D&D 5E Dealing with optimizers at the table

[TwoSix]

So, you have identified resources that the optimizer uses.

To repeat myself, provide uses for those resources that are not as good as the optimizers uses in the form of magic items or houserules.

Then turn up the game difficulty to match.

One player has PAM+GWM+BM reaction attacks at level 11, to make 5 attacks/round at +10 to damage with their +2 glaive? Neat. That is a lot of damage. The 16 dex ranger dual wielding short swords isn't going to keep up with that.

Flamedancers: This pair of +2 scimitars deals +1d6 fire damage on a hit. When you have both equipped and use two weapon fighting, your bonus action attack lets you attack twice. When you are hit by an attack you can expend a reaction to attack back; if your reaction attack hits, the triggering attack must reroll with disadvantage.

If I did my math right, this still does less damage than the BM PAM GWM fighter does, but it (a) closes the gap, and (b) is really fun.

As the DM you have mechanical levers. They aren't the only things you have, but they are part of your toolkit.

You are in charge of magic items. You are in charge of monster stats.

Part of the DM's job is to use those levers..

This is excellent and often under-utilized advice. Magic items are a fantastic lever to drive the game in various directions, and fall under complete DM control to modify and place in the game under most tables' social contracts. Give your undertuned PCs straight up potency bumps (+hit, +damage), and give overtuned PCs utility and options.

Most of the strongest builds in 5e are locked to particular weapon types, so it's pretty easy to give out magic weapons that the strongest PCs won't want. A PAM/GWM fighter or paladin will probably turn down even a vorpal or flametongue longsword.

 

[CleverNickName]

@TwoSix You and me both.

It just goes back to the original point, about making sure everyone is on the same page and everyone has the same expectations for the game. There's nothing wrong with playing an Evoker, even a highly-optimized, cherry-picked half-elf sorcerer/warlock/green flame blade/whatever. It only causes problems when the player expects something that the DM won't deliver, or vice versa. It sounds like the OP was having that issue.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I disagree. Who cares what type the trees are if one is trying to avoid the forest? It's not about how optimized the builds are, it really doesn't matter.

The OP says their is a forest that they want to avoid, so how do they go about going around the forest or even cutting it down? Never does it matter what type of trees are in teh forest if you are going to drive/fly/walk around the outside of it. There are very few situations that it matters what type of tree you are cutting down. You're still going to use an axe or a chainsaw or a bulldozer, depending upon what you have.

Well sure, we can come up with nonconstructive, extreme solutions without knowing anything about what we're actually talking about. The world proves that every day.

The OP has clearly signaled that they understand that they can ban things and people from their table. They seem to want a more nuanced solution and I think that would require respondents to have a more nuanced understanding of the problem.

 

[LordEntrails]

The OP has clearly signaled that they understand that they can ban things and people from their table. They seem to want a more nuanced solution and I think that would require respondents to have a more nuanced understanding of the problem.

I agree with a better understanding of the problem, but I don't think the problem is so much about the PC build and what awesome combos it can do, what it's DPR is or any other aspect about the character.

Player problems are about the players. Why does the player insist on such a character? Do they understand how their play affects others at the table? Do they feel they game can be won? Do they see each gaming session as a set of challenges to overcome/win? Are they really looking to play a superhero game where the superheroes always win? Can they, or would they appreciate nuance and having a character be forced to chose between two bad options? Are they willing to explore social/personal challenges of their characters that maybe can't be 'won'?

Those, to me, are the types of details that can help solve the problem. Not what race/class/build the character is as addressing that is simple nerfing one build, and there are always other builds that can be optimized.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

If someone comes asking for help with problem X, and get a bunch of suggestions for dealing with problem X, the respondent's aren't dismissing OP if OP really has problem P.

Not to say that rudeness is justified, but the confusion is obvious - he's got a mild munchkin problem, not an optimizer problem.

The presence of the optimisers (or munchkins; however you like it) and their impact on the game is situation X.
Now the optimal solution Z (kicking the players if they don't improve their behaviour) is not one that this DM is in a position to be able to apply.
Therefore they have to use an alternative solution Y (dealing with the optimisation and reducing the level that it hurts the enjoyment of the other people in the group.

Crowing about how you (general you, not you personally) are in a position to enforce solution Z and how it is the only way to deal with it in a situation where you have been told it isn't an option is fundamentally unhelpful, and at worst, actively hurtful. Waving your privilege in someone's face and dropping to autopilot for how to deal with a problem without actually reading the post asking for help to understand the actual situation isn't going to help resolve it.

We don't have enough information to determine if this is actually true or if the OP needs to realign his or her expectations. I suspect the underlying issue could be something other than character optimization.

We know the underlying issue: a couple of jerk players. However since the OP is not in a position where they can treat the cause, they are looking to try to mitigate the symptoms: the impact the optimisers are having on the rest of the game.

Very little skill is required. With forum and video guides, rankings etc building a frighteningly effective PC just requires opposable thumbs and a computer with internet access.

Given that the Twilight and Peace cleric combo that the optimisers recently talked about wanting to play was called out not long ago as a broken combination by Treantmonk by all people in one of his youtube videos, I think that might be exactly what is happening here.

Learn2play Invoker

Off the top of my head, of all the situations where someone has been asking me for help, I can't think of a single one that has actually been helped by someone saying "Learn2play" or "Git gud".

 

[Horwath]

Off the top of my head, of all the situations where someone has been asking me for help, I can't think of a single one that has actually been helped by someone saying "Learn2play" or "Git gud".

Ofc not.

And if mentioned player of invoker character asked for help here, I am sure that most(me included) would do their best effort to give precise advice on the subject.

But as invoker was mentioned as an abstract example, I just said in general term that he needs more knowledge of the game as wizard than other (more) simpler class.

 

[FarBeyondC]

And yes, I've tried the standard "why don't you try talking to your players" routine. Doesn't help. The optimizers just keep doing it. They literally refuse to stop. This makes the non-optimizers have no fun because they either stop playing the way that's fun for them or stop playing entirely. So I basically have to choose. Which group of players will I run the game for. I don't have time for both. I don't want to exclude either group from my table, but they simply do not mesh.

TL;DR: optimizers ruin the fun for everyone but themselves at my table. Help.

You have exactly two worthwhile options in this scenario:

1. Exclude/drop one of the two groups from your table entirely.

2. Stop running entirely.

 

[iserith]

We know the underlying issue: a couple of jerk players. However since the OP is not in a position where they can treat the cause, they are looking to try to mitigate the symptoms: the impact the optimisers are having on the rest of the game.

Without knowing more about the game or how exactly these supposed "jerks" are disrupting it with their optimized characters, it's a bit difficult to provide any useful advice, given that the standard advice of "talking to them" was rejected out of hand.

 

[jmartkdr2]

The presence of the optimisers (or munchkins; however you like it) and their impact on the game is situation X.
Now the optimal solution Z (kicking the players if they don't improve their behaviour) is not one that this DM is in a position to be able to apply.
Therefore they have to use an alternative solution Y (dealing with the optimisation and reducing the level that it hurts the enjoyment of the other people in the group.

Crowing about how you (general you, not you personally) are in a position to enforce solution Z and how it is the only way to deal with it in a situation where you have been told it isn't an option is fundamentally unhelpful, and at worst, actively hurtful. Waving your privilege in someone's face and dropping to autopilot for how to deal with a problem without actually reading the post asking for help to understand the actual situation isn't going to help resolve it.

There is only two way to deal with jerk players: talk to them or kick them. It's not a "position of privilege" to note this. If those aren't options, then OP has no options. You can't change attitudes of the players toward the rest of the table by changing the rules of the game, because the problem exists outside of the rules of the game.

It may be that the builds are problematic, but we don't know what the builds are, so we can't help there, but even if we did. we wouldn't be addressing OP's problem. None of us want to give OP advice that won't help them, because what would be the point?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Here’s something to try that might work in the given parameters. Tell the whole group that because of the issues there have been with party composition, you are going to have to individually approve each character as well as level up decisions.

At that point you are taking responsibility for knowing what character choices are going to be overpowered, but it sounds like you’re up to it. The players will quickly realize that their optimization will be constrained to the power level you will allow. They can then accept the challenge of making something that works for them within that constraint or choosing to bow out of the game themselves.

I would also be willing to entertain other solutions if people can offer them when you present this one. This rule should at least get them talking and maybe someone in the group, whether the optimizers or the others, will come up with a better solution everyone will be on board with. Let them put that puzzle-solving creativity to work trying to come up with an alternative solution rather than breaking the game for the other six participants.