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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OnlineDM" data-source="post: 5588585" data-attributes="member: 90804">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=90770" target="_blank">DumbPaladin</a>  and  @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=85555" target="_blank">Bedrockgames</a>  - Thank you for chiming in with your thoughts on the original question. I particularly find DumbPaladin's comments to be fascinating. If I'm reading them right, he's saying that he thinks power gamers are BAD and should be shunned, just like dog beaters, etc. Wow. That's harsh. That's not the way I feel, but I still I appreciate the perspective, and I appreciate the thought of, "If you really want to learn to accept these horrible people, try interviewing a bunch of them." I don't think they're horrible, I just look down on them, and I'd like to not look down on them.As to Bedrockgames's comment about trying to get a feel for the table as a whole and get the group to come to a consensus on "we are power gamers here" or "we are not power gamers here" I think that's a good approach in the big picture, but not always possible on a particular day. For an ongoing campaign, a player can choose to adapt or find another game if the rest of the table is very different from them; it's not going to be easy to do that at a public play game, but that's okay since those are one and done.And to those on the thread who have chimed in to say "Here's why power gaming is right," I appreciate the input. It might help me become more accepting, even if it's not quite what I was looking for. And please try to keep in mind that not everyone sees things the way you do - not everyone feels that if you're NOT power gaming, you're "doing it wrong".  @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/member.php?u=87792" target="_blank">Neonchameleon</a>, I see things differently than you do, but I appreciate your perspective all the same. I think you're saying that tweaking a PC's stats to the max is not cool in your perspective, since it's not something the PC can control, but tweaking things like feats and powers and spells and gear is cool because the PC can control it and the PC as a "real character" would WANT every advantage they can get that's within their control. To which I say yes, but the PC doesn't have the source books to browse through hundreds of feats and powers and spells necessarily, nor do they know about all of the possible equipment that exists in their mysterious world and therefore spend their time seeking out the right bazaar to get the Uber-Sword of Iwreckyou. An in-character way of power gaming would be for the PC to realize, "Wow, I really had a hard time when I fought that dragon; I'd really like to focus on fighting better against flying foes so that if I run into another dragon I'll be ready." And then the PC decides to spend his down time learning a feat to get an advantage against flying creatures or a better ranged weapon or a spell that's effective against dragons or something like that. The PC would NOT spend time getting a bizarre pair of feats that break the action economy in some completely non-intuitive way or something like that; that's not role-playing, even if it may be maximizing the PC's effectiveness. How the heck would the PC know about those possibilities?I can't say, "All feat choices and power choices and spell choices and equipment choices are fine to maximize combat prowess because they're under the PC's control." That may be technically true, but it may strain the bounds of plausibility (given that we're already talking about a fantasy game here). That's meta-knowledge on the part of the player, and that's what I'm trying to learn to be more accepting of.</blockquote>

Verification