D&D 5E Char Ops forums: Something I wish hadn't come over.

[Kabouter Games]

Welcome to old school. 3d6 in order, pick a class, slap on some gear, and get adventuring! Survive as long as you can. Originally, this game was designed with setup for the players being very simple and quick. As long as the DM was prepared, you could get out the D&D game with a table full of fresh new players and be adventuring in 30 minutes or less. That ease of starting to play was huge plus in attracting new players. Spending hours noodling over what is essentially, tweaks for your little car, shoe, or top hat would be baffling to many early players.

That's what's behind my reaction to "optimizing," as I pointed out up-thread. The grognard editions, being truly class-based games instead of skills-and-powers games, made chargen very simple and fast.

That's why I have a significant problem with optimization in 5E: It's back to a class-based system. You can just roll your stats, choose a class, pick some gear, and start playing. This is great for new players, folks coming from Olde Schole versions, or those who just want to get rolling with a minimum of fuss.

You can also use the optional rules of feats and multi-classing. This is great for those who want to tweak things to get exactly the character they want, or who simply want more crunch in their game.

The problems come when you try to mix the two in one party.

In my experience, the character with feats and multiple classes will consistently be more powerful, levels being equal, than a "by-the-book," class-based character. The Shadow Monk Assassin I've built does more damage than the class-based Paladin even when he switches on his Smite. He does more than the class-based Rogue even though she gets more Sneak Attack dice. With the Alert feat he always goes first unless my dice are trying to kill me.

I am not a skilled optimizer, and yet I can do this. I can only identify two possible causes: The classes as written are bollixed up beyond belief, or optimization gives an advantage compared to by-the-book PCs. As by-the-book PCs work very well together, with no one class being heads and shoulders above the rest (I think the current crop of designers have done very well indeed at balancing the classes as written), I can only deduce the latter is the cause of the inequality.

For me, this points to a mixed table being thin ice. One must tread very carefully to avoid disaster. It can be done, as others have noted, but the likelihood of cracking through is high.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

As much as I personally love old school play, min-maxers seem to hate it, in my experience.

Welcome to old school. 3d6 in order, pick a class, slap on some gear, and get adventuring! Survive as long as you can.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

As much as I personally love old school play, min-maxers seem to hate it, in my experience.

Except for those exceptional strength dart specialist fighters, at least.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

How about this... when I was younger I liked shooting basketballs, but being out of shape I was never good at sports. We would play horse, and I would loose 9 out of ten times. However, there was one guy I hated playing with. He would take trick shots and long distance shots... and I just didn't want to play with him...

years late I would be at the bar and I was awesome at darts, but a lot of my friend weren't. I would purposely not go for triple 20's at all, and I would aim for double teens instead... As it went I played two years and no one ever complained I was too good.


in D&D if I play a perfect 45dpr AC 21 high initative high skill character, and everyone else is a 20ishDPR 13 or 14 AC low intitative character with 1 or two skills but none as good as mine... that's more like taking the "Behind the back one handed fromt he three point zone" shot in horse then aiming for double 13's in darts...

 

[Kabouter Games]

in D&D if I play a perfect 45dpr AC 21 high initiative high skill character, and everyone else is a 20ishDPR 13 or 14 AC low intitiative character with 1 or two skills but none as good as mine... that's more like taking the "Behind the back one handed from the three point zone" shot in horse then aiming for double 13's in darts...

That's where I am with the monk I optimized. It's becoming unfun for me. Though I have yet to ascertain if the other players are feeling any negative vibes from the PC or my playstyle, it's becoming unfun for me. So I think I'll kill him off or something. Blaze of glory, trying to stun a dragon or something.

 

[Agamon]

How about this... when I was younger I liked shooting basketballs, but being out of shape I was never good at sports. We would play horse, and I would loose 9 out of ten times. However, there was one guy I hated playing with. He would take trick shots and long distance shots... and I just didn't want to play with him...

years late I would be at the bar and I was awesome at darts, but a lot of my friend weren't. I would purposely not go for triple 20's at all, and I would aim for double teens instead... As it went I played two years and no one ever complained I was too good.


in D&D if I play a perfect 45dpr AC 21 high initative high skill character, and everyone else is a 20ishDPR 13 or 14 AC low intitative character with 1 or two skills but none as good as mine... that's more like taking the "Behind the back one handed fromt he three point zone" shot in horse then aiming for double 13's in darts...

Your first two examples are competitive, the last one is cooperative. Do you think in team sports, everyone else on the team hates the star player because he's really good at what he does?

I can understand not wanting to constantly play against someone better than you, but having that person on your team is a good thing.

Now, if that PC is completely overshadowing everyone else, that's a problem.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Your first two examples are competitive, the last one is cooperative. Do you think in team sports, everyone else on the team hates the star player because he's really good at what he does?

I can understand not wanting to constantly play against someone better than you, but having that person on your team is a good thing.

Now, if that PC is completely overshadowing everyone else, that's a problem.

It's still a game... there is an epasoid of fresh prince of bell air that does it best "Give will the ball" wasn't fun for carlton... "I'll sit and wait while you win the fight" is no better

 

[Mistwell]

There is a lot of theoretical here. But this started with a complaint about the actual threads being moved over from WOTC that are optimization threads, and people who don't like them.

And those same people who don't like them, for the most part, have never read them.

A few people tried to explain early on they're not what you think, but we seem to have gotten away from that. Let's return to that point, because it's an important one. They're not what you think, and you should read a few before concluding they're bad.

First Point: The guides are just structured opinions on rules. For the most part it's just an organized way for people to discuss a class or idea. For example, people will simply list all the spells of first level for a wizard, and then discuss each of those spells and give their opinion on them. The structure they use is a color code which indicates whether they think the spell is always good, situationally good, or usually a poor one.

And then people discuss that opinion. They debate situations where a spell can be good or bad.

That's it - that's how most of these guides are built. It's mostly just a structure to discuss rules, with people just exchanging opinions. Sometimes the original poster is persuaded and changes the color they coded something, sometimes they're not persuaded. Few people use the guide to do just exactly what the original poster says they should do - it's just a series of opinions, with structure to it.

Second Point: Many of the most popular guides are themed on the concept of helping the party as a whole, not dominating the party with damage per round.

The most popular Wizard guide is written by Treatmonk - whose entire theme is making a wizard which everyone else thinks is useless in play but in reality is helping every other PC do better. Helping them attack with advantage, or give the foes disadvantage, or help people position themselves better, or prevent foes from swarming on your allies, etc.. It does nearly zero damage. And even other Wizard guides (like the one I just copied over here) is based on the advice from Treatmonk, and credits his guide as inspiration.

What's the most popular Bard guide? Same darn theme! Zardinar for example wrote a popular Lore Bard guide here, and the entire theme is again about helping the party do their damage and protecting the party, rather than the Bard itself doing any damage.

Cleric gudies? They start with the power of Bless - a spell that helps the entire party hit better. Druid guides? Faerie Fire - a spell that makes the foes hit worse against the whole party. Take a look through these guides, and you will find many of them are nothing like the stereotypes bandied about this thread about "Handing the ball to Kobe". These are not, in general, guides to being the Damage Per Round kings.

Third Point: Some guides exist to make a concept usable. For example, I wrote a brief guide to making a dagger thrower (I am not even sure if the advice there works anymore since it was written). But the only point of the guide was to try and find a way for someone who wants to play a dagger thrower to make one that actually works. It's not "powerful", just "usable". Because you can't just make a dagger thrower in this game, due to the way it's written, and expect to ever be even slightly vaguely effective at it - not good, just somewhat close to actually getting to the role playing concept you have using the rules. It's a quirk of the rules, and a guide helps find a way to build the role playing idea you want.

So give the Guides a quick read before you judge them as simply tools for someone to hog the spotlight and deal as much damage as possible. Anyone can be a jerk, but in general the Guides are just organized discussions of the rules, often to help the party in general without taking the spotlight, or to help achieve the role playing concept you have in mind. They're pretty good articles, written by good people, who are not trying to harm games or role playing.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Mistwell]

Mistwell,

I think you raise a bunch of very good points, although sometimes off-topic conversations are the best ones!

But to get back on topic, my two cents are as follows:

1. I tried reading your guides. I think you do a good job. But they're not my cup of tea. Which is fine- not everything will be.

2. I think it's great that there is a home for them here!

3. I would prefer that they not be listed on the general 5e Board without a way of filtering them; but that's my preference only. This might change, in time, if there are fewer postings on those topics. Or maybe I don't understand the boards well enough; but it requires a bit of work to weed through them. That said, if they stay, I'll live. And if they get put in a different board, I'll live. I'm glad you found a home for them.

I agree. There should be a way to filter them for people who don't want them to appear, or a separate forum for them in some fashion (a 5e rules forum, or a 5e house rules and character builds forum, or something like that).