Anti-munchkins?

[Old Fezziwig]

I've played with a person who played a wizard that would not cast spells against opponents (or on herself, but as she only cast one spell, we never found out if she had any buffing spells) unless at least one of two conditions were met. The opponents had to either cast spells against us or be non-humanoid (beasts, monsters, undead, all that stuff). Her character didn't have a missile weapon to use against people and rushed into melee combat with her quarterstaff (she wore no armor, had no dex bonus). In the two sessions that character was in the party, she almost died twice (in 2 of 3 combats). It was kind of frustrating at the time, but, in retrospect, it's fairly amusing. This, of course, was a counterpoint to her previous character (a conjurer that was fairly hopeless in combat after her spells ran out — although when the rest of the group's dice went cold and started fumbling and just plain missing, she'd have her character picking up rocks, throwing them, hitting almost any AC, and doing solid damage — also funny, but pretty odd, too).

Best,
tKL

 

[Dark Eternal]

Mmh, I can see making weak characters for challege, if games I have played had been more like "Ancient Domains of Mystery" or "Nethack", or whatever roguelike, especially if I'd already tested all the killer-combos of min-maxing.

Exactly - that's me, right there. Once you've played the chick with the 50 AC stark naked, or the barbarian who can mow through an NPC army, or the cleric who single handedly turns the ancient red wyrm into green slime, you start to realize something - the game's just not that much fun when your character is never threatened. And besides - take a guy off the street, hand him a Total Munchkin Death Machine, and of course he's going to kick the crap out of the bad guys!!! So what makes you so special? Now show me the list of people who can make it to 20th level with a character that had 1 hit point at first level... this is an accomplishment.

Anyways, that's my 2cp. Signing out~

 

[Bendris Noulg]

In reality, however, they are more often disruptive to dm and insist on other players following their lead too. It's ok, if you want to play "adventures of ordenary slightly unusual people", but really bothersome, if you try to play heroic fantasy.

Another trend is to do characters, that no way are likely to ever go into adventure in the first place, at least not with people they are supposed to be travelling with (aka rest of the party).

If anything, this is a failing of the system. In any genre, there are (effectively) 3 forms of hero:

1. The Born Hero
2. The Made Hero
3. The Unlikely Hero

The game fully supports the 1st, will allow the 2nd, but seems completely opposed to the 3rd.

That's a design problem, not a Player problem.

Some things picked by these players are illogical even from point of characters, considering what kind of life these character are supposed to have lived.

Which is? Even the Hero Builder's Guidebook presents backgrounds from noble to peasant, from acedemic scholar to dirt farmer and ex-slaves. What "life these characters are supposed to have lived" would you be refering to exactly?

 

[ThoughtBubble]

Which is? Even the Hero Builder's Guidebook presents backgrounds from noble to peasant, from acedemic scholar to dirt farmer and ex-slaves. What "life these characters are supposed to have lived" would you be refering to exactly?

I believe that he's referring to the adventurer with with no family, no friends, no enemies, and no goals who sits in a room in the inn reading all day. It's amasing how many of the people who consider themselves in it for the characters that I've DMed for have a tendancy to make that character. Maybe it has soemthing to do with playing with friends getting computer degrees.

But I've also got a wizard that, if he had the stats for his playstyle would be a barbarian1/rouge2 right now. As a wizard, he does the most horriffically suicidal things ever (Charging into every battle but one so far, single handedly trying to save the rouge from a group of 4 orcs, jumping off a bridge into the river to try and rescue the fighter), but it's also heroic and he's got a character with loads of personality. And I love it. I love the rock solid guy without much personality, but who's always there too.

It's just the LN cleric who goes into hiding when something happens, and is typically dragged along with the party, and the CN warrior who is defined by his apathy towards everything that suck.

I guess, in the end, I have no problem with a weak character concept as long as the player has no problems accepting the consiquences of being weak. But when the cleric asks for a Knowledge(herbalism) then complains the skill is worthless, it gets on my nerves.

So, Dark Eternal, what exactly did you do with your stat points on the one HP wizard. What all did you need to try to survive? And did it make your wizard more memorable? Was he fun (or at least not a giant pain in the ass) for the DM?

 

[Lord Pendragon]

What I wonder is, for those who create RP-characters that are weak combat-wise....are these in games with a very low combat-to-RP quotient? In most games I've played in, it's generally a mixture of the two. As a result, I try and create a PC that is combat-wise a powerhouse, and RP-wise a complex and interesting personality. That way I can have fun during the orc raid, and I can have fun at the royal ball at the same time.

Luckily, I've never encountered a player that purposefully created a useless PC as a way to "prove" his RP greatness. The closest I've come is playing with a new player who inadvertently created a combat-weak PC. The elf-barbarian with the 14 strength....not the deadliest combatant.

 

[diaglo]

Edit: I forgot to mention it - out of the player characters in the party that I played that wizard? I was the only one to survive first level. The party fighter - min/maxed and quite well equipped - died, was replaced, died again, was replaced again, and - you guessed it! DIED!!! My one hit point wizard survived five sessions - at which point the game fell apart due to scheduling conflicts. *sigh*.....

at its core D&D is a roleplaying game meant for teamwork. from your above statement it sounds like your character didn't contribute to the team.

how's this sound for fun?

1hp guy: my character waits in the middle of the party for something to happen.
min/maxed fighter: i wait, too.
rest of party: we wait, also.
Frustrated DM: an ogre charges out of the night. Enters the tavern and attacks your party
1hp guy: well since i have only an 11 int (therefore being able to cast but not getting a spell bonus) and light armor i duck behind the fighter.
min/maxed fighter: i don't want to die. i duck behind the wizard.
rest of party: we flee.
Frustrated DM: do you want to try anything?
that way no one is risking their lives and therefore lives.

 

[Voadam]

I played in a oneshot 1e 1st level game as a magic user with a 9 intelligence (the minimum). He had one spell, light and a dagger, but I played him like rambo and had a great time. His THACO was as good as all the fighters, and he freaked the other characters out. His tactic was to blind an opponent with light and then go psycho with his big survival knife.