D&D 5E Can my table focus on making things fun instead of optimizing?

[Mistwell]

"Can my table focus on making things fun instead of optimizing?"

Sure they can, but have you thought about the fact that optimizing can be very fun and interesting to those who enjoy it?

I don't mind optimization at the table and expect it, however it can suck what makes the games entertaining for me out of the game. Usually it leads my players to want to speed through the levels because they want that next optimization point over just having fun playing the game - including failing and having things go sideways. I think you can roleplay and roll play but I may need to make a motivational poster that says, "Be interesting and entertaining" on the wall...players asked for options and then did the exact same options every single encounter. The script repeated fight after fight. I found it very unentertaining as a DM...Find a good effective combo and repeat ad nauseum.

I feel like his post addressed your question before you asked it. What did he fail to address? He's saying yes, people have fun with it, but it's detracting from his enjoyment of the game.

 

[billd91]

I can't be bothered with taking notes at the table. It's too much like going to school. Fortunately, my wife is the exact opposite and writes copiously on what happens in the game. So, I get to cheat and look at her notes.

You're lucky. But taking notes really is a powerful answer to the problem of forgetting names and what's going on in a game. How do we combat the 4-6 hours of focus out of a 168 hour week? Use some kind of mnemonic like notes to make up for not living in the game.

 

[Paraxis]

I feel like his post addressed your question before you asked it. What did he fail to address? He's saying yes, people have fun with it, but it's detracting from his enjoyment of the game.

My point is his fun is not paramount, his fun is not more important than the fun of others, so some compromise has to happen. So that is why I suggested to let his players keep having fun optimizing but try and show them other ways to have fun, his ways of having fun.

 

[Mistwell]

My point is his fun is not paramount, his fun is not more important than the fun of others, so some compromise has to happen.

How is "I as DM am having no fun but you guys are" a compromise in any way? That's not compromise, that's one side getting their way to the detriment of the other. So the DM quits, and now unless someone else steps up you have no game.

I know you are proud of proclaiming you are a powergaming charopper, but I don't recall you ever saying you'd be willing to compromise in any way on doing that. Are you saying you have compromised before in this to a meaningful degree?

 

[Blue]

As I play, I notice that players don't take enough notes. So, yeah, I have to repeat some things. And it's usually the same players every time who can't remember.

I'm in two campaigns right now and each has a player with great notes and memory, better then me. One I'm a player, and it's fantastic. One I run and it really keeps me on my toes!

I've found a wiki that players can edit is useful in building player engagement in the world as they add in their notes and such. And it gives player game-related activities that aren't polishing optimization builds for the next 10 levels.

 

[Paraxis]

How is "I as DM am having no fun but you guys are" a compromise in any way? That's not compromise, that's one side getting their way to the detriment of the other. So the DM quits, and now unless someone else steps up you have no game.

I know you are proud of proclaiming you are a powergaming charopper, but I don't recall you ever saying you'd be willing to compromise in any way on doing that. Are you saying you have compromised before in this to a meaningful degree?

Every compromise is to the detriment of the other side to some point, that is why it is a compromise.
Telling players they can't optimize at all, when they clearly enjoy it is just as one sided. So let them optimise, but show them how else a roleplaying game can be enjoyable.

I am a proud powergamer, I am willing to work with a DM to a point sure, if he doesn't want me to optimise for damage, then I optimize for defense or healing or crowd control or diplomacy. I don't play in a game where the DM says a character concept of someone competent and good at their job is not a valid one, unless it is some kind of silly one shot.

So it depends on what you mean my a meaningful degree? In one of my current 5e games I am playing I choose to be the group healer, I know I could break the combat encounters with some builds so I choose to keep everyone alive and continue with the story. So I am playing a human nature cleric, with the healer feat, I could have picked life cleric, but I wanted to use shillelagh to have a magic club that did a d8 at the start, since this DM doesn't like giving out magic items, I also picked nature because dragons and therefore a variety of elemental attacks were the theme of the campaign and I figured the Dampen Elements ability would be very useful. I picked everything about my character to build an effective version of what I wanted to accomplish in the game, it's how I enjoy the game away from the table.

 

[Henrix]

Why can't my players ever bother remembering an NPC's name instead of tacking on some stupid (and usually vulgar) nickname?
.

Write the name on a folded piece of paper or post-it note.
Stick it to your DM screen whenever she's around in (or important to) a scene.

And create memorable names. Weird fantasy names are hard, there's nothing to relate to as they're unique. There are almost never any names used more than once, no 'Jane', 'Bob' or 'Tom'.

Take a page from Dickens and try to make names reminiscent of the character or role the NPC has. A stick thin girl can be called Stickels, a fat old merchant Boozle, and a sombre gravedigger Bleek.

 

[Henrix]

Every compromise is to the detriment of the other side to some point, that is why it is a compromise.

Frankly, if the DM isn't enjoying it the campaign won't last.

Why ever should she put so much work into it if she's not having fun?

 

[Paraxis]

Frankly, if the DM isn't enjoying it the campaign won't last.

True, but if the players aren't enjoying it the same can be said. So you do your best to get everyone to have fun.

Why ever should she put so much work into it if she's not having fun?

They should put in the work, because putting in the work is part of the fun, at least for me it is. They should put in the work because being a DM is like giving gifts at christmas, you do it to make others happy and that in turn makes you happy. They do the work because, there are plenty of ways to challenge optimized characters and having a few high numbers on a character sheet might bring joy to the player, but it can't compete with the omnipotent power of being a DM.

If a DM can't have fun because some players optimized then maybe they should step back and play for a bit.

But I still think the best solution is to encourage the players to get more out of the game than optimizing, but that doesn't mean you need to take away the optimization.

 

[Mistwell]

Every compromise is to the detriment of the other side to some point, that is why it is a compromise.

What you outlined was only one side suffering any detriment. Hence not a compromise.

Telling players they can't optimize at all, when they clearly enjoy it is just as one sided.

When did anyone propose that?

So let them optimise

See, zero compromise. You're saying it has to be 100% optimize OK, as opposed to a reduction in optimization.

I am a proud powergamer, I am willing to work with a DM to a point sure, if he doesn't want me to optimise for damage, then I optimize for defense or healing or crowd control or diplomacy.

But have you ever actually compromised on the concept of optimization itself? As in simply not doing it as much? An actual compromise over the issue of optimization would be you doing it 50% less than you did it before, not simply focusing in in a different narrow focus.