Min Maxxing or Munchkining in 4th

[Matamane]

My friend recently just started a 4E campaign, and keeps trying to tell me that i is impossible to munchkin in 4th and it's so balanced. I've started reading the last few years of books, but without any prior information, I thought it would be prudent to ask for opinions.

What are the mose broken or powerful things in 4th, races, classes, powers, everything.

[hamishspence]

While it's most definitely not impossible, WoTC does have a tendency to correct the the worst cases shortly after they are brought to light, in errata.

I think the CharOp forums on WoTC would be the best place to look for a list of broken things.

[Matamane]

No offense to the people on that board, but I think the people here are far more knowledgeable.

[hamishspence]

Maybe- it's just that I'm not sure where the 4E munchkinry threads are on this forum, so I suggested a location on the other forum where one might expect to find it.

The CharOp forums on WoTC are, I'm told, very active, and have produced quite a few memes of their own during 3rd ed. Pun-Pun may be one.

[Kurald Galain]

My friend recently just started a 4E campaign, and keeps trying to tell me that i is impossible to munchkin in 4th and it's so balanced.

What do you mean by "impossible to munchkin"? Does the term "munchkinning" refer to (1) rules lawyering, (2) making a min/maxed character, (3) metagaming or cheating, (4) being a jerk to the rest of the group, or (5) attempting to kill anything and everything in the campaign world including gods?

What are the mose broken or powerful things in 4th, races, classes, powers, everything.

Certain classes or builds are clearly better than others; for instance, the fighter is considered a better defender than the assault swordmage, the tactical warlord is more effective than the bravura, and a wizard (who is not a striker) can be built to outdamage a sorcerer (who is a striker).

Then there's builds that do 1000 damage per round, builds that literally cannot be killed, and builds that permanently stun enemy monsters, or that hand out -10 to-hit penalties every round. Most of this occurs at epic tier, obviously.

Sure, the game is reasonably well balanced; but nevertheless there are some crazy combos out there.

[dsmiles]

Maybe- it's just that I'm not sure where the 4E munchkinry threads are on this forum, so I suggested a location on the other forum where one might expect to find it.

I don't think there are any 4e munchkinry threads here. 4e is relatively munchkin-resistant (compared to 3/3.5).

[Erom]

4e has plenty of stupid tricks, but the combination of frequent, "patch" style errata and a fairly balanced base to work from mean that the amplitude of the cheese is usually less. IE, you can build a character that can stunlock one monster forever, which is clearly not intended and breaks the game a little bit, but you can't build a character that can stunlock all of creation like you can in 3.5

The truly game-shattering characters tend to be nerfed which each errata pass. I haven't kept up on the CO boards (which, as people have said, really is a better place to find the silly-er side of 4e) so I'm not sure what the FOTM power builds are.

[valadil]

No offense to the people on that board, but I think the people here are far more knowledgeable.

That may well be, but the CharOps boards actually focus on optimization.

The gap between weak and strong is smaller in 4e than it was in 3.5. The weakest classes in 4th might be a tier 4 by 3.5's scale and the strongest are tier 2. You're just not going to take your min maxing as far in 4th ed because the power difference between characters isn't as wide.

[Hzurr]

It is possible to "munchkin" in 4E, you just have to significantly change your definition of munchkin. If you want to define it as "the absolute optimal build that will allow me to fulfill my role as _______ better than any other" yes, it's very possible to "munchkin."

However, 4E is designed around the team and the party, so what is "munchkin" for one game may be completely ineffective for another; because the tactics and powers can be either very useful, or practically useless, depending on who else is in your party. (For example, the "lazy warlord" build can be pretty crap when you have say a wizard, a wis-cleric, and an archer-ranger in the party, but if instead you have an essentials fighter and a barbarian, suddenly you're much more awesome).

So if you're wanting to "munchkin" in the traditional sense (ala 3.5 CoDzilla), you're out of luck. If you want to make an optimal character for the party, you can make something that can blow the DM's socks off, but it will depend on the party, and what class/role you want to play; but even then "munchkin" doesn't mean "indefeatable"

--edit---

that being said, what are you wanting to play? If there's something specific, than folks here can make sure that you have a very solid build for what it is you're wanting.

[Kurald Galain]

It is possible to "munchkin" in 4E, you just have to significantly change your definition of munchkin.

I'm not sure where you got your "traditional" definition of the word "munchkin", but the term is both much older and much broader than "3.5 CoDzilla".

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Munchkin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munchki...aying_games%29

http://www.noitacy.net/munchkin/definition.html

[Mando Knight]

Then there's builds that do 1000 damage per round, builds that literally cannot be killed, and builds that permanently stun enemy monsters, or that hand out -10 to-hit penalties every round. Most of this occurs at epic tier, obviously.

Most of these don't overlap, though, so you kinda have to watch it if you boast your uber-game-breaker-build can take on Tiamat. She might take you up on that, then make you eat 5 or more standard actions a turn. Including at-will domination.

[Kurald Galain]

Most of these don't overlap, though, so you kinda have to watch it if you boast your uber-game-breaker-build can take on Tiamat. She might take you up on that, then make you eat 5 or more standard actions a turn. Including at-will domination.

Yes. It's funny to see the power discrepancy between Orcus (who was written before the charop boards got their hands on 4E) and Tiamat (who was written after). A trick to one-shot Orcus with L15 character was found within a week of the game's release.

To be specific, within a week before the game's release

Of course, that particular trick has been errata'ed out of existence. But the notion that one can't minmax or munchkin in 4E is pretty much untenable if a L30 monster can be one-shotted by a L15 character.

[Sir Homeslice]

If you've got IRC, go to the freenode server and hop over to ##4eCO, they've made some positively mad crazy 4e builds.

[Keld Denar]

There is a whole subforum on the Brilliant Gameologist boards for min/maxing 4e. GitP for the most part doesn't focus a whole lot on it. There are occasionally threads for help here, but there tends to be the lack of focus on it like you'd see over there.

CharOp boards on Gleemax or whatever they call it now is pretty well dead. They've alienated most of their longstanding community. I personally haven't been back there in over a year. I'm content to spend most of my trolling time here.

[The Glyphstone]

Indeed, 4E is just as prone (initially) to munchkinry as 3E was. The difference is WoTC releases a lot more errata, so the broken combos have a much shorter shelf life. Stuff like the Ranger of Infinite Arrows and the Lockdown Cleric (the latter of which soloed Orcus at lvl15 before the books were released)...they're the most famous ones.

[kyoryu]

Any system that lets you do some sort of deck or character building is susceptible to optimal and/or broken builds. Period.

That said, 4e is more *resistant* to broken builds than 3.x, simply due to the smaller number of combinatorial possibilities. In 4e, when looking at balancing Foozles, they designers only really need to consider the other abilities that Foozles can get. In 3.x, they have to consider not only the abilities that Foozles get, but all of the abilities that other classes get due to multiclassing.

Additionally, the limited number of abilities that 4e characters get reduces the problem space. You know you'll only ever get 1 level 1 daily, and so don't have to worry about what happens when you combine 2 level 1 dailies in an interesting way.

Again, that doesn't mean that broken builds don't exist, just that they'll tend to be a little harder to come up with, and easier to fix without destroying the game. The fact that the baseline power levels of the classes are more in line with each other (most classes in 4e qualify as Tier 3), also mean that the effects of "reasonable" optimization efforts tend to be less game-breaking than in 3.x.

Also, munchkining is about far, far more than just broken builds. It's a whole playstyle - the term probably goes back to at least AD&D, which didn't really have "builds" to begin with.

[tcrudisi]

Any system that lets you do some sort of deck or character building is susceptible to optimal and/or broken builds. Period.

There is a large difference between "optimal" and "broken". Just because something is optimal does not mean that it is anywhere near the level of broken.

That said, 4e is more *resistant* to broken builds than 3.x, simply due to the smaller number of combinatorial possibilities. In 4e, when looking at balancing Foozles, they designers only really need to consider the other abilities that Foozles can get. In 3.x, they have to consider not only the abilities that Foozles get, but all of the abilities that other classes get due to multiclassing.

I'm not so sure about this any more. When 4e first came out, sure. However, there are a LOT of options now. The hybrid class really opened up a whole new can of worms. Additionally, you can have a hybrid that paragon multiclasses and gets to choose from 3 different classes powers. Or a bard that PMC's to get to choose from all class powers. Yeah, there's a lot of options now. Then, combine with all the paragon paths (95% of which any class can take with a simple multiclass) and epic destinies (same), and wow there are a lot of options.

Additionally, the limited number of abilities that 4e characters get reduces the problem space. You know you'll only ever get 1 level 1 daily, and so don't have to worry about what happens when you combine 2 level 1 dailies in an interesting way.

Incorrect. At level 5, a character can instead choose to get a level 1 daily instead of a level 5 daily. Does it happen often? No. Does it happen? Yes.

Again, that doesn't mean that broken builds don't exist, just that they'll tend to be a little harder to come up with, and easier to fix without destroying the game. The fact that the baseline power levels of the classes are more in line with each other (most classes in 4e qualify as Tier 3), also mean that the effects of "reasonable" optimization efforts tend to be less game-breaking than in 3.x.

It does take a lot of creativity to get a broken build in 4e. A lot of creativity. Even then, a broken build in 4e still has to be a team player as he can't do everything on his own (not even combats). Also, you can't use the old tier system in a new edition. It doesn't work. Due to the balance, they would all be tier 3 and it's not much of a ranking system if they are all ranked the same.

I do agree with your last statement: "reasonable" optimization efforts will not break the game.

[ericgrau]

The CharOp forums on WoTC are, I'm told, very active, and have produced quite a few memes of their own during 3rd ed. Pun-Pun may be one.

During the transition to 4e besides the edition wars wizards.com was facing major Gleemax forum problems which led me to come here. Most of those people likewise dispersed. Many people have returned now, but I have no idea who they are.

AFAIK 4e really is facing power creep and there is char op and imbalance but it's probably not crazy. I dunno though. FWIW reasonable optimization efforts in 3e don't break the game either, but maybe we're talking different scales here. I only played 4e once and already some allies (also new players) were pulling some pretty wonky tricks, but maybe that's expected?

[Frenchy147]

My friends wizard build is soooo broken you wouldnt even believe it. He one dealt 30+ damage to each of 5 seperate lvl. 7 targets when he was at lvl. 6. That's not counting the ongoing 5 to each target.
He's also taken on several rooms of level appropriate enemies for a party of 5 by himself.
There are many other example of brokeness, these are just examples.

[Frosty]

My friends wizard build is soooo broken you wouldnt even believe it. He one dealt 30+ damage to each of 5 seperate lvl. 7 targets when he was at lvl. 6. That's not counting the ongoing 5 to each target.
He's also taken on several rooms of level appropriate enemies for a party of 5 by himself.
There are many other example of brokeness, these are just examples.

This is funny, because in 3.5, we'd call that an inefficient use of an action (I Fireballed a group of enemies and used Sudden Maximize for 36 damage!)

[Oracle_Hunter]

My friends wizard build is soooo broken you wouldnt even believe it. He one dealt 30+ damage to each of 5 seperate targets at level 6. There are many other example of brokeness, this is just an example.

With what?

Anyhoo, as a DM I suggest the OP not worry about "broken" stuff in 4E. Keep current with the errata (easy to do with a live DDI account) and you'll be fine. If you want an extra layer of protection, just outlaw Dragon Magazine stuff; it isn't designed as well and doesn't receive the same level of attention as published books do.

Optimization is easy to adjust to as well - just throw higher EL Encounters at the party. Provided you stick within the DMG suggestions (and maybe those from experienced DMs as well) you'll be able to challenge the high-Op PCs without making the low-OP PCs worthless.

[Kurald Galain]

Actually, a funny thing about the charop forums is how quickly certain people there declare anything "broken" that isn't anything of the sort.

A +5% chance to hit once per day? Oooh, so overpowered, everybody must have this! The ability to negate enemy lightning resistance? Awesome, the greatest ever! Adding 10% to one defense for the next three seconds? Wow, I cannot believe WOTC is printing that!

There are, of course, actual broken things on charop, such as the literally-immortal ranger, the teleport-enemies-into-the-stratosphere warlock, or the permanently-erase-you-from-existence wizard. The people who post actual high-level builds that do ridiculous things are pretty good at pointing out broken options. But there's also the people that just try to evaluate every new power, item, or feat from Dragon magazine, and it's funny how quickly they pounce on every single bonus to attack or defense, without considering how often it occurs, how long it lasts, or what the opportunity cost is.

[Hzurr]

It's also important to remember that when someone posts a level 30 "SUPER AWESOME OMG TEH BROKENZ!!!111!!!" build, there's a decent chance that the build was useless for the first 20 levels (3.5 had the same problem too). "Broken" and "Munchkin" changes radically depending on what level you are, what class you are, and who you're playing with.

My friends wizard build is soooo broken you wouldnt even believe it. He one dealt 30+ damage to each of 5 seperate lvl. 7 targets when he was at lvl. 6. That's not counting the ongoing 5 to each target.

See...this really isn't all that broken, assuming this was via use of a daily power or two, and some good rolling. If this were at will, or possibly encounter, I'd consider this bad, but I wouldn't classify this as "soooo broken"


4E wizards in particular (and controllers in general) are tricky. If you have someone who knows how to play one, they can really dominate the battlefield. That being said, they're easy to play ineffectively, and a clever DM can prevent the wizard (or whoever it is) from dominating via good encounter design.

[dsmiles]

4E wizards in particular (and controllers in general) are tricky. If you have someone who knows how to play one, they can really dominate the battlefield. That being said, they're easy to play ineffectively, and a clever DM can prevent the wizard (or whoever it is) from dominating via good encounter design.

So my daughter's 11. We were playing our first session of DnD. She wanted to use an Eladrin Fey Pact Warlock (yaay, FAIRIES!). So I helped her build one. She was all, like, meh. Second session, she wants to play a Eladrin Wizard. So I helped her build one. Talk about your ultimate cosmic power. She dominated the battlefield. My oldest played a Gun Mage (Arcane Striker, long range, decent damage). Her younger brother played an un-nerfed Cleric (he didn't really get into it until he saved somebody's life with a well placed healing word). My youngest, 6, played a greatweapon fighter (used a maul, his tactics were cleave, reaping strike, cleave, reaping strike, etc.).
Apparently, dominating the battlefield with a wizard is intuitive. I never even had to explain my daughter's role as a controller. So I think you may be underestimating the ease of learning to be a wizard in 4e. Just my $0.02

[The Glyphstone]

Nerf children, they're OP.

[dsmiles]

Nerf children, they're OP.

You, sir, win the thread.

[DragonBaneDM]

Hm... I'm going to skip telling you that there aren't any munchkin builds in 4e, regardless of the fact that I'm in agreement with that, and give you some good builds for each role.

Defender: Earth Wardens.
They don't really die too often. One word on them will be almost twice as good as most of the other members of the part. Also, they have plenty of ways to heal themselves. Low damage, yes, but this is one of the most overlooked classes in the game. If you're new to the game, and don't like the idea of being unconcious or relying on the rest of the party too much, who might be new too, this is a solid, solid pick. Also: Dwarves. Trust me here.

Striker: Archer Ranger.
You'll be safe most of the time. If you're asking us for broken classes, that means you're new to 4e. This is your class of choice then. Nice and simple. Sit in the back, (or grab Harrowing Swarm Scout and Called Shot and get adjacent to the beasties), burn through your encounters, then Twin Strike. Also, Rangers have one of, if not the best, skill sets in the game.

Leader: Tactical Warlord.
Your party will almost never lose initiative. If your DM isn't my DM, that will actually help (his monsters appear 2 rounds into the fight). Also, when in doubt, let the melee guys take another swing with a hefty bonus to damage. What was the saying.... "A barbarian attacks with his axe, and a warlord attacks with his barbarian"?

Controller: Telepathic Psion
Before I get any "But the wizard is...", I'm considering the fact you're new. Wizards get complicated. Psions aren't. Pick up Dishearten and Betrayal. Congratulations, you're now making the boss miss and/or hit his friends, triggering the Defender's marks. It's not so much "I need to control this battlefiend" as it is "pick a monster, make it suck".

[kyoryu]

AFAIK 4e really is facing power creep and there is char op and imbalance but it's probably not crazy. I dunno though. FWIW reasonable optimization efforts in 3e don't break the game either, but maybe we're talking different scales here. I only played 4e once and already some allies (also new players) were pulling some pretty wonky tricks, but maybe that's expected?

There's definitely power creep. Some PHB abilities (Brute Strike offhand) are completely outclassed by later abilities that are just... better. While Brute Strike does 3W, others do 3W and have an additional effect (lasting mark, etc.).

There is a large difference between "optimal" and "broken". Just because something is optimal does not mean that it is anywhere near the level of broken.

Yup. And 4e is better about letting things be optimal without being "broken." There are less ways to do "broken" things than 3.x, but I'd still argue that in any system with sufficient "building" options, you can find something broken.

Incorrect. At level 5, a character can instead choose to get a level 1 daily instead of a level 5 daily. Does it happen often? No. Does it happen? Yes.

Okay, I'll give you that one. It's still much different than anything previous to 4e, where you have to consider *all* spells potentially being in combination with each other.

It does take a lot of creativity to get a broken build in 4e. A lot of creativity. Even then, a broken build in 4e still has to be a team player as he can't do everything on his own (not even combats). Also, you can't use the old tier system in a new edition. It doesn't work. Due to the balance, they would all be tier 3 and it's not much of a ranking system if they are all ranked the same.

I think I even said that. Apart from some of the broken cheese I've heard of (infinite stunlock, etc.), "reasonable" optimization will likely result in everyone being Tier 3. That's pretty much what I meant by "4e is resistant to broken builds." Not impossible, but you've gotta get further to the edges of the possible builds to really get something broken.

I do agree with your last statement: "reasonable" optimization efforts will not break the game.

Right. That's my point. If you look at optimization on a range from 1-100, you probably have to get in the 90-95 range to start getting game-breaking stuff. You know you're doing it, and it's a deliberate cheese, and is probably easier to fix with errata due to the combinatorial issues.

Compare to 3.x, where some classes are basically game-breaking out of the box.

[fulong]

There are, of course, actual broken things on charop, such as the literally-immortal ranger, the teleport-enemies-into-the-stratosphere warlock, or the permanently-erase-you-from-existence wizard. The people who post actual high-level builds that do ridiculous things are pretty good at pointing out broken options. But there's also the people that just try to evaluate every new power, item, or feat from Dragon magazine, and it's funny how quickly they pounce on every single bonus to attack or defense, without considering how often it occurs, how long it lasts, or what the opportunity cost is.

I'm curious. What is this "the teleport-enemies-into-the-stratosphere warlock"?

[Kurald Galain]

I'm curious. What is this "the teleport-enemies-into-the-stratosphere warlock"?

Basically, you use Eyes of the Warlock to be able to cast an attack from an ally, then use any flight power to fly as high as you want, then cast Dark Transport to swap places with the BBEG standing near your ally. You'll end up on the ground, bad guy ends up in orbit and takes a ludicrous amount of falling damage.