D&D 5E Are powergamers a problem and do you allow them to play in your games?

[Jefe Bergenstein]

So why did you come here? What constructive message did you actually bring to the conversation? Did you think you were going to get a load of people around you going "yeah yeah yeah"?

No. U R.

That's the level of discourse you invite, and contribute. When someone disagrees, you can't just say "no" and leave it at that, when it's clearly based on subjective experience.

Still, I guess it beats crying about how 5E is failing because we arent drowning in pointless splats like Pathfinder...

 

[Iry]

So sit down with your other players and ask them how they feel. If they are feeling useless and unhappy, then definitely sit down with the powergamer and talk to him about it. Most powergamers are fairly decent people who will be happy to change things up if they are making other people unhappy. They might not even realize it.

If your players are happy and don't mind the big guy doing lots of damage (or whatever he does), then stop and analyze the situation. You're the only one unhappy with the guy. Are you unhappy because he's not roleplaying enough? Are you unhappy because he's trivializing your encounters?

If he's not roleplaying enough for you to enjoy the game, then definitely sit down with the powergamer and talk to him about it. Most powergamers are fairly decent people who will be happy to change things up if they are making you unhappy. They might not even realize it.

If he's trivializing your encounters? Just let it happen. He's obviously happy stomping around like Godzilla, while the rest of your players are happy contributing in their own way, or ending the combat faster so that they can get back to the Socializing or Exploring pillars. You can make things more interesting for yourself by changing up the encounters -- use a mix of stronger and weaker monsters, or a mix of enemies that are resistant to magic while others are resistant to physical, or include alternative goals in the combat like talking down a hysterical hostage or disarming a trap while the battle rages.

TL;DR Talk to your powergamers. We are people too. Only a few of us are total jerks.

 

[FrogReaver]

@FrogReaver

You can also engage in those tactics with feats and multiclassing enabled, and I believe the disruption caused by combining them is greater than dealing solely with the tactical choices you describe. Yes, a standard rogue can kite, but one with CE and SS is going to be more effective (or disruptive) when doing so, for example.

A determined powergamer will find a way to play the game the way powergamers be playin', and if that means engaging in the tactics you describe, I'm fine with that. We differ in our opinions about what's harder to manage as a DM. As I see it, most combats are about HP attrition, so I view very high DPR feat/multiclass builds as more problematic. Kiting doesn't come up enough in actual play for me to stress over, and I've been DMing long enough to expect spellcasters to make the battlefield weird with magic. Not much to do about paladins saving their smites unless the DM feels like house ruling class features, which I largely avoid. Still, I'd rather have a no feats/no MC paladin saving his smites than warlock/paladin spamming them.

A confession as an aside: I've never actually had a powergamer at one of my home tables (AL is different), at least not the way the term is being used here. Nearly all my players are strong optimizers, though. I've also never run a table without feats and multiclassing until just last night, when my players embarked on their first adventure of a new campaign that's been in the planning for months. However, this decision wasn't made to contain powergamers, so I won't be able to provide an actual play report about the effects removing feats/MC has on that player type.

Anyway, the bottom line as far as you're concerned - if I'm reading you correctly - is that removing feats/MC doesn't reduce disruption from powergamers, and may in fact increase it. Positive or negative, the imaginary average % difference in disruption is probably rather low for either of our positions given the enormous fuzzy space we're talking about. I admit to presenting the removal of feats/MC as a handy silver bullet for problematic powergamers, and that's clearly not the case. I think it can be helpful for DMs like myself who regard major DPR disparities as problematic, but it won't address all the underlying challenges (socially and mechanically) that powergamers bring to the table.

I will maintain that it's a handy game setting for weeding out powergamers (some, not all), if it's a matter of recruiting new players.

I agree with most all of your post. You described perfectly what I was saying there at the end. A few points that I'm sure you are aware of and probably even agree with:

1. To contain DPR you can always add more monster hp. You can add more enemies, you can buff the enemies hp by calling it an elite etc. There's numerous super easy ways to cause this effect. That's why I suggest managing high dpr isn't so hard. You see the high DPR guy derives part of his fun from A) I made this fight a cakewalk B) OMG if I hadn't done so much damage we would have all died. He may not say these things and brag about them but that's part of where his feelings and emotions and fun are at.

2. I agree major DPR disparaties can definitely be problematic (But not always). If I know a player is playing a extremely high DPR build going into a campaign then my group tends to optimize the other characters towards less DPR combat abilities and they give them more out of combat and in combat utility purposes. So honestly, in the right group having a high DPR Power Gamer may actually benefit the rest of the group by having them focus even less on DPR and combat in general, which opens up some interesting character options to them they may not have otherwise played. However, if players with less system mastery or differing intentions made a character they wanted to be solid at DPR and is constantly getting overshadowed by the powergamer then that is a problem.

As an aside, I'm amazed you are more worried about the Paladin warlock than the Pure Paladin (unless you are talking really high level play which I admit to not playing much and thus not considering much.)

 

[GameOgre]

I've been a gamer for over 30 years now and in all the time I've been gaming I've tried to accommodate everyone's playstyle. Well I'm afraid I don't look at powergaming as a playstyle anymore, I see it as a problem. I no longer allow powergamers at my table, nor will I play in a game with them. Every time I have ran games with a powergamer it always, and I mean always, ended up falling apart. I'm not talking about someone who arranges their states to fit the race and class perfectly, I'm talking about those that really go out of their way to find every game breaking combo they can find.

I actually class this as disruptive behaviour and I do not tolerate it. I had been in a on going 5th edition game where we had a powergamer who ended up making all encounters a cakewalk and the DM started handing out magic items left right and center to try and balance things but it only ended up getting out of control, like it always has no matter the edition. I decided then and there that I had enough.

To me powergaming is just another form of disruptive behaviour and I will not allow it in my games anymore.

Anyone else have this kind of problem?

Your post is troll bait.

It's really a DM who needs more practice(Don't we all) and is coming online to vent.

How about instead of acting like a Bad ol Troll DM you tell us what happened and maybe we can help.

Out and out screaming about a play style and calling BAD and then trying to walk it back to just people with that play style who try to ruin your game is weak and trollish.

 

[GameOgre]

I'm going to throw a hot take out there. I really don't mean to offend anyone but at the same time I think this is how I feel about powergamers.

They're not the problem. DM's that can't handle powergamers, need to learn how to handle them as part of their growth as a DM, or they shouldn't be DMs.

If you asked me this same question 20 years ago I'd feel differently, but just like other things, there's "good" powergaming and "bad" powergaming. It's got more to do with the player in question than the practice of doing it.

1,000% this. Great post that hit the nail right on the head.

 

[Sunseeker]

I enjoy power building, mostly as a thought-exercise. I rarely put any of those things into practice at the table, even if my PC is capable of them. I like to think of some of those combos as "last reserve" sort of abilities. Should all the "regular" mechanics fail, I've got a "big gun" just in case.

I don't care how you build your character: if you're causing a problem you're causing a problem. This goes as much for power-builders as anti-builders (characters are are interesting, but fundamentally a drag on the party for no reason) and if you're making the party/DM's life difficult because that's how you define "fun", well, we've got a problem.

 

[hejtmane]

I've been a gamer for over 30 years now and in all the time I've been gaming I've tried to accommodate everyone's playstyle. Well I'm afraid I don't look at powergaming as a playstyle anymore, I see it as a problem. I no longer allow powergamers at my table, nor will I play in a game with them. Every time I have ran games with a powergamer it always, and I mean always, ended up falling apart. I'm not talking about someone who arranges their states to fit the race and class perfectly, I'm talking about those that really go out of their way to find every game breaking combo they can find.

I actually class this as disruptive behaviour and I do not tolerate it. I had been in a on going 5th edition game where we had a powergamer who ended up making all encounters a cakewalk and the DM started handing out magic items left right and center to try and balance things but it only ended up getting out of control, like it always has no matter the edition. I decided then and there that I had enough.

To me powergaming is just another form of disruptive behaviour and I will not allow it in my games anymore.

Anyone else have this kind of problem?

Only problem I see is people complaining about power games. Then again I am probably a borderline power gamer I am not all out but I do tend to lean towards one side of this argument on what people define power gamers

 

[Ancalagon]

I have 4 comments on this:

1: Powergaming and it's potential impact is very dependent on the system. 5e is a lot "flatter" than 3.X or Pathfinder (can't comment on 4e). In 3.X/Pathfinder, there was a lot more options and choices, and taking the "right" combo could make your character far more powerful that a character who made poor choices. In 5e it seems to be less the case (and even more so if you don't allow feats). So I'm less worried with this edition.

2: The motives of the powergamer are important. I find myself powergaming more when I feel my character has to "compensate" for something. In one game (this was 3.x, with an alchemist imported from Pathfinder) I was in a party with poor "tank coverage", no wizards, not enough healing... so I made a jack of all trades character (an alchemist). But I really wanted to play a dwarf (a sub-optimal race for alchemist) so... you bet I powergame the heck out of that character, I had so many niches to fill!

In another campaign - a short lived PbP campaign here, using 5e, I really wanted to play a gnome ranger... but we had no tank. So I created a melee gnome ranger (dex based). This is *really* not the best way to make a tank, so I used as much of my system mastery as I could to compensate for those poor choices.

If on the other hand, *every optimal choice* is made and the only concern is how bad-ass your character is then...

3: In general though, it's all in the eye of the beholder. I remember, many hears ago, I was accused of being a power gamer... because I had put a high con score on my fighter...

4: I am a huuuge fan of this rolling system: every character is about the same, you get to roll, and you can't intentionally create a dump stat (you might have one, but you may not). I have a battlemaster with the lowest stat is a 10. It's very refreshing to play someone who isn't deficient in some way http://aramis.hostman.us/dnd/RedrickRoller.html

 

[GameOgre]

There is nothing wrong with wanting to play a optimized character and being as bad arse as you can get.

There IS something wrong if that's all you care about and your character has no personality, goals, wants and dreams. The DM and other players need something to work with. Make friends, make enemies! Care about other people both in the party and outside of the party and no DM worth the tittle will complain.

Make the most UBER LEET POWNYBOY you want but he better be fun for everyone to play with and fun for me to DM(Even if it does add more work) or go back to the drawing board.

But the same can be said for making a massive waste of in combat space. If you can't be effective at all in combat WTF are you doing on the battlefield? Better be real fun to play with and DM for(even if it does take extra work) or go back to the drawing board.

 

[Blue]

Had one overpowered 5e character in the second to last campaign; iirc, a 7th level Goliath Barbarian with ridiculous Str, Dex and Con (like, 20, 18, 20 or some such nonsense; we roll random stats, btw)...but had a 6 Int. He never really had a challenge, physically, (go figure!) until 7th level. Where he encountered an Intellect Devourer. Again, round one and a failed save and lucky rolling from the ID and POOF! Dead as a door nail. The player was a bit upset...but he knew it was only a matter of time before his Achilles Heel got the PC killed.

Just to help me understand.

1. Your table roll for ability scores.
2. People get upset when someone rolls well and is too powerful.
3. The DM then conspires to kill them off.
4. The player is upset, for the root cause of having rolled well on ability scores and therefore getting targeted.

If I was at this table either as a player or the DM, I would strongly push for point buy or standard array. This way people don't feel put out when others roll better than them, and others don't get targeted for the crime of rolling well. It seems the table doesn't handle random variation in a mature way.