Pathfinder 1E When the min-maxer tries to build your character for you.

PhiloPharynx · Sep 23, 2021

payn said:
Question then is are you willing to come down to their level or are you going to pester them until they climb up to yours? Some folks want to learn the system by trying it themselves and a lot of folks try to prevent that.

As I said, I prefer a happy medium. I tend to have a lot of rules expertise, and I generally offer different options that fit with the other character's background and flavor. I don't present it as "you'd better take X or you're a dumbass" I tend to say, "X offers you Y, and it connects to your time with the Monks of Zygoth. Or R offers you S and fits your style of shielding others."

I'm not trying to prevent them from learning. I try and explain what some of the options are.

billd91 · Sep 23, 2021

Urriak Uruk said:
I also loathe when it's your turn, and other players give unsolicited advice, "You really need to do this right now, otherwise your wasting your turn." Just let me make my own decisions gosh darnit!

I've had to shut down players about that one - particularly when they do it to kids.

DrunkonDuty · Sep 24, 2021

I have a horrible feeling I am that min-maxer. :.-(

In a game GM, one of players recently re-designed their fighter barbarian. (Back when the campaign started half the players were brand new so I'd drawn up most of the PCs. Some levels later people now want to do their own thing.)

The player wanted to take the feat that lets you ignore penalties with improvised weapons. Before I knew what my mouth was doing I said "What? Really? That's not exactly a great feat." Or words to that effect. I immediately apologised and backed off. The player wasn't even slightly bothered. But I'm hoping to be better in the future.

Azuresun · Sep 24, 2021

payn said:
I havent experienced this in awhile, but I recall a super fun forum discussion once. The OP said he wanted to make a swashbuckler character that used a rapier. The thread devolved into making a monk who uses a piercing strike with their empty hand lol.

I remember building a Swashbuckler and going for archetypal acrobatic-human-with-rapier, then getting told that optimally, I should have gone for a dwarf with a pick because [mathbabble mathbabble mathbabble]. Which is what everyone thinks of when they hear the word "swashbuckler", right?

RealAlHazred · Sep 24, 2021

"This build isn't really optimized."
"Yes it is."
"What? You made a goliath wizard, that's not optimized for a bunch of reasons, like-"
"No, no, you misunderstand me. This is a totally optimized character -- for roleplay."
"... But the numbers-"
"I'm not playing with numbers, I'm playing with people. You should try it."

EDIT: I should mention, that was a guy at an Adventurers League event, who moved to a different table. I'm pretty sure my table had more laughs, and oddly enough my table also had the only wizard left standing at that event after the particularly tough end-boss fight. Stone's Endurance, baby!

cmad1977 · Sep 25, 2021

I go with a derisive sneer and say..
“I don’t make builds. I make characters” and then ignore them.

niklinna · Sep 25, 2021

DrunkonDuty said:
I have a horrible feeling I am that min-maxer.

In a game GM, one of players recently re-designed their fighter barbarian. (Back when the campaign started half the players were brand new so I'd drawn up most of the PCs. Some levels later people now want to do their own thing.)

The player wanted to take the feat that lets you ignore penalties with improvised weapons. Before I knew what my mouth was doing I said "What? Really? That's not exactly a great feat." Or words to that effect. I immediately apologised and backed off. The player wasn't even slightly bothered. But I'm hoping to be better in the future.

No need to feel horrible: There's nothing wrong with being a min-maxer—for yourself, of course. And, you caught yourself before pushing something on another person; I wouldn't be bothered if told a choice wasn't great, and might be curious about why.

Then again, I am an optimizer (which sometimes involves min-maxing). ;-)

DrunkonDuty · Sep 25, 2021

niklinna said:
No need to feel horrible: There's nothing wrong with being a min-maxer—for yourself, of course. And, you caught yourself before pushing something on another person; I wouldn't be bothered if told a choice wasn't great, and might be curious about why.

Then again, I am an optimizer (which sometimes involves min-maxing). ;-)

I'm a shocking min-maxer for my own characters. I just can't go past certain options. "A fighter without Power Attack? Getowddahere." And that's fine. I just gotta remember that, even if I'm GMing, it's not my job to do that for others. I mean, I am worried that when they run into my optimised NPCs they'll get smacked down. But so far this hasn't happened so I'm probably just worrying for nothing.

niklinna · Sep 25, 2021

DrunkonDuty said:
I'm a shocking min-maxer for my own characters. I just can't go past certain options. "A fighter without Power Attack? Getowddahere." And that's fine. I just gotta remember that, even if I'm GMing, it's not my job to do that for others. I mean, I am worried that when they run into my optimised NPCs they'll get smacked down. But so far this hasn't happened so I'm probably just worrying for nothing.

Part of the problem (for those to whom it's a problem), is that certain games put an emphasis on "winning" and "being effective" rather than "encouraging/enabling interesting things to happen". To pick an option that fits a concept but doesn't provide much in any direction, mechanically or for role-play, is to pass up on something of real value!

One of the things I loved about Spirit of the Century and the generic Fate system that evolved from it is that it encouraged players to design aspects for their characters that could both fuel tactical & narrative advantages as well as complications (that pay you back with fate points)—as opposed to mere mechanical disadvantages. Now, Fate is a much more free-form system than some people like, but it's one of the best examples of what I'm talking about.

You put D&D or Torg Eternity in my hands, though, and I'm gonna optimize the heck out of my character, which often involves min-maxing, depending on the character concept of course (which for me overrides most considerations of "being effective").

DrunkonDuty · Sep 26, 2021

niklinna said:
Part of the problem (for those to whom it's a problem), is that certain games put an emphasis on "winning" and "being effective" rather than "encouraging/enabling interesting things to happen". To pick an option that fits a concept but doesn't provide much in any direction, mechanically or for role-play, is to pass up on something of real value!

Agreed, DnD/PF/etc definitely put an emphasis on succeeding in combat. Now obviously this isn't the only way to play them; one can role play in any system. But when compared to a game like Fate, where role play mechanics are put up front, it's a bit of an epiphany to realise that DnD/PF can be played like this.

The good news is that Fate's fate-point system is easily tacked on to any other game. I've even got plans to tack it onto my next Champions game. Only, since it's supers, I'll be calling it Soap instead of Fate.