what do you do when a +3 bloodclaw weapon is more powerful than a +4 artifact

[thecasualoblivion]

This is me as well. I think the OP needs to get more comfortable with the "just say no" aspect of being a DM.

As well, I find the Char-Op boards to be a great resource for DMs as they actually are quite helpful in telling you "these items will be a problem, we houserules/banned them in our campaigns" -(I don't think many people realize this aspect of the char-op board. Many assume that the denizens of said board regularly abuse the system breaking faults but IME, most of the denizens are actually quite happy to use the banhammer)

The most abusive items in AV for example
Radiant, Reckless and Bloodclaw (From least to most-the last one especially)
Staff of Ruin
The specific combo of Orb of Ultimate Imposition, Cunning Weapon and the Phrenic Crown (this is more of a design issue as there should have been a "no stacking of penalties" rule a la the "no stacking of bonuses")
Iron Armbands of Power
Solitaires (- really, there's no reason NOT to have one if you have the cash - this is the only section of the AV which is flat out problematic/broken)

evilbob, if you actually ban these things, you will probably see a lot more variation in character's stash of items....For example, if you actually ban radiant, reckless and bloodclaw, you still have over 100 weapon properties (and funny enough, the next most used weapon property would be from the PHB - Vorpal)

I've done something for most of these items. At least the ones I've encountered.

Radiant I've left be(its borderline), Reckless I've upped from level 3/8/13+ to 5/10/15+ and Bloodclaw I've completely removed.

Staff of Ruin I've left be, despite the fact that it tends to be the only staff in existence. Most Druids, Invokers, Sorcerers, Artificers and Staff Wizards I have seen in my games have used this Staff almost exclusively. Implement damage boosts are so rare I tend to tolerate this.

Saving throw penalty stuff hasn't come up in game yet, but I'll probably invoke RAI on that one and just ask the player to do something else.

Iron Armbands of Power(and the archery equivalent) I have changed the levels on. They are now level 10/20/30 instead of 6/16/26. They still see almost universal use, but I'm happy with the balance now.

Solitaires tend to get banned.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

If you feel like restricting everything is too much, just do it this way:
- The players can build/craft/buy everything in the PHB 1.
- You still might hand out items from other sources as treasure.

You could do something similar with powers or feats. Every feat or power outside the PHB 1 requires some kind of special (re)training. Occassionally, the players might find a "Manual of Gainful Exercise" or visit a magical academy, and you open up a few new powers that you think are unproblematic.

To minimize your own work, still ask the players for "wishlists" beyond the scope of the PHB 1. So you can look at the powers and equipment they wish and figure out if you find that okay. If yes, they might find a book containing a spell or a heap of treasure containing the desired item at some point.

 

[Piratecat]

My personal feeling on the bloodclaw weapon is that the power should be usable only once per round, instead of at-will.

That limits it to only one attack getting the bonus. It's still good, but it doesn't make multiple attack powers do overwhelming damage.

That's a great, easy fix.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I think part of the disconnect is between how AD&D 1st ed was played and how D&D 4e is developed.

1st ed, you generally didn't buy your items. There may have been Vorpal Swords and other powerful items that 'broke the rules' (Hammer of Thunderbolts... so good with the Gauntlets and Girdle) but because you didn't walk up to the local vendor and slam down a bag of gold yelling, "hook me up.", it wasn't preceived as a problem.

This design philosiphy seems to have followed in previous editions despite leaning more and more towards a 'point buy' system where the players can take any feat they qualify for in game as well as any power or magic item.

If as a GM you find yourself facing clones because the party members all maximize their characters, ask what type of points of light setting are you utilizing where the characters can all BUY those items in the first place?

It's not a 'fix' for the broken game system, but if I'm right and the game designers expect the GM to work with the players in providing them options in the game world as opposed to walking up to street vendors and buying said items... it's not really broken in the first place.

 

[Mallus]

Here's another thought: how 'broken' an item is depends on the character using it.

For example, a Bloodclaw battle axe wielded one-handed by my paladin is different from the Bloodclaw greatsword wielded by my friend's avenger.

I think there's a tendency to look for global solutions to balance problems; ban this element (item, spell, feat, class, etc). It might be better to look at balance in terms of the whole character, 'broken' characters, not broken elements. Most individual elements have legitimate uses, for instance, 'powering-up' underpowered classes, or are balanced as used by the particular character (you see this a lot w/pre-4e spells).

Banning things outright removes what can be useful tools. It's more effective to say "Tom, please don't do that with your character", rather than "No one can use the PHBII".

 

[FireLance]

After reading through some of the items in the AV, I find myself ... amused.

The staff of ruin and the radiant weapon effectively add +1 damage per plus.

The reckless weapon adds +2 damage per plus, if the user takes a -2 penalty to AC.

The bloodclaw weapon adds up to +2 damage per plus, or up to +3 damage per plus if used two-handed, if the user takes half or a third of the extra damage he deals respectively.

For a +3 weapon, that's +3, +6, or +9 damage. Given that most 10th-level monsters would have around 100 hp, even +9 to damage doesn't seem very impressive to me. Granted, if your base damage is low, as might be the case for an avenger, a bloodclaw weapon might double your damage output. However, if this means that the avenger will now be able to defeat the monster in six hits instead of twelve, this could be considered a good thing. In fact, if you're facing a grind problem, giving every weapon the bloodclaw property might actually be a decent solution.

So anyway, I can sympathize with complaints that they create cookie-cutter characters because every PC wants one of those items. There are only that many magic items that grant constant (or near-constant) damage bonuses, so it isn't surprising that PCs who want to increase their damage output will naturally gravitate towards them. However, if these are among the most broken items in the Adventurer's Vault, I'd say that the designers have done a pretty good job of keeping the game balanced.

 

[Stormtalon]

Well, I see a couple of different options here. Bloodclaw weapons are indeed great -- as long as the one using them doesn't have to worry about taking much damage in a fight. Easy solution (though a bit meta-gamey) is to start tossing in a few encounters with monsters that have damaging auras. For instance, a Maw of Acamar or two will make the ability of the weapon suddenly look a lot less attractive.

Second thing is more of an observation -- Artifacts in this edition don't seem to be designed to be the pinnacle of power for their level. Rather, they're impressively versatile; more importantly, they're plot devices of the highest caliber. Their value isn't in their innate power but in the ability of an artifact to be a driving force in the story of the campaign. They don't appear in the hands of characters randomly; the artifact has a purpose and its appearance is because it is once again time for it to affect the flow of history. The artifact is a Big Thing(tm) and prone to vanishing into the mists of the world when it feels its purpose has been fulfilled for the time being.

So, my advice is to forget about the disparity in raw power, and focus more upon the meaning and significance of the Artifact appearing at this particular time and this particular place to this particular character.

 

[AllisterH]

THe issue with Static damage is the combination with multiattack/hit powers.

But yeah, wth over 100 weapon properties in the AV and given what else was produced, yeah, there's a lot less abusive items than I epected honestly.

Sure, there are items that actually seem wrongly placed (a.k.a the levels got switched between two sets of items) but other than the Solitaires, there's no one section of the book that makes me say "Forget about it, at least 33# of this is broken and I don't want to waste time fixing it"

re: sameness of PCs

To the OP: Some things you can't help though if the characters are all the same class/role. For example, in LFR, it seems like all Avengers wield the fullblade but there's no way to get different weapons on avengers since the basic mechanic (re-rolling) ainerently makes the crit aspect of the fullblade attractive.

 

[OchreJelly]

ok I'll bite. What's the problem with Solitaires? Genuine question, because maybe I'm not seeing the uber combo. Even with something like a Daggermaster, I don't see a free save roll or heal surge that procs on a crit once per encounter as overpowered.

 

[evilbob]

I think JoeGKushner has hit on something interesting. It's MUCH harder to "ban" a broken item in a system where it's pretty much expected that a) every character can (at least eventually) get any item they want, and b) "everything is core." In older editions, treasure was more of a "what you got" vs. "what you get for yourself" mechanic, so it was easier to control. Now, anything is available and "everything is core," so it's much harder to argue against specific items - especially without an individual review of each. Not that rule 0 doesn't exist or is invalidated or anything; it's just a harder argument (at least in my opinion).

In response to some of the direct questions, in the game I was talking about in the OP I am a player, but I also DM. It's not really relevant to this thread, I think: you can think of it in either PC or DM terms and it's pretty much the same set of issues.