when is to much.........well to much

[Empirate]

While the Stormwind Fallacy seems to lurk just over the horizon, I must admit that a certain threshold amount of optimization from anyone in the game, be it the DM or even just one of the players, will change the way your game plays out at the table.

Optimization forces more optimization if the mechanical aspects of the game are supposed to stay fun for everybody. I know I'm having less fun as a player when I'm playing an unoptimized melee guy and see another PC regularly one-shotting the boss of the week. I'm also having less fun as a player when my DM throws us curveball after curveball with extremely optimized monsters, and us poor little PCs are simply being ineffective much of the time.
And I also know I'm having less fun as a DM when every encounter I send against the party is brushed off in a couple combat rounds - especially if it's only one PC who does the heavy lifting all the time. Or the othe way round.

So in order for the game to stay fun, even one person at the table optimizing well means everybody needs to step up their game at least a bit. This is not about competition (D&D isn't a competitive game), it is about playing in the same league. Competition aside, I just wouldn't enjoy myself playing Roger Federer on the tennis court if he doesn't pull any punches - and neither would he, playing me.


I believe optimization is more or less neutral where the general fun a given group will have is concerned. However, large imbalances in the amount of optimization applied by the players can heavily detract from the game.

Or, to put it another way: always make sure everybody understands the game at least roughly well enough not to flounder too much on the mechanical aspects. And make sure nobody tries to out-optimize everybody else.

 

[Samloyal23]

Anyone remember those ancient, long ago days when "mini-maxing" was actually looked down on by people? I remember when people actually tried to develop a character that was a flawed but realistic and natural persona that would be challenged by difficult circumstances and risked getting killed...

 

[xigbar]

Anyone remember those ancient, long ago days when "mini-maxing" was actually looked down on by people? I remember when people actually tried to develop a character that was a flawed but realistic and natural persona that would be challenged by difficult circumstances and risked getting killed...

No, but I've read back on forums of people saying how boring it was to be effective at combat. Why can't someone be both an optimizer and roleplayer? I found the seemingly endless possibilites and all the preposterous things you could make a character do as exhilirating as the writing aspect of it. It breathes life in to the mechanics, and some powerful builds are flavorful as well.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Anyone remember those ancient, long ago days when "mini-maxing" was actually looked down on by people? I remember when people actually tried to develop a character that was a flawed but realistic and natural persona that would be challenged by difficult circumstances and risked getting killed...

Nope.

 

[Empirate]

Anyone remember those ancient, long ago days when "mini-maxing" was actually looked down on by people? I remember when people actually tried to develop a character that was a flawed but realistic and natural persona that would be challenged by difficult circumstances and risked getting killed...

I just KNEW Stormwind would rear its ugly head in the not-so-very-distant future. Looky here, next post, bam!, Stormwind. Just great. Now leave this train of thought alone, it has been hashed and rehashed countless times and doesn't lead anywhere except into the trenches of nerd flamewar.

 

[emanresu]

Anyone remember those ancient, long ago days when "mini-maxing" was actually looked down on by people? I remember when people actually tried to develop a character that was a flawed but realistic and natural persona that would be challenged by difficult circumstances and risked getting killed...


yep.............gestalt happens!

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

I just KNEW Stormwind would rear its ugly head in the not-so-very-distant future. Looky here, next post, bam!, Stormwind. Just great. Now leave this train of thought alone, it has been hashed and rehashed countless times and doesn't lead anywhere except into the trenches of nerd flamewar.

What's Stormwind?

 

[Empirate]

Here you go. Basically, the argument "min/maxing, character optimization, or generally any attempt at finding mechanically superior solutions to in-game problems detracts from 'good roleplaying'" pretty much sums up the Stormwind fallacy. It is a fallacy because mechanical system knowledge and roleplaying are not inherently mutually exclusive, and may in fact promote each other in some cases. Quite a few cases, in my experience.

Everytime I hear "powergamer no good roleplayer" or "rollplayer =/= roleplayer", I want to kick something until my toe hurts.

 

[xigbar]

I just KNEW Stormwind would rear its ugly head in the not-so-very-distant future. Looky here, next post, bam!, Stormwind. Just great. Now leave this train of thought alone, it has been hashed and rehashed countless times and doesn't lead anywhere except into the trenches of nerd flamewar.

Having only just read about Stormwind (upon seeing you mentioning it, ironically) I wonder how anyone can dispute it.

 

[Greenfield]

I don't think that optimization/min-maxing is inherently bad, or good. Not for the game, not for role-playing.

What I find though is that characters who can power through challenges tend to do exactly that, and other problem solving skills/abilities atrophy.

There is also the question of balance. Not "game balance" as such, but balance around the table. If one player has an unstoppable battle monster and nobody else does, then the DM has very few choices. He/she can either challenge the combat monster and slaughter everyone else, challenge the bulk of the party and let the combat monster run roughshod over everything on the field, or come up with some reason why the mega-cannon only seems to aim at one character, ever.

None of these solutions seem to advance the role-playing side of things, and none of them would sit very comfortably with me.

Powering up the group also means that the DM has to power up the opposition as well. The CR system in the game, flawed as it may be, is still a good guideline for most DMs. Min-maxing pretty much forces DMs to toss it out, and in fact to toss out most of the monster manual. There's bloody little in there that can pose a real challenge to a tricked out Hulking Hurler who can throw a planet, or the charge monster mentioned in the OP. And absolutely nothing there at the character's level/CR can survive the onslaught of even one such character.