How important is it to you or your players for characters to feel "overpowered"?

[Lanefan]

I've had players in the past* who found over-poweredness to be the most important thing but have managed to winnow them out over the years.

* - once we called them munchkins; more recently, powergamers.

 

[Kannik]

Overpowered? No.

But having agency? Having competence? Being able to make my way through the scenario? Those are important to me.

And what each of those specifically entail depends on the realm of the specific game/campaign/scenario/theme/tome. So it's more about having what it takes to move the story forward.

Games where outcomes mostly depend on what effectively is a coin flip interest me less.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I run low-power games. I have no interest in watching problem-solving by way of Talent X, or spell Y.

 

[Bae'zel]

Overpowered? No.

But having agency? Having competence? Being able to make my way through the scenario? Those are important to me.

And what each of those specifically entail depends on the realm of the specific game/campaign/scenario/theme/tome. So it's more about having what it takes to move the story forward.

Games where outcomes mostly depend on what effectively is a coin flip interest me less.

Yeah roleplaying is escapist fantasy for me. I want to play a competent character.

Real life is miserable enough with bad luck, embarrassments and awkwardness. Not saying that I never want to fail in a RPG, but you can bet that if a GM relishes in frequently dishing out mean-spirited “critical failures” I’m out.

No expectations to be overpowered, no. Just not a bumbling idiot, unless it’s a comedy game, or the tongue-in-cheek misery tourism of WFRP 1e.

 

[GrimCo]

Power is relative. So, do i want my characters to be overpowered? In a game like d&d, yes. But overpowered in comparison. I want my lv 10 fighter to curbstomp and steamroll over enemies that were level apropriate challenges for him when he was level 1-5. But i still want enemies that are on par or more powerful than my lv 10 fighter. D&d is game where PC's grow vertically with power. Higher level, more punishment one can dish out and take.

In a game where your PC's ability to take damage doesn't grow, it's lot harder to be overpowered. FE in nWoD, you can sink in couple of dozen points in your Mages destructive abilities. But he still has his 7-8 health points. Someone with hunting rifle (4L/9 again) and solid dex and firearms skill (say 3 dots in both, so competent but not expert or master) can usually one shot kill him. In that game, it's hard to feel overpowered when there are so many "mathematically" weaker opponents that can one shot kill you.

 

[nevin]

Excellent point -- the extremes on both ends are boring I think we could agree. I guess another question could be, "do your players want to feel like they are playing through a dangerous enough scenario that their characters could die?" Or do they want the comfort of knowing that death could never really happen? I'm not talking about opening a chest and fearing they'll die or that a mosquito bite could kill them.

but still the same thing if the danger is the same every game every encounter. without variable danger. Everything is samey and boring

 

[Maxperson]

So this one seems to be coming up more frequently in other discussions, especially as regards players comparing new games to D&D, so I am going to phrase this very "carefully"

How important is it for you or your players to feel their characters can basically RTFLPWN enemies?

I say this laughingly as someone who had plenty a character die in our old AD&D days. Do they expect they can run into a hail of bullets and come out unscathed? Kick in a door without a plan and fight 20 to 1 odds and come out smelling like a rose? Or even just slightly scuffed? When they roll a character do they expect they are ever going to be threatened, or are they creating a heroic model that shrugs off monsters with a dirty stare? I exaggerate a bit and could have asked "how important is it to feel "heroic?" but I chose the "OP" because it's come up specifically in a number of discussions.

In comments feel free to elaborate, and also maybe talk about age groups of players (I'll do a follow poll on this). I ask this follow up because from our own experience, we wanted more danger in our games as we got older, and wondering if there is any connection.

And for our theme song!

Do you really mean overpowered, or do you mean feel like heroes? I want my players to feel like they are playing heroes, which means higher stats and good abilities. However, heroes have weaknesses and are challenged on their quests. They can fail.

Sometimes I will put in an easy encounter so they can "basically RTFLPWN enemies," since it's good to feel like you are super duper, but most fights are challenging to hard. Even for the heroes.

 

[Umbran]

Well, there are genres of games in which that would be called for.

But, in a more general sense (like, what feeling do I need/want to have fun in a game?) then it isn't important.

 

[CreamCloud0]

i appreciate seeing the sentiment here that 'your character doesn't need to be powerful in combat, just competent in their area of expertise', given how much combat is touted as 'a necessary capability' for all classes in DnD.

 

[Micah Sweet]

in many games weak means ineffective and barely functional struggling like worms in the darkness. Characters need to feel useful and effective in proper context with the game story. id say 99 percent of players would disagree with you on being weak.

They play to be the hero

That is an incredible claim. 99% play to be the hero? How is that not One True Wayism?