D&D 5E Dealing with optimizers at the table

[Lanefan]

random initiative. Especially useful if you have players who are very tactically 'smart'.

random NPC hitpoints and damage. Helps increase randomness and hinders an optimizer's planning (ok, if I we do this he will be dead in x rounds and only do x damage to use.

Totally agree with these!

Give the non-optimizers magic items to keep them up to pace the optimizers

Assuming the players/PCs control their own treasury division (I've never even heard of a game in which they did not) this one's problematic, as the optimizers might very well end up with the items intended to even the playing field.

 

[Umbran]

Often not, because you're taking fun away from the 10% to do so. Getting nerfed isn't fun. Buffing the 90% might not reduce anyone's fun (depending, of course, on the details.)

Or, you know, before you touch a rule, you can have an adult conversation with everyone about the desired game experience and norms at the table. There can be a bit of give and take, but if some folks can't come into the consensus, they can play at another table.

If people are being jerks, that's a human problem, not a rules problem. Human problems are not generally fixed by powering up a bunch of feats.

 

[overgeeked]

Assuming the players/PCs control their own treasury division (I've never even heard of a game in which they did not) this one's problematic, as the optimizers might very well end up with the items intended to even the playing field.

Yeah, I'd thought about that. It's fairly easy to make sure an item meant for one character gets to that player. Make it a specific quest reward for something they did, given to them by an NPC they're close with, a contact, mentor, etc, or if it's a weapon the rest of the group isn't built around or using, it goes to them. Same with armor. If the other PCs don't use that armor but the intended recipient does, it will generally go to them. Not guaranteed, of course. General found magic items are where you more easily get into trouble.

 

[Lanefan]

Often not, because you're taking fun away from the 10% to do so.

If taking some fun away in the short term means a better and more robust game in the long term, that's a trade I'll make all day long.

And it's a trade I've been making ever since I started kitbashing 1e many a year ago - I'd rather nerf one thing than power up ten things, as poweing lots of things up just leads to a 3e-style arms race. Bleah.

Getting nerfed isn't fun. Buffing the 90% might not reduce anyone's fun (depending, of course, on the details.)

Except buffing the 90% is the start of an arms race as I then have to buff the opponents to compensate. No thanks.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, I'd thought about that. It's fairly easy to make sure an item meant for one character gets to that player. Make it a specific quest reward for something they did, given to them by an NPC they're close with, a contact, mentor, etc, or if it's a weapon the rest of the group isn't built around or using, it goes to them. Same with armor. If the other PCs don't use that armor but the intended recipient does, it will generally go to them. Not guaranteed, of course. General found magic items are where you more easily get into trouble.

Sure, this can be done once in a while. Do it too often, however, and you risk being accused - perhaps rightly - of favouritism, which IMO is one of the greatest sins a DM can commit.

 

[dmhelp]

If untouchable AC optimization is a problem then limit armors/shields to +1 or just non optimum armor (chainmail instead of plate) without magic shields depending on how bad it is. You could also give items that cast mage armor or no concentration bark skin (to bring up the bottom). That way everyone gets hit and takes some damage.

If certain weapon styles are a problem then drop non optimizable weapons (a +3 acid tongue mace will make a non optimized character or dual wielder compete with pam/gwm). It is harder if it is a sharpshooter build since they benefit from any ranged weapon. But nice one handed (not staff/polearm) melee weapons will even the spread somewhat. You can also do things like gloves of the drow weapon master that add 1d6 or 2d6 damage while twfing (you would do this instead of +3 acid tongue not in addition to). You can be honest that this is to balance things because cbe/ss and pam/gwm are too good. So that is why you are playing favorites. There is a game where I minmaxed and started with pam. I got a flametongue and pam turned into a wasted feat. I don’t mind, it was my choice to minmax.

If it is abusing conjure animals that is harder. Limit summons to 1 creature or make summoned creatures take shares of xp. You could start having more enemies do AOE spells or use conjure animals if it doesn’t cause party wipes due to the unoptimized players.

 

[Istbor]

Exactly. It's even less effort to say "no optimizing". But that didn't work.

Optimizing is the issue. Their optimizing is causing them to almost exclusively have the spotlight during combat, to drastically overshadow the other players, they're so wrapped up in the charop minigame and combat that nothing else is engaging to them...and a few other problems...all of which directly come from their optimizing. Again, I'm not talking about having your high stat match your class or picking a race with a beneficial bonus to your desired class.

See this is where maybe some are having difficulty. When you say something like this; to me it doesn't read as optimization as the issue. Its that THESE player(s) are doing the optimization either in a way or to an extent that it stops being for the greater good of the group, and more for their own gain. You can feel powerful while still relying on others to cover your flaws or weaknesses, so that they too gain that feeling of being powerful and relevant. This just sounds more like time to have a 'real talk' discussion about how what they are doing is impacting the other players, yourself included.

I mean honestly, I know it is terrible, but I wouldn't mind trying out a coffeelock at some point, or that interesting cleric combo you mentioned, that I have no actual clue about. These sound fun to me! Do I also understand that they probably have a specific place in certain campaigns and groups in which they fit and are allowed? Yes. If that bit, has been explained, and then ignored by the player(s) who are causing this rift, then it is on them.

 

[ClaytonCross]

By traditional definition, that is not min/maxing as it does not address the min which is minimizing weaknesses.

By design D&D requires investment of recourses. You can't maximize one thing without minimizing others because the game does not provide the resources for both. I don't mention what is minimized because the conversation is about the optimization / maximization issues the GM is dealing with and because the minimized stats are going to variable. I have no doubt you know and understand this... and that it is min/maxing so I don't see what point your trying to make since its simply not true to say I was not talking about min/maxing.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Before I say anything else: which edition are you playing? Because that will have a huge influence on this.

Optimizing is the issue.

 

[Ragmon]

Don't be afraid of certain play-styles, embrace them and adjust your GM-ing accordingly, adapt and have fun.

First thing first, "optimized" isnt the same as "game-breaking" or "over-powered".

Second, you are the GM, adjust the combat accordingly (while preparing and/or on-the-fly). Very easy to do in 5e (IMO).

Your goal as the GM is to try to create an environment/situation where everyone is having fun.
Give everyone moments to shine, no matter the play-style (unless ist something horrible/abusive).

I can go into detail and stuff, if someone asks.

Thoughts I have while GM-ing for players who "optimize".

• "ooh this guy is really sharpening their character to a fine edge, hmm lets see if I put the party into this situation"
• "what if I create a situation where they isolated from the group in combat".
• "lets figure out what is their character's weakness"
• "lets find the breaking point"
• "this is rather fun to think about"