Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 7991999" data-attributes="member: 5834">Let me see if I can clear this up. My players don't min-max to break the game. I know those players exist, but that's not my players. My players min-max within the framework of a given system because they like being really effective in combat. So asking them if they miss being able to min-max isn't really what I've asked them. They wouldn't even understand the question and might be get offended. Sometimes I give them a hard time for min-max like one of my buddies chose to use a longsword for 1 point of extra damage until he reached level 3 on a magus so he could use a scimitar for dex damage and when I said that is BS, you're min-maxing for a point of damage. He got offended and said I can do whatever I want. So I left it alone.Their mentality summed up: 1. They don't rule lawyer. If something seems too powerful and they can see it too, they don't mind if I come up with a reasonable compromise to reduce the ability in power. They aren't trying to exploit the game.2. They still very much build concepts. They don't take every powerful ability in the game even if it doesn't fit their concept. They have a strategy and a character concept they are building around. They try to find the most effective combat ability to support their concept.3. They play to win, but want something worth winning. They love winning and defeating challenges. It would bore the living crap out of them if they built these powerful concepts and they ran over everything like it was nothing. That's why I have to put so much work in. They don't want a broken, easy game, but in PF1 I really had to work hard to challenge them. 5E wasn't as bad as PF1 thankfully, I found it boring to DM but I didn't have to hugely modify creatures to make them challenging.I hope that better explains. We discuss the game, but not in the context of min-max. I've been asking my players if they are having fun. I can give you the reasons they've told me they still like it and some of their concerns:1. They like the 3 action system and the variety of options. The options really got them on board. They really missed being able to build interesting characters and additional books in 5E. One of their biggest complaints they joked about was having all this extra money because they had no 5E books to buy. We talked about that. They are looking forward to buying books again.2. The champion is finding the shield underwhelming as he levels. Monsters hit so hard that blocking isn't a good option any longer. We might look at that some more.3. One player doesn't like having to buy up skills like Religion and Arcana to get more access to feats he wants or rituals. He wants to be able to buy skills at trained and not be limited. I don't agree with that, so I likely won't be making that change. I like player having to build up his skill to be better with the skill.4. I think the wizard is too weak. They need some tweaking in my opinion. But I'll definitely wait until someone really puts effort into playing a wizard before I make changes. See I'm missing something.Those are some of the topics we've been discussing as we play. I can't ask them about min-maxing. Sorry. That would lead to arguments or eye rolling.</blockquote>

Verification