Quote Originally Posted by Hawk7915 View Post
D&D 4E appears to be, buy and large, the most balanced edition. There are no linear wizard-quadratic warrior issues. The difference between the top tier and the bottom is small, small enough to be negligible (especially in heroic). Nevertheless, there are some stinkers. For some, it's that they were badly built from the word go (Vampire, O-Assassin, Seeker) while for others the issue is more a horrible lack of support (Sentinel Druids, Runepriests).

In 3.5, there's a drive to "fix" what is broken. Seriously, just look at how many home-brew fixes there are for Monks, Fighters, and Paladins! In 4E, this seems to be less the case. For instance, I posted a homebrew Seeker fix with new powers and Paragon Paths to little attention here on the forums. I'll admit I'm partially posting here to get some extra eyes on my Homebrew, but this isn't my first project to get almost no attention and it struck me as curious. So, I was wondering, how do you deal with this in your games? Do you ignore and avoid these classes, using refluffing and/or hybrids to capture the flavor without the bad mechanics? Do you just roll these classes and deal with it, since the power difference isn't as vast as in 3.5? Do you try your own hand at simple home-brews and house rules to help these classes out? Why is home-brew so uncommon for 4E compared to 3.5E?
It's worth noting that there are 2 ways to read O-Assassins to make them reasonably powerful as they advance in Paragon:

1) Read the two Flurry of Talons (E13) and Shadow Fire (E17) as up to 3 damage instances. They both roll 3 attack rolls, and you're supposed to "resolve them as one attack." The hit text reads like: "1[W] + Dexterity modifier fire damage if one of the attack rolls hits, 2[W] + Dexterity modifier fire damage if two hit, and 3[W] + Dexterity modifier fire damage if three hit", so it's possible to parse it as 3 separate instances (worth noting that there's an E1 that uses the same language but says "or" instead of "and" in the hit text).

2) Assassin's Shroud reads "This damage roll never benefits from bonuses to damage rolls, and is in addition to the attack’s damage, if any." If you read the latter half of the sentence as being a separate damage instance, it helps. Doubly so if you read the first half as only excluding things with the word "bonus," but not any other indicator such as a +. Both of these stretch the rules fairly heavily, but they're not totally out of all common sense, and they're helping a really weak class anyways.