D&D 5E Char Ops forums: Something I wish hadn't come over.

[procproc]

I used to post in the WotC Min/Max boards (before they became the CharOp boards circa 2004) under the user name Grey Muse. There was a lot of interesting theorycraft that came out of those discussions. I think even the archives of that time are long gone by now, though, since they changed the forum software at least once since then.

These days, I focus a lot more on story elements -- it's easy enough to put your thumb on the scales when actually running a game to make characters balanced with one another. I'm happy to see those kinds of threads around here, at any rate.

 

[Sunseeker]

It's not entirely on me because it became a product of those crazy combos. In order to challenge me, the DM had to throw stuff that would destroy the other players.

I don't consider that a playstyle.

"I didn't kill people, the gun killed people!"

No, I'm sorry but you willingly power-built. You don't do that on accident. You can't say "it's the systems fault because there were broken combos that I took advantage of." you could have chosen not to power-build. But instead you chose to power-build and to avoid you steamrolling encounters the DM upped the ante. You could have depowered yourself or made a new character, all those choices were available to you.

Obviously you did consider that a playstyle and I won't speculate as to what caused you to change your mind, though I can guess, but power-building most certainly is a playstyle that works.

Being un-fun at the table is a consequence of how you play. Not your stats.

There are people who do, though, and they're really annoying.

And they're jerks. Some people will always be jerks. I've played with theater-majors who were jerks because they power-RP. That's, IMO, less fun than power-building because if Bob the Weakling dies, the new character has all the options open to them that the power-builders do. While a person who isn't a professional actor can't simply take better feats and role-play better.

 

[Tony Vargas]

CharOp is still an interesting exercise as it always has been, but with 5e's DM-empowerment and rulings-not-rules philosophy, it can't disrupt a campaign much unless the DM actively abets the optimizer.

To put it another way, truly effective optimization or powergaming in 5e is not a matter of gaming the system, but of gaming the DM.

And no one has to peek into a forum they don't like the looks of.

 

[CapnZapp]

In the end, it's very easy to not go to that section of the forums.

The problem is that, as far as I understand, there can be one of two implementations:

The previous one, where 5th Ed charop threads were exiled to one big charop forum which nobody looked at. This meant EN World was not the go-to place to discuss 5E charop issues.

The current one, where 5th Ed charop threads are automatically included when you view the main 5e forum. While this massively increases the visibility of any 5E charop thread you make, it makes it harder to "not go to that section". In fact, AFAIK it's currently impossible to not go there: you simply can't read the main 5E forum without the charop threads!

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

And there seems to be no technical solution that allows some of us to watch all 5E threads in one spot and others to view only general 5E threads. Same with house rule, adventurer's league and a few other forums.

---

As I see it, the core problem is having one big charop forum. If 5e charop was its own forum, there wouldn't be a need to filter on tags. Which is the explanation Morrus has provided: you can't set up a forum that adds BOTH "this other forum" AND "threads tagged XYZ from this other forum", so the only way to have it the way it is now is for the main forum itself to add "threads tagged XYZ from this other forum".

(I might be wrong; I don't work here)

Also, if 5e charop was its own forum, perhaps it - in combination with the sudden influx of WotC forumists - would garner enough interest since you wouldn't have to even know PF or 4E (or AD&D, or OSR etc) charop issues are even discussed at the site. Which would be a fundamental necessity for you guys to ever get your wish. Meaning that I would hate for charop threads to disappear from the main forum if that means EnWorld goes back to being not the go-to place to discuss 5E charop issues!

 

[Uchawi]

Why did I bring a knife to a wizard party ... the very nature of the game hints at optimization just by comparing classes while playing. Get rid of envy, jealousy, curiosity, or one-upmanship and maybe we can hand ought flags and play touch. But if you are happy with your character, what does it matter what the other person is doing?

5E is not a complicated game (in comparison to D&D overall), so the inconsistencies or more powerful options as easy to expose.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I find that the only time a player heavily into optimization results in their being any problems at all, that it is not because the optimizer is present and is optimizing, but because the DM and group at the table are not prepared to play with an optimizer.

The main mistakes made from that lack of preparation are:

1. The other players developing envy because the optimized character is good at what it is optimized to do - the answer is not to be upset by another players character by focusing on your own. If you like your character and the other players like their characters, and no one is playing against other players, the result will be a party of characters that work well together played by players that enjoy them (the optimized character is, factually, a boon to the party they are in).

2. The DM thinking they are meant to challenge the optimized character. That's not at all the case. The optimizer has done what they can do to improve chance of success at some particular set of activities, so answering their effort by reducing those chances back down to "normal" with your challenge design causes the optimizer to either feel their level of optimization is absolutely necessary so that failure isn't more common than success (perceiving this higher challenge level as what your "normal" is), or to try harder to push even more performance out of their character (meaning you've started an arms race that never ends well).

If the DM realizes that they can just build challenges as if the optimizer weren't an optimizer, the end result is that the non-optimizers at the table aren't overwhelmed by the challenges, and the optimizers at the table can scale their optimization to the relative level they want when it comes to chances of success at their optimized activities and be satisfied with the results.

I've even found such an approach to lead to players once absolutely certain that to not optimize meant to die (their prior DM made this the case) reconsidering that idea and finding it to be false, so they now focuse less on optimizing their characters.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Personally, I've been involved in character optimization on forums for about 8 years now. During that time there have definitely been some optimizers who have not been nice to others at all, and frankly, there have been some non-optimizers who aren't very nice either. However, I think you will find, if the chance is given, that most of us are here because we enjoy the game and like to communicate with others that enjoy the game too.

Optimization isn't a fringe part of the game. It's built right into the rules. The PHB is giving you optimization advice consistently as you read through it (example: The "quick build" advice for each class). This is because the game is a mix of storytelling and challenge, and some basic optimization allows you to meet that challenge with success. Avoid it if you like, but removing optimization from the visible 5e forum makes no more sense than removing any other rules based discussion.

The general forum-etiquette I have always followed, and I daresay the vast majority of optimizers follow is this:
1) Provide guides or advice on clearly labelled threads so they can be found by those interested in looking at them (Example: My own "Treantmonk's guide to Wizards")
2) Provide advice or feedback on any thread where optimization advice is requested. (Example: Someone asking for advice on a Wizard build to fit into a stealth-based party)
3) If optimization advice is not requested, don't provide any. I always figure if someone wants advice on this topic, they will ask.
4) Participate in the community as a whole, by posting experiences/opinions that are not optimization advice (as I'm doing right now)
5) Don't dump on anyone, period. Honestly, Optimizer/Non-optimizer says nothing about our personality. I'm an optimizer, but I'm certainly not a power-gamer looking to overshadow anyone.

 

[Olrox17]

As a DM, i found the CharOP forums an invaluable source of knowledge. Once I knew about all the broken, bent and overpowered things it was much easier to establish clear power limits and table rules before the start of a campaign.

No chance to have an absurd combo just pop up during play and disrupting things, when you know them all beforehand!

 

[MoonSong]

Personally, I've been involved in character optimization on forums for about 8 years now. During that time there have definitely been some optimizers who have not been nice to others at all, and frankly, there have been some non-optimizers who aren't very nice either. However, I think you will find, if the chance is given, that most of us are here because we enjoy the game and like to communicate with others that enjoy the game too.

Optimization isn't a fringe part of the game. It's built right into the rules. The PHB is giving you optimization advice consistently as you read through it (example: The "quick build" advice for each class). This is because the game is a mix of storytelling and challenge, and some basic optimization allows you to meet that challenge with success. Avoid it if you like, but removing optimization from the visible 5e forum makes no more sense than removing any other rules based discussion.

The general forum-etiquette I have always followed, and I daresay the vast majority of optimizers follow is this:
1) Provide guides or advice on clearly labelled threads so they can be found by those interested in looking at them (Example: My own "Treantmonk's guide to Wizards")
2) Provide advice or feedback on any thread where optimization advice is requested. (Example: Someone asking for advice on a Wizard build to fit into a stealth-based party)
3) If optimization advice is not requested, don't provide any. I always figure if someone wants advice on this topic, they will ask.
4) Participate in the community as a whole, by posting experiences/opinions that are not optimization advice (as I'm doing right now)
5) Don't dump on anyone, period. Honestly, Optimizer/Non-optimizer says nothing about our personality. I'm an optimizer, but I'm certainly not a power-gamer looking to overshadow anyone.

I get where you come from, personally I'm an anti-optimizer, or more like an optimizer who optimizes for suboptimal. But it still involves tinkering and using options, and it carries some stigma. Nothing wrong with charop, these guides can bring well guidance, and give you interesting ideas you weren't aware of. I perused -and peruse- the 4e guides but still play characters with a 15 or 14 on their primary score for example.

And I was thinking of writing a sorcerer guide myself, if I only knew about dpr....

 

[steeldragons]

Ok. So, apparently the thread that has caused the upheaval, which I linked to in my previous post, is now essentially meaningless and we're stuck with the current situation for a time.

So, I urge everyone to head on over to this new/now/next thread on the subject in the Meta forum, here, Where should "5e House Rules" and 5e "Character Builds & Optimization" Posts Go, and let your voice/vote be heard.