I feel like a Munchkin...

[Felix]

You know, I was thinking about the munchkinism of my character and came up with this:

By 20th level, the guy will be a
Barb 2 / Rgr 3 / Rog 3 / Ftr 2 / Forsaker 10

For a while I thought that this was way too munchkinny. Maybe it is. But I think the guy is cool, and partly because of the way he interacts and what he's good at. I mean, skills spent on literacy in common, SP on learning to read and write elven (they have the most information on herbal stuff), and lots into heal, prof (herbalist), and knowledge nature. Craft (poison) while you're at it. Munchkin or not, I don't feel bad about Konstantin one bit.

 

[maddman75]

I'd say you are similar to how I play actually - both a power gamer and roleplayer. Powergamer not in a bad sense, just in that you enjoy the 'crunchy' aspect of the game. The power plays, the effective combinations, etc.

But that isn't all that you do either - you seem interested in distinct characters, then use your powergaming fu to make that character become real. So while you have the powergaming mojok, you use it for good instead of evil.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Generally, I try to steer players away from power-plays in character design. The way I explain it is that if every last point, feat and decision is based on effectiveness, than what you end up with is a bunch of numbers with a story/background that justifies it rather than supports it. By the same token, I also warn that opting to use less than half of your options to be good at something generally means you won't be good at much of anything, particularly in a game where (while less often than the standard game) combat does indeed occur.

Generally, I find the PCs that have the best chances of survival and the most flavor regarding personality and non-adventuring RP aspects aim for about 70%-80% focus, with the remainder going towards expanding beyond the abilities of Class and/or Race. This provides for competance "in the field" as well as promotes character depthness "in life".

Another trick is to not aim for the "as soon as possible" aspect; Just because a nifty combo can be fullfilled at 5th Level doesn't mean you can't put off that last Feat, Skill or Class until 8th or 10th in order to pursue other (minor) character goals. If you know that your DM will take the game into Epic Levels, what harm is there in not pursuing a Prestige Class until 15th Level?

Simply moderate yourself. Planning ahead is fine; It's adhering to that plan when in-game considerations would suggest otherwise that would be a problem from the RP-side of things.

 

[Henry]

I don't think I've EVER planned a character above his next level. Now, I may have said, after reaching 3rd or 4th level, that I'm aiming for a certain PrC, but getting there was a matter of me taking whatever skills I needed at the time, until I had enough to meet my prerequisites, whether this was at 5th level or 12th.

The best way I look at it is that people PLAN out their lives all the time - but rarely does it exactly match what they had expected. I planned to be a chemist - and I'm tech support for a company now, and happier than I would have been as a chemist. Translate that experience to your D&D games - what you need is not what you always want.

Worrying about whether you fit someone's stereotype label is not worth worrying about, because you don't live life well in the meantime.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I've been trying to teach my players that while it's all well and good to plan for a PrC six levels from now, if you don't live in the now you'll seldom live to see that PrC.

 

[Nifft]

I encourage my players to plan their careers (flavor-wise at least). That way I know what sort of hooks will grab them, and what kind of PrCs to dangle in front of them.

-- Nifft

 

[Saeviomagy]

Felix - your concept isn't really power-gamey in any sense of the word (primarily because forsaker is so crap).

However, depending on the definition, it could be considered 'munchkin'. Specifically based on the definition of "someone who doesn't really care about the rest of the group having fun". This isn't your fault. Again, it's primarily caused by the forsaker class, which will, basically, be unable to fit in with any moderately-magical party. Even if he refrains from attacking magical party members or destroying magical treasure, he'll still generally hold up, delay and cause problems for the rest of the party (can't teleport, dimension travel, heal quickly, become invisible etc, etc.).

Powergaming is using the rules to their fullest to create a powerful character. Your character is, typically, supposed to be a great hero. Thus powergaming is being sensible. Even some of the smackdowns around are merely powergaming - they tend to excel in one particular department and situation, while being cripples in most other areas.

Min-maxing is maximising advantages while minimising disadvantages. This is merely a different brand of powergaming. Smackdowns are the antithesis of this - min maxing produces characters with minimal weaknesses, while smackdown characters tend to be one-trick ponys.

Role-playing is not incompatible with either of the two. Roleplaying and rules-use are not mutually exclusive, or indeed linked in any way. Full stop. Playing a peasant with 6's in every stat doesn't make you a better roleplayer, and playing a character who can deal 1000 damage with a punch doesn't make you a worse one. Either character can have a good history, personality, quirks etc.

Munckinism is making the game 'your' game. Playing the game to the detriment of the other players involved, stealing the show at every opportunity, cheating, and playing to 'win' against your fellow players are behaviours I'd classify as munchkinism.

Note that these can apply both to characters who abuse the rules ("my character can obliterate the entire world, and he does! I win!") to characters who abuse significantly less tangible aspects of the game ("My character's family consist of every member of royalty around the world! And they all really like me!"). The roleplayer who constantly leaps forward to talk to absolutely everything, when the rest of the party are hungry for blood is still a munchkin. He's still ruining the game for someone.

 

[Felix]

Saeviomagy

My DM incorporated the Forsaker class into his campaign world: they work for the rulers of the Principalities of Galantri (you might remember this from previous editions). They don't have to "Grrrrr, I hate magic", they just have to have a "I can do this better using my physical power" mindset. He also made a few house rules that makes them feasable.
-They can store level*100 amount of gold piece worth to be used for the Magic Destruction. When they break an item, 10% of value goes to that pool.
-They get Improved Sunder (double damage to objects) in their progression.
-Their skin tingles when they touch magic stuff.
-Because the class is based on practical mage-killing and not "I hate magic", they have a limited ability to travel magically. I haven't figured out all what they can do quite yet.

My DM's also letting me use Craft (poison) and Herbalism, Heal, Know (nature), and Wild Lore to create healing salves. So, I hopefully won't need all that much healing.

In terms of flavor, he's a non-magic using ranger. Although I still haven't gotten it through the cleric's head that I dislike magic cast upon me. I guess we'll see how munchkin it gets.

 

[diaglo]

I've been trying to teach my players that while it's all well and good to plan for a PrC six levels from now, if you don't live in the now you'll seldom live to see that PrC.

well the campaigns they were coming from, they were expecting to reach their PrC in 1 or 2 sessions.

 

[diaglo]

what you need is not what you always want.

why do i hear the Rolling Stones singing in the background?