D&D 5E D&D Stats: What The Typical 5E Party *Actually* Looks Like

[Paul Farquhar]

I wonder how many people have actually "unlocked all options" on D&D Beyond? My guess, a couple of hundred.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This brings up a related question I've often wondered about.

Is there such a thing as a bad powergamer? Not in terms of being obnoxious, or a bad person, but someone who has an actual goal of powergaming and optimizing and munchkining, but is just terrible at it?

Sort of like, "Muahahahahahaha! My Strength-build wizard will rule them all! Bow before me and my awesome True Strike!"

Sounds like me.

 

[Parmandur]

This brings up a related question I've often wondered about.

Is there such a thing as a bad powergamer? Not in terms of being obnoxious, or a bad person, but someone who has an actual goal of powergaming and optimizing and munchkining, but is just terrible at it?

Sort of like, "Muahahahahahaha! My Strength-build wizard will rule them all! Bow before me and my awesome True Strike!"

When I CharOp, it is usually to minimize the mathimatical damage from a silly concept, like a Gnome Paladin.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[RSIxidor]

This brings up a related question I've often wondered about.

Is there such a thing as a bad powergamer? Not in terms of being obnoxious, or a bad person, but someone who has an actual goal of powergaming and optimizing and munchkining, but is just terrible at it?

Sort of like, "Muahahahahahaha! My Strength-build wizard will rule them all! Bow before me and my awesome True Strike!"

There's certainly people that don't actually understand the system they are playing in but believe that they do to the point they think their build is uber-effective, and then find their builds fall apart under inspection. The only other thing I can think of is people that really push for unusual builds just to see if they can. The results are usually effective but not "optimal" builds.

 

[TwoSix]

Mathematical damage?

What about the AESTHETIC and EMOTIONAL damage inflicted by gnome paladins?

I min/max my eDPR (emotional damage per round).

 

[Parmandur]

Mathematical damage?

What about the AESTHETIC and EMOTIONAL damage inflicted by gnome paladins?

Part of the fun.

 

[BookBarbarian]

They screen out test concept characters, by using metrics about work being down in a PC sheet that indicate use in play. Not 100%, probably, but probably good enough.

True, but I level up these background characters as I level up my campaign character and even upgrade their gear, especially in the case of the Artificer. So I wonder how sophisticated their way of determining use in play is.

 

[Parmandur]

True, but I level up these background characters as I level up my campaign character and even upgrade their gear, especially in the case of the Artificer. So I wonder how sophisticated their way of determining use in play is.

At that point, is there a difference from their point of view...?