D&D 5E Where does optimizing end and min-maxing begin? And is min-maxing a bad thing?

[Geeknamese]

[MENTION=6785999]Geeknamese[/MENTION]

I do not disagree with the idea that we should all play the games that we like with the people we like. All games require unity of player interests if they are going to really provide an experience we are looking for. I do think we should take a critical look at games that encourage players to act against the stated interests of the game. I also do not believe it is helpful to shame player behavior. I think we can do better than that. I think we can honestly and openly talk about the things that interest us, reach accord if possible, and if not go our separate ways.

You're right. Reading back over what I wrote I think the tone is not really conducive to meaningful discussion. It came off as a vent due to having to deal with it many times in the past. Love the game and love sharing the game with people which makes it tough when I have to either work to come to a compromise with someone who is unbending or having to turn someone away from my table. I hate turning people away from my games.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[Arial Black]

Personally, I prefer just the standard array. Solves all of these problems nicely.

To give a more nuanced perspective....

The standard array does indeed avoid the heinous 16/16/16/8/8/8.

So you can min-max the standard array (by adding your two human +1 bonuses to the two odd numbers so that your stats are all even) and have 16/14/14/12/10/8, but that is certainly less min-maxed than is possible with point-buy.

So the standard array has its own mix of strengths and weaknesses, just like point-buy and rolling have their own packages of strengths and weaknesses. You may prefer the standard array 'package' over the packages of the other two. Personal choice and all that.

Standard array's strengths include fairness to all the players, limited min-maxing, able to create PCs in advance without having to wait to roll for stats in front of a DM, being certain to get the stats you need to play the class you want.

Standard array's weaknesses include lack of verisimilitude ('real' people aren't all equally blessed), lack of being able to fine-tune the stats to better reflect your concept, lack of the chance for the unpredictability of dice-rolling to inspire creativity, cookie-cutter characters, a more limited number of combinations than the other two methods.

You pays your money, you takes your choice.

 

[Arial Black]

And I remind people that having maxed out scores isn't actually that beneficial, and certainly isn't necessary.

I've seen this a few times on this thread.

If the extra +1 that a 16 gives over a 14 "isn't actually that beneficial", then neither is the -1 from an 8 instead of a 10 "that harmful".

Further, you play your PC so that you use your high scores a lot more than you use your low scores, so that extra +1 from the 16 happens a lot more often than you suffer from that -1 for having the 8.

 

[Arial Black]

Three 16s and three 8s is pretty blatant min-maxing. I try to be very accommodating to my players because at the end of the day, I want them to enjoy the game. So, 3pp products and homebrews they find on Reddit, Pinterest or DMs Guild are all fine as long as I get a chance to review them. Alternative rules or systems found on those same sites are also fair game once reviewed as well.

But...I have to say, dumping three stats to make a Lebron James freak of nature character to optimize Combat just puts a bad taste in my mouth. For me, gaming is all about the shared narrative experience where we all are shaping the events and world together through storytelling and improvisation. It's just the guy who brings the three dump stat character is usually (but not always) the guy on his iPhone distracted when it's not Combat.

Or the guy who's bored during Social encounters and cracks jokes and makes irrelevant side comments during actually engaging improvisational in-character Social interactions.

Or he's the guy who, during Exploration, has no useful skills and gets bored because the rogue and wizard is getting most of the spotlight finding traps or creatively using their skills/abilities to overcome challenges so he starts to do stupid things like intentionally and recklessly charging into rooms or whatnot. The three dump stat players typically (but not always ;p) are there to pwn! in fights as power gamers and check out in other situations.

Or lastly, I get the three dump stat player who espouse of their role playing ability and then start rationalizing to me that they're Int 8 char is actually a genius but grew up in a bubble and wasn't properly schooled, who's Wis 8 is quick-witted and extremely intuitive but has ADHD and Cha 8 is extremely good-looking with incredible presence but due to low self-esteem doesn't realize it and is anti-social. Child, please...

I'd rather have the players that are more interested in the narrative and being able to contribute to the evolution of the story meaningfully. In my game right now, we play in a homebrew world where the Mageocracy rule and the gods and their wars and divine chars are blamed for destroying the old world. The Mageocracy push propaganda to make sure no one thinks otherwise. Divine chars have to hide their abilities (a la Dark Sun) creatively using whatever skills they have or need to in order to escape detection as divine chars are hunted. This does give divine characters a disadvantage in the game. Guess what, half the players went for divine chars to secretly preach the gospel like Christians and they use their Performance skill to disguise abilities or another character plays a cook with cooking utensils tool proficiency who's like the king of organic, gluten-free, homeopathic healing through his miraculous food. He actually fights with an improvised weapon (rolling pin) and large flat pan as a shield. No cares at all about optimizing and just enjoying how his character can continue spreading the gospel and vanquishing evil one biscuit at a time.

I think I'd be doing a disservice to my players if I allowed three-dump-stat l33t player to come to the table not interested in all pillars of the game.

This is known as 'The Stormwind Fallacy'; the idea that 'optimising' and 'role-playing' are mutually exclusive.

The idea that a player who optimises his PC is more or less likely to be disruptive, uninterested when not in the spotlight, on his smartphone, doesn't care about the shared narrative experience, cracks jokes and makes irrelevant side comments during actually engaging improvisational in-character Social interactions, has no useful non-combat skills, recklessly charges into combat, refuses to role-play his stats than players who can't or won't optimise is simply untrue.

Would these stereotypical 'bad' players suddenly turn into 'good' players if you changed their PC's stats from 16/16/16/8/8/8 to 16/14/14/12/10/8?

Would the 'players that are more interested in the narrative and being able to contribute to the evolution of the story meaningfully' suddenly be unable to do so if their PC's stats were changed to three 16s and three 8s?

There is 'character creation and optimisation'. There is 'gameplay and role-playing'. An individual player may be more or less interested in both, one, or neither. There is no inverse corellation between the former and the latter. Wanting to optimise in no way interferes with wanting to role-play well, or vice-versa.

 

[Arial Black]

Because high stats are expensive in point buy, and, you are going to get ASIs as you level. Giving up one point of a very high stat gets you 3 of a lower stat, but when that ASI comes around, you can take a +1 in the high stat. You can get closer to the stats you want by buying the low and mid-level stats where you want them, and building up the highest ones with ASIs.

Yes, the higher stats cost 2 per point while the lower stats cost 1 per point. That is a price worth paying if you have no interest in those low stats.

Sure, I could have 14/10 instead of 15/8, and later raise my 14 to 16 while my 10 will always be better than the 8 it could have been. But if I don't care about that low stat at all why would I waste even 2 points raising it from 8 to 10 when I could instead raise the stat I actually care about from 14 to 15 and make it even higher with ASIs later?

I will use that high stat over and over. I will avoid using that low stat whenever I can.

It is worth it.

 

[Hussar]

I've seen this a few times on this thread.

If the extra +1 that a 16 gives over a 14 "isn't actually that beneficial", then neither is the -1 from an 8 instead of a 10 "that harmful".

Further, you play your PC so that you use your high scores a lot more than you use your low scores, so that extra +1 from the 16 happens a lot more often than you suffer from that -1 for having the 8.

Actually, where it runs into problems is with contested checks. There aren't that many bonuses that you can pile on after stat. Proficiency is around +3. Other than that, there isn't a whole lot of plusses out there.

So, you've got a character with a 14 vs 16 wis, means that his passive perception is only one higher. Ignoring proficiency, he goes from a 12 to 13 passive perception. Which means that either way, he'll spot most things that aren't actively hiding.

However, that 8 vs 10 is a HUGE difference. A passive perception of 9 means that virtually anything sneaks up on you. Base DC's for most activities are 10. So, now you're getting ambushed often. I mentioned this before but, that means you can only jump 9 feet - meaning that it requires a check to cover any 10 foot pit.

There's number of other issues, but, basically, if your base "passive" score is less than 10 for any skill, you have a serious problem. Once you've cleared 10, there isn't that much that you need to do. It doesn't matter too often if you can jump 11 feet after all. Let's not forget that those minuses accrue. An 8 con means that you're getting 1 less HP per level. Getting +2 or +3 generally isn't going to make an enormous difference. But, going from -1 to +2 is a serious disadvantage.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[CapnZapp]

You know, you really didn't need to "call" me just to say you have a different view...

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I've seen this a few times on this thread.

If the extra +1 that a 16 gives over a 14 "isn't actually that beneficial", then neither is the -1 from an 8 instead of a 10 "that harmful".

Further, you play your PC so that you use your high scores a lot more than you use your low scores, so that extra +1 from the 16 happens a lot more often than you suffer from that -1 for having the 8.

You play your character that way, perhaps, and that is fine of course. However, I certainly don't, nor does most of my group. Nor do I DM in a way that is amenable to that style of play.

If you don't have physical skills, investigative/research/Lore skills, and social skills, or at least 2 of 3, you're going to miss them, at my table, and challenges will be harder for the whole group.

So, yeah. Boosting 3 8s to 10s instead of a couple 15s to 16s is a better choice at my tables. Pretty much always. But also, even when I just tell a new player that the game doesn't need them to have maxed scores, as part of explaining how point buy works, they never min/max. At least, so far. In fact, once there is a reminder that the 16 (or in 4e, 18 or 20), is not necessary, the nature of point buy seems to discourage min maxing, because the max costs so much, and those points can be used to be competent at more skills and saves/defenses.