Closet Optimizing

[IZ42]

Hello playground! Today I was wondering: Have you ever played with someone who denies they optimize characters, or honestly don't think they optimize their characters? I know a lot of you guys are rather... Gung-ho about optimizing (grumble grumble Spirit Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian grumble), but I was recently asked by my RL campaign GM to tone down the opti-fu, and I had not been aware I optimized. What are your thoughts on this?

[Curmudgeon]

Unless you're picking feats and class levels at random, everyone is trying to build and play their character effectively (optimally). There's no such thing as "not optimizing".

[Sewercop]

Yeap, no.

Everyone optimizes, everyone. Even the choice of class is a choice based on optimal selection based on what you want to play.
Ask why the clerics wis is hight, the fighters strength, the etc etc..

[Psyren]

In your DM's defense though I will say this - optimization is a sliding scale, not binary. It's not "I optimize, or I don't" - it's "does my degree of optimization match what my table can handle?" ('Table' applies to both the DM who has to come up with your challenges, and the rest of the group who want their characters to occasionally shine too.)

If the DM is asking you to tone it down, the most likely answer to the above question is that you and your table are out of sync somehow.

[WeaselGuy]

In your DM's defense though I will say this - optimization is a sliding scale, not binary. It's not "I optimize, or I don't" - it's "does my degree of optimization match what my table can handle?" ('Table' applies to both the DM who has to come up with your challenges, and the rest of the group who want their characters to occasionally shine too.)

If the DM is asking you to tone it down, the most likely answer to the above question is that you and your table are out of sync somehow.

This happens at my table quite often, but we're a pretty good natured bunch, and work around it. It actually started when my wife (who really doesn't "do" optimization) decided to make a Pixie Scout. We didn't realize at the time that Improved Invisibility + Skirmish + Flyby Attack was so ridiculous.

That was followed by me going from Shadowcaster/Rogue into Spellwarp Sniper/Arcane Trickster (DM helped me with some fiat on this one), our friend doing a tripmaster Monk later in that session, the DM going with a Venerable Kobold Battle Sorcerer/Abjurant Champion in the next campaign (my wife DMed that one), our other buddy using a Wilder/Diabolist in our current campaign, and culminating in me pulling off a DMM:P Deepwyrm Lesser Drow beatstick Cleric right before this deployment. But, I'm pretty sure the Diabolist is working on a DFI Snowflake Wardancer for when I get home in September.

[IZ42]

Oh, I suppose I didn't explain my thoughts well enough. I didn't mean optimizing by doing basic things to make an actually usable character, I mean optimizing to the point of Spirit Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian Totemist etc. Basically building am extremely optimized character beyond basic choices made sub-consciously.

Edit: to answer your question Psyren, I have the best understanding of the system (pathfinder) than anyone at the table beyond maybe my DM. Not to say the others are inexperienced, they definitely not, I just have more stuff that I understand in the system.

[Greenish]

I didn't mean optimizing by doing basic things to make an actually usable character, I mean optimizing to the point of Spirit Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian Totemist etc.

That Barbarian/Totemist sounds like a usable character for mid-power games, though I guess if you have higher-powered game you'd want a caster instead.

Basically building am extremely optimized character beyond basic choices made sub-consciously.

So if you think about it, you're optimizing?

[atemu1234]

I once accidentally made a gish that made both the party fighter and the party wizard angry.

[Telonius]

It's going to depend a little bit on whether or not your DM counts it as part of a complex skill check (crafting a house might involve stonemasonry; thatching; woodworking; painting; Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate to get the permit from the local authorities) or a separate single-room issue (Craft: Carpentry). Stronghold Builders' Guide should have the rules for it. Either way you'll want to pump up your craft skills as much as you can. (Cleric would probably be your best bet, for Guidance of the Avatar, at least until you get access to the Fabricate spell). As far as materials go, you'll want something that can withstand being set on fire, but isn't an obvious call-out for being full of Vests of Resistance and Robes of the Archmagi. The deluxe version would probably be the center of a permanent Private Sanctum spell (complete with Forbiddance and other assorted defenses), and include a permanent Gate to your private demiplane. Maybe make it an Intelligent Item?

... That aside, "optimized" is a relative term. It's definitely possible to accidentally become more powerful than the rest of the table, or at least more powerful than the DM had planned for. It could be that they're having trouble figuring out an encounter that would both challenge you and not kill the rest of the party.

[MorgromTheOrc]

My group always claims I over-optimize because of all the builds I make for fun, but most of my in game characters are only at mid-optimization level which is a minimum or our party would TPK daily since my DM re-fluffs giants and minotaurs as guards and bandits and no matter how broken we house rule them they don't know how to play casters(they always try to turn them into some kind of blast based rogues), only doing damage(although A LOT) and no defending themselves in any way. But no matter how hard I try not to have my characters steal the spotlight they always complain about them OP and when I ask how they basically describe being OP as being the groups tank(Which I have to because otherwise they'd die) and curiously they always reference my first character which always stole the spot light and did all the damage as an overly optimized fighter, and they say it was their favorite. That character also had no existing RP beyond "Is there a blacksmith or enchanter nearby?"

[eggynack]

Oh, I suppose I didn't explain my thoughts well enough. I didn't mean optimizing by doing basic things to make an actually usable character, I mean optimizing to the point of Spirit Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian Totemist etc. Basically building am extremely optimized character beyond basic choices made sub-consciously.

Unless you allow all of your character decisions to be made by your dream self, you're probably making your choices consciously. Optimization is, as was mentioned, a sliding scale, and balance is relative. Your example character could plausibly be too much in some games, when you're hanging out with basic monks and fighters (who are themselves almost certainly optimized in some fashion through conscious decision making, even if it's something as low power as weapon focus), but in other games it could easily be too little, if you're trying to contend with wizards and druids. Point is, you're optimizing because literally everyone optimizes unless they make choices randomly, and if there are issues, then you're either too far towards the optimal end of the spectrum, or your DM has a poor understanding of game balance.

[Segev]

To the OP: The best thing you can do when a DM asks you to tone down the optimization is not to say, "I don't think I am optimized," but rather to ask him directly, "What do you see as being overpowered in my build?"

Be careful the tone you ask that in; you're not challenging him. You want to ask him so that you know what to tone back. Ideally, if the problem is that your numbers are "too big," you can ask him where he'd like to see your numbers. Then optimize to hit those numbers exactly.

If the problem is that you've got tactical options with which he doesn't know how to deal, you can remove those and replace them with something else, or you can offer him suggestions on how to handle them. Maybe even do it while playing, "Man, I'm glad these guys can't fly," or just broadcast your next moves and plans. If you're playing a wizard and he's upset that your fireball is overpowered because it's nuking the entire fight, lampshade it for him next time. "Are they all bunched up together? Because that'll make my fireball able to take them all out." Then graciously ignore it if he *ahem* reveals they'd *ahem* always totally been spread out in tactical groups *ahem*.

Basically, help him out as politely as possible, and work with him to get your character in line with what he'd like to see. If it looks like he's even subconsciously abusing it, let your character suck it for a game, and discuss it with him afterwards. If needs be, keep track of die rolls, results after bonuses/penalties, and end results (hits, misses, how much damage,etc.) you and the other PCs and the monsters do, so you can show him how often things are hitting, how hard, average damage per attack, etc.

People have a tendency to over-emphasize in their own memories the things that "go wrong" in their view. They see your major success as a chronic problem rather than the one lucky roll you got all night, while you see the times you missed as a trend rather than as just something statistically normal.

[prufock]

In your DM's defense though I will say this - optimization is a sliding scale, not binary. It's not "I optimize, or I don't" - it's "does my degree of optimization match what my table can handle?"

Spot on. You (OP) should ask the DM what about your character is too powerful for the group. Dealing too much damage? Casting sidestepping all the challenges? Diplomacy check too high and used too much? Weird combos or classes/feats/abilities from uncommon sources? The first step to solving the problem is specifying it; "optimized" is way too vague.

[lycantrope]

Had a guy swear he wasn't optimizing and then proceed to take on ~30 at-or-higher level enemies in three waves while half the party bled on the floor and the other non-bleeder flew around casting fog and delaying the waves.

It's definitely a thing, and likely a result of comparing the end result to a best in show wizard, rather than the rest of the party.

[Segev]

Had a guy swear he wasn't optimizing and then proceed to take on ~30 at-or-higher level enemies in three waves while half the party bled on the floor and the other non-bleeder flew around casting fog and delaying the waves.

It's definitely a thing, and likely a result of comparing the end result to a best in show wizard, rather than the rest of the party.

Again, it's misusing "optimize." He was optimizing. What he meant was that he wasn't "power-gaming." And he may not have thought he was. That doesn't mean he is right if he thinks that means his PC is not too powerful for thet able. It does mean that you need to go over, with him, where you see his character as too powerful.

Don't accuse him of power-gaming, and don't talk about optimization at all. The former gets people's hackles up, and the latter is technically something you're actively doing when toning down the PC: you're optimizing it to fit in with the table.

Figure out where others' bonuses are, and figure out the ACs and attack bonuses of the monsters you plan to use. Determine a maximum amount of time you want "misses" to happen against the PC and "hits" against the monsters, and tell him to get his numbers such that, on a d20, he hits or is missed no more often than that, if the d20 rolls "as expected."

Identify any abilities he has which make challenges impossible to pit against him without destroying the party, and either come up with ways to make challenges work, to get the rest of the party similar abilities, or remove that from this character and replace it with something else.

But the key is discussion and knowing what your goals are. Optimize the character to fit in with what the table needs.

[VariSami]

Well, matters other than actual optimization may also affect the DM's judgment. The fact that you attend a forum like this means that you probably utilize a larger than average pool of resources, both your own time and those published by Wizards. Even being aware of such dedication to character creation might influence the attitude of a DM and the hints you will have inevitably received here will likely also affect your own judgment of options unless you consciously avoid the proper options.

Of course, I am not implying that this is even likely true in this case, but I know from experience that acquiring a reputation as an optimizer will bias the evaluation of your new characters. In this regard, I speak of experience, having played a few... template-ridden warrior characters in my time. As in, Feral Mineral Warrior Half-Minotaur Goliath Fig/Bar/Wrb. Even when I played a Wild Elf Spellthief after that, I was suspected of somehow secretly optimizing the character (who did, admittedly, survive the particularly deadly campaign from its beginning to his retirement).

[IZ42]

To the OP: The best thing you can do when a DM asks you to tone down the optimization is not to say, "I don't think I am optimized," but rather to ask him directly, "What do you see as being overpowered in my build?"

Be careful the tone you ask that in; you're not challenging him. You want to ask him so that you know what to tone back. Ideally, if the problem is that your numbers are "too big," you can ask him where he'd like to see your numbers. Then optimize to hit those numbers exactly.

If the problem is that you've got tactical options with which he doesn't know how to deal, you can remove those and replace them with something else, or you can offer him suggestions on how to handle them. Maybe even do it while playing, "Man, I'm glad these guys can't fly," or just broadcast your next moves and plans. If you're playing a wizard and he's upset that your fireball is overpowered because it's nuking the entire fight, lampshade it for him next time. "Are they all bunched up together? Because that'll make my fireball able to take them all out." Then graciously ignore it if he *ahem* reveals they'd *ahem* always totally been spread out in tactical groups *ahem*.

Basically, help him out as politely as possible, and work with him to get your character in line with what he'd like to see. If it looks like he's even subconsciously abusing it, let your character suck it for a game, and discuss it with him afterwards. If needs be, keep track of die rolls, results after bonuses/penalties, and end results (hits, misses, how much damage,etc.) you and the other PCs and the monsters do, so you can show him how often things are hitting, how hard, average damage per attack, etc.

People have a tendency to over-emphasize in their own memories the things that "go wrong" in their view. They see your major success as a chronic problem rather than the one lucky roll you got all night, while you see the times you missed as a trend rather than as just something statistically normal.

I never denied that I was optimizing for a higher per level than the rest of the party when my DM mentioned it, because I saw what he was saying, my first character (guess what class?) was as powerful unbuffed as the rest of the party was buffed, except for maybe the Druid. Which still wasn't the intent of the original question.

Yeah, this wasn't a player help "My DM wants to nerf mah character ermagurhd"(not to sound rude), there was no issue between us, it was my character being powerful without me realizing it that sparked the question, which would be better phrased as "Have you ever made a character that was more powerful than the rest of the party without realizing it, and/or what are your thoughts on it?"

[VariSami]

Oh, in that case (although I never misunderstood you as complaining about the DM):

The most obvious case of this was actually with my first 4th edition character ever. I had already racked up some recognition for system mastery among my playgroups but that was a completely different beast so I though I would go with whatever whimsical combination of a race and a class would suit me. Thus, I made a Tiefling Fighter... Who turned out to be able to solo the rest of the group when they ganged up on him due to a misunderstanding. He was one level above them (3rd level, as opposed to a party of level 2s) due to the circumstances surrounding this misunderstanding. But in 4th edition, being able to do this was a clear mark that the character was much more optimal than the rest. (Oh, and Core only.)

Then there's the case of Jürgen "Wolverine" the Druidic Avenger. This was a Witcher-inspired E6 game with Core and Unearthed Arcana as basically the only available books (this particular DM had decided that this was the best way to balance the party). I made the Druid a Druidic Avenger (no animal companion and penalty to Wild Empathy; capacity to Rage) with Whirling Frenzy and Deadly Hunter (no Wildshaping or armor profiencies; Wis to AC, fast movement and ranger benefits). Basically, I had intentionally nerfed the character by quite a bit. Of course, being a Druid is bad enough (I wanted to try it for once), and I was deemed an optimizer simply because I was using alternative class features.

And yes, even my Wild Elf Spellthief - the second most non-optimal character I have ever created - was deemed somewhat cheesy simply because he managed to survive a crazy deadly campaign until I decided to retire him for my secondary character (the game was deadly enough that most players needed to utilize secondary characters just to have one ready at all times). This was someone whose greatest trick was shooting with a non-composite shortbow while borrowing the ability to Spider Climb from our Warlock. All of his utility came from being a somewhat decent trapsmith due to a very good Search check as well as the ability to detect magic reliably. Basically, what allowed him to thrive was good luck and being out of harm's immediate vicinity.

[LooseCannoneer]

Yeah, I tend to do that. Whenever I meet a new group, I tend to play a Bard, since I can shore up weak points in the group and adjust myself to their level of optimization.

[Psyren]

I never denied that I was optimizing for a higher per level than the rest of the party when my DM mentioned it, because I saw what he was saying, my first character (guess what class?) was as powerful unbuffed as the rest of the party was buffed, except for maybe the Druid. Which still wasn't the intent of the original question.

Yeah, this wasn't a player help "My DM wants to nerf mah character ermagurhd"(not to sound rude), there was no issue between us, it was my character being powerful without me realizing it that sparked the question, which would be better phrased as "Have you ever made a character that was more powerful than the rest of the party without realizing it, and/or what are your thoughts on it?"

My thoughts are pretty much exactly what Segev suggested you do - have a dialogue, find out what the DM and/or group considers to be reasonable, and aim for that. And if you feel like doing that is playing down or hobbling yourself, start with a weaker base (e.g. a low-tier class) and scale it up.

[Flickerdart]

Novice gaming groups are easy to scare with phrases like "alternate class feature," splatbooks, or even multiclassing. It takes some experience to realize that taking something from a different book doesn't make it overpowered, and taking something from the PHB doesn't make it balanced.

The best way to expedite the process is to have solid roleplaying reasons for your choices. Have your character take Spirit Lion Totem not just because it's more killy, it's because worshipping the lion is a major part of this character. Grab some other options like Wild Cohort (for a lion) or even describe your character as having hair like a lion's mane. Whirling Frenzy? Well, lions aren't tanks - they strike with many limbs and teeth instead of beating the enemy about the head and neck with a big ol' club.

Of course, the classic piece that completes the trifecta is Wolf Totem, which might be harder to justify in RP terms, but anything is possible if you think outside the box and don't have a total buzzkill DM trying to control everything.

[Necroticplague]

Of course, the classic piece that completes the trifecta is Wolf Totem, which might be harder to justify in RP terms, but anything is possible if you think outside the box and don't have a total buzzkill DM trying to control everything.

Two words: fleshraker totem. Like the jungle predator that you revere, you launch yourself at your foe, bringing them to the ground in a flurry of blows, where they can then be easy prey for your predatory wrath.

[jedipotter]

{scrubbed}

[Flickerdart]

Two words: fleshraker totem. Like the jungle predator that you revere, you launch yourself at your foe, bringing them to the ground in a flurry of blows, where they can then be easy prey for your predatory wrath.

Ye Olde Buzzkille DM will hold you to the existing fluff of the abilities. If it's called lion, that means lion. If it's called barbarian, you're an unwashed, uncivilized hide-wearing viking.

Your real trouble comes from said DMs making up their own fluff for these abilities and trying to force it on you.

[Greenish]

Two words: fleshraker totem.

I've toyed with that idea, making a character with Pounce, Imp. Trip, Scorpion's Grasp (representing Imp. Grab), and Touch of Golden Ice (representing the poison). Requires more than a little finagling, but sticks to the theme. Well, presuming fleshrakers were Exalted Good.

[Curmudgeon]

{scrubbed}

Where are the rules for "Just Playing"?

[Psyren]

{scrubbed}

Storm Windy, some might say

[LooseCannoneer]

{scrubbed}

Really? I don't believe so. Although, you have said:

Logic just does not fit in with the real world. And only the guilty throw fallacy's around.

So, I guess I'm guilty for pointing out that that is wrong.

EDIT: Swordsaged. I did get the cool graphic, though.

[Troacctid]

Am I the only one who saw the title of this thread and thought about how to optimize a closet? You could use magic to boost its hardness, line it with lead to block divinations, and maybe coat the interior with blue ice so that it doubles as a refrigerator.

[Greenish]

Where are the rules for "Just Playing"?

Rule 1: The DM is as inerrant as Orcus is omnipresent.
Rule 2: Play exactly like the DM wants you to, or rocks fall.
Rule 3: They might fall anyway.
Rule 4: Only these 5 rules matter.