Is it common for players to powergame?

[shilsen]

Sure. In my group everyone powergames to some degree, since they enjoy having characters who are powerful and competent and can do neat tricks. But they do it within the rules, without trying to bend them to their benefit. And they also roleplay and talk and develop their characters and interact with the campaign and enjoy complicated plots which don't involve combat.

Repeat after me - powergaming is not necessarily inimical to roleplaying (emphasis on necessarily).

 

[GlassJaw]

In a discussion like this, it invariably ends up being a powergaming vs min/maxing discussion. I think most of the example here are min/maxing and not powergaming, although the original post is probably an example of powergaming.

My definition of powergaming is wanting to have either the most powerful character or get some kind of extra bonus for minimal cost. You just want to kill stuff really fast. Usually, powergaming has a slight negative connotation to it. The subject of the initial post wanted some extra skill bonus for virtually nothing in return.

Min/maxing is a little different. You just want a character that is effective at something and you want to be the best at that one thing. It could be combat but not necessarily.

My characters have been pretty good about not trying to powergame, at least not how I define it.

* I have a fighter who took improved trip (with a guisarme) before taking power attack.
* I have a bard who was willing to pay 2x the DMG price for an antique +1 elven thinblade -- a weapon he wasn't proficient with and wouldn't be for another level and a half -- simply because he thought it was cool. My bard also made it a top priority to find a good chef who was willing to adventure, and paid him 1g/day even when his total net worth was under 50g.
* I have a wizard who used his first level feat to become proficient with the hand crossbow.

Do you feel a need to justify that you aren't powergaming or min/maxing? Just play. I have actually seen this a lot lately with D&D/d20. The system is so crunchy that there becomes a huge division between those that embrace the crunch and those that don't. And then we end up with discussions like these.

 

[DragonLancer]

Out of the 5 players I have, 1 is a powergamer. The rest of us don't like that play style and it has caused issues in the past.

I personally can't stand that play style but each group to its own.

 

[TracerBullet42]

My bard also made it a top priority to find a good chef who was willing to adventure, and paid him 1g/day even when his total net worth was under 50g.

That's awesome...he needs to meet up with my halfling chef.

 

[FireLance]

* I have a wizard who used his first level feat to become proficient with the hand crossbow.

Just a side note: this is technically not possible by the core rules, because a hand crossbow is an exotic weapon, and the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat requires a BAB of +1, which a 1st-level wizard does not have.

Of course, neither is it wrong, as the DM can change or modify the rules as he thinks fit, and there is nothing to stop him from allowing a 1st-level wizard to take proficiency in the hand crossbow.

But, back on topic: powergaming is common, and it is not a bad thing. It has its roots in a desire to have a character that is good at something; heroic, if you will. But like all good, normal, healthy desires, it turns bad when it becomes an obsession. In its worst incarnation, a powergamer tries to create an illegal character and hopes the DM doesn't notice. If you will, it's the difference between tax planning and tax evasion (or tax fraud).

 

[The_Gneech]

There is a player in my group who has a tendency to want to wheedle a little bit more out of everything...

HIM: "If I take the attack of opportunity for using a ranged weapon in melee, do I get any kind of a to-hit bonus for point blank range?"

ME: "Uh, that's a big ol' NO."

...or...

HIM: "Wait a minute, you want us to clean out the orc-infested tower for a measly 1000 gold plus whatever loot we find? I think we should be able to claim the tower for ourselves."

ME: "The baron looks at you like you're nuts."

HIM: "Okay, fine, but does he at least give us some magic items to help with the fight?"

etc.

There are some people who always want "just a little more." Fortunately, the guy in my particular group is good about taking "no" for an answer. (If he wasn't, I doubt he would have lasted.)

In the specific case of the guy who wants a +1 for reading a book, I'd say, "Well, studying the book gives you the knowledge you need to spend points on that skill when you level up! Enjoy."

-The Gneech

 

[Doug McCrae]

Min/maxing is a little different. You just want a character that is effective at something and you want to be the best at that one thing. It could be combat but not necessarily.

There seem to be two different definitions of min/maxing. This is one. The other (which I use) is maximising your character's strengths while minimising his weaknesses. In other words - powergaming.

 

[Pielorinho]

HIM: "Wait a minute, you want us to clean out the orc-infested tower for a measly 1000 gold plus whatever loot we find? I think we should be able to claim the tower for ourselves."

ME: "The baron looks at you like you're nuts."

HIM: "Okay, fine, but does he at least give us some magic items to help with the fight?"

That, slightly modified, doesn't bother me: there's nothing wrong with playing a PC who bargains hard, and DMs should design plot-hooks with that in mind. Someone who offers to hire the PCs either needs to know what their top price will be, or needs to have some other means of persuading the PCs. And they don't necessarily have to start with their top price; it can be pretty fun to play the character who manages to score a better deal for the party.

Of course, that should be roleplayed; asking the DM about what an NPC does in the third-person just takes away the fun, IMO.

When a character powergames by considering their world and doing their best to excel in it, I've got no problem with it. A druid who chooses which vermin to make giant based on the relative strengths of the vermin's poisons or attacks is just acting rationally, as is a wizard who carefully balances her spellbook to make sure she's got spells with will, fort, and ref saves.

But when a player powergames by combing sourcebooks for the worst-balanced prestige class or feat, or by creating new magic items with ridiculous powers, or by insisting that their character ought to be able to do a much better job than I've just said they did--that's when it gets obnoxious.

Daniel

 

[JoeGKushner]

Sounds like people I'd have to smack around.

Now don't get me wrong. I feel that there is nothign wrong with powergaming through feat, PrC, and skill selection, but trying to bend the rules or take advantage of the GM is bogus.

I've seen it happen because the GM was weak and let one player do it, so then all of the other players complained about it until they could all do it, then they found other things that they wanted and the GM just quit GMing because he couldn't say "No."

 

[derelictjay]

Let me weigh in on this. Yes....Actually one the first DMs I learned to play with (back in early 2e years) actually encouraged this style of play. Handing out uber-powerful weapons and equipment (oh your third level, you need a +8 sword of uber-goodieness). Needless to say, when I took up the DM reigns of that group, it took me years to widdle down the powergaming attitude of the players and orient it towards a more roleplaying attitude. But it worked and now I'm playing in a a game with one of those players where we had 2 fights and roleplayed most of the rest of the night, it was an enjoyable experience. In the end the game is all about fun, and as long as the players powergaming antics don't take away the fun, who cares.