Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Winterthorn" data-source="post: 3502525" data-attributes="member: 1702">A DM's view...Speaking as a DM: I expect a certain degree of "power-gaming" from most players and regard it as Skillful Character Optimization (SCO). <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> However, as a caveat to this view of mine, I draw the line with players generating PC's assembling a mish-mash of uber-features that fail to meet campaign context. "Over-the-top" character "builds" can spoil the fun for me, as DM, and the other players. And that's the point, does the power-gamed PC actually "fit" the setting/genre/theme; for the game setting/genre/theme - as far as this DM is concerned - defines the main limits of the kind of PCs are fun for me to referee. (Sometimes a DM has to simply, firmly and quietly say, "no".)But the trickiest thing about what is fun is that it's all about context, degree, subjectiveness... What may be acceptable to one is not acceptable to another. So attempting to discern an absolute for everyone on play style is nothing more than an attempt to nail gelatine to a tree.Regarding "SCO" <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />, I do get a kick out what players put together, the diversity of ideas (given campaign context limitations), and their ingeneous "work-arounds". And yes, sometimes I relent because the power-gaming player somehow manages to make the other players and I break out in laughter, or awe, or just  thumbs-up "<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /> ness dude".  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />I believe the wisest course of action, at the gaming table where this question arises, is to first negotiate before the game is set-up, and afterwards defer to the DM. It is the DM who has the responsibility to adjudicate issues predicated upon the intial intent at the table. Ideally, and I think this is quite important, everyone should have communicated adequately their expectations at the beginning. If some form of SCO occurs as things progress, and the DM has "read" and "managed"*** her/his players reasonably well, then there shouldn't be a problem and everyone can continue to gain some fun and enjoyment out of the game! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />For players in my games who emphasize role-play, even at the expense of watching their character's mechanics (and thus overlook a healthy degree of optimization), when the opportunities present themselves, they will shine the most in driving the plot direction of the game! In a way, I could say that those who practice SCO entertain the table through deft handling of challenging combat situations, while those who practice good role-playing will be the ones who entertain by driving the story (that in turn could lead to further of the above said combat situations). A potential yin-yang kind of give-and-take between play styles that makes it potentially enjoyable for all. A healthy balance if you will. (By no means do I wish to suggest that a player cannot accomplish good rp and good SCO... I salute those who can put it off! While those who fare poorly at both may cause me to ask if they enjoy my campaign, if they learnt the basic game rules well, whether they really like the hobby at all, or if there is another factor inhibitting their success, for this hobby does demand a fair effort at focus and enthusiasm.)I don't always get that nice blend in a group, and other times extremes at both ends cause conflicts. But I like refereeing a diversity of styles in moderation, where campaign context is respected, and the principle terms of play are agreed to in advance. For me, variety is the spice to a game - just don't over spice it <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />That's my opinion for now, before I really start rambling... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> -W***: Yes, sadly enough as many can atest, DM-ing can also be an exercise in player personality management.PS: forgive my spelling and grammar <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification