Has anyone got any flak for buildung a character that wasnt optimized?

[Thomas Shey]

3rd edition did have a lot of unbalanced stuff but the stated design goal of the developers was they were just throwing stuff out there and the DMs were expected to manage thier own games and it's balance. It wasn't until 4e and PF that this idea of the game balancing itself came into being

They sure didn't state it in the game, and frankly, with some of the material the only balance possible would have been to outright discard it. And frankly, I'm not sure I believe everyone was on the same page there or bothering with the CR system and Level Adjustment seems perverse.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I think there is something to that thought. I think it also pulls a disproportionate number of control freaks who don't want the DM making decisions. You know the "can we let the rules decide" kind've player.

I think characterizing people who don't want to have to have most things done by ad-hoc GM decision as "control freaks" is playing the dozens here. I don't want that in my games and I'm overwhelmingly a GM.

 

[aramis erak]

Well, it didn't hurt that in some early incarnations of D&D, the difference between a moderately low and moderately high set of attributes could be almost invisible. It wasn't until after the publication of Greyhawk that the physical attributes made much difference other than experience awards, and the mental ones made almost no difference for non-spellcasters even then.

A 3 point spread (-1, 0, +1) isn't almost invisible unless using the "alternate combat system" ... When rolling on 1d6 to hit using chainmail, or on 2d6 using the fantasy supplement therein, is actually pretty strong. And the -1 to +1 on damage on 1d6 actually is quite strong. The combo of +1 to hit and +1 damage is actually quite notable.

It's only when one uses the alternate combat system and the Greyhawk alternate damages that it's no longer notable to have 16 str.

Keep in mind: under OE core +Chainmail, a PC was comparable to a number of men... and a wizard with his dagger did the same damage as a fighter with his sword... and, at first to third levels, as often

 

[aramis erak]

Are you telling me that I am a liar? Who in his right mind would ever use the UA rolling method? Not any DM that I have ever coached. 4d6 in order, drop lowest. Still the way to go today. Maxperson's method of 4d6 x3 and 3d6 x3 has merits and I am seriously thinking of using it.

He's pointing out your claims are not objectively true, not calling you a liar. There is a difference.

And yes, Optimizers definitely did exist in the 80's. Playing D&D, I was one, so were several greybeards I knew. So I can definitely say, objectively, your claim of lack of Grognards optimizing is dead flat wrong if it's about the era as a whole.
You're not a liar, but you are also objectively not correct, either. ?

Over the years. By the end of 1990, I had "introduced" into the hobby about 100 people. From coaching new DM to getting other people play and keep the hobby alive and having tournaments (preparing and organizing mainly), I was very active. In 10 years, it only took a dozen new players per year to get the ball rolling. And I often had more than 6 groups of 6 people (my absolute max was 10 groups or so). It all dropped when I got to college (before university) as the workload in college was a lot more than high school. And even then, I kept enough players for two groups and one group for the friday night dungeons/exhibitions (again, to encourage the recognition of the hobby).

Nice.

 

[Helldritch]

He's pointing out your claims are not objectively true, not calling you a liar. There is a difference.

And yes, Optimizers definitely did exist in the 80's. Playing D&D, I was one, so were several greybeards I knew. So I can definitely say, objectively, your claim of lack of Grognards optimizing is dead flat wrong if it's about the era as a whole.
You're not a liar, but you are also objectively not correct, either. ?

Well, I did say they were not on the scale that 3xed showed us. Yes, you could "hope" for a magical item to make your "optimized" build but you had no feat, no ability score increase to triffle with. And finding that magical item was not a sure thing either. I know of some crazy build with darts of the hornet's nest, but if you don't find any, your build is pretty much done for.

The best you could do was to specialize in the weapon your previous fighter had. Bob 1 died. He had a +2 long sword. Let's make Bob the second. Also specialized in the long sword. Otherwise, you were pretty much stuck with what the DM would throw at you. I had a player "forced" to rely on the magic user to cast enchant weapon on his halberd because he never found any that were magical. (well... he found one, at level 19th...)

Nice.

Thank you.

 

[Maxperson]

Are you telling me that I am a liar? Who in his right mind would ever use the UA rolling method? Not any DM that I have ever coached. 4d6 in order, drop lowest. Still the way to go today. Maxperson's method of 4d6 x3 and 3d6 x3 has merits and I am seriously thinking of using it.

Correction. My method is 3d6 x2, 4d6-L x2, and 5d6-2L x2. That gives you two main stat rolls, two normal stat rolls and two "dump" stat rolls. However, do to the random nature of rolls, the 5d6 rolls can be low(seen it) and the 3d6 can be high(seen that, too).

 

[jasper]

Yes, here and on other online forums. And occasionally at various game stores over the years.

 

[Thomas Shey]

A 3 point spread (-1, 0, +1) isn't almost invisible unless using the "alternate combat system" ... When rolling on 1d6 to hit using

In OD&D, an 8 Strength and a 12 Strength made absolutely no difference in attack bonus prior to Greyhawk (I'm not even sure it did then). The only thing Strength effected was your experience bonus if you were a Fighter and (maybe) your encumbrance. It had no other mechanical effect.

chainmail, or on 2d6 using the fantasy supplement therein, is actually pretty strong. And the -1 to +1 on damage on 1d6 actually is quite strong. The combo of +1 to hit and +1 damage is actually quite notable.

I'm not sure where you're getting these bonuses from.

It's only when one uses the alternate combat system and the Greyhawk alternate damages that it's no longer notable to have 16 str.

Keep in mind: under OE core +Chainmail, a PC was comparable to a number of men... and a wizard with his dagger did the same damage as a fighter with his sword... and, at first to third levels, as often

Went backed and looked, and I'm still not seeing any bonus to hit in Men and Magic for Strength, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. Checked Greyhawk, too, and you had to hit a 13 before it made any difference there, and that was of course only intended with the alternate combat system. Damage didn't kick in until 16.

 

[amethal]

I've certainly heard stories about players getting flak for building unoptimised characters, sometimes to ridiculous extremes (e.g. in a 3rd edition game, one group apparently banned sorcerers, on the basis that "if you want to play an arcane caster, wizards are better so we won't accept sorcerers in the party").

Fortunately, I've never come across it in practice. About the closest was when one player asked me why I was playing a Nagaji druid in a Pathfinder game, since Nagaji didn't make particularly good druids - the answer, that I wanted to try out the druid archetype that was only available to Nagaji, was accepted as perfectly reasonable.

I must admit I do struggle to keep quiet when other people are deciding what to do in combat, but only to point out things they may have overlooked, given Pathfinder is such a complicated game. (Or if my character is bleeding to death on the floor and the party cleric doesn't seem to have noticed!)

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Never seen it happen in real life. I have advised players on how to optimize characters, but only if they asked for help - like one of the other players in our Odyssey campaign wanted my input on what Cantrips to pick - he'd already picked the "right" ones though.

Online it happens routinely but I don't really think it counts because there's nothing you can post online which some numpty won't critique lol.