Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet" data-source="post: 7192746" data-attributes="member: 6689161">I am glad I inquired about this issue.  I have gained some insight from the responses of others.I believe the focus on optimization really increased with 3.0 through 3.75.  More moving parts means more levers to pull and more options.  I am not suggesting this is all bad.  In fact, I was in grad school when 3.0 was coming out and it reignited my D&D fire.However, as some old timers point out, the whole thing is really more of an orientation and a style which is independent of edition.  For example, look at some of Gygax's writings.  This thread reminded me of some of them in which he specifically addressed the ever present push for players to find an advantage and some level of one upmanship.  Its not all new.  But neither is the push for challenge and variety.  I look back at the old Axis and Allies game or "true" wargames.  Why would anyone EVER take the axis?  In almost all games they are doomed to fail.  And yet, we used to argue and push to take the underdog because they were interesting.From this perspective, it seems clear to me that even the precursors to D&D also included the opportunity for some to play with fewer advantages and that some enjoyed that.In sum, the complementary or competing forces have been present since early wargames.  My question about this (meaning optimization) being a new culture could have also been asked from the other viewpoint.  When did people start choosing less than optimal at times?  The answer is that both have been in dynamic tension since the early days of wargaming.And beyond that, many people cherry pick some of both sides (the rule of cool and the rule of optimal) to land somewhere in the middle.I believe the other point about the internet and selection bias is well taken.  There probably are more threads about optimization since this analysis benefits from system mastery and greater experience.  Choosing what sounds cool relies less on the knowledge base of the player.  You can know what you want and then hunt and peck to see if the choice exists.  When you try to fill in knowledge gaps or gain mastery, you discuss with others.(As an aside: this has almost ruined some strategy games for me.  As a collective, online communities have analyzed best strategies to the point that some opening moves are now quite static and no real experimentation is required to find and use them.  I suppose any angst I have about optimization is that some new players may feel pressure to adopt what others think should be done.  In real play experience, you learn how you can cut corners in optimization for more coolness without leaving your character ineffectual).However this too is not an absolute.  I did have a thread some time back which devolved into ways of making a character more imposing and dark magic oriented without consideration for optimization (e.g. Thaumaturgy recommended without much discussion about how it would impact resolution of actions via bonus to die).  It really helped me get immersed when I play that character...which is part of the fun for me.  The other fun thing for me is capably busting heads with a greatsword and rolling that 'ol 20-sider...</blockquote>

Verification