Why not?
D&D 5E Where does optimizing end and min-maxing begin? And is min-maxing a bad thing?
[MENTION=6855234]CTurbo[/MENTION]: I've got no strong view on what optimisation, min/max etc should be taken to mean, or whether or not they're inherently pejorative. But your PC seems fine to me. I wouldn't normally expect a player to add stat boosts to stats they don't see as very important to their PC.
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I think that "time" was just 3.5. And Pathfinder too.
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
Not only that, but the 5e PHB literally says in its quick build section to place your highest stat in Wisdom, followed by Strength or Constitution. It's hard to take an accusation of bad faith play seriously when the printed directions in the book give you min-max advice! (There is literally no advice in the quick build section about using personality as a guide to a stat assignment. And the Chapter 1 section on assigning stats only uses a
personality rationale for the assignment of tertiary and quaternary stats.)
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Well, if the paladin smiting and then long-resting breaks the game, one might expect that the game would not permit it.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Usually it does not. Would make no sense else. Limiting long rests with gane rules other than what it already does (once per 24 hours) could be more problematic. If your table allows 5 min work days then it is your table's or rqther your DM's fault. And of course the player's fault not ti adapt
Mercule
Adventurer
Min-maxing is a subset of optimization, IMO. For most purposes, they can be used interchangeably. In general, they're a problem when they interfere with "normal" game play in any number of ways that can be summed up as differing expectations between participants.
For me, that primarily means anyone who spends more time on making sure the numbers work out than that the character is narratively interesting. The two aren't always in conflict, though -- I've played with a lot of folks who are just plain good at math and understanding the implications of certain choices, but still build the character personality first. At my table, it's a problem when one or two players are substantively more or less engaged in the numbers than the others, to the point that it's difficult or impossible to build challenges that don't either wipe out part of the group or force part of the group to either dominate or fade into the background.
At a macro level, I find it a problem when certain players and/or tables are substantively more or less engaged in the math such that things like "level appropriate" and Challenge Rating lose meaning across the game, as a whole. It's fine when a group recognizes they're well outside the "norm" and can express their style accordingly (giving new players a heads-up and/or interpreting the rules with a bit of salt). When they start to get into "badwrongfun" territory, it's a problem. It seems, to me, that this is more a problem with the optimizers because they are noisy. The more casual/roleplay folks tend to just walk away and/or are better at just ignoring the rules.
For me, that primarily means anyone who spends more time on making sure the numbers work out than that the character is narratively interesting. The two aren't always in conflict, though -- I've played with a lot of folks who are just plain good at math and understanding the implications of certain choices, but still build the character personality first. At my table, it's a problem when one or two players are substantively more or less engaged in the numbers than the others, to the point that it's difficult or impossible to build challenges that don't either wipe out part of the group or force part of the group to either dominate or fade into the background.
At a macro level, I find it a problem when certain players and/or tables are substantively more or less engaged in the math such that things like "level appropriate" and Challenge Rating lose meaning across the game, as a whole. It's fine when a group recognizes they're well outside the "norm" and can express their style accordingly (giving new players a heads-up and/or interpreting the rules with a bit of salt). When they start to get into "badwrongfun" territory, it's a problem. It seems, to me, that this is more a problem with the optimizers because they are noisy. The more casual/roleplay folks tend to just walk away and/or are better at just ignoring the rules.
L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I dunno, I hear cancer is pretty bad.
Similar Threads
D&D General
6 Core Classes: You are in charge
