New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 484
  1. - Top - End - #31

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by tedcahill2 View Post
    I disagree. I think D&D 3.5 is a game that had a pretty good core design, but over it's 10+ years of development the core design started to evolve and you ended up with a very swingy balance scale as a result.
    I mean, I consider 3.X to be the most badly designed D&D edition out there so clearly I disagree.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Berlin
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by tedcahill2 View Post
    I disagree. I think D&D 3.5 is a game that had a pretty good core design, but over it's 10+ years of development the core design started to evolve and you ended up with a very swingy balance scale as a result.
    Let´s put it this way:

    3E has a very good and solid core, but the design decision to reference additions only to core and disregard other additions and the synergy that can create is what's killed it.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Nifft's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by tedcahill2 View Post
    I disagree. I think D&D 3.5 is a game that had a pretty good core design, but over it's 10+ years of development the core design started to evolve and you ended up with a very swingy balance scale as a result.
    The most broken stuff in 3.5e tends to be in the PHB / DMG / MM1 -- stuff like candles of invocation, wish & gate, bindable Outsiders & Elementals with (Su) wish, Druids, Clerics, etc. so it's odd to call the core design less swingy than later stuff like Warlock, Shapeshift Druid, Warmage, etc.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    One problem with power-gaming is that it's symptomatic of a childish approach to TTRPGs i.e. treating like them a video game that you can win by just being more powerful than everyone else in the game. Sooner or later most players realise that you're never the biggest badass in the multiverse and in fact it would be pretty boring if you were, at least in the standard D&D model of gaming. So they tend to explore other reasons why they game, and tend to end up as better gamers as a result.
    Re: 100 Things to Beware of that Every DM Should Know

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    93. No matter what the character sheet say, there are only 3 PC alignments: Lawful Snotty, Neutral Greedy, and Chaotic Backstabbing.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhedyn View Post
    Throwing such insults tends to be a sign of insecurities or a crippling fear that the game they like isn't designed or balanced well.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Beer View Post
    One problem with power-gaming is that it's symptomatic of a childish approach to TTRPGs i.e. treating like them a video game that you can win by just being more powerful than everyone else in the game. Sooner or later most players realise that you're never the biggest badass in the multiverse and in fact it would be pretty boring if you were, at least in the standard D&D model of gaming. So they tend to explore other reasons why they game, and tend to end up as better gamers as a result.
    Guys, stahp. STAHP.
    "Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Beer View Post
    One problem with power-gaming is that it's symptomatic of a childish approach to TTRPGs i.e. treating like them a video game that you can win by just being more powerful than everyone else in the game. Sooner or later most players realise that you're never the biggest badass in the multiverse and in fact it would be pretty boring if you were, at least in the standard D&D model of gaming. So they tend to explore other reasons why they game, and tend to end up as better gamers as a result.
    I feel like we're working on different definitions of "Power Gamer" here.

    You seem to be thinking of what, to me, is a munchkin. A munchkin will do anything to get more power, probably disregard roleplay, might very well cheat, and generally has the sole goal of MOAR POWER! at the expense of others' fun.

    A power gamer is merely someone who's more mechanics first, and likes to be powerful at what they specialize in. But, some key differences are that they're willing to keep it in line with the group's genera; power level, will try to pick a niche that isn't covered, and will DEFINITELY not cheat.

    I mean, at least when it comes to 5E, I tend towards more mechanics first. I still roleplay just fine, but my thoughts are not usually "I want to play this type of person. What mechanics fit that?" it's "I want to play with these mechanics. What character fits that?"
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by BreaktheStatue View Post
    2. When does optimization become "power gaming?"
    Power gaming is like driving on a one-lane country road. Anyone slower than you is a slug; anyone faster than you is a maniac.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2018

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Wow, thanks everyone for the great responses. There's no way I'll be able to address everyone, but I feel like everyone had some great insight to offer.

    I don't want to misrepresent anyone, but I think this might be a useful summary of a lot of what has been said:


    Above all else, keep harmony in the group
    1. As with most things in tabletop RPGs, there are very few things, to include power-gaming/mechanical optimization, that are inherently bad, provided that they don't disrupt the harmony of the group. As long as you're "power gaming" while also keeping the needs of others in mind (i.e.: not being a "d*ck"), you're okay, most of the time.

    2. As far as the terms themselves, "power gaming" - (the practice of mechanically optimizing PCs) - is not inherently bad (assuming it follows point 1), but "munchkining" can encompass, in addition to "power gaming," a whole different combination of behaviors, such as a willingness to (unreasonably and frequently) complain to the DM, whine, rules lawyer exclusively in one's own favor, etc., which are almost always toxic.

    3. It's recommended to think of your PC as a "person," and not just a combination of scores.

    (I personally think every optimizier/power gamer - including me - should have a compelling backstory justification for every weird multiclass combo/choice they make. If you can't make a convincing case for why it makes sense to have a paladin/warlock/bard/sorcerer, you probably shouldn't make one)

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    Guys, stahp. STAHP.
    But I just stahed. STAHTED.

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    I feel like we're working on different definitions of "Power Gamer" here.

    You seem to be thinking of what, to me, is a munchkin. A munchkin will do anything to get more power, probably disregard roleplay, might very well cheat, and generally has the sole goal of MOAR POWER! at the expense of others' fun.
    Sure that's fine. That way, you can have a group of 'power gamers' who are playing a fun, balanced campaign with highly optimised characters, far be it from me to be Captain Badwrongfun.

    I don't think there's any percentage in arguing about exact definitions...much more importantly, it's one of those things that's a problem when it's a problem whether it's called being a 'power gamer' or a 'munchkin' or 'goddamit who invited Eric again? It's always Eric.'
    Last edited by Mr Beer; 2018-05-16 at 08:07 PM.
    Re: 100 Things to Beware of that Every DM Should Know

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    93. No matter what the character sheet say, there are only 3 PC alignments: Lawful Snotty, Neutral Greedy, and Chaotic Backstabbing.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    I think there's something to be gained by using common terms. To me, a power gamer is someone who is more mechanics first and into optimization, but won't disrupt (or at least, will try not to disrupt) a game. A munchkin is someone who takes optimization too far (and can quite easily take non-optimization too far, such as by cheating) and refuses to adjust to the table.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    John Campbell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    It's an irregular noun which declines like so:

    I'm an optimizer.
    You're a power gamer.
    They're a munchkin.

    (More serious response later when I'm not on my tablet.)
    Play your character, not your alignment.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    I think there's something to be gained by using common terms.
    Of course, clarity of language is useful. I'm not convinced that there is consensus on what constitutes a power-gamer vs. a munchkin in TTRPG terms but your definitions look reasonable. In this lexicon, 'power-gamer' is a neutral term whereas 'munchkin' is negative. Works for me.
    Last edited by Mr Beer; 2018-05-17 at 06:05 PM.
    Re: 100 Things to Beware of that Every DM Should Know

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    93. No matter what the character sheet say, there are only 3 PC alignments: Lawful Snotty, Neutral Greedy, and Chaotic Backstabbing.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by martixy View Post
    Rather than looking at arbitrary lines in the sand, which everyone draws in different places(read: arguing terms/semantics), I'll just address the underlying issue.

    WHY does this attitude exist?

    The answer is relatively simple actually.
    The attitude exists in the public/group conscious. It is tribal knowledge within the D&D/TTRPG community. It persists, because in general it allows said group to operate more efficiently. Why? Because statistically power gaming in a majority of cases is a red flag and a strong indicator of other problems on the horizon. So a general stance of "hate" results in a better result for the entire group overall. It is strongly self-reinforcing in that the bad power gamers are filthy munchkins everyone should be warned about, while the good power gamers are not power gamers, but valuable party members, that you want to have in your party for those clutch moments. Social dynamics 101.
    I think this warrants some merit because there are good power players and bad power players. Nobody minds the good powerplayer because he shares the spotlight with the group and gets the group out of trouble during these "clutch" moments. Nobody minds because he's the combat monster in a group of stealth PC's that is happy to be plan B when things fall apart. He contributes to the fun, immersion and roleplaying that the rest of the group values that he also brings a mechanically strong character.

    The problem with a bad power player isn't that he's a power player, it's just he's a bad player. The bad power players I've played with had issues and the power playing was the least of their issues. Player usually become problematic when they disrupt play or make the game less fun. It's THAT GUY, he shows up with 5 eighteens and of course his STR is 18/00 because he has all the luck. He disregards the rules to make mechanicly stronger character. When a player shows up with his character who is a vampire draconic half drow and half tiefling and tells you that his last GM allowed him to play the character then you have met THAT GUY. He tries to twist the rules in insane ways and misunderstands abilities for his own benefits. He doesn't care about the rest of the group having fun and disregards teamwork....he may be playing the tankiest guy in the group but when that troll shows up he doesn't want "eat that kind of damage" and runs after a goblin. You know the guy that pockets the magical item while the group isn't looking, it's him....it's THAT GUY!.
    Optimizing vs Roleplay
    If the worlds greatest optimizer makes a character and hands it to the worlds greatest roleplayer who roleplays the character. What will happen? Will the Universe implode?

    Roleplaying vs Fun
    If roleplaying is no fun then stop doing it. Unless of course you are roleplaying at gunpoint then you should roleplay like your life depended on it.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaptin Keen View Post
    I didn't say it was. But I said that he wanted to play a templated character at zero LA. I believe he wanted to play a lizardman, add the halfdragon on top, for a total of +1 HD, +4 LA, +7 natural armor ... and so on, and so forth. So, while he might not have been good at it - he was certainly greedy enough.
    Oh. Gotcha. I played with someone like that, actually... Specifically with lizardman to boot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    The tilt about optimization is part of the inherent problem/advantage of RPGs: You have to play multiple games.

    Character building is often dull, takes far more nuance then playing the character, and instead of learning a sheet you learn all of the same rulebooks as the DM.

    As it is not only not fun for many players and takes a lot of time and effort, that it overshadows them in actual play can be galling. Like that guy who plays fighting games on his free time at a party, it quickly changes the tone of the game and can lead to resentment.
    So, if I've spent the past 20 years in the "couch potato" lifestyle, show up for a casual game of doubles tennis, and one of the four of us is a world-class tennis champion...

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    The issue isn't that any particular level of optimization is "bad". They're not.

    The issue is when people have differing ideas about what level of optimization is appropriate for the same game. Much like other types of expectation issues, the issue is not the preference itself, but incompatibility between differing preferences.
    I strongly agree, with the caveat that, in the right group, Thor and a sentient potted plant can be fun for all. So long as people don't have an expectation of balance, balance isn't required.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    Agreed. when I want to play a barbarian hero who risks life and limb to protect innocent people, its kind of undercut by the next guy over being a super-powerful wizard who seeks complete immortality and proceeds to destroy the foes easily before the barbarian hero gets to do anything. Just isn't fun for me.
    Have you ever consisted how fun it is for the person playing Thor for you to bring a potted plant?

    At most of my tables, the answer is "great fun", because then Thor knows I'm not stepping on his toes, but ymmv.

    Quote Originally Posted by BreaktheStatue View Post
    rules lawyer exclusively in one's own favor
    Dude, you not only did a great summary, you even managed to not malign rules layering carte Blanche. Kudos!

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    So, if I've spent the past 20 years in the "couch potato" lifestyle, show up for a casual game of doubles tennis, and one of the four of us is a world-class tennis champion...
    Except no amount of actually playing an RPG makes you good at optimization. More like spending 20 years playing basketball and the other guy points out there isn't a rule about using gorillas.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Vibranium: If it was on the periodic table, its chemical symbol would be "Bs".

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2018

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    Dude, you not only did a great summary, you even managed to not malign rules layering carte Blanche. Kudos!
    Thanks. I think there's a big difference between "Trying, to a reasonable (therein lies the rub!) extent, to stay faithful to the rules of the game/table, so everyone has a similar expectation of what is possible in the world," and "Trying to squeeze the language and meaning of the rules to give my character an edge, while generally not caring about other's enjoyment."

    Power Gamer:Munchkin :: Rules Faithful:Rules Lawyer?

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Dimers's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhedyn View Post
    Power gamer is also used as an insult directed at who ever makes stronger characters than the one throwing the insult around.
    Yeah, it can be a case of "Anyone who drives slower than me is a moron, and anyone who drives faster than me is a maniac."

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    Power gaming is like driving on a one-lane country road. Anyone slower than you is a slug; anyone faster than you is a maniac.
    ....... Razzafrazzin' rumblemump, stealin' my lines ...

    Quote Originally Posted by BreaktheStatue View Post
    Power Gamer:Munchkin :: Rules Faithful:Rules Lawyer?
    Rules Plaintiff?
    Last edited by Dimers; 2018-05-17 at 12:17 AM.
    Avatar by Meltheim: Eveve, dwarven battlemind, 4e Dark Sun

    Current games list

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2010

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Unless everyone is a power gamer, power gaming makes the game much harder for the DM and less fun for the non-power gamers. I'm currently in a game where this is an issue. I joined a but late and made a character at a power level similar to my friends character which he described to me. However, once I joined the game I realized he was WAY more powerful than anyone else int he party, and I'm actually slightly more powerful than he is. He and I basically destroy encounters while the other players have almost no meaningful contribution in combat. If the DM makes a monster that can even hit us or can possibly avoid/resist our attacks, it is invulnerable to the other characters and can't miss them at all. If I had known the party balance beforehand, I would have made a much less powerful character because it wasn't my intention to make other people feel useless.

    Basically, it's best to avoid much optimization unless the rest of the players are also optimizers. If you're playing with non-power gamers and playing on god mode is the only way you can have fun, group tabletop may not be for you. If you just enjoy squeezing every ounce of power out of a character, pick some ****ty classes and try to optimize them to be functional.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    I think there's something to be gained by using common terms.
    And SIGNIFICANTLY more to be lost.

    The time and energy spent getting to "common terms" is far and away not worth it.

    Lurk enough on these boards and you'll have seen plenty of discussions that have devolved into pointless rhetoric of how one's usage of a particular term differs from another's and people bickering about insignificant crap just to one-up each other.

    Things would be so much better if people avoided terminology arguments. Instead, if there is a misunderstanding be verbose about the point you're trying to convey, rather than about redefining another person's misuse of terms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Koo Rehtorb View Post
    I mean, I consider 3.X to be the most badly designed D&D edition out there so clearly I disagree.
    Personal opinion is fine, but the previous blanket statement doesn't contribute much.
    I'm with Quertus on this one. Balance is overrated. Also, see Snowbluff axiom.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2018

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hackulator View Post
    If you just enjoy squeezing every ounce of power out of a character, pick some ****ty classes and try to optimize them to be functional.
    This is great advice. It'd probably result in some pretty interesting characters too, RP-wise.
    Last edited by BreaktheStatue; 2018-05-17 at 01:59 AM.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    Oh. Gotcha. I played with someone like that, actually... Specifically with lizardman to boot.
    IKR?

    And it's not even that there's anything wrong with that. But when it's completely out of line with how the rest of the group plays, it becomes a problem =)

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ClericGirl

    Join Date
    Jan 2018

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Harsh D&D truth: Virtually every player out there is playing to win. Certainly do several players prefer story-based character options, mechanical synergies, big bursts regardless of viability or streamlining the character to be ideally suited for the campaign at hand. But once everyone sits at the table, unless someone is a massive problem player who only wants to cause trouble, everyone is working together to fulfill the campaign's objective with their given characters - in other words, win the campaign.

    The main "power gamers" with strong mechanical builds are actually experienced and mature players who know how to make self-sufficient characters capable of contributing in a variety of situations and/or to effectively contribute in their intended role. As for power imbalances, I strongly favor a bottom-up approach to boost the less capable players (not just by giving them freebies that the stronger players could potentially claim, but also by encouraging the other players to help them build/play their character effectively) rather than a top-down approach to weaken the build that's being effective (most of the time, the player isn't violating any game rules and it's not exactly antisocial to try and do your best in a situation for the sake of the team).

    "Not stepping on toes" is a more troublesome scenario where I'd consider my approach to help the weaker characters more useful. In some systems and events, a player can end up with a class that's far more powerful/versatile than the other players, forcing them to step on eggshells not to make other players feel inadequate is saying "screw you for wanting to play this class". It can also hamper your IC roleplaying since you're making your character live in a world of cardboard, always taking care not to break something; to break someone*. If you're instead helping the lesser classes by pointing to more viable options that can keep up better, your other players can do more and your power player doesn't have to compromise their character.

    If complexity is an issue and your players aren't capable of playing the game at a certain degree of competence, it's probably worth considering to switch to a lighter system with less moving parts in terms of mechanics.

    *not ashamed for quoting Superman

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Drakevarg's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Ebonwood

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by MeimuHakurei View Post
    Harsh D&D truth: Virtually every player out there is playing to win. Certainly do several players prefer story-based character options, mechanical synergies, big bursts regardless of viability or streamlining the character to be ideally suited for the campaign at hand. But once everyone sits at the table, unless someone is a massive problem player who only wants to cause trouble, everyone is working together to fulfill the campaign's objective with their given characters - in other words, win the campaign.
    I don't think that I've ever once played in a campaign that had a clear win condition. Even ones with an obvious main antagonistic force (which was far from all of them) were never obvious in how they would actually be beaten. Most people I've played with aren't intent on winning the campaign so much as they are intent on experiencing the campaign (and by logical extension, survive it). I doubt it's that unusual for players to view a campaign as a story expressed through obstacle courses rather than obstacle courses contextualized with a story.

    Now obviously in the shorter term, "survive the campaign" does imply "win the encounters." But playing to not lose is a relevant philosophical distinction from playing to win. The implied onus to excel is significantly more lax, and all that's really needed is to not be actively incompetent (which really should not be that hard).
    If asked the question "how can I do this within this system?" answering with "use a different system" is never a helpful or appreciated answer.

    ENBY

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sweden

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by BreaktheStatue View Post
    3. It's recommended to think of your PC as a "person," and not just a combination of scores.

    (I personally think every optimizier/power gamer - including me - should have a compelling backstory justification for every weird multiclass combo/choice they make. If you can't make a convincing case for why it makes sense to have a paladin/warlock/bard/sorcerer, you probably shouldn't make one)
    The problem with "compelling backstory" is who decides? Also, when it is clear that the backstory is only created as a means of, as you put it, "justification" for a really weird mix of stuff that makes the character a certain power-level, has the player really thought of the PC as a person?

    If it is simply up to the DM to decide what makes for a compelling backstory, many power-gamers would get very upset if they say "no". Also, a backstory can be "technically possible" even though it isn't very "plausible". It is very hard as a DM to decide where to the draw the line of exactly how plausible a character's backstory should be.

    I've found that most power-gamers work with the end goal (the character build) first and comes up with the backstory second. Which is contrary to how some others like to do it, which is to start with the backstory and then see what character build makes sense for it. It is not an intrinsically wrong way to do it, but it can create group clashes.

    Basically, as so many others have said, power-gaming isn't bad, not inherently. There are plenty of groups out there who are full of power-gamers.

    The reason why I think you have encountered "power gamer hate", is due to an inability of many power-gamers to adapt to the theme, tone and power level of the group they come to. They'll just make their über-powerful character, without regard for the rest of the group. Which is why many people have developed an instinctive dislike for this type of player.

    I personally am quite similar in mind to kyoryu. One person power-gaming either means the other characters will be overshadowed, or everyone has to power game. Since neither of these options are something I want personally when playing, they (power-gamers) match poorly with my play style.

    Interestingly enough, not all power-gamers are good optimizers. I have encountered one in particular who wasn't a very good optimizer, but he was most certainly a power-gamer (though I would say, not a munchkin). I certainly have the skills to optimize, I just most often choose not to. So being a power-gamer doesn't automatically make you an optimizer, imo.

    In my view, a munchkin is someone who sees their character as just a set of numerical scores. A power-gamer is someone who does think of their character as a person, but they want to be a REALLY POWERFUL PERSON (and since power is relative, it means either relative to the rest of the party or relative to the world). An optimizer is someone who uses system mastery to accomplish some goal or another.

    I can be an optimizer, and sometimes I am (depending on the goal). I can optimize to power-game, but I choose not to (as it doesn't really interest me). I can, however, not see my character as just a set of numerical scores. Not even, ironically enough, when playing munchkin.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    Blue text for sarcasm is an important writing tool. Everybody should use it when they are saying something clearly false.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    Agreed. when I want to play a barbarian hero who risks life and limb to protect innocent people, its kind of undercut by the next guy over being a super-powerful wizard who seeks complete immortality and proceeds to destroy the foes easily before the barbarian hero gets to do anything. Just isn't fun for me.
    That is more a D&D specific problem.

    My other point of reference being Savage Worlds, those two kinds of players are fine to have in the party with each other. Magic is cool and melee is cool.

    Games like D&D that are centered around resource management get into the problem of limited resources classes just being better than at-will classes because the at-will power is vastly over valued.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by martixy View Post
    I'm with Quertus on this one. Balance is overrated. Also, see Snowbluff axiom.
    Balance is not binary. There's a wide range between "oh no, they do .2 more damage per round than me!" and "Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit".
    "Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    A workable group dynamic is not overrated, however. Without it .... you quite simply cannot play.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    Balance is not binary. There's a wide range between "oh no, they do .2 more damage per round than me!" and "Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit".
    True and...
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaptin Keen View Post
    A workable group dynamic is not overrated, however. Without it .... you quite simply cannot play.
    ...true(sorta).

    And there's different kinds of balance too. Balance between the player and the world, balance between him and the rest of the party. The latter is where Keen's point comes in. If you'd be focusing on anything, focus on that.

    But it's only sorta true, because "simply cannot" isn't true. It only makes it more difficult. Or you gotta have the right player. One who's primary incentive doesn't clash with an imbalanced party(e.g. can derive enjoyment out of the game without being numerically competitive).

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by martixy View Post
    But it's only sorta true, because "simply cannot" isn't true. It only makes it more difficult. Or you gotta have the right player. One who's primary incentive doesn't clash with an imbalanced party(e.g. can derive enjoyment out of the game without being numerically competitive).
    Without a working group dynamic - your group doesn't work. That's ... I mean, it's a circle argument, you can't really argue against it.

    Group dynamic can be a lot of things, and yes, I'm sure you can have a working group dynamic that isn't based on balance - which I'm guessing is the point you're making? And yes, I agree, in an imbalanced group it's harder to build a working dynamic.

    So .. I'm not sure we disagree. You can easily have a working group dynamic with equally optimized or powered characters - high or low. Less easily with inequally built ones. The greater the disparity, the greater the difficulty. But it's not insurmountable.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: "Power gamer" hate?

    Quote Originally Posted by MeimuHakurei View Post
    Harsh D&D truth: Virtually every player out there is playing to win. Certainly do several players prefer story-based character options, mechanical synergies, big bursts regardless of viability or streamlining the character to be ideally suited for the campaign at hand. But once everyone sits at the table, unless someone is a massive problem player who only wants to cause trouble, everyone is working together to fulfill the campaign's objective with their given characters - in other words, win the campaign.

    The main "power gamers" with strong mechanical builds are actually experienced and mature players who know how to make self-sufficient characters capable of contributing in a variety of situations and/or to effectively contribute in their intended role. As for power imbalances, I strongly favor a bottom-up approach to boost the less capable players (not just by giving them freebies that the stronger players could potentially claim, but also by encouraging the other players to help them build/play their character effectively) rather than a top-down approach to weaken the build that's being effective (most of the time, the player isn't violating any game rules and it's not exactly antisocial to try and do your best in a situation for the sake of the team).

    "Not stepping on toes" is a more troublesome scenario where I'd consider my approach to help the weaker characters more useful. In some systems and events, a player can end up with a class that's far more powerful/versatile than the other players, forcing them to step on eggshells not to make other players feel inadequate is saying "screw you for wanting to play this class". It can also hamper your IC roleplaying since you're making your character live in a world of cardboard, always taking care not to break something; to break someone*. If you're instead helping the lesser classes by pointing to more viable options that can keep up better, your other players can do more and your power player doesn't have to compromise their character.

    If complexity is an issue and your players aren't capable of playing the game at a certain degree of competence, it's probably worth considering to switch to a lighter system with less moving parts in terms of mechanics.

    *not ashamed for quoting Superman
    So, I very much agree with a lot of what you've said.

    I've definitely felt the whole "Superman-esque having to be careful not to break things when playing with less skilled players" thing. It's like walking on eggshells, and not terribly fun. And I strongly agree with uplifting the weak* as preferable to wielding the cursed nerf bat.

    However, I question your initial thesis about playing to win, and actively disagree with your last paragraph.

    Some people - such as myself - enjoy the moving parts, the complexity. Your purposed solution of moving to simpler systems is a detriment to such people, without even taking that into consideration. It's especially egregious if the people who are new to the system are among the ones who enjoy complexity.

    Now, having players with different levels of player skill helps keep from having a party of Determinators. So that's a good thing. And players with the correct role-playing player skills can play down their system skill when playing a less skilled character. But it's awful dang hard for an unskilled player to play a skilled character - without help.

    IMO, very few GMs have the inclination or skills to provide the help necessary to let someone without the appropriate** player skills play a skilled character.

    In D&D 3.x,, when I see someone pull a boneheaded maneuver, I generally*** give their character a DC 5 Wisdom check. If they make the check, I tell them why I think that their plan is questionable. This way, really wise characters don't make foolish mistakes; other characters might.

    Some might say I'm a **** for not giving them more help; IME, most GMs don't even go that far.

    As a software developer, I can't fault you for blaming the tools, but there's a little more to the equation than that. Personally - and I'm highly biased here, mind you - I think you'll get more mileage out of fixing the wetware (especially the bit behind the GM's screen) than changing systems.

    * Heck, I even had a character ascend to be the god of just that!
    ** here, I am primarily referring to system mastery (plus setting lore, I suppose), and secondarily to the (related) ability to judge the effectiveness of actions / make good choices.
    *** sometimes, I realize I haven't told them something relevant, and just give them the relevant information, no check required.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lorsa View Post
    A power-gamer is someone who does think of their character as a person, but they want to be a REALLY POWERFUL PERSON (and since power is relative, it means either relative to the rest of the party or relative to the world).
    Hmmm... What word/phrase would you use to describe someone who has a concept for a character, that happens to be powerful in one system, but they'd just as happily play that exact same concept / character in a system where they'd be under-powered?

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    Balance is not binary. There's a wide range between "oh no, they do .2 more damage per round than me!" and "Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit".
    And the question is, what is the size of the group's acceptable range? So, find the size and position of that range, and play within it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •