Is optimization on a common ground such as teamwork good for an rpg?

[xechnao]

I have been thinking about this. For the moment my conclusion is that it runs contrary to a roleplaying game's needs. Character building decisions are made to influence the decisions of others -it is an interactive game. But if the optimization is not based on a character's ideals but on team everybody's course is already set and what it only remains is to follow the story the dm addresses -as soon as they have learned the optimization procedure.

So perhaps what a new generation of rpgs needs is powers that alter the world in a certain way that is significant and influential to others so one must still focus on his character through a common environment each one can influence its proprieties. A show of each players and PCs ideals that create new ideals -even for the DM.

 

[wedgeski]

I'm sorry, I really don't get what you're saying. Are you suggesting that by baking teamwork mechanics straight into the game, individual character building is somehow sacrificed?

 

[Victim]

Considering that most RPGs are played as group, focusing on the whole of the team for optimization instead of 4 or 5 lone wolf bad @sses each with their own agenda seems like a general positive.

 

[xechnao]

I'm sorry, I really don't get what you're saying. Are you suggesting that by baking teamwork mechanics straight into the game, individual character building is somehow sacrificed?

Something like that. I mean you have this concept of a character on who he is and what he wants. In the case of teamwork optimization this gets streamlined by the book mechanics -since it is a team played game. I believe it would be more interesting if it could instead be a dynamic play on what each player wants in contrast to others.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

It may be a positive for game mechanics but it doesn't necessarily translate into individual fun. I guess this is where many folks differ ad different games become better choices for different individuals. I personally am not into being forced to design a character to optimize as part of a group. I want to design a character that does the things I am interested in immersing myself in from a character point of view. Part of the fun for me is seeing how all these individuals come together and solve problems. If I wanted to be forced into narrow character roles with defined jobs in combat I would be playing WoW.

 

[xechnao]

Considering that most RPGs are played as group, focusing on the whole of the team for optimization instead of 4 or 5 lone wolf bad @sses each with their own agenda seems like a general positive.

It is about the dynamic relations of the group I am talking about. One must have a reason to stay in the group but he must also have the power to influence the group to fit his reason. Focus on team optimization mechanics seem to lack this.

 

[Dice4Hire]

One of the things I like best about this edition is that there is indeed teamwork, and it is critical for the group to succeed. No longer do spells rule as strongly as they used to, where the rest of the party just followed the spell casters around ,and spell casters had way too much "Mother, may I?" influence. Now the problematic spells have been moved over to rituals or just plain gotten rid of, so the classes are all on a more even keep of power. Yes, the power of the party is less in some ways, as invisibility, flying and teleportation are less, but I can live with it.

 

[Bialaska]

Considering that most RPGs are played as group, focusing on the whole of the team for optimization instead of 4 or 5 lone wolf bad @sses each with their own agenda seems like a general positive.

I think the issue with that is that it greatly limits the options for the players. What is wrong with having characters that may not be optimized as a team, but still cooperate and are fun to play? While some players do not mind this limitation, others like having opportunities.

 

[Umbran]

But if the optimization is not based on a character's ideals but on team everybody's course is already set ...

This assumes two things:

1)Everyone chooses the optimal course.

2)There is only one optimal course to choose.

I submit that one cannot have a single optimal choice unless one already knows the challenges one will face. Short of that, it's guessing, and choosing some thing that are hopefully reasonably good. So, then ideals come into play...

 

[xechnao]

One of the things I like best about this edition is that there is indeed teamwork, and it is critical for the group to succeed. No longer do spells rule as strongly as they used to, where the rest of the party just followed the spell casters around ,and spell casters had way too much "Mother, may I?" influence. Now the problematic spells have been moved over to rituals or just plain gotten rid of, so the classes are all on a more even keep of power. Yes, the power of the party is less in some ways, as invisibility, flying and teleportation are less, but I can live with it.

3e had its balance issues and problems. But is focusing on teamwork the right answer to balance problems for a tabletop rpg? I am personaly coming to the conclusion that it is not. I think it is something more complicated than this.

choosing some thing that are hopefully reasonably good. So, then ideals come into play...

In rpgs a player must have some influence on the challenges he will face. If not we conclude that the rpg experience is just the DM's storytelling. This is a part of the problem I am talking about.