D&D 5E Characters are not their statistics and abilities

Corwin · Nov 1, 2016

iserith said:
You know, I wonder if there is some other metric that is being prioritized. If everyone survives with little to no permanent cost and some members of the team are un-optimized, is that still a bad thing for players like the OP? Or is it like when I used to play RTS games and I would try to get the best kill to loss ratio or fastest time to a milestone? I knew I would ultimately prevail in the conflict, but I wanted to see if I could win by some other standard.

If everyone at a table of mixed players - some optimizers, some not - survives a harrowing adventure, do the optimizers secretly (or perhaps even loudly) fume that they could have been just a bit more efficient? I wouldn't imagine so, but I could be wrong.

I agree completely. And they probably do. Deep down inside their dark, nasty souls. If they even *have* souls, that is.

Which is why I was careful to point out that the metric I (okay, we, I guess) identified was the only metric "worth considering". Not necessarily the only metric that exists. Because if you are in mixed playstyle company, everyone obviously needs to have room to have their kind of fun. Making it to the next adventuring day means the players can continue to have *that* fun.

BoldItalic · Nov 1, 2016

At daybreak, when the orcs were massing at the gates and all who were valiant gathered before the prince, Ardwulf Longblade the battle-worn hero and victorious leader of the Eagle Tribes greeted his life-long friend Eldaron High-Elven, mail-clad and stern in resolve.

And Ardwulf did say, "Look, it would be better if you were a gnome, with those stats".

Azzy · Nov 1, 2016

"I R Serious Gamer! Win! Win! Win!"

dave2008 · Nov 1, 2016

shoak1 said:
Power gaming, not role-playing, is the dominant play style in the industry now. What defines a D and D character to me and everyone I know? Stats 80% and fluff (personality, background, blah, blah, blah) 20%.

Do have any real information to back up that statement? I've played D&D on and off for 30 years and I have never played with a power gamer. I didn't even now it was a thing until I started coming to the old WotC boards in 4e. Your anecdotal statement does not trump my anecdotal experience. Care to supply any really useful information to back your claim. You could be correct, it is just not my experience.

jayoungr · Nov 1, 2016

jasper said:
The OP is asking I think. Why are characters which are not geared for combat but for social roleplaying encounters frown on and then a power combat build also frown on.

To the OP, I would say "Are you sure they're being frowned upon by the same people?"

TwoSix · Nov 1, 2016

dave2008 said:
Do have any real information to a back up that statement? I've played D&D on and off for 30 years and I have never played with a power gamer. I didn't even now it was a thing until I stated coming to the old WotC boards in 4e. Your anecdotal statement does not trump my anecdotal experience. Care to supply any really useful information to back your claim. You could be correct, it is just not my experience.

I would be shocked if there wasn't a generational aspect to the divide.

hawkeyefan · Nov 1, 2016

TwoSix said:
I would be shocked if there wasn't a generational aspect to the divide.

I would have been tempted to agree with you, but [MENTION=83242]dave2008[/MENTION] mentioned playing for 30 years, and based on past conversations I think [MENTION=54380]shoak1[/MENTION] has been playing that long or longer.

I think it just boils down to some folks sticking more to the wargaming roots of the game, and others focusing more on the storytelling aspect.

One point I would make is that the storytelling aspect has clearly been there from the start and is not a new phenomenon.

pirate gonzalez · Nov 1, 2016

It's important to remember that everyone has different tastes and preferences. The issue comes when you start critiquing someone else for their choices. Believing that another character is sub-optimal, for example, is not really your business unless you all decide on that kind of game beforehand.

Work together before the game to understand what kind of game you all want to play, and then make your characters with that in mind. If I feel that power-gaming is bad, and 'you' (random person for sake of argument) believe that sub-optimization is bad, neither of us is right. The only problem is 1) not discussing it beforehand and 2) trying to impose your preferences on another person.

jasper · Nov 1, 2016

hawkeyefan said:
I would have been tempted to agree with you, but [MENTION=83242]dave2008[/MENTION] mentioned playing for 30 years, and based on past conversations I think [MENTION=54380]shoak1[/MENTION] has been playing that long or longer.

I think it just boils down to some folks sticking more to the wargaming roots of the game, and others focusing more on the storytelling aspect.

One point I would make is that the storytelling aspect has clearly been there from the start and is not a new phenomenon.

And power gaming. I had players kill off their pcs if they didn't like their stats. And games who would "roll" 36 times or make up their "I honestly roll this" stats. It not a generational thing, it an individual thing. Play with military types with egos get power gaming and grid tactics. Play with drama class kids, get drama lama and story base pcs. ETC. And it was the one's with the huge ego who would turn to other gamers and say you are having bad wrong fun.