Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mordane76" data-source="post: 855963" data-attributes="member: 7172">I think the problem is your definition of "munchkin."  Your tone relays an assumption -- that you think high-damage-dealing characters are munchkins, and that those who choose to make such characters aren't really looking to roleplay, just "rack up points," so to speak.  While your statement may be correct some of the time, I don't think it's correct all of the time.I can see a fighter who has all combat feats, low social attributes, low social skill points, and who is still a compelling character, if that fighter is in the hands of a player who can characterize.  If the fighter is a fighting powerhouse, socially inept, and so on, then he should be played as such -- but that doesn't mean he can't have compelling backstory elements such as family and friends that will lead to emotive scenes and provide good character development opportunities.Another assumption that your post conveys is one I partially agree with as well.  DM's are responsible for a portion of the "munchkin" behaviors in their games.  But there is an interplay that your post doesn't seem to recognize -- good DMs cannot completely override munchkin players.  Even if they try, there will still be this slow power-creep if players are trying to twink out for combat.Going back to the original idea of this thread -- I believe there is a degree of power-creep occuring in 3E, and will probably be continued in 3.5E; combat is becoming harder and harder to control, because players simply have so many options.  Take with that the questions of advancement and the question of magic item necessity, and an argument for this increase in power level can definitely be made.  However, I don't think the levels of magical items and spells has changed too much from 2E to 3E -- I think the amount of integration and expectation changed during the process of revision.Magical items, IMO, became more an expected piece of equipment in 3E than in 2E.  Characters are expected to have much easier access to these items in 3E, and I think some of this change comes from a change in society.  When D&D was originally developed, there were no real home computers, and hence no computer games.  I think that some of this magical item expectation is part of the CRPG trend -- items are readily available in computer games, so much so that they are REQUIRED to complete some aspects of the game.There are those of us who don't use the extra bells and whistle when we play our CRPGs.  I stopped playing most CRPGs because they just don't appeal to my sensibilities anymore -- I want some real interaction, some compelling development, not just numbers and hack-factor.  But there is either a majority or a very vocal minority of the RPG consumers who WANT this kind of game, or there is a re-inforced perpetuating misconception that all RPGers want the things in these books because we keep buying product that supports this style of play.Sure, we're modifying it at home.  And I think that's how it's going to have to be.  The nay-sayers might feel that the industry should bow to our demands and slow the advancement and slash treasure accrual, but they won't -- we're telling them it's okay because we keep buying the product.Personally -- I think 3E is more powerful.  But that doesn't stop me from buying the books, because they provide me with the framework I need to make my campaigns.  What elements I keep, and what elements I modify to my standards are unimportant, and I think able DMs and players can meet and develop a game that suits their tastes on power with the rules provided and changes they make to those rules.</blockquote>

Verification