Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="brassbaboon" data-source="post: 4967360" data-attributes="member: 66114">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.</blockquote>

Verification