bracers/shield items is the cure for the iron armbands, methinks.

--Steve

 

[keterys]

In looking at the braciers, I wonder if the people who are talking about banning them are also concerned about the grind in a typical battle.

If they were, I'd hope they would also supply bracers that give damage to implement attacks. And perhaps a bonus that doesn't empower multiattack powers more than single attack powers... but I wouldn't count on it.

More interesting bracers/shield items is the cure for the iron armbands, methinks.

I suspect 'interesting' is the wrong word, but rather 'powerful' is the correct one.

 

[WOLead]

In looking at the braciers, I wonder if the people who are talking about banning them are also concerned about the grind in a typical battle. Are we really that concerned about +2 or +4 damage on an attack (and the +4 damage is a level _16_ item)? If a lot of people pick them, perhaps it's because they haven't found anything more interesting or useful to replace them with. More interesting bracers/shield items is the cure for the iron armbands, methinks.

--Steve

Its just how powerful those things are. Any melee attack gets twice the amount of added damage, then if they spent a feat for a Weapon Focus. Same with the Bow version. Now if a DM dropped that to a +1/+2/+3 bonus instead of +2/+4/+6, then more people might start looking at other items.

On the other hand, I like to take other enchantments in that slot when aiming defensively. Such as Shield of the Barrier Sentinels for any shield using melee, or Warlock's Bracers for Warlocks or Swordmage|Warlock Hybrids. Shield of the Barrier Sentinels I find especially nice if you have some way to negate the attack bonus to enemies for being Flanked, such as Uncanny Dodge or Alert Familiar. Its kind of funny to TRY to be flanked, so your AC and Reflex is higher against any attack, while the enemies go out of their way to not flank you so they and their allies have a better chance to hit.

 

[FireLance]

As I said on another thread, the fact that one of the items that gets complained about the most grants +2/+4/+6 to melee damage rolls is an indication of how well-balanced 4E is as a whole.

It may be boring. It may be popular. It may even be "overpowered" in the sense that it is better than any other magic item occupying the same slot and of approximately the same level.

But broken in the sense of "This will bring your game to a screeching halt"/"This will allow the PCs to overcome encounters that are supposed to challenge them too easily"/"The character with this game element will overshadow all the others in play"? Hardly.

 

[Greatwyvern]

Whats a Dm to do?

I have just joined this site and of course this topic was like a giant bulls eye for a fellow Dm to read and after reading i feel almost a little sad. If i could gather your attention Ladies and Gents and have you sit around the fire as I twist my tale and philosophy I would sincerely be grateful.

As for banning Builds, items, powers or even game mechanics I have never been a fan of. In my time of 9 years of playing D&D and 6 years now running campaigns for many different groups and people i have learned three key things. When i first started Dming I was out to "win" and didn't like when my players easily thrashed my big nasties or easy bypassed my hard dungeon or traps. But as the years went on I realized as a Dm I was not there to "win" but more as a guide and narrator. As Dm's we are there for our players to guide them into a world of fantasy where they embark on fanciful quest and heroic, or diabolical, endeavors. We strive to make the game fun and have fun our selves as the players move through the plots, stories and worlds we have created.

With this said I move onto my banning philosophy. If i believe items are making my players to powerful and breaking the game, I just move on to tougher enemies or better enemy groups that can work together as well as my players can. In a recent game I played in a Dm wanted to ban haste and increasing the tempo just cause the bard poped both at once on his final boss of a dungeon on the ranger who just went and the thing was at only 1/4 its hp. However this happened because both the ranger and bard spent 2 daily powers each and both action pointed and didn't miss once. Is this over powered? I don't believe so as a DM, i call it skilled team work and dumb luck. Just because a set of daily powers can crush an enemy quickly doesn't mean there over powered, that's why they are DAILY powers. If the daily powers in a group are annoying you, do what i did and start having your group have anywhere from 1 to 6 encounters per 24 hours. This way they will not just pop off their dailies every encounter and will learn that teamwork is stronger then just over powering daily damage.

As for items, some items do seem like everyone and their mother are always going to get those items and sometimes it saddens a DM to have a group of monoitemized groups with no versatility. My easiest answer to this is make your players do more then just hack and slash encounters. Have hard encounters where they wish they had choose that floating shield(saved a full plate wearing fighter in my group from drowning to death 5 times....). Also encourage your players to fill out back rounds and character growth that might make some other items more interesting. Like a game i am in now my Dragonborn fighter could have went bloodclaw and iron arms but instead since he has sworn to destroy tiamat(he's lacking a lot for that job LOL) he went with dragonslayer and more deffensive route. If players still insist on maxing out damage and power gaming them selves into walking blenders, toss in a mix of non combat action encounters, this way they realize the power of non damage maxing items.

This is just my philosophy on bans and running as a DM. To everyone that does ban items to each their own and I respect your choices in your games, just try to always remember that as a DM we are there as story tellers, guides and narrators and above all. Make sure our players have FUN!

Thank you for reading my post and to all Good luck and may you have many fond memories.
Richard R.

 

[abyssaldeath]

Its just how powerful those things are. Any melee attack gets twice the amount of added damage, then if they spent a feat for a Weapon Focus. Same with the Bow version. Now if a DM dropped that to a +1/+2/+3 bonus instead of +2/+4/+6, then more people might start looking at other items.

So because a MAGIC item is more powerful then a feat it's too much? Even if you dropped it to +1/+2/+3 bonus it will still be chosen nearly as much because people like constant bonuses. I don't even look at magic items that don't have properties.

 

[FireLance]

This is just my philosophy on bans and running as a DM. To everyone that does ban items to each their own and I respect your choices in your games, just try to always remember that as a DM we are there as story tellers, guides and narrators and above all. Make sure our players have FUN!

Good first post and welcome to ENWorld!

While I happen to agree with your DMing philosophy, I don't think it is the only way to DM. For example, some DMs see themselves more as "referees" - neutral arbiters of the game rules and the PCs' actions. Of course, 4E does make this DMing style slightly more difficult because, unlike previous editions, there is no way to randomly generate magic items by the rules. The standard 4E approach of PC wish lists and adventures with unspecified "Level X" magic items found as treasure means that the DM is almost forced to take an active role in deciding what magic items are found by the players.

This leads me to wonder whether all this banning may be a side effect of DMs needing to choose which magic items to give to the party instead of rolling for them randomly. In a way, I think it is a mindset shift. Rolling randomly tends to provoke the question, "How do I deal with X if it shows up in my game?" whereas choosing magic items tends to provoke the question, "Do I want X in my game?"

 

[brassbaboon]

I've been playing and DMing D&D since about 1982. In that time I've never banned anything, although I've had a few items banned by other DMs.

Reading through this thread it's almost like there are two different interpretations of what is an acceptable reason to ban items. Some of the posters are OK with banning according to one interpretation, some the other, and some both.

The first interpretation is that the item is "broken". In that sense it implies that the item is so overpowered that it makes the game unfair with that item, power or feat.

The second interpretation is that the item is "too commonplace". In that sense it implies that since every character of a certain role automatically takes that item, it should be banned because it is restricting the options and making the game too "cookie cutter."

In some cases both come into play.

One of the, if not the, most commonly banned items seems to be the iron armbands of power (or the bracers of archery for a ranged character). With a +2 damage per tier, it is very, very hard to see these as "broken" in the sense that it overpowers the game. However, because damage is so critical for strikers, if the item is available, it is almost game play negligence not to have them. (Disclaimer, my ranger has the iron armbands of power).

But this is a real pandora's box of banning if you think about it. Banning the iron armbands of power not because they make a character super-powered, but simply because they are near universal, means that once they are banned, the next item on the list is ripe for banning itself.

This is one major reason I don't ban items. I also don't like to "nerf" items for the same reason. What I have done in past versions of D&D is to simply customize magic items so that individual characters have options that make sense for them, and those items are comparable in usefulness to the "most common" item.

So, if every striker in my campaign is taking the iron armbands of power, my immediate reaction is not that they are overpowered, but that there simply aren't good options that cater to individual builds.

Looking at the Character Builder arm slot items, it is my opinion that this is exactly the problem. Iron Armbands of Power are a level 6 item. There is nothing else at that level, or within several levels above it, that offer ANYTHING remotely as obviously beneficial to a striker. For example, moving up to level 7, the first armslot item in the CB is "bracers of defense." With that name you might think they offer an always on +1 to AC or something, which would be comparable to an always on +2 to damage. But they don't. What they do is offer a daily power to reduce damage by 10. This is laughable compared to the Iron Armbands of Power. You would have to be a fool if you are playing a striker and you give up +2 damage for every hit to be able ONCE PER DAY to reduce damage from one attack by 10. That's simply ludicrous.

Also at level 7 is a set of bracers that ONCE PER DAY gives a +1d10 damage to ONE attack. That's an average of 5.5 additional damage, or slightly less overall damage than three hits with the Iron Armbands of Power. Again what kind of idiot would take that?

At level 8 there are no armslot items that increase damage, which is what strikers do. Again, it would be almost party-negligence to take one of them when you could have IAoP instead.

At level 9, more of the same. Situational items that don't appeal to strikers.

At level 10 you actually have a couple choices that do add damage. But a little simple math will demonstrate that neither of them will keep up with the sixth level IAoP item.

I could go on. The end result of this analysis is that it is pretty likely that until you get to the +4 Iron Armbands of Power there simply isn't another striker-specific armslot item that makes any dang sense at all.

So my conclusion isn't that Iron Armbands of Power are overpowered, or that I need to ban them because they are too common, my conclusion is that the armslot items for strikers simply suck big time.

The real solution to the "problem" is to provide more options to the role that is always picking the same thing. What else would appeal to a striker that might make a player think twice about choosing the iron armbands of power? Here are some suggested items that I don't believe are overpowered but that would also appeal to a striker.

Armbands of accuracy. Free action: Once per encounter reroll a missed attack roll with a +2 bonus to the roll.
Armbands of punishment. Free action: Once per encounter add 1d8 to every attack roll made before the end of your turn.
Armbands of reach. Extend your weapon's reach by 1 square. You grant combat advantage to all enemies.
Armbands of energy. Your melee attack becomes one of the standard energy types.

Just some examples. I can guarantee you that in the next 4e campaign I run, I intend to come up with some alternatives that will make even those already wearing the IAoP think twice about keeping them.

It is my opinion that the magic weapons available actually provide quite a bit of interesting, tempting diversity. Vengeful looks good to a one-shot nuclear bomb striker. Bloodclaw looks good to a striker who doesn't expect to take a lot of damage. Vanguard is perfect for a charging barbarian. Subtle might be great for a rogue (I don't have a rogue, but it looks good to me). Quick weapons are great for high attack bonus characters...

Give us more options in the arm slot and we won't all pick Iron Armbands of Power.

 

[keterys]

I actually think that upping the general value of magic items is a totally valid enterprise... but one that requires a _lot_ of work since you have to do it almost across the board. At the moment you've got a flat sea with, like, a few rare points above it. Budgeting everything to those points is definitely viable, but a lot of work.

I did go through at one point redesigning a few dozen items to be more flavorful and valuable, though. I just gave up cause of the character builder* and the effort involved.

That and all kinds of static bonuses (to anything) isn't really healthy for the game. Better off none than hordes, really.

* It is amusing how much stuff in 4e I won't bother to touch since it won't go in the character builder.