D&D 4E 4e vs Min-Maxers

[JoeGKushner]

I'll bet a much larger group will be a group that complains that a point system will cater to the min-max powergamer. If fact I agree with this (not my objection to it, but I agree that the mix max players live for that sort of system).

This was in response to talking about point based systems versus something like D&D.

Now my theory is that min-max power gamers aren't even the 'problem' in this case as much as the wide ability to communicate with many people over a static system. Once one person learns how to min-max the system and posts how to do so, EVERYONE now knows how to min-max the system without being a min-maxer.

What could 4e possibly have in it to minimize the old min-maxers? I don't see how it could to be honest.

 

[Glyfair]

What could 4e possibly have in it to minimize the old min-maxers? I don't see how it could to be honest.

IMO, D&D can't. At least it can't and still be D&D.

My point was, min-max players will always be there. Rejecting a sound design decision because min-max players might min-max it is a pointless exercise.

 

[WayneLigon]

I don't think any game system can be immune to having some choices be better than others, unless there is simply no choice. 1E could be min-maxed, GURPS can be, virtually any system can be.

 

[marune]

I think 4E will give back some power to the DM, for example on magic item creation and "monstrous playable race". That should prevent the most obvious abuses. (For RPGA/Online playing, that's a good thing)

Power-gaming, Min/Maxing always was and always will be part of the D&D experience.

If you don't want it, try some Indie RPGs (Dread would be a good example).

 

[blargney the second]

Once one person learns how to min-max the system and posts how to do so, EVERYONE now knows how to min-max the system without being a min-maxer..

I see parallels with actual computer crackers and script kiddie wannabe hackers. I've been thinking the same thing lately, that modern communication methods help promote build mentality for breaking RPG systems.

 

[Nifft]

I like to hold up SW Saga as an example of min-max minimization. The SW Saga system enforces general competency rather than allowing hyper-specialization. (That's not to say you can't specialize -- you can, and doing so is rewarded -- but rather that you cannot specialize at the expense of your general competency.)

How do they do this?

-> Skills: you get better at everything every other level.

-> Damage: you get better with any weapon every other level.

-> Defenses: all are much better at 20th level compared to 1st level.

-> Ability scores: you are forced away from single stat improvement.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Nifft]

I've been thinking the same thing lately, that modern communication methods help promote build mentality for breaking RPG systems.

Interesting.

I wonder if the trade-off between rapid "debugging" of new material is worth losing the sense of wonder you get in discovering and exploiting those bugs yourself.

(As a DM, I'd prefer to know about potential problems BEFORE someone tries them out in-game. I also appreciate seeing "builds" and their advantages -- they're like monster books for NPCs, and they help me advise my players what to do with their PCs.)

Cheers, -- N

 

[Wayside]

I see parallels with actual computer crackers and script kiddie wannabe hackers. I've been thinking the same thing lately, that modern communication methods help promote build mentality for breaking RPG systems.

I don't see the problem though. Is it really that hard to gut min-maxing by putting the players in situations they aren't min-maxed for?

 

[blargney the second]

'Sploit happens.

It can make the system more robust when the problems get addressed in updates. In the meantime, it can try your patience when you've got some punk trying repeatedly to punch a hole in your system.
-blarg

 

[Philip]

Communiciation is only one aspect.

Min-maxing can only occur with DM fiat. A big part of the problem of min-maxing with 3e is the comprehensiveness of the ruleset. If you discover a min-max 'loophole', your argument versus the DM is that much stronger because the comprehesiveness of the rules suggest that the people that created the rules intented the loophole and thus by refusing you to allow the loophole the DM is arbitratily restricting your options.

For example: if there are monsters with an ECL modifier, it is hard for the DM to forbid that particular monster to be used as PC when he thinks it unbalancing, but not others. If the race never a modifier in the first place, it is much easier for the DM to either allow or forbid on his terms.

You seem the same problem with magic item creation. Because there are rules, it becomes harder for DM's to forbid completely rules-legal but still unbalanced or broken creations.

BTW, my 1e min-max character was more unbalanced than my 3e min-max character ever was.