What is, by consensus opinion, obviously broken?

[arscott]

4e isn't broken. It's just... off. Like a car that gets you to your destination just fine, but has very uncomfortable seats and no AC.

The numbers behind almost everything are sound, but they don't usually reflect what people want out of their game. Biggest example is the Grind: combat is mathematically sound when you hit 55% of the time and knock off about 20% of a creature's hp with each hit, but it's not satisfyinging--it doesn't feel like meaningful progress.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

multiclassing in 3rd edition seemed like a thing of beuty, but actually was a mess. A good system, which could have been more thought out. The Trailblazer idea of using base caster level would have been a step in the right direction.

The multiclassing system of 4e is not so bad, but a bit too cautiously. With Hybrid rules in full effect, multiclassing could have been a lot better by picking up "multiclass talents"

I believe untyped bonuses "ruin the game a little bit": there was a reason why 3rd edition had so many typed bonuses: because they didn´t want them to stack into oblivion. The latter introduction of items which produced luck bonuses and metamagc that allowed for making spells last a day resulted in an abuse of this system.

the untyped bonuses resulted in hybrid talents beeing restricted to one pick. If a class added class bonuses by deafault for a weapon specialization (like fighter or rogue´s) you would not have to be that cautious in what to allow and what not.

Also i believe ritual casters that should do some rituals regularly should have a class feature like the bard to reduce cost or time to zero and utility spells be combat only with feather fall rather be a ritual with material component a feather an a casting time of a free action. Maybe allow a memorization of rituals. Maybe you could make ritual cheaper and faster if you have a specific material component which is exactly the right focus for this particular ritual.

Also i think, although garthanos has very good arguments against it, that ability scores define what you do with it, not the class. So you can better multiclass because stats match better.

An alternative, which was suggested is a more ADnD approach: a class dependent attack bonus (+1/2 per level) which is more or less independant of a stat, and only damage is modified by ability scores. This way, lower stats are valid and you don´t need magic items to hold it up.

The way the multiclass system works disallows unfitting multiclass options.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

Really? I've found the opposite--it's much easier to dispense with "Magic Item Wal-Mart" in 4E. As long as you make sure to hand out treasure with the appropriate number of plusses at a given level, you're good. And if you use inherent bonuses, you don't even have to do that.

Don't get me wrong, I have all kinds of criticisms of the 4E magic item economy. But this particular issue is not one that I'm seeing.

Why do you find this to be a requirement in 4E?

Well, as I said in my post, it hasn't happened before, even with the group I'm still with since 3.5
It just feels like I'm required to either fork over magic items or have a shop at absolutely every place the heroes visit.
I've been following the basic guidelines for magic item distribution, with a small twist of allowing the players to pick what the item is within the (your level + x) limit... but then they kill a single kobold (or somthing) and are like "do we get magic items?"

A good real example was my PCs were defending farmland from goblins who were burning crops and stealing cows. They dropped a level 2 item and a level 1 item (both of the character's choosing). One of the players who GOT an item was like "So... is there a magic shop near by? I want to buy some things"

Again, this is from the same group that never once complained about not having enough magic ever before... it just seems 4e has brought out the munchkin in everyone in my group.

 

[Dausuul]

A good real example was my PCs were defending farmland from goblins who were burning crops and stealing cows. They dropped a level 2 item and a level 1 item (both of the character's choosing). One of the players who GOT an item was like "So... is there a magic shop near by? I want to buy some things"

Again, this is from the same group that never once complained about not having enough magic ever before... it just seems 4e has brought out the munchkin in everyone in my group.

Huh. Curious, that. Maybe it's because of the generally-acknowledged blandness of 4E items; they're less satisfying to find, so players want more to make up for it.

Of course, it might also be due to putting them in the PHB, which makes them "player territory" rather than "DM territory." That does encourage a certain entitlement mentality in players, I think; the "magic item as fashion accessory" syndrome.

 

[catsclaw227]

Hey, I have some very valid points. I don't agree with the premise of the thread, everyone has an opinion on what they don't like, to try and come to a consensus or post what they think is a consensus is false. So I took the opportunity to post some things I disliked in an effort to add to the conversation. I think that is what everyone else is doing too. Put on your amulet of natural armor.

But here's the thing... The topic isn't about what you don't like. It's about what is obviously broken.

You listed 40 things you don't like, but with out any explanation as to how they are broken. I can't see how minions are broken, they work good in my game, nor do I understand how you can see that "neck slot" is broken, though I guess you might have a reason why you don't like it.

Personally, I think that the grind needs to be dealt with, along with Orbizards, and some stacking concerns. I also found that locking down solos, when they are encountered alone, is too easy at mid-paragon and higher. I like what MM2 did to help improve them. I also am finding that Expertise at high paragon and epic makes some combats way too easy. I am of the opinion that, while some kind of smoothing of the curve needed, the Expertise feats broke things and didn't fix the multiple-weapon/implement problems for players with multiclassed PCs or PCs with powers that used both.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

But here's the thing... The topic isn't about what you don't like. It's about what is obviously broken.

Well, "broken" is a word which seems to change meaning depending on on the phase of the moon.

For this thread, I'd define a "broken rule" as one that fails to do what the designers said they wanted to do in 4e.

So, say, the game using miniatures is a legitimate complaint but it doesn't make it broken. The designers wanted it to use miniatures.

But the designers said they wanted to reduce the magic item Christmas Tree to a Christmas Bush, but in my games I see a pretty substantial tree. Players want to fill every slot with something that helps.

I can't see how minions are broken, they work good in my game,

My experience as a DM and player is that minions work at low heroic levels but become irrelevant once you reach paragon. The PCs, even the non-controllers, have so many encounter area attacks powers that wipe any minions of the map before the start of the third turn. Selecting all the miniatures for a group of minions can delay the setup of combat substantially, and this is a waste of my time and the players time if the minions all die before they have any effect on the battle.

IMO the following are broken:

Stacking save penalties, since they can make an effective save or die, which the designers said they were trying to avoid.

On the other hand, I've got to the point where I think controllers without stacking save penalties are broken, in that there's nothing that role can do that the other roles can't do just as well.

I'd put the huge number of conditional modifiers you may apply to any roll as heading back towards the sort of complexity they were trying to avoid in 4e. Ie "I get +1 to damage because I'm not bloodied, and +2 because the monster is bloodied, and -4 because of the status effect I had put on me, put +5 because the leader hit the monster with an attack that gives me a bonus." These modifiers are becoming worse as more feat and powers are released.



There's a problem with monster damage at paragon levels, in that they don't seem do nearly enough damage to really hurt the players anymore. I'm not sure if this fits the definition of broken I'm using as it may be intentional, since the monsters seem to get a whole lot of status effects to make up for it.

 

[catastrophic]

This is such a brilliant idea that I want to marry it and have its children. No, really.

Yeah they really need to recast 'monsy' as 'plot resources' and put them in a meaningful context.

So yeah, during heroic tier, you get paid, you buy horses, you bribe a dude, maybe charter a ship, and none of it IMO should interfere with how good your magic sword is.

Then you get to paragon tier and things get bigger. It isn't even that contrived to imagine that because of the semifeudal structure of the land, if you want to say, own or build a castle, or purchase a large amout of land, or form an army, that is simply not stuff you're going to be able to do by saving up lots of copper, silver, or even gold coins. I would argue that even in modern times, money alone doesn't get you real power, and back in old timey medievil days or a 'points of light' 4e setting, that's doubly so.

That takes something more impressive, like a boon from a powerful noble, church, or creature- and such a boon might not even have to be a favour, it could represent a lost prince reclaiming his birthright, or a charismatic folk hero forming an army from peasant volunteers. A party might only have a few boons 'saved up' at any one time, which makes each of them special- they could be general use, or focused on certain areas or concepts(or vary on a boon by boon basis). The point is to recognise that it's on a different scale, and to make those kinds of decisions meaingful, but also manageable.

On the other hand, still at paragon, if you really want to talk about treasure, you're not talking about a treasure parcel- you're talking about a Treasure Hoard. A huge, ridiculous pile of gold coins that a dragon sleeps on, or the pillage of the private art gallery of a rich decadent noble, or maybe the party just strikes gold in an old dwarvern mine. Again, it's not even really a contrivance to say that if a bunch of heroes came out of the Flaming Cave of the Red Dragon with donkey-carts full of gold, they'd have a hard time spending it like they did the sack full of silver they took of a dead orc one time. A hoard is the kind of thing you bribe a dragon with, or use to fund the construction of a mighty fortress, or use to pay your way into nobility by purchasing the support of your new peers.

Then, at epic, gets crazy. Why are people trading astral diamonds and stuff? Sure, once in a blue moon that might make sense, but deep down we all know that epic level characters should not be doing epic level fedex quests to get epic level loot drops so they can buy in an epic level marketplace. They can still have coin, boons and hordes from earlier tiers, but the resource of choice of epic pcs should be PURE UNADULTERATED POWER, of the kind that gods, demon lords, and archmages thrive on. Do you think bahamut has a purse? No, he has power. Do you think Ioun buys books? No, they deal in pure streams of knowlege that would literally blow the mind of a mortal creature exposed to them.

Whatever this stuff would be, let's just call it power for now, it would be the thing you spend when doing all the really crazy campaign stuff that epic level charactrs do. Want to create your own pocket dimension? It takes power- not gold, not astral diamonds: power. Want to resurect a massive crypt full of ancient paladins so they can fight in the final war against darkness? That takes power.

Where do you get power? You get it from doing epic things. Maybe people begin to worship you as a god. You can draw it from the other powerful beings you destroy. It can be siezed from various sources like ancient mysteries and elemental vortexes- in other words, jsut like all treasure, the GM puts it in the story how they want, and the PCs go after it how they want.

So anyway yeah the idea would be to A)sever it from magic items, partially or completly, and B)render it into tier-based characterful fo
rms that the players can use to do cool plotty stuff in the game.

 

[catastrophic]

Money as a skill? Or at least working vaguely that way? If you want to buy something, roll your Wealth skill against an items cost, and if you succeed you get it. Characters would gain wealth incidentally as they level up just as their skills improve, but there's also scope for feats ("Wealthy") to improve that. If you recover some particularly impressive treasure it provides a one-time bonus to one particular attempt to buy something. If you get something that gives you a steady income ir provides a permanent bonus, so being granted land by the king provides a permanent benefit for your ability to obtain things.

I certainly think something like this could fit for normal purchaces made at paragon tier, but I also think at heroic tier, a lot of people like to loot the bodies and tally up their gold.

Yes - exactly - money as a type of skill. Leaves the parcel system intact for adventurer wealth but lets one address mundane items, cost of living, and worldly possessions in an external system.

Yeah, actually on second thought that could work really well as a simple fix to get around the 'alms or swords' problem at any tier.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I didn't like these things either:

Things I didn't like:
14. Funky unique races in first book
17. Too many feat requirements
19. Master work armor
20. Hyperbolic economy and astral diamonds
23. minions
25. 1/2 elf +2 con
26. 1/2 orc +2 dex
27. Astral Fire, Burning Blizzard, Dark Fury and Raging Storm
29. Paladin, Cleric, Warlock and Ranger two stat power structure
30. Inability to make it my own through customization on DDI
36. Some conditions are off
37. Stealth skill and stealth errata
38. Teleporting elves

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

It must be said I am more satisfied with 4e than any previous edition. Most of the problems in 4e can be solved by a small handful of houserules.

Regardinng 37. Personally I think the Stealth rules are just too complex. A 20 page discussion on this forum on the errataed stealth should be a clear indication of that.

I don't like how the Paladin with 8 str and 20 cha can use full plate armor. It just feels wrong. Game mechanically it works fine.

 

[awesomeocalypse]

Yeah they really need to recast 'monsy' as 'plot resources' and put them in a meaningful context.

So yeah, during heroic tier, you get paid, you buy horses, you bribe a dude, maybe charter a ship, and none of it IMO should interfere with how good your magic sword is.

Then you get to paragon tier and things get bigger. It isn't even that contrived to imagine that because of the semifeudal structure of the land, if you want to say, own or build a castle, or purchase a large amout of land, or form an army, that is simply not stuff you're going to be able to do by saving up lots of copper, silver, or even gold coins. I would argue that even in modern times, money alone doesn't get you real power, and back in old timey medievil days or a 'points of light' 4e setting, that's doubly so.

That takes something more impressive, like a boon from a powerful noble, church, or creature- and such a boon might not even have to be a favour, it could represent a lost prince reclaiming his birthright, or a charismatic folk hero forming an army from peasant volunteers. A party might only have a few boons 'saved up' at any one time, which makes each of them special- they could be general use, or focused on certain areas or concepts(or vary on a boon by boon basis). The point is to recognise that it's on a different scale, and to make those kinds of decisions meaingful, but also manageable.

On the other hand, still at paragon, if you really want to talk about treasure, you're not talking about a treasure parcel- you're talking about a Treasure Hoard. A huge, ridiculous pile of gold coins that a dragon sleeps on, or the pillage of the private art gallery of a rich decadent noble, or maybe the party just strikes gold in an old dwarvern mine. Again, it's not even really a contrivance to say that if a bunch of heroes came out of the Flaming Cave of the Red Dragon with donkey-carts full of gold, they'd have a hard time spending it like they did the sack full of silver they took of a dead orc one time. A hoard is the kind of thing you bribe a dragon with, or use to fund the construction of a mighty fortress, or use to pay your way into nobility by purchasing the support of your new peers.

Then, at epic, gets crazy. Why are people trading astral diamonds and stuff? Sure, once in a blue moon that might make sense, but deep down we all know that epic level characters should not be doing epic level fedex quests to get epic level loot drops so they can buy in an epic level marketplace. They can still have coin, boons and hordes from earlier tiers, but the resource of choice of epic pcs should be PURE UNADULTERATED POWER, of the kind that gods, demon lords, and archmages thrive on. Do you think bahamut has a purse? No, he has power. Do you think Ioun buys books? No, they deal in pure streams of knowlege that would literally blow the mind of a mortal creature exposed to them.

Whatever this stuff would be, let's just call it power for now, it would be the thing you spend when doing all the really crazy campaign stuff that epic level charactrs do. Want to create your own pocket dimension? It takes power- not gold, not astral diamonds: power. Want to resurect a massive crypt full of ancient paladins so they can fight in the final war against darkness? That takes power.

Where do you get power? You get it from doing epic things. Maybe people begin to worship you as a god. You can draw it from the other powerful beings you destroy. It can be siezed from various sources like ancient mysteries and elemental vortexes- in other words, jsut like all treasure, the GM puts it in the story how they want, and the PCs go after it how they want.

So anyway yeah the idea would be to A)sever it from magic items, partially or completly, and B)render it into tier-based characterful fo
rms that the players can use to do cool plotty stuff in the game.

I agree 100% with this. Just buying stuff with gold seems mundane, anachronistic, and at odds with the way the paragon and epic tiers should "feel". Yes, powerful magic items, fortresses and kingdoms, incredibly status and world-changing power, all of these should be available to players at high tiers. But as a direct product of adventures, not as just more things to buy when you find enough astral daimonds. Who are these people anyway, who just have castles and artifacts ready to sell in exchange for astral daimonds?

My experience as a DM and player is that minions work at low heroic levels but become irrelevant once you reach paragon. The PCs, even the non-controllers, have so many encounter area attacks powers that wipe any minions of the map before the start of the third turn. Selecting all the miniatures for a group of minions can delay the setup of combat substantially, and this is a waste of my time and the players time if the minions all die before they have any effect on the battle.

IMO the following are broken:

Stacking save penalties, since they can make an effective save or die, which the designers said they were trying to avoid.

On the other hand, I've got to the point where I think controllers without stacking save penalties are broken, in that there's nothing that role can do that the other roles can't do just as well.

These two things are related. A big part of what a wizard was initially designed to do was handle minions. If you don't use minions, then that role becomes meaningless.

Of course, the problem is that wizards are too good at handling minions. If you don't use them, the wizard never gets to do his thing. But if you do use them, he wipes them out with no trouble. Also, since many characters (like warlocks) have powers which key off an enemy's death, minions can actually be beneficial to the pcs, which was not their intent at all.

The two fixes which have worked for my group are:

a.) Make minions much cheaper in terms of xp cost. It depends on the minion, but anywhere between 1/6 and 1/10 of a normal monster cost seems about right to me. 3 or 4 minions here and there is nothing. 15 minions all around the battlefield...now thats an actual threat the pcs will need to include in their strategies, and will require much more than a single dragonbreath or cloud of daggers.

b.) All minions have damage resistance equal to one half their level, which tends to be enough that incidental autodamage won't simply wipe them out, although pretty much any direct hit from any character will kill them.

These two changes have made minions much more useful, which has, in turn, made controllers much more useful.