D&D 3E/3.5 Thoughts of a 3E/4E powergamer on starting to play 5E

[Sunseeker]

I'm not saying it's cheating. I'm saying it's a disruptive behavior that impacts the fun of other people at the table. And one of the best comparisons in terms of disruptive behaviors is cheating.

"I'm not calling you a lair. It's just that the best thing to compare you to is a bunch of lairs."
Pardon me while I quote you:

Nope. Don't buy that.

Typically, when you compare two things, it's because you feel they have similarities and feel that by pointing them out, it will become clearer how the two are related. That's the actual purpose for a comparison in writing. So you are either saying powergaming is cheating, or you are implying that powergaming is cheating.

And the best defense you can make about a behavior is that it's not explicitly against the rules. That's robbing the bank in Monopoly. "It's not cheating because the rules don't say you can't rob the bank."

And the best defense you have is identical. You're suggesting it is against the rules because the rules don't explicitly say you CAN.

If you can't play nice with other people at the table you're violating the social contract of the game, plain and simple. If it's not fun to play with someone you stop playing with that person. It doesn't matter if they played by the rules or not.

I'm glad I'm not playing with a bunch of easily offended anti-powergaming SJWs like you and your group. I can't imagine being around people getting so easily triggered just by playing differently.

I can powergame and still be polite. Apparently you can't even tolerate the smell of a powergamer and feel the need to call them disruptive, cheating game destroyers. Crickets in a can I breathe easier knowing we'll never play together.

If you're doing something that isn't fun for everyone at the table you're putting your fun ahead of the fun of other people. At best that's just plain selfish.

Fortunately for me, I've discovered this incredible thing called "tact" where I know how to both have fun in the way I enjoy, without taking away from other people's fun. Apparently you haven't, since the mere existence of my style of fun (highly efficient, effective characters) is disruptive to your fun and tantamount to cheating in your mind.

I don't think there's anything left to say here.

 

[JonnyP71]

That just means more than likely the burden is on you as DM to ensure that party succeeds overall.... the could be fudging dice rolls, using lame tactics or no tactics at all and just selling out your monsters as bags of experience that you as DM distribute out. This is assuming combat is the main component of acquiring experience in your game. If not, then carry on.

I'm not DM in that game - though we use milestone xp in that one so it works just fine.

 

[S'mon]

There's a lot to reply to, so bear with me. This may take several posts.


I don't seek to dominate the game through character building. I seek to kick ass, and powergaming is the means to that end. Dominating the table isn't necessary for that, though at times it has happened. It happens less often because I often help the rest of the players at the table powergame their characters as well.

As for why I'm joining Curse of Strahd, I've more or less committed to driving my ex-wife's son(it's complicated) to the game at the local FLGS, and it isn't worth me coming home than going back to pick him up. I've tried for the past few weeks to wargame or board game with other people there who aren't playing 5E, or working on gaming or life stuff on my tablet, but that hasn't really worked out so well, so I'm kind of joining because there really isn't anything else to do...

...Badwrongfun eh? 5E is a better game for not supporting the tastes of people you don't like?

I'm a bit worried you may end up harming the fun of other players at your table. Anyway there is a fair bit of space to minmax around feat selection if you play a variant human & start with one at 1st level. Barbarian seems easiest to minmax, Barb + Reckless Attack from 10' with Polearm master + fall back 5' lets you hit all the time for tons of damage and rarely get attacked.

 

[Jester David]

You and other people in this thread presume a lot about other people's tables. What of organized play? The game I was talking about joining in the OP is an organized table. Where does that fit into your worldview?

Unchanged.
Actually, this has formed a large part of my opinion. I've played a LOT of organized play, for 3.5, Pathfinder, and even 5e. And when one person's character owns every single encounter it is really not fun. It's nice not to struggle and almost die in a module, but I like my character to do cool things as well.

In organized play, the social contract is still there and actually the requirement to "play nice" is intensified, as there isn't the leeway friendship provides. You don't know the people, and you aren't friends. The DM is less obligated to play with you and accommodate you.
If you walk into a game store and engage people in a friendly game of, oh, let's say chess. And you obliterate them mercilessly. Eventually people will stop playing with you because it's not fun for them. If you make running the game not fun for a DM they're move you to another table or just stop showing up to run the game.

This is not just because I can't optimize. I'm not great at it, but I can hold my own. My last couple PFS characters were pretty badass, and really out shown the rest of the table (of newbies). So I played inoptimally and tried to assist them. I used my action to aid attacks, moved into flanks, and the like. Because the ONLY way you can win at D&D is if you have fun, and if everyone at the table isn't having a good time, the entire table just lost at D&D.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I'm a bit worried you may end up harming the fun of other players at your table. Anyway there is a fair bit of space to minmax around feat selection if you play a variant human & start with one at 1st level. Barbarian seems easiest to minmax, Barb + Reckless Attack from 10' with Polearm master + fall back 5' lets you hit all the time for tons of damage and rarely get attacked.

You seem to presume a lot about a group of strangers you've never met

 

[ExploderWizard]

"I'm not calling you a lair. It's just that the best thing to compare you to is a bunch of lairs."

If WOTC ever picks up the series again can we include [MENTION=37579]Jester Canuck[/MENTION] in the next book of lairs?

 

[Mathilda]

I'm not DM in that game - though we use milestone xp in that one so it works just fine.

Then if combat is not the key component in your party's level advancement, why would a combat powergamer not be welcomed in that party?

In the course of achieving the next milestone, there should be ample opportunity for each individual player to shine due to the DM basically earmarking events to characters.

 

[Caliban]

Some people want to "play" the game, others want to "win" the game. 4e was better suited to "winning" D&D, as it treated the game more as a tactical board game than an RP game, while the 5e developers deliberately tried to reduce that aspect in the hopes of enhancing the RP aspects of the game, so that people can enjoy playing, not just winning.

If 4e is your preferred game, then you probably won't be happy with 5e. They simply favor different playing styles.

 

[Mathilda]

You seem to presume a lot about a group of strangers you've never met

Yes he does....

I find it very amusing that we both powergame but we do it for totally different reasons...

As stated earlier, you want to kick ass.... which is totally cool with me.... However, I power build to be like a fire alarm... "in case of fire break glass"

In organized play, I cant tell you the amount of times I have played with schlubs and needed to dominate the encounter.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of proficient players as well.... that just lets me kick back and enjoy the table and probably a longer break between game slots

I have been playing some version of this game for over 30 years and I know I am a very good player... I don't need to flaunt in every combat but failure is not an option for me hence building a strong character for what if.

 

[Mathilda]

Some people want to "play" the game, others want to "win" the game. 4e was better suited to "winning" D&D, as it treated the game more as a tactical board game than an RP game, while the 5e developers deliberately tried to reduce that aspect in the hopes of enhancing the RP aspects of the game, so that people can enjoy playing, not just winning.

If 4e is your preferred game, then you probably won't be happy with 5e. They simply favor different playing styles.

This is a rather odd statement...

I would argue the point that playing and winning are the same in that context.

Are you inferring that there are people who play this game and want to "lose"?