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

[JonnyP71]

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.

As I've already said at least once, mainly it's because combat powergamers tend to focus on the combat part of D&D, the tactics, and the stats.

We don't, we're a RP heavy group - combat is often haphazard and chaotic at best, and very free-form - no grid, no precise measurements, tactics go out of the window quite frequently - and most importantly we don't take more than a few seconds to decide what we are doing each round. We're more interested in driving the storylines of our characters through their interactions with each other and the world around them. The DM is also a very strong improviser who creates a lot of lavish scenes where there is nothing to kill, but where we can spend hours exploring and roleplaying.

If the powergame player is also a strong roleplayer, is happy to go entire sessions without combat, capable of thinking outside of the numbers, doesn't get frustrated by our own PCs antics, and doesn't sit for ages trying to come up with 'perfect' combat actions every round, then they'd be ok. IF.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[pming]

Hiya.

That's important to you, not me. All I ask for on the equality front is equality of opportunity. What I want out of the game is to kick ass. I don't need to be better than anyone to do that. If everyone kicks ass, I still kick ass and all is well. If some people choose to not kick ass, that doesn't affect me. They should also live with their choice and not get cranky with me.

D&D adventuring is dangerous business. It can and probably should kill you. I don't understand the appeal of RPing a character that sucks at D&D.

You know what I thought about when I read this? ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKv6o7YqHnE&spfreload=10

Guess who's the "optimizers" and guess who aren't?

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Sunseeker]

I will take one more stab at this to explain my frustration with certain comments.

Imagine, if you will, a certain player who prefers PvP games (aka player killing). He joins a group where everyone else is not into player killing. However, he keeps insisting that:
1. Player killing is not against the rules (true!).
2. Really, aren't we all just player killers under certain definitions of "player," and "killer?"

That's what's it is like discussing these issues with certain min maxers (sorry, optimized). There are people, and tables, that love PvP games! There is nothing wrong with that- so long as that is what the table has bought into. The problem occurs is one (or the minority) of players believe their style of play (here, PvP) must dictate the style of play for the table - because it's not against the rules.

The optimized are like this - it's not that they want to play a certain way (which is fine), but that they demand that their style of play be allowed, regardless of what the other people at the table want. And that, I don't understand. If I play at a table where optimization is assumed, then I either optimize, or (more likely) I find another table. The desire to force a style of play on others is something I find ... disturbing. Because D&D is a social activity.

And it's that lack of empathy, that desire to define all play as optimization, and to simply say that all tables just have to deal with optimzation, to be weird. Optimization is fine - but so is non-optimization.

To be fair, there is a key difference here:

PvP is naturally confrontational. In order to exist, I have to fight another player at the table. I have to force another person to do what I want to do, PVP. If you don't fight me, I can't PvP.

But min/maxing, powergaming, optmizing is not. In order to be optimized I don't need you to do anything for, or against me. I just need to be allowed to use the rules to the best of my ability.

There's nothing wrong with non-op. Don't have a problem with it. So long as non-oppers are okay with their own choices. And at the end of the day, that's all that matters, is that you're OK with your own choices. IME, people are okay with their own choices aren't very concerned with the choices of others. That in turn again IME, makes for good tables since everyone is happy with what they have, and what they're doing with what they have.

Part of my complaint stems from the fact that I don't have the luxury to choose the 5 people who all want to play 90% the same way, out of hundreds of gamers. Everywhere I've lived there has always been only a handful of players. So when I start running into DMs who say "you're not allowed to play the way that's fun for you, everyone must play the way that's fun for me and these other guys". I start questioning the whole rationale of it being the optimizer who is actually causing dysfunction and "un-fun" at the table.

Lets hypothetical here: I build a well-optimized barbarian, geared towards combat and not much else. Per your PVP comparison where others are being forced to engage in the style of play I prefer, how am I, by optimizing, forcing you to engage in optimization? Maybe if you could explain that to me a little more I might "get it" from your side.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I will take one more stab at this to explain my frustration with certain comments.

Imagine, if you will, a certain player who prefers PvP games (aka player killing). He joins a group where everyone else is not into player killing. However, he keeps insisting that:
1. Player killing is not against the rules (true!).
2. Really, aren't we all just player killers under certain definitions of "player," and "killer?"

That's what's it is like discussing these issues with certain min maxers (sorry, optimized). There are people, and tables, that love PvP games! There is nothing wrong with that- so long as that is what the table has bought into. The problem occurs is one (or the minority) of players believe their style of play (here, PvP) must dictate the style of play for the table - because it's not against the rules.

The optimized are like this - it's not that they want to play a certain way (which is fine), but that they demand that their style of play be allowed, regardless of what the other people at the table want. And that, I don't understand. If I play at a table where optimization is assumed, then I either optimize, or (more likely) I find another table. The desire to force a style of play on others is something I find ... disturbing. Because D&D is a social activity.

And it's that lack of empathy, that desire to define all play as optimization, and to simply say that all tables just have to deal with optimzation, to be weird. Optimization is fine - but so is non-optimization.

How I want to play is right in the book. I don't have to break any rules to do so. How is this such a crime? It sounds to me that you guys want your cake and to eat it too. You want to be able to build unoptimized chararacters without any consequences. If somebody at your table builds something effective, better to hassle and chase them away then just to live with being less effective, like you chose to be.

 

[Mathilda]

As I've already said at least once, mainly it's because combat powergamers tend to focus on the combat part of D&D, the tactics, and the stats.

We don't, we're a RP heavy group - combat is often haphazard and chaotic at best, and very free-form - no grid, no precise measurements, tactics go out of the window quite frequently - and most importantly we don't take more than a few seconds to decide what we are doing each round. We're more interested in driving the storylines of our characters through their interactions with each other and the world around them. The DM is also a very strong improviser who creates a lot of lavish scenes where there is nothing to kill, but where we can spend hours exploring and roleplaying.

If the powergame player is also a strong roleplayer, is happy to go entire sessions without combat, capable of thinking outside of the numbers, doesn't get frustrated by our own PCs antics, and doesn't sit for ages trying to come up with 'perfect' combat actions every round, then they'd be ok. IF.

Semi-Joking... Are you sure you folks are playing DnD and not some other game?

No combat for an entire session is extreme, not just for me but imagine for most people here.... given that one of the pillar books of the game is the Monster Manual

 

[Sunseeker]

Hiya.



You know what I thought about when I read this? ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKv6o7YqHnE&spfreload=10

Guess who's the "optimizers" and guess who aren't?

^_^

Paul L. Ming

Let me guess, the evil bad guys destroying little children?

Go peddle your propaganda elsewhere.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Semi-Joking... Are you sure you folks are playing DnD and not some other game?

No combat for an entire session is extreme, not just for me but imagine for most people here.... given that one of the pillar books of the game is the Monster Manual

It doesn't have to be extreme, and players can optimize for activities other than just combat. The diplomancer build from 3E comes to mind. Sometimes the players are doing things that don't involve fighting and at other times they may spend an entire session fighting.

I prefer to have a nice mix of activity each session, but a player driven campaign can go in unexpected directions at times leading to long periods of one activity type instead of another. It happens.

 

[ExploderWizard]

How I want to play is right in the book. I don't have to break any rules to do so. How is this such a crime? It sounds to me that you guys want your cake and to eat it too. You want to be able to build unoptimized chararacters without any consequences. If somebody at your table builds something effective, better to hassle and chase them away then just to live with being less effective, like you chose to be.

Some people want to just play and enjoy the game. They might not have time to study all the best combos away from the table and they also prefer to play in games where their decisions DURING the game have a whole lot more impact than ones made during character generation. I enjoy 5E because no one needs to be chased away. The optimizers can do their thing without spoiling the game for others. Its a win win for everyone who wants to enjoy playing and not just get their rocks off pointing out how everyone sucks but them.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*