LordEntrails
Hero
Poor person
For whatever reason, maturity, ego, whatever.Not that you are wrong, I was just trying to say that at another table, that person would be a fine player. But at this one, not one I would keep around.
D&D 5E Dealing with optimizers at the table
- Thread starter overgeeked
- Start date
For whatever reason, maturity, ego, whatever.Not that you are wrong, I was just trying to say that at another table, that person would be a fine player. But at this one, not one I would keep around.
TaranTheWanderer
Legend
Just an idea or two: So, my previous suggestion was to make sure to limit class abilities to specific books and allow multiclassing based on story and character development.
1. is the optimizer a cleric? Do they want to take a level of Warlock? Did they have an opportunity to meet or summon or create a pact with chosen entity in game? No? No multiclassing to warlock then.
2. To further this story driven advancement, do you give xp or do you use milestone? Riffing off someone else’s idea, level people up based on their story arcs and goals individually. Always fighting does not always further goals. So, if two players are doing non-combat stuff to further their goals, they will level up. The optimizers will suddenly find themselves a level or two behind the rest of the party until they start focusing on character goals. Since you design the encounters, furthering their goals might not require combat. They will realize that to optimize(and level) , they need to design characters that don’t always have combat in mind.
just a suggestion.
1. is the optimizer a cleric? Do they want to take a level of Warlock? Did they have an opportunity to meet or summon or create a pact with chosen entity in game? No? No multiclassing to warlock then.
2. To further this story driven advancement, do you give xp or do you use milestone? Riffing off someone else’s idea, level people up based on their story arcs and goals individually. Always fighting does not always further goals. So, if two players are doing non-combat stuff to further their goals, they will level up. The optimizers will suddenly find themselves a level or two behind the rest of the party until they start focusing on character goals. Since you design the encounters, furthering their goals might not require combat. They will realize that to optimize(and level) , they need to design characters that don’t always have combat in mind.
just a suggestion.
loverdrive
Prophet of the profane (She/Her)
I am struggling to come up with any build for 5e that can actually ruin the game. Examples, please?
TaranTheWanderer
Legend
I do find it funny that, almost 250 posts in, after several requests to see an example of the optimization in question, none have been provided.
Zardnaar
Legend
This there's build advice on youtube now. Don't even have to find a char op guide anymore.
Zardnaar
Legend
The big ones I've seen.
Archer with sharp shooter and buffs, specific Battlemaster fighter XBE+sharpshooter and rolled stats.
Sorlock with quickened Eldritch blasts sacking spell slots for more Eldritch Blasts.
Various paladin builds.
Bladesingers.
Multiclass warlocks in general, 2 level dips (Paladin/hexblades)
Optimized clerics (death, arcane, twilight) sometimes multiclassed.
Divine Souls.
Life cleric 1/druid or bard
Low level moon druids.
loverdrive
Prophet of the profane (She/Her)
I personally have only one contender -- a coffeelock, but that's either in the realm of stupidity, or not that big of a deal -- like, 4 short rests worth of slots -- who care/
These are like baseline characters. Like, if you're an archer and you don't have a sharpshooter -- then you're an archer that had died 10 sessions ago.
Jacob Lewis
Ye Olde GM
Optimizing characters is not the problem.
You have two individuals who are insensitive and unsympathetic to creating a good environment for the group. As long as they get what they want (and it seems they know how to force the DM to give in), they could care less about what anyone else thinks or feels. And that is wrong.
This needs to be addressed as a group and as adults. It isn't solely the responsibility of the DM to cater to the whims of problematic players. Nor is it their job to adjust the rules of the game to try curbing the behaviors of those who know exactly what they are doing. If the other players are not enjoying themselves because one or two other players are being selfish and disruptive, then they need to speak up about it.
A lot of these problems could have been avoided during Session 0 if a DM takes some time to lay out expectations for the game, and solicit similar input from all the players as a group. If the players are able to express their ideas to each other, they may be able to come up with better compromises and allow a better experience for everyone. And I don't mean character ideas and themes. I mean real talk about what kind of play style they prefer, what they want out of the game, and what they can do to make it fun for all. Communication is the key.
Given that this particular group is comprised of friends just wanting to play a game, maybe being honest with each other isn't such a good idea because their "friends" are actually more like "acquaintances". I don't know the dynamics of the group and I don't feel like the OP would be forthcoming about it. Fact is if you can't talk to your friends, then they're probably not really good or close friends. Since the OP has stated several times that he has talked to them repeatedly without success, I am inclined to think the value of friendship on these individuals is either high or misplaced.
Like it or not, the options have been laid out many times already in this ridiculously long thread. The game is not broken. Speaking to them has not worked. They are unwilling to compromise. So either remove them from the group, or continue putting up with their shenanigans to the detriment of the rest. They are clearly in control until you decide to take action.
You have two individuals who are insensitive and unsympathetic to creating a good environment for the group. As long as they get what they want (and it seems they know how to force the DM to give in), they could care less about what anyone else thinks or feels. And that is wrong.
This needs to be addressed as a group and as adults. It isn't solely the responsibility of the DM to cater to the whims of problematic players. Nor is it their job to adjust the rules of the game to try curbing the behaviors of those who know exactly what they are doing. If the other players are not enjoying themselves because one or two other players are being selfish and disruptive, then they need to speak up about it.
A lot of these problems could have been avoided during Session 0 if a DM takes some time to lay out expectations for the game, and solicit similar input from all the players as a group. If the players are able to express their ideas to each other, they may be able to come up with better compromises and allow a better experience for everyone. And I don't mean character ideas and themes. I mean real talk about what kind of play style they prefer, what they want out of the game, and what they can do to make it fun for all. Communication is the key.
Given that this particular group is comprised of friends just wanting to play a game, maybe being honest with each other isn't such a good idea because their "friends" are actually more like "acquaintances". I don't know the dynamics of the group and I don't feel like the OP would be forthcoming about it. Fact is if you can't talk to your friends, then they're probably not really good or close friends. Since the OP has stated several times that he has talked to them repeatedly without success, I am inclined to think the value of friendship on these individuals is either high or misplaced.
Like it or not, the options have been laid out many times already in this ridiculously long thread. The game is not broken. Speaking to them has not worked. They are unwilling to compromise. So either remove them from the group, or continue putting up with their shenanigans to the detriment of the rest. They are clearly in control until you decide to take action.
Marc_C
Solitary Role Playing
I had an optimizer who constantly bullied other players into playing the best possible action every single combat round despite the role-playing desires of the players.
I told him that wasn't necessary since I didn't super optimized all the foe's actions. I prefer a role-playing approach to combat. He said combat in D&D was a mini-wargame inside the role-playing game. Role-playing should stop when combat starts. Others players didn't agree with him.
The next game I had a special combo just for him. One creature would stun his character and the next one knocked him prone. All his character could do, on his turn, was get up with no attack. I repeated the process 4-5 rounds in a row. He started getting upset asking how long this would last. I said "Well I'm optimizing, that is what you said D&D combat was."
He wasn't so keen on full combat optimization by other players after that. Lesson learned.
I told him that wasn't necessary since I didn't super optimized all the foe's actions. I prefer a role-playing approach to combat. He said combat in D&D was a mini-wargame inside the role-playing game. Role-playing should stop when combat starts. Others players didn't agree with him.
The next game I had a special combo just for him. One creature would stun his character and the next one knocked him prone. All his character could do, on his turn, was get up with no attack. I repeated the process 4-5 rounds in a row. He started getting upset asking how long this would last. I said "Well I'm optimizing, that is what you said D&D combat was."
He wasn't so keen on full combat optimization by other players after that. Lesson learned.
Last edited:
I have seen most of those played, I don't think any of them are broken.
Similar Threads
