I was just checking the blog list at RPG Bloggers and saw reference to "Kenshiro Cascadero" - didn't know what that was, so I Googled it and I think it's what you're looking for (and what someone was referencing with "Blade Cascade").

Kenshiro Cascadero "Rattata" Orcuslayer
Kenshiro Cascadero "Rattata" Orcuslayer, Level 30

I have no idea what most of it means, so I'll leave that for someone else to comment on.

When 4e D&D was first released, we had just started a new campaign in my friend's home brew setting.  This campaign was centered on the good guys during a period of racial conflict.  A charismatic orc leader is amassing a horde, raiding, conquering, etc.  We decided to put the game on hold until we got a grasp of the 4e rules, and then would convert.  We stopped when the characters were 4th level.

In the meantime, and as a method to learn the new system, the GM decided that we would create characters from the other side, the goblinoid horde, and that these evil characters are destined to meet our good characters in a climactic battle in which the evil characters will perish by the hands of our good characters.

So, we have been playing the evil characters all this time, and they are 14th level.  We have a goblin warlock, hobgoblin warlord, orc rogue, orc fighter, and bugbear ranger.  I created the bugbear ranger.  Bugbear rangers could certainly fall into category of "easily broken."  He uses two large greatswords, at the same time, for Christ's sake!  When I line up Hunter's Quarry, Predatory Eye, and a 3[W] power, then his DPS is pretty fracking good!

That's an awesome way to convert, Drohem.
Really appreciated you sharing this. Cool beans!

Quote from: PaladinCA;292222Errata is a necessary evil. I don't like tracking it, but it can help clarify rules or correct mistakes that were not caught during playtesting. I'd rather get an official "fix" if they realize a change is needed.

This does not stop people from "fixing" things on their own, nor does it stop people from ignoring the errata they don't like. It just lets us know that a change might be needed or even be recommended.

Do with errata what you will.

WotC provide errata so you can get out the Sharpie and do the copy-editing for them, OR get a subscription to DDI, which always has the current corrected rules.

Quote from: PaladinCA;292227Oh, and on topic, I haven't had enough time to read or play 4E to know if it can be broken or not. Most game systems can be broken, given enough exposure to min-maxing munchkins and power whores.

Yup, that was my point. I figure that by now the power whores would have figured it out, unless ALL of the choices in the game are literally so meaningless and "rules illusionism" that nothing you ever do will ever actually put you better off than any other choice.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Benoist;292265That's an awesome way to convert, Drohem.
Really appreciated you sharing this. Cool beans!

Thanks!  

Quote from: RPGPundit;292212So, is 4e really so utterly "balanced", so impossible to make any of your choices matter, that even a veteran powergamer or min-maxer could not "game the system" to create a "broken" character?

1) It is hard to accidently make a sub-optimal character.  Noobs to 4e will make good characters just from the PHB.   Each class gives you two build options that are both good starting places for noobs.

2) The effectiveness of a regular character versus a min-maxed character is not as notable as it was in 3.5 or GURPS/Hero.  

3) Groups who do chargen together based on the interplay of their powers will be far more powerful than group who just min-max their own character without focus on their fellow PCs.

It's this last part that I like the most.   Lots of power combos can be done by looking at what your character can do to pump up the effectiveness of a team mate.   Sure, the fighter could min-max himself, but then he loses the opportunity to pick a power that could help keep the wizard safer or one that makes their rogue more effective.  

Quote from: Benoist;292217How would a designer know better how certain game elements actually play at our own game table?

Playtesting.

Quote from: DeadUematsu;292254If you want my opinion (and word of mouth seems to back it up), fighters are the second best DPS class in the game with dual strike and warlocks are ASS (I play one and if you play under a GM like mine - doesn't give magic items, loves building higher-level encounters - you will suck and be laughed at).

Well really its not the fault of the Warlock class. Not to be rude (to you or your DM) its the fault of the DM. Characters by the design of the game in 3.0,3.5, and 4e are assumed to have a certain number of magic items of the correct power level in correlation with character level. The system, and encounters framework are built around this. So when you remove the items it breaks the system. Making encounters and such, far harder than they are intended. As you are not properly equipped to deal with them.

I understand this only to well. One of the last 3.5 campaigns I played in the DM was the same way. At eigth level my barbarian had no magic weapons, and no magic armor. The only magic items I had were healing potions (Little rat bastard heal 1d6 ones), and a crown of far speak in which I could communicate with other people who also had crowns. Unfortunately the only other people that had the crowns were evil, and spoke in a different language. But I fixed all this. The game left me unsatisfied. So I left the game. Found one that had challenges but didnt make me feel like I was continously behind the eight ball.

Quote from: Spinachcat;292316Groups who do chargen together based on the interplay of their powers will be far more powerful than group who just min-max their own character without focus on their fellow PCs.

I've found that actually understanding your powers helps, too.

In my campaign, the players still use terribly ineffective tactics even after five sessions plus several one-shots.  They virtually ignore half their powers and other available options.

It has the interesting effect that individual combats are still deadly, despite the game being set up moreso for a series of combats to be deadly.

Yeah, I had the same issue when I first ran it. Lots of death.

Spinachcat does have a great observation- that there is group character creation dynamic that should be tapped for a highly effective group.

Quote from: Ronin;292340Well really its not the fault of the Warlock class.

No, it's the fault of the warlock class. The DM just makes it worse.

Quote from: Drohem;292261Bugbear rangers could certainly fall into category of "easily broken."  He uses two large greatswords, at the same time, for Christ's sake!  When I line up Hunter's Quarry, Predatory Eye, and a 3[W] power, then his DPS is pretty fracking good!

The capacity to wield large sized weapons is something that WOTC only put in the MM and has slowly but surely been moving away from.  It's unlikely to to ever see the light of day as an ability for a full player race.

Othere than Drohem's comment, which does point out a problem that WOTC has addressed, looks like 4e is doing pretty well, since no one's been able to come up with any problems.  Long live the tyranny of fun!

Quote from: counterspin;292418The capacity to wield large sized weapons is something that WOTC only put in the MM and has slowly but surely been moving away from.  It's unlikely to to ever see the light of day as an ability for a full player race.

Othere than Drohem's comment, which does point out a problem that WOTC has addressed, looks like 4e is doing pretty well, since no one's been able to come up with any problems.  Long live the tyranny of fun!

Mearls actually came right out and said No PCs should ever be wielding large weapons, and that it would be errata'd. This was clarified in the minotaur which had the same issue.

Quote from: DeadUematsu;292382No, it's the fault of the warlock class. The DM just makes it worse.

Why? Can you explain why? While I have not played one. I've seen them played as effective ranged strikers.