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

[MechaPilot]

I always optimize. That doesn't mean I dump on other people.

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

Sure, but just about any group of people is going to contain some bad apples. The same is true of optimizers. Yeah, some of them are jerks. However, the problem is that those particular persons are jerks, and not that they are optimizers, and not that all optimizers are jerks (for that latter point, to be clear, I'm not responding to an assertion on your part; I'm just covering all my bases).

 

[frankthedm]

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!

It can be helpful in spotting stuff that might be problematic.

 

[Shasarak]

The Character Ops forums are something I wish would die with the Wizards forums and not have made their way over here.

I find this type of culture very disruptive to the game overall because it breeds a type who think that you aren't playing a class right if you don't choose the most optimal choice, or there is a problem with class A if it's optimal choices don't out it on par with class B.

I was a Min/Maxer back in the day and I can tell you that it always led to games that were not pleasant. It ruined the fun for everyone at the table.

I think it's also why we saw the errata treadmill of 4th edition because as soon as new things came out, CO was finding that power X plus combo Y + Q was overpowered and so the next errata tried to fix it again only to cause even worse results.

I hope it's changed from what it was, but what I remember was basically all about the DPR.

CharOp is just part of the gamer cycle of life.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I'm reminded of when SW:TOR launched, and a bunch of gamers said "I hope they never have damage meters in this game; damage meters ruined WoW."

 

[Leatherhead]

Folks complain about it because it is a far distance from bad/weak to optimized. Modern editions of the game (to me at least) seem quite survivable with pretty stock, non-optimized stuff. You have to kind of work at it to really shoot yourself in the foot these days. But, having someone who optimizes, among people who don't, can increase risk for the group, rather than decrease it - the GM has to stat things up to challenge the optimizer, and that puts middle-of-the-roaders at risk. Thus, successful play only requires optimization if others are optimizing.

The number of people who flip out over something as minor as a flying PC , magical lock-picking, or non-magical healing, has proven to me that the real issue with this particular aspect of the problem was never optimization. It was that some people can't handle anything other than the standard script.

 

[Psikerlord#]

The Character Ops forums are something I wish would die with the Wizards forums and not have made their way over here.

I find this type of culture very disruptive to the game overall because it breeds a type who think that you aren't playing a class right if you don't choose the most optimal choice, or there is a problem with class A if it's optimal choices don't out it on par with class B.

I was a Min/Maxer back in the day and I can tell you that it always led to games that were not pleasant. It ruined the fun for everyone at the table.

I think it's also why we saw the errata treadmill of 4th edition because as soon as new things came out, CO was finding that power X plus combo Y + Q was overpowered and so the next errata tried to fix it again only to cause even worse results.

I hope it's changed from what it was, but what I remember was basically all about the DPR.

I agree that overall, the game is best without any true "optimization" efforts. More focus on a realistic PC = more fun, ime.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

I agree that overall, the game is best without any true "optimization" efforts. More focus on a realistic PC = more fun, ime.

I just started a new campaign earlier tonight. I play a halfling Bard that uses Vicious Mockery (with a list of funny insults I've pre-selected). (Eventually he'll be using these insults with "cutting words", but right now he's level 1)

I made Charisma my highest ability. I chose to do this so his Vicious Mockery would work more often (higher save DC). This of course is optimization. I'm curious how you think this reduced my fun?

Edit: More importantly (frankly FAR more importantly), I'm curious how this reduces your fun? If there's one thing that is crystal clear from this thread, my choosing Cha as my highest stat somehow creates great offense to many on these boards, and I don't really understand why?

 

[Dragonsbane]

The difference for me and my games, over the last 20+ years:

A player who rocks at role-playing usually enhances the game.

A player who rocks at optimizing sometimes makes the game better, but more often than not it upsets other players who didn't optimize, and often disrupts the game, especially at high levels.

My experience, after running dozens of campaigns and hundreds upon hundreds of sessions.

I wish I was wrong. Yet, just three sessions ago, while playing Pathfinder, the rogue finally stopped showing up after the optimized wizard showed he can do everything the rogue can do, in addition to dozens of other things the wizard can do. His DCs make it hard to challenge the whole group, and his cherry-picking of spells and powers makes me want to go back to just core rules.

Its my last PF campaign, and my current 5e games have strict house rules on numbers and bounded accuracy, ie no classes with less than 5 levels by 20th level (no dips into a class for 1 or 2 levels only), GWM set to -3/+6, and so on.

I wish the two were compatible. In my experience, sadly, they rarely are.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I just started a new campaign earlier tonight. I play a halfling Bard that uses Vicious Mockery (with a list of funny insults I've pre-selected). (Eventually he'll be using these insults with "cutting words", but right now he's level 1)

Total tangent: one thing I find frustrating about the bard fluff is that it conflicts with the mechanics. I love the idea of roleplaying Cutting Words by flinging actual silly insults ("You fight like a dairy farmer!")--but how can you roleplay doing that in the middle of someone else's sword swing when you see they're about to hit in the midst of chaotic melee, while you're busy Inspiring another comrade and casting a spell? Just how fast is this bard talking? It ends up disrupting my sense of immersion and, as a DM, I wind up wanting to reflavor the bard as just using magic for these tasks, even if it's not the newfangled wizardly-type spell magic. (Cutting words = you hum a chord of dissonant notes which resonates strangely in the enemy's mind. Also explains why language doesn't matter.)

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I wish I was wrong. Yet, just three sessions ago, while playing Pathfinder, the rogue finally stopped showing up after the optimized wizard showed he can do everything the rogue can do, in addition to dozens of other things the wizard can do. His DCs make it hard to challenge the whole group, and his cherry-picking of spells and powers makes me want to go back to just core rules.

Apropos of nothing, I wonder why more people don't try variant campaigns, such as "everyone is nonmagical" or "wizards gain levels by age and not XP; if you play a wizard, your level is the square root of the number of years since your apprenticeship ended" or "fighter XP table is arithmetic; wizard XP table is exponential". You have to lay that out at the beginning of the campaign of course.

But I think an all-fighter or mostly-fighter campaign could actually be quite fun, kind of like the A-Team. Playing a 3rd level wizard in a group of 11th level fighters could also be fun--"Yeah I'm weak in combat without my friends, but I can cast illusions and infiltrate enemy positions and turn you invisible and disable your enemies with laughter, so I'm still a good guy to have in the group." Very old-school.