D&D 5E A simple questions for Power Gamers, Optimizers, and Min-Maxers.

[Flexor the Mighty!]

When it comes to risk-taking, I find that the opposite is true: you have to supply reasons to the characters to act in non-cautious ways. Otherwise it becomes like Shadowrun, the game where PCs routinely risk their lives for a month's rent, a.k.a. cognitive dissonance galore.

In a casual game where roleplaying doesn't happen much and players aren't concentrating on acting as character advocates (i.e. "what would Ralph want to do here?"), it's much easier to persuade players to make a PC stick his head in a mysterious hole in the ground just to see what happens. But no sane human being would actually behave that way, because sane human beings don't expect to reincarnate immediately with a new set of stats and all relationships intact if "killed."

No sane person is going to descend into some long abandoned temple of Tharizdun so I figure it all plays into the theme.

 

[smbakeresq]

If I have a low stat, I'll dump charisma.

I find that roleplaying an anti-social jerk is a serious challenge.

No, you don't have to comment on that. Really.

Low charisma doesn't mean anti-social. It could just mean unable to express yourself, or maybe just very quiet. Or maybe you are a person who make people nervous.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[smbakeresq]

When it comes to risk-taking, I find that the opposite is true: you have to supply reasons to the characters to act in non-cautious ways. Otherwise it becomes like Shadowrun, the game where PCs routinely risk their lives for a month's rent, a.k.a. cognitive dissonance galore.

In a casual game where roleplaying doesn't happen much and players aren't concentrating on acting as character advocates (i.e. "what would Ralph want to do here?"), it's much easier to persuade players to make a PC stick his head in a mysterious hole in the ground just to see what happens. But no sane human being would actually behave that way, because sane human beings don't expect to reincarnate immediately with a new set of stats and all relationships intact if "killed."

Yes, because of online games that punish risk taking, which is all of them. When we get a new player that comes from them they are conditioned to be able run in, run back out, heal, repeat and if they cant to sit around a corner waiting for someone else to go. Its terrible what they have been conditioned to do. They are also deathly afraid to let go of any item.

Its just how it is now until you break them of the habit. I also play World of Tanks, they will just sit there and watch the team lose to get in one shot of damage late in game.

 

[TwoSix]

If I have a low stat, I'll dump charisma.

I find that roleplaying an anti-social jerk is a serious challenge.

No, you don't have to comment on that. Really.

At least your posting history shows you're ready to tackle even the toughest challenges.

(I can't help it, it was right there!)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[smbakeresq]

Something else to do as a DM that doesn't get mentioned enough, look what your characters are race and class wise and put something in their for them. Half elf, make sure to put some social interactions in there. Goliath, take them to the mountains and the cold. Dwarfs better find that moving stone trap in the mine they are in. BTW, double up on traps, once they find the first one they generally stop looking for the second one! Humans are generalists, so they fit everywhere.

Speaking of Goliath, I changed the powerful build to previous version. You can use weapons one size larger without penalty i.e. d8 to d10, d10 to d12, etc. The game effect is to add 1 to 2 points to average damage, which distinguishes the race more. The d12 greataxe (always a favorite since a goliath with greataxe mini exists) is a d16, use a d8 and an odd/even roll, odd is 1-8, even is 9-16. Just make sure you pay attention to weapon sizes and equipment sizes, some but not all magic stuff will resize to fit wearer.


This version is far easier to DM then previous ones.

 

[TwoSix]

You have no idea.

Before every post, I have to stop and think to myself, "What would [MENTION=205]TwoSix[/MENTION] write?"

Only after that, am I properly in character.

It's an honor and a privilege. Or as my thri-kreen katana would say, "I will kill you for your XP, fleshy skinbag." (Sorry, sometimes idioms don't translate well.)

 

[Captain Panda]

It is not a system building question, it is a theoretical one. If you can't get over that cognitive leap that's cool, no worries.

Yeah, I think that's where I am. I do not think that one can balance the mechanics while keeping them distinct without making them dull at the same time.

Further, I don't really know what it means to optimize something in a context where a character constructed at random will have the exact same level of power. If it could be done, I don't even think it'd be a desirable outcome. I think that characters should feel like they have different levels of power, perhaps varying due to context somewhat, but I think that the half-orc barbarian should be just a bit more menacing (mechanically as well as thematically) than the gnome.

 

[dave2008]

I think that characters should feel like they have different levels of power, perhaps varying due to context somewhat, but I think that the half-orc barbarian should be just a bit more menacing (mechanically as well as thematically) than the gnome.

Personally I agree completely. I think races in particular should be much more unbalanced. IMO, gnomes, halflings, kolbolds (and maybe elves and dwarves), etc. should not be able to get a strength of 20. Then take this line of thinking to all of the races and just see what ya get.