• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E A simple questions for Power Gamers, Optimizers, and Min-Maxers.

I believe (or at least hope) you have idiosyncratic beliefs.

"Working the ref" (or gaming the DM) might be tactically acceptable, if socially unacceptable, in professional sports, but D&D isn't a professional sport. If I thought a player was "gaming the DM" (me), then the first time, I would speak to him about it.

The second time, he would find a new table.

It's a social game, and friends don't game friends.

The first rule of gaming the table, DM or other players, is never let them see you do it. If they see you do it, you aren't good at it. The second rule is to first make the DM and other players value your presence. The more they value your presence, the more you can get away with. For example, a treasure horde contains a magic sword both I and another PC can benefit from. If the other players like me and my PC more than they like the other player and his/her PC, I am likely to end up with the sword. Also, a lot of it is passive, for example knowing how a DM will rule on something and acting accordingly.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

TwoSix

"Diegetics", by L. Ron Gygax
I believe (or at least hope) you have idiosyncratic beliefs.

"Working the ref" (or gaming the DM) might be tactically acceptable, if socially unacceptable, in professional sports, but D&D isn't a professional sport. If I thought a player was "gaming the DM" (me), then the first time, I would speak to him about it.

The second time, he would find a new table.

It's a social game, and friends don't game friends.
Ehh, "gaming the DM" isn't quite that perverse. It's more figuring out what table behaviors the DM tends to reward, and leaning more into them. Maybe he doesn't like to call for skill checks very often, so you don't build a skill monkey character. Or she's very permissive towards letting your party take rests, and doesn't have a very attrition-oriented play style, so you pick a character that uses long rest resources. Things like that.
DMs are human, all humans have some idiosyncrasies, and you do better by playing towards the DM's style than away from it. It's not really different that human interactions in general, assuming you have an interest in making a good impression.
 

TwoSix

"Diegetics", by L. Ron Gygax
The first rule of gaming the table, DM or other players, is never let them see you do it. If they see you do it, you aren't good at it. The second rule is to first make the DM and other players value your presence. The more they value your presence, the more you can get away with. For example, a treasure horde contains a magic sword both I and another PC can benefit from. If the other players like me and my PC more than they like the other player and his/her PC, I am likely to end up with the sword. Also, a lot of it is passive, for example knowing how a DM will rule on something and acting accordingly.
<Nod>
One thing about being unapologetically a power gamer in a group of more story-oriented characters is that there actually a lot more willing to let you be stronger in combat because they know you can carry them when the fights get hard. It's not viewed as my usurping their playtime, it's that I allow them to make their characters more off-the-wall because they know my characters will carry a greater share of the combat load (that they aren't very interested in).
 


l0lzero

First Post
Thank you for those definitions - would you mind if I put them in the OP? Not sure I will, but maybe. Also, I don't think the issue is completely about balance, but clearly a lot of people look at it that way.

Do what you want, man. Doesn't bug me in the slightest. Re-word them however you want if you want to, too.
 

dave2008

Legend
The arbitrary randomness can be reduced compared to other options within 5E, but not so much compared to other systems. In 4E randomness was mitigated by stretching tasks over a multitude of rolls, which greatly lessened the impact of any single roll. In addition, bounded accuracy didn't really apply to skill checks, as it was fairly trivial to get your success rate with 1-3 skills to 80-100% against moderate DCs, especially at higher levels. Other systems allow you to either brute force rolls, stacking a modifier that overwhelms the die roll, or give you more numerous and more decisive "I win" buttons.

I think you are mistake. I could respond more, but I think [MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION] basically covered it in post #270 if you care to engage with someone more knowledgeable.

I will say this though, from your posts is seems as though you are less concerned about randomness and more interested in easy buttons. Would it be OK if there was little randomness, but every battle was basically a TPK?
 

smbakeresq

Explorer
Seriously?

From a purely mechanical standpoint, in 5E, the statement isn't true. There is a big enough difference between optimized and vanilla in 5E to matter, to say nothing of the gap between optimized and unoptimized, and the gap widens at higher levels. You might not be able to mitigate with optimization the arbitrary randomness of 5E's overwhelming focus on die rolls, but you can certainly build a character that is objectively and significantly stronger than the one the player sitting next to you has.

The optimizer is fine, the power gamer cares nothing except for the mathematical construct of building the character. Everyone has seen the power gamer play 8 Int character as a genius, or the low wisdom who seems to have perfect judgment. That's the player that no one really needs at their table.

Players who play a "sub-optimal" character, especially one with a flaw, should be rewarded.
 

l0lzero

First Post
I think it's generally more enjoyable (for the RP'er) to reward good roleplay with in-universe roleplay awards, rather than XP.

The good RP'er has a better in-game reputation amongst the NPCs (either friendly or feared depending on what they go for), forms alliances or friends that will pay off later, may get a better reward because the NPC's are more impressed with them, etc.

The combat monster gets their enjoyment from curb-stomping monsters, or pulling out a win when the odds are against them. They'll barely remember RP rewards, much less care about them.

(This is an extreme example, as there are players who care about both RP and combat effectiveness.)

I wholly agree with this; I consider myself a powergamer/optimizer (I will play any kind of character, pregen, whatever, but I definitely have a preference), but I definitely appreciate in-game rewards. Honestly, I really could care less about getting XP at this point, I just enjoy playing the game, but if my RP were to earn me a serfdom, or a business with some employees, or a collection of slaves, some things that I could make decisions about that had long term ramifications in the game world, I would put more effort into my RP. By the time you hit the mid levels it's very possible to have more gold than you'll spend in your career, and you're so busy as an adventurer there's little point to spending it on the construction of a new keep or whatever. But being gifted with already established properties is actually kind of awesome.

In one game we killed a hoard of vampires who had taken up in an old estate (big stone mansion, not really fortified) and we spent a good three sessions ignoring the quests at hand and just working on our new guild-hall (had a well of worlds, part of the quest line, trying to be brief). My character was a slave to an efreeti from the elemental plane of fire in the city of brass, and there were a bunch of dragonborn slaves that I was raised with, so we spent a considerable sum of gold and did some quests for the efreeti to get their freedom, so then we took all the freed slaves to our guild hall and helped them build up a town with farms and mines and my paladin established a temple (recently had adopted Kord) and the whole group was WAY into setting up their own little aspects of the newly formed guild (we were around level 8 when we got the property and had been amassing wealth for levels with little opportunity to spend money, the monk set up a little dojo, the druid locked himself up with the well of worlds, the rogue hired a halfling engineer to build him contraptions (including the paladin mounted halfling launcher which was basically a modified crossbow that let me shoot the halfling rogue at dragons because neither of us had ranged attacks), and all sorts of stuff, rescued some town folk from an undead army and they moved in, good times).

If you want to reward RP strongly, and you've run out of cool mundane stuff like titles, lands, retainers, etc., consider minor boons (rewards from a devout cleric's deity, or the spirits of the wild help the dedicated druid, etc.) or the non-combat oriented wondrous items. An RPer is going to be ecstatic if NPCs start handing out single use items that do random crap to their friends, and, you can always trick the munchkins into thinking they aren't being hosed by giving them magical equipment for their minor attacks (your barbarian already has a +2 greataxe? toss him a couple returning handaxes, no plus, they just count as magic and return) or tricks. "Yeah, the manifestation of nature bestows a boon upon you too, your save DC for the spell minor illusion is +2" or something similar. Just a tiny mechanical buff to them that doesn't really change the outcome of their broken tricks all that much, but they still go "Hey, that's a reward I care about" even though its effects are actually negligible.
 

I think you are mistake. I could respond more, but I think [MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION] basically covered it in post #270 if you care to engage with someone more knowledgeable.

I will say this though, from your posts is seems as though you are less concerned about randomness and more interested in easy buttons. Would it be OK if there was little randomness, but every battle was basically a TPK?

I hope you mean only "potential TPK". :) It might be possible to make a fun game where TPK happens regularly and unavoidably but it wouldn't be easy.
 

Yeah, 5E combat essentially isn't random at all. Good play utterly swamps die roll randomness, at least within non-uberdeadly combats. The most important thing you can do is first gain an advantageous position; after that the die rolls are just details.
If we are speaking about 5E in isolation, and comparing good 5E play vs bad 5E play, I don't disagree. If I am comparing 5E randomness to randomness in other systems, I disagree.
 

Remove ads

Top