D&D General DM Says No Powergaming?

[Micah Sweet]

I don't know if WotC has ever said it, I'm just talking about the actual process of play.

Generally speaking, the game involves the PCs interacting with NPCs. Not the players watching a DM having a bunch of NPCs battle it out.

As I said, it may come up at times that one NPC has to interact with another... an ally of the PCs is going to try to persuade someone he knows to assist the PCs or similar... and in those instances, sure, use the stats. But for larger scale events of the kind we're talking about.... a thousand NPCs versus a monster... in every instance I can think of and every example I've ever seen online except white room analysis wankery... the DM just decides what happens.

I've always seen statblocks as representative of a creature's abilities as depicted by the game's rules. PC interaction optional.

 

[Dross]

I don't get this.

Not really, no. It’s proven that people on the internet will yell at you for saying it. People on the internet say it’s possible to do both. But people are incredibly bad at judging their own abilities, see the Dunning-Krueger effect. And people on the internet will say any kind of nonsense, see the flat earthers, NFT bros, and Elon Musk fans among so, so many examples.

Personally, I have yet to meet a single power gamer in real life who’s even halfway decent at RP. Most seem to think that a single line of in-character dialog once every third session is the height of good RP. I had one say that the best role-playing of the night was when they attacked an ooze with an axe. Their definition of good RP was simply not metagaming.

So, no, it’s not in any way disproven. I have yet to meet this particular breed of unicorn in the flesh, but people on the internet keep insisting they exist. So I won’t assume they don’t.

You initially say that it doesn't happen because you haven't seen it, then say it can happen because people have said they have seen it.

One invalidates the other.
Either
1 because you have not seen a RP-ing powergamer they don't exist, which implies everyone that claims they have seen it are at best mistaken, or
2 it can happen/assume it does because people say they have seen a RP-ing powergamer.

Now I don't doubt you personally haven't seen a RP-ing powergamer, but I also don't doubt people who say they've seen one (otherwise why be here at all?).

So given that, what evidence would you need to show that there is such a thing as a RP-ing powergamer? Or does your definition of a powergamer preclude that possibility? This seems at odds to what most people think a powergamer is but is the only way I can make some sense of what you said.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I've always seen statblocks as representative of a creature's abilities as depicted by the game's rules. PC interaction optional.

Sure, and I'm not going to say it's wrong to think that way. Especially as a general reference or quick summary. But from an application standpoint... it doesn't really come up too often, does it?

If you design a dungeon that's currently occupied by gnolls after they drove off the previous inhabitants, a group of duergar... do you roll the battle for the dungeon out? Or do you just say the gnolls won?

The vast majority of times we use monster or NPC stat blocks is going to be in relation to PCs.

 

[overgeeked]

Nothing has that power anymore. Just resistance. You'd have to houserule it, which i would be and am happy to do.

I’m less and less inclined to fix obvious oversights by WotC.

 

[overgeeked]

So given that, what evidence would you need to show that there is such a thing as a RP-ing powergamer?

Personally meeting one in real life.

ETA: Not saying hello to someone who claims to be that, but actually sitting at a table and playing with them and seeing it be an actual thing that happens in person.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, and I'm not going to say it's wrong to think that way. Especially as a general reference or quick summary. But from an application standpoint... it doesn't really come up too often, does it?

If you design a dungeon that's currently occupied by gnolls after they drove off the previous inhabitants, a group of duergar... do you roll the battle for the dungeon out? Or do you just say the gnolls won?

The vast majority of times we use monster or NPC stat blocks is going to be in relation to PCs.

Sure, from a practical perspective, not so much. But I'm very much not a fan of the principle behind it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I’m less and less incluned to fix obvious oversights by WotC.

So what's the alternative? What do you play? I have finally come to the conclusion that WotC isn't going to make the game I want, so I have to make it myself.

 

[Stormonu]

I've always seen statblocks as representative of a creature's abilities as depicted by the game's rules. PC interaction optional.

To be honest, I haven't. Don't see a statblock for a Butcher, Baker or Candlestick maker in the MM, after all. Usually only need a stat block if blood is going to be shed or there's likely to be some opposed contest with with PCs. And I do like that the 5E statblock isn't supposed to represent every minute ability a being has, unlike 3E's assumption.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To be honest, I haven't. Don't see a statblock for a Butcher, Baker or Candlestick maker in the MM, after all. Usually only need a stat block if blood is going to be shed or there's likely to be some opposed contest with with PCs. And I do like that the 5E statblock isn't supposed to represent every minute ability a being has, unlike 3E's assumption.

The statblocks you're looking for are under the entry for "commoner" with an appropriate skill proficiency.

I always liked 3e's assumption, especially since you can always add or subtract as needed. Granted, it was a little unwieldy, but that's why I saw 5e's version as a broad strokes version of 3e's, not an entirely different game philosophy. Sad to see in recent years that I was wrong.

 

[Cadence]

When that 3e dragon accidentally picks the village full of 20th level commoners...