| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
YRM_DM
Sergeant
905 Posts
    
 | | 12/13/2006 7:38 PM |
| Some debate about this in other threads, so, I thought it'd be good to start fresh and talk about what a player is doing.
To me, real Min-Maxing is when a PC has multiple DUMP stats, and uses everything too boost one stat.
A Barbarian, Frenzied Berserker, Half-Ogre with a Keen Greatsword and a lot of dump stats is going to achieve a MASSIVE STR rating while raging and frenzied and could be doing around a hundred damage on a crit which occurs about 20% of the time.
A wizard with a maxed out INT and lots of odd feats and PrC can crank his save DC vs SAVE or DIE spells into the unmakeable zone.
This might also include feats and spells that can inflict multiple maximized drops on ability scores to achieve a quick COMA. An example is a dual DEX draining ray, maximized, against a Dragon, who has a lowish dex and terrible touch AC.
I know some of those things are effective but I don't personally abuse them.
---
Power gaming is what I'm doing with my pure Monk. He is built to shore up the few weaknesses that a monk has, and the DM has a very hard time putting a world of hurt on my Monk PC.
Power gaming is taking a good feat progression, buying the right items if possible, and making sure to use the most effective attacks (without busting out a calculator).
---
But at the same time, you don't want a Power Gamer who is a "Bard/Dragon Disciple" for no reason other than liking the build.
We do combat cherry picking and PrC abuse in our campaigns. A DM must approve a PrC, and it must be worked towards with some level of role-play.
We approve of good tactics and good builds, but they have to come with a solid story behind them, and the player has to act the part.
---
I'd think that a lot of players would like to have more effective team mates, if they don't already. A lot of PCs would really like to be able to count on certain buff spells, or count on certain tactics in combat.
Total party kills at conventions are often caused by a new team of players exhibiting poor synergy and teamwork.
A highly effective party can simply be pushed harder by the DM, who starts using monsters to their fullest.
A lot of DMs use KID GLOVES when working with the tougher monsters, like Dragons or Devils.
Perhaps an Erinyes sniper is teleporting and sniping at the party for multiple rounds before leading them into a trap. You can't play like that against a disorganized party, or you'll kill them all, first time out (which may not be a bad thing either).
---
This is my personal opinion, but, if I had to pick an ideal player to be a fellow player, I'd want them to have the following traits on a scale of 1-10. (assuming that perfect 10s across the board are not going to be found)
PC Effectiveness of Build - 7 or 8
PC Teamwork Effectiveness - 9
PC Depth and Backstory - 6 or 7
PC Role Playing - 7 or 8
They could start with a PC idea that they like, but make the idea effective, or they could start with an effective character concept, but build a deep PC around it.
Either way. | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 12/14/2006 1:27 AM |
| I can agree with you, only if it's people I've plaed with before. I play a lot of LG. When I don't know the person, it doesn't matter to me how good a roleplayer that person is. Sure, it adds to the experience if they can roleplay well, but I'd rather have an greater Effectiveness and Teamwork than actual Depth and Role Playing. Too many times, I've seem PC s with the latter cause many problems with the forme (see for instance the player I describe in the rules lawyer thread). If I'm in a group that meets regularly, I'd like a role player but I want someone that I can ignore half the world and assume they are covering or dealing with (if that makes sense).
That basically describes my best friend in terms of roleplaying. He and I really complement each other. He is great roleplayer, but he also min/maxes like a champ so I know he is effedtive. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
905 Posts
| | 12/14/2006 5:59 AM |
| When you say he "min/maxes" like a champ... are you saying that he's an effective powergamer? or are you saying he uses a lot of dump stats and PrCs to create one spell or one hit kills all the time?
You're right about the teamwork though, and effective team tactics are much more important than individually perfect builds.
Our team PCs are probably 80-85% effective builds, but, our tactics, buff spells, battlefield responsibilities, and general synergy make the group more effective.
We don't do this all the time, but, one session, it made sense to clear a dungeon while barely leaving initiative order so we could keep our buff spells. This meant you could search, but not take 10 or 20... and we moved through the entire dungeon level in 12 minutes of game time like a SWAT team.
BTW, this is another great use for a Monk. I was actually intentionally setting off traps. High AC, high all around saves, evasion, etc. It was risky, but, time was a factor, and it's sometimes nice to take calculated life and death risks with your PC. | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 12/14/2006 9:13 AM |
| Effective build. Although he does use dump stats, he is a Dervish build. No one hit kill, but give him a round... Now that I think about it, his sniper characters in Shadowrun were one shot/one kill.
| |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
Oryan77
Sergeant
955 Posts
| | 12/14/2006 11:18 AM |
| I've DM'ed a Min Maxer before. Both of his characters sucked. They were interesting, but they were 1 trick ponies and I felt the effects of it as the DM.
First his Fey'ri rogue was just too weak. If he was the target of an NPC, 1 or 2 hits and he was down. Then, when the PC's needed some help in melee, his PC was too weak to hit anyone with an attack. Even his sneak attack was weak. But boy was he good at escaping fights and leaving the rest of the party there to die.
After people complained about his character making their group of 4 fight more like a group of 3, he made a new PC.
His grappling monk dwarf sucked too. Sure, if there was an NPC wizard, the wizard would be in a world of hurt. But I use about 75% more non casters than I do caster NPCs....so he felt useless most of the time. I also learned to dislike monks after DM'ing his PC. I just felt monks got a lot of cool abilities, but it spread them out thin and they weren't really strong all around. While he was in a grapple with an NPC doing a whopping 6-7 damage, the sorceress is laying down 15-25 damage a round while the melee PC's are doing 10-20 damage a round. And when a creature had DR, I got to hear the monk player really whine about how he only does 6-7 damage and now he's only doing 1-2 damage if he's lucky.
I'm now DM'ing a powergamer for the first time. At first it annoyed me at how hard it was for me to challenge him & make him worried about dying. But I've gotten the hang of it and he goes unconcious as much as the others. But what I really learned to like about a powergamer is how good he is at saving the rest of the party. His powergaming isn't all about him, he uses that talent to help the entire party out. He seems to choose the right spells for his Cleric and almost always has something very helpful during a life threatening situation.
| |
Miniatures for sale *more added 07/17/08*: Click here
I will buy your unwanted D&D WotC minis collection (DDM only). Email me your asking price! | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
905 Posts
| | 12/14/2006 12:38 PM |
| Posted By Oryan77 on 12/14/2006 11:18 AM
I've DM'ed a Min Maxer before. Both of his characters sucked. They were interesting, but they were 1 trick ponies and I felt the effects of it as the DM.
-snip-
I'm now DM'ing a powergamer for the first time. At first it annoyed me at how hard it was for me to challenge him & make him worried about dying. But I've gotten the hang of it and he goes unconcious as much as the others. But what I really learned to like about a powergamer is how good he is at saving the rest of the party. His powergaming isn't all about him, he uses that talent to help the entire party out. He seems to choose the right spells for his Cleric and almost always has something very helpful during a life threatening situation.
Great post.
My DMing style would destroy most Min/Maxers because I try to make every session and most battles different.
The guy in my group who plays a Barbarian actually has pretty balanced scores, and I still knock him out of fights frequently. (Dragon Bile, Ray of Enf, Sleep from a Gauth, Ogre Grapple, Tanglefoot Bags, Charm Person, etc.)
When he's on a roll, he does dish out the damage, but, he doesn't shine in every battle.
It's not that I'm metagaming, it's just that I throw a lot of stuff at the whole party, whether it is a good save for them or a bad save doesn't matter.
If you get a Power Gamer who works to improve the whole party and supports the team, you just have to get used to the PCs walking through some of your encounters.
If you mix them up enough, in ways that make sense, there'll be some fight that comes out of nowhere and ends up being very challenging.
PC has high AC? - Fireshield & similar, rays, magic missile, etc.
PC very effective spellcaster? - Someone throws a Silence area on him. Someone throws a thunderstone at him to deafen him.
Mix in bad weather, rough terrain, tripping, grappling, counterspelling (sorc w Dispel Magic).
Hit the party with Dispel Magic, targeted and area. Even if THIS fight isn't hard, you make the next fight harder.
Ready an NPC action to fire a bow at the spellcaster.
Hit spellcasters with ongoing damage spells to force Concentration checks.
If the NPCs have a reason to have intelligence on the party, use it. If not, just use a random mix of tactics whether they are strong or not.
Use Oozes, Constructs and Undead for a mix of immunities. Use evil outsiders to hit-and-run. Use dragons to snatch the cleric and drop him somewhere else, a few rounds away from the party.
Mix it up, but try to do it with logical reasons for why things are doing what they're doing, and you'll force the party to work effectively, and it won't matter, because they'll still be challenged.
Remember also that a PC feels challenged not just by damage. If you hit his ability scores, or get him with a negative level, or dispel a bunch of buffs, or sunder a weapon, or shatter a wand, blind or deafen the PC, etc.
The PC will feel pressed and challenged, even if he barely loses any HP.
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
gss_000
Commander
3204 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 12/14/2006 1:47 PM |
| I think the trick in powergaming is picking the right schtick. Some just don't work well, like the example of the fey'ri rogue. But if you pick it correctly, it can be a thing of beauty.
My DMing style would destroy most Min/Maxers because I try to make every session and most battles different.
I find this funny, because I find it the exact opposite. I think you are doing the exact right thing by mixing up encounters, but I find Min/Maxers do better than those that are average at everything. In this case it might be that what you think of "destroy" I'm thinking of what happens normally. If you don't have that focus in some area, a character stays up by DM whim in many situations and is a detriment to the team. If I was one of your players, you may get me with these things once or twice, but a good min/maxer would get those things to make them a lot less likely: Cloak of Displacement, ring of freedom of movement, rod of silent spell, etc. And so the dance would continue. 
This is not to say that a noncombat oriented character is a problem. I find those can be just as good if they can get you through other encounters (traps, diplomacy, gathering information, etc) that in the end make fights easier. | |
Completed trades: blackthorne, Drakkengi,Thorgrin, Ironfist Boulderbender x2, ckissee, nasamonkey, Username, Star, Ace13 x3, emontedodger x2, Drconveyor, church, Joeyb, Sir Bozak The Damned, Xeromod, the other guy x2, Qucalion of Celene, Dagaron x2, berus316, qillan_dvra, AshloreDarkShadow
For further info go to My Reference Thread and Trade Interface
Champion of Radiant Sevant | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 12/14/2006 4:22 PM |
| I'm not really sure I buy that 'min/maxing' specifically refers to having one high stat and dumping others, etc.
Taken literally it means 'maximizing your strengths, and minimizing your weaknesses'. This is something you can do with multiple-stat-dependent classes just as much as you can with an arcane spellcaster (which are the only true single-stat classes, I think; barbarians are a 3 stat class IMO.) | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
| 
zenthrus
Commander
4836 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 12/15/2006 12:48 AM |
| Posted By IanB on 12/14/2006 4:22 PM
an arcane spellcaster (which are the only true single-stat classes, I think; barbarians are a 3 stat class IMO.)
Arcane casters are 3 stat classes (Int or Cha, Dex, Con).
I've always used a slightly different set of terminology when discussing optimization:
Average Player: Doesn't really bother to optimize much since it's all about having fun and role-playing anyway (or because they aren't terribly familiar with the rules--I've gamed with both cases). Average players are usually avid readers and great storytellers but their characters can be a bit "squishy."
Optimizer (or min-maxer): Builds characters that are balanced (meaning they have shortcomings and try to compensate for them). Usually Optimizers look for tactical advantages allowed by the rules and think ahead about how to construct their characters for the long haul. Optimizers tend to like crunching numbers but always try to formulate a logical argument as to why their characters are built the way they are.
Powergamer: Spends an inordinate amount of time building 'test' characters looking to find an outstanding combination of feats/class abilities/PrC/and magic items. Invariably has 'dump' stats (usually Cha) and characters are built around dps (damage per second). Powergamers tend to build characters that need spreadsheets to sort out the multiclassing. Powergamers love number crunching and probability. They usually try to at least make a token effort to present an argument for why their characters have 2 levels in 9 different classes, but sometimes it's just not worth the effort. Powergamers may or may not be interested in role-playing but are almost always interested in roll-playing (a lot of Powergamers are people who grew up playing Final Fantasy or FPSes).
Munchkin: Munchkins are like powergamers, but worse. They pore over every sourcebook they can find in order to figure out a combination of feats/class abilities/PrC/and magic items that will allow them to perform the 'one trick pony' of legend (dealing out 100+ damage in one shot, casting save-or-die spells with insanely high DCs, etc). Munchkins prefer not to have any dump stats (18 in every stat is the ideal), but in order to maximize the cheese, they'll happily dump two (or three) stats in order to boost the other three. Munchkins particularly like somewhat sketchy abilities in WotC source books (i.e. Character Flaws in Unearthed Arcana, Wings of Cover in PH2, or Vow of Poverty in Book of Exalted Deeds) because "if it's in a WotC book it must be balanced, right?" Munchkins are the bane of all gamers. They're typically born and bred on Final Fantasy (naturally never beating the game before level 99), tend to rules-lawyer, and rarely even bother with character concepts ("umm...I can deal 100 damage per swing, who cares whether or not I was traumatized as a child?").
Super-Munchkin: Super-Munchkins are thankfully quite rare. Super-Munchkins memorize all the stats in the Monster Manuals ("how could that worg have survived my attack? I dealt more than their maximum hit points"). Super-Munchkins build characters purely based on combinations of abilities that tend to be broken and rules-lawyer around their weaknesses. Super-Munchkins don't play video games until they have access to the cheat codes, and keep up on every gaming supplement printed (including reading every adventure released even if their DMs plan to run the module). Fortunately for gamers everywhere, Super-Munchkins are fairly rare.
My group tends to have a mix of Optimizers and Powergamers. Occasionally we'll see an average player (usually friends of mine who like roleplay but hate to be bothered with rules). More frequently, we'll run into munchkins.
The only playing style that I truly dislike is the Super-Munchkin because of the borderline cheating that tends to crop up. Most other playing styles are just that: playing styles. If crunching numbers and meticulously placing miniatures on 3-dimensional terrain makes the group happy that's fine. If sitting back and role-playing out the entire adventure (never actually rolling any dice) works, that's fine too.
| |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
905 Posts
| | 12/15/2006 11:40 AM |
| I'd fall in the Optimizer class, maybe tipped toward Power Gamer.
What I meant by punishing a Min/Maxer is more meant about punishing a one trick pony.
You know how a boxer with a lot of knockouts and wins doesn't "go for the knockout" or "plan to knock people out"? Instead, they throw a lot of good punches and just have confidence that, eventually, the other guy is getting knocked out.
---
One of my best strategic players is playing a less than optimal build.
He's a Dwarf - Fighter - Wizard - Spellsword (Spellaxe in his case)
He also has a Weapon of Legacy (which are surprisingly well balanced and difficult to advance if you play them correctly).
Everything about this PC is average to good.
- He's got average HP (but better than a typical caster)
- He has lowish BaB, but isn't too bad at fighting.
- He has useful spells and good spell DCs.
- He has a lot of craft skills, and has used them to help the other players.
In almost any situation, this Dwarf has some solution.
When a Decipher Script check was required, the Dwarf had ranks.
When it comes to IDing an Item (we use the alternate Spellcraft rules), the dwarf has a lot of ranks.
His axe is very versitile and extremely good vs dragons due to it's Legacy Advancement, and it has a variety of abilities that can be used a few times a day.
He can cast True Strike prior to combats, and he hastes the party.
All session, every session, the dwarf is useful.
Now, in combat, his problem is that he isn't a top level caster or combatant, so, some types of foes are beyond his hittable AC and beyond his spell penetration.
I've thrown countless effects at the Dwarf, but, he often has a defensive spell in place or a good save when he needs it. This guy isn't optimized fully, but, he plays his PC very very well and makes the group better.
---
On the other side, the Barbarian, Lander, has AMAZING damage and a solid build.
He can hit just about anything and hurt it badly.
However, because his role in combat is pre-defined, he's fallen victim to a variety of effects, especially when an enemy is intelligent, has mind effecting spells, and sees a giant figure with a giant sword as a tempting target.
The guy who plays Lander isn't a bad tactician, but, his PC is very straight foward.
It's good at what it does, and not so good at everything else.
He has stepped up a bit in the Role Playing lately, and gained the Leadership feat (with a Bard cohort), so, his character has become a bit more flexible.
They find that they can't always get optimized items though. I am pretty tight to the recommended wealth per level, and if you want high cost items, a lot of times, you have to travel to, or order from, a large metropolis.
There are usually delays or finder's fees or shipping costs associated with custom buying an expensive item that is exactly what you want from a major city.
Most smaller cost items can be found easily, so, the players have some freedom.
A ring of Freedom of Movement would require some effort to track down, and you'd have to have saved the large amount of Gold ahead of time. You could get it, but, you couldn't walk into the local shop and buy the one on the counter (because it's not there). | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Skyscraper
Sergeant
659 Posts
Montreal
| | 12/15/2006 12:07 PM |
| Ah, to put the words on the concepts
I guess player definitions depends on your view of the game. For me, how much effort a player actually puts into the numbers is not really that relevant. Am i an "average player"? Good question, "average" being an interesting concept by itself
When i create my own character, i like for him to have intersting strengths, to be very good at some things, but i absolutely want to have some flaws, since for one thing, it represents life where everyone has flaws, and also it makes the strengths all the more tasteful. Also, simply outshining everyone else and building something alone instead of building a fun cooperative game is not my thing. BUT: i like to take advantage of my strengths and use them efficiently. I like to use terrain to my advantage on the battlefield, and since i always play a PC that will want to work with the group (since i don't like to create egoist or chaotic neutral-type PCs, for example), i try to always find what is more relevant for the group instead of my PCs - though surviving is on the top of my list of priorities
Am i an optimizer? Not sure.
When evaluating a player, for me number crunching is not that important, i was saying. I'll evaluate how effectively a player is able to put himself or herself into a fictional environment in his mind. Because for me the game starts there. Then, is that player interested in learning the rules, and how much does he learn about them. Some players know the rules very well, and use them (optimizers, i guess), some know the rules very well but simply don't care to use them for self-declared "flavor" purposes (often self-declared ROLE-players). Also, is that player intersted in getting down into immersive role-playing sequences, i.e. how intensely and effectively will they push their role? Some players say "i ask him this or that" and there stops the role-play. Some players, however, will come out with jewels of role-play moments.
In our main D&D group, we have different levels of each of these types. All players are very good at setting themselves into fictional environments, i.e. they don't or very rarely metagame (one does it, but on rare occasions), they can imagine how their characters should be feeling in this or that situation (no casual "i start digging through the corpses piled up in the room, then rip the throat out from my father's dead body and shove my hand down his body until i find the ring he swallowed. While doing that, i tell my buds the joke about the green giant and the half-orc maid", for example ).
Then, rules-wise, we have varying levels of knowledge. One player and myself are rather knowledgeable, but we'd probably not be considered top-notch around these boards. We know our stuff, but still need to look up how grappling works... er, wait, everyone does that. Two players are new to D&D and don't really read rules outside of our games, but they're fast learners and they've played tons of RPG and table-top games, so they're doing OK. The last one is less knowledgeable as far as rules are concerned, but he still puts efforts into using them correctly.
Finally, there is the role-play. The most rules-knowledgeable player is probably the weakest role-player, but he's still fairly good. Two of my players are very good role-players (including the one that doesn't know the rules that well, which sometimes leads to: this is what i'm trying to do, tell me out it turns out - which is fine by me). We do have some good and intense role-playing moments, and usually those are up there with the best battles.
Overall, their synergy in combat is rather weak. The role-play is more important for them, apart from one of them (the rules guy), who brings a lot of combat knowledge to the table. Still, the others are not that bad, but we're pretty far from the swat-team described above.
So. Am i an average player? Heh. Dunno. I can't really say where i stand myself. I have trouble taking one of the elements i talk about up there out of the context of the others. For me, the game is throwing yourself into a fictional environment and acting out your role and palying with the rules used for the game.
I'm digressing, am i not? Haha. Friday afternoon, can't help it!
My old group was much more swat-team like. They were very efficient combat-wise, and... much less into roleplay (that tends to support the myth, doesn't it?  ). They were a fun group to play with, i've DMed for them for 10 years.
I don't know where this is going, really. I think this thread will be another attempt at putting names to concepts, i'm not sure i'll be putting anything helpful forward, apart if discussing my own group helps? No? Oh well.
Sky  | |
The wise man doubts often. The ignorant, sometimes. The fool, never. | |
|
nycfarmkid
Underboss
1210 Posts
Wadsworth, OH
| | 12/15/2006 12:42 PM |
| I think a lot of it depends on what motivates a person. Do you find motivation in playing a role? Do you find motivation in watching your character progress over the levels and events in his/her/its life? Do you find motivation in a good challenge?
I find myself falling into the latter group. I love being challenged. Whether it is through combat, or skills related, or even role playing. However, i admit i do enjoy the challenges of combat the most. I'm very meticulous in what I do, and this transfer over to D&D. I find the fun in taking different character concepts or archetypes, be they strong or weak, and getting the most out of them. This has ranged from the Spellcasting Elven Archer, to the speedy fighter trying to keep up with his stronger adversaries. Doing the best you can with the cards you are dealt is what drives me. | |
Looking to buy some figures? Chances are I may have them!! Check here!!
My Reference Thread | My Warbands | My Ebay Auctions | My Qualifier Warband
Champion of Spellswords
| |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
905 Posts
| | 12/15/2006 1:07 PM |
| I'd say, all of the above, but, if I had to pick one, I'd pick the good challenge too.
Any DM can wipe out any party at any time, and it's also easy to throw one beatable foe after the next into the PCs.
But if every session is different than the last... with a mix of challenges...
- Outdoor long range battles through forest on grass map.
- Indoor dungeon crawls with skilled NPCs and traps.
- Cavern crawls filled with various abberations and powerful creatures.
- Battles occurring in town... the golem guarding the magic shop just went berserk and there's a fire.
- PCs are poisoned at the Inn and have to find out who did it.
- PCs join a Dwarven Squad as they hit a platoon of enemy hobogoblin raiders.
- PCs are trapped on another plane.
- PCs are captured and stripped of their gear and have to escape and recover their gear.
- PCs fighting underwater or on a ship.
- PCs fighting enemies with various fighting styles, and combinations of various purpose.
- PCs fighting to take a tall keep, spider-climbing 1-1 duel between PC swashbuckler and NPC Duelist (this actually happened, great fight ending in the Duelist falling to his death). This happened on my giant Cult Stronghold HA model.
Of course, the transition from style to style has to make sense.
A few times, we've had players come in and "guest NPC", so, if someone lives in or near the Pittsburgh area, and wants to give it a try, I'd have to chat w you a bit, but, we welcome that kind of chance to improve a session by adding another layer of depth.
One guest NPC played as an evil ally who was permitted to abandoned the party at their hour of greatest need or stay and help, depending on how useful and likeable he found the group (which became a secret roleplaying challenge that they weren't aware of).
| |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
Star
Sergeant
978 Posts
New Britain, CT
| | 12/15/2006 1:25 PM |
| I think that average, optimizer etc. are just labels. Of course some people make and play characters as you've described but I think that many are a mix of many different styles.
I've been called a powergamer and a munchkin (usually jokingly). I don't know if I'm the best judge as to what label to apply to myself though. I'm an average to good roleplayer. I love making backgrounds (including ongoing backgrounds detailing my characters activities away from the party or during downtime). I make useful characters but not really broken ones. I often make two weapon fighters with a good charisma and high diplomacy skills. I multiclass a lot but not in a munchkin way - taking the previous example I might start out as a human rogue with Able Learner for the skills then switch to fighter. A munchkin wouldn't do that because it would screw up your base attack. I usually don't have a dump stat unless I roll poorly during character creation and in that case I roleplay it and explain it in the background.
I CAN minmax - and have done so in the past when surrounded by other players doing so (I don't need to have the coolest PC but I prefer not to be useless either). I've found that I enjoy playing above average characters with managable weakness's rather than munchkin characters with glaring weakness's.
And please do not judge this post on the fact that my avatar is "MinMax" from the Goblins comic strip. I think he's a funny character - not a role-model. | |
Champion of Gromph Baenre | |
|
maijstral
Underboss
2105 Posts
| | 12/15/2006 2:45 PM |
| I'm going to use zenthrus's definitions above.
The problem I have as a DM is the mix of players at the table, I have 2 players that are powergamers with a pinch of munchkin tossed in and 3 players that fall in the average slot, I myself probably fall into the optimizer slot. When trying to create an encounter I have to run the balance between offering the powergaming players a challange while not making it so difficult I accidentally kill off the average players. Its rough sometimes trying to walk that narrow line between letting the powergamers just walkover encounters and making the enounters so powerfull that the other 3 have little chance of surviving without letting the powergamers do all the work. In either case its no fun for the average players to just sail through encounters or have to run and hide and let the other two do the bulk of the work. As a result ,prehaps unfairly, I tend to target weaknesses of the powergamers in adventures just to make balanced encounters,they do make it tough to find weaknesses though. The response to this is the powergamers offering build help to the 'average' players so i won't pick on them thus amping up the average power of the party. | | | |
|
YRM_DM
Sergeant
905 Posts
| | 12/17/2006 9:10 PM |
| Yeah, a lot of players manage to have several traits.
My favorite thing to do in D&D is to participate in or lead superior group tactics, where we pull out an improbable win or beat something we shouldn't have been able to beat.
My next favorite thing to do in D&D is to build an effective character. It doesn't have to be 100% optimized, but, it has to be above average and effective. Gaining treasure, levels, feats, spells and abilities is fun.
But those two things fall flat if the story is implausible or if the role-playing is terrible. I need a good story and roleplaying to care about the great PC I have and the success we have as a group.
I'm not the world's best roleplayer or writer, but, I put a lot of effort into a concise backstory and I don't hesitate to step up and talk to the DM's NPCs. I try to improvise and stick to my character's personality.
As a DM, I get to role-play a lot of different NPCs, and I've had a pretty intensive class on improvisation at one point in my life (fun class btw). I've also helped to develop some games, big and small, in the past, so, I have an appreciation for balance (even though it's tough to achieve).
---
As far as faults go, I'd say that, as a DM, I spend too much time on this, and, as a player, I hold the DM to pretty high standards. I don't think I'd do well in a group where the DM ad-libbed a lot of rules, especially if they threw off the game balance.
It's actually the extent of DM ad-libbing that would get me. Some ad-libbing is fine, like mixing a few checks for a PC to swing on a rope on a ship and make an attack with his sword, but ad-libbing a rule (like disarm or improved trip) that is clearly written in the combat section already? That's not our cup of tea.
So that's my fault as a player, and I have to stay within groups that are going to want to be deep and creative within the rule-set, rather than a more open RP only game. | |
Completed good trades with Demagogue, PigSnot, DoB, and Alepulp.
I know you can hear MY thoughts... Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow, Meow... | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |