Min/Max explination

[diaglo]

Little light starting to go off:
So person one is simply a min/max PC while person two is a power gamer/min/max PC.

PC = player character.

people usually refer to the min/maxer or power gamer as the player not their player character (PC).

it is the player who designs their PC to be min/max. it is more the player's attitude towards gaming.

 

[Henry]

EXCEPT THAT another widely-used definition of "power gamer" is "one who plays in Epic-Level or high-powered and often high-magic games.

There are those who can min-max at first level - and then there are those who refuse to play in games less than adult-dragon-killing level, because they are bored with going through the "growing levels" (1-7, say) over and over again.

So, in the end, some people use it with pride, some use it with derision, and NO one has yet established an objective definition - kind of like the term "immature" in reference to hobbies.

 

[Laurel]

And even though I know there is no one absolute definition, all the above info. is giving me a much better handle on what it means- THANK YOU ALL!!!!



Random but I was also just told by a friend that it can humorously be referred to as 'Munchcanism'?

 

[diaglo]

And even though I know there is no one absolute definition, all the above info. is giving me a much better handle on what it means- THANK YOU ALL!!!!



Random but I was also just told by a friend that it can humorously be referred to as 'Munchcanism'?

Munchkinism comes from the Wizard of Oz.

munchkins another term that no one can agree on... can refer to power gamers trying to break the rules to win the game. not all power gamers break the rules. munchkins do.

 

[Crothian]

Min maxing is also more seen in pooint based systems. A person takes advantages that are meaningful while taking disadvantages that are meaningless to their game.

 

[JDowling]

a certain amount of min-maxing makes sense from an in-character stand point.

If Thokk the half-orc barbarian notices that "Weapon X" causes larger wounds than "Weapon Y" and Thokk is concerned with dealing damage (as any good barbarian should be), then Thokk will logically choose "Weapon X" over "Weapon Y".

That is not to say that your "Hulking Hurler" who is some bizzare hapenstance with 4 templates (or however many they have), a ludicrous combination of items and skills to reach 200 str (or whatever rediclous number they have them up to) can possibly be justified "in character"

just so my 2cp about "not all min/maxing is bad" gets tossed in

 

[Pielorinho]

Yeah, I definitely think a certain amount of minmaxing makes sense. It's what people do in the real world: someone learns a lot about how to play hockey at the expense of learning political oratory, or they study ancient Sumeria while neglecting to learn how to change the oil in their car, or they learn all about computer repair but never quite get the hang of firing a gun. Everyone knows what a jack of all trades ends up mastering, and I kind of expect players in my game to do some level of minmaxing like this. It makes it more fun when each character has a special thing they can do better than anyone else, IMO.

Where I get frustrated is when people find ways to go beyond that: when someone finds a way to do their special thing better than anyone else does their own special thing, especially when they do it by exploiting loopholes in the rules, by trying to use poorly-designed rules, or by taking rules from multiple sources that were never designed to work together.

Daniel

 

[GlassJaw]

I figure I might as well chime in on this subject that is so near and dear to my heart since I am an admitted (and recovering ) min/maxer.

Min/maxer - A min/maxer wants their character to be very good at one very specific thing. Like anything else, there are varying degrees of min/maxing. You can min/max with any set of rules provided, even if it just the core books.

I think what a lot of people have a problem with is less about actual min/maxing and more about the sheer volume of crunch available to the player. Some players scour every single book to find the most obscure feat or PrC or broken combo. This is where min/maxing starts to become gray IMO. Hence we come to powergaming...

Powergamer - They want to WIN! They want the most powerful character with the most toys. It is true that most powergamers also min/max but they don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Powergamers may also disrupt a gaming group because they want to be uber at everything or have discovered some ridiculously broken ruling and have exploited it.

Munchkin - The munchkin is in another league by himself. The munchkin isn't concerned with balance or rules or role-playing. They want it all and don't care how they get it, which may or may not include cheating.

These are of course my own definitions and I think we've established correctly that they vary greatly.

 

[jmucchiello]

Min/maxer - A min/maxer wants their character to be very good at one very specific thing. Like anything else, there are varying degrees of min/maxing. You can min/max with any set of rules provided, even if it just the core books.

This is close. True min/maxing usually involves numeric analysis. The true min/max fighter has a spreadsheet that tells him the optimal amount to Power Attack by based on hitting the monster with a strike that hits AC 20. ("What? You hit an AC 20? Ooooo, I can PA another +2.").

Powergamer - They want to WIN! They want the most powerful character with the most toys. It is true that most powergamers also min/max but they don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Powergamers may also disrupt a gaming group because they want to be uber at everything or have discovered some ridiculously broken ruling and have exploited it.

Right, this is a social thing.

Munchkin - The munchkin is in another league by himself. The munchkin isn't concerned with balance or rules or role-playing. They want it all and don't care how they get it, which may or may not include cheating.

My take on munchkinism isn't that they want it all. It's that they want to tell you how they got it. They are the folks that will tell you how they killed a god (usually Thor) with their 43rd level rogue/barbarian/fighter/sorcerer/assassin/blackguard/loremaster. Munchkins delight in telling others about their +16 worldbreaker slingshot, about the time they killed Death, about the time they put out the fires of hell. Yes, definitely in their own league, and definitely require a munchkin DM for best effect. Again, they are a social problem because they make you scared that you should be impressed by what there saying or they might react badly.

Min/Maxing isn't necessary unsocial. It's gamist and very unnarrative (in the gamist, narrativist, simulationist triumverate). The social problem with min/maxing is the narrativists who look down upon it. (That is until you become a powergamer doing it. Party: "Let's see if the rogue can pick this lock." PG:"Why bother, I can do it with this spell..." Party:"Let's see if the burly fighter can bash the door down." PG:"I have a chime of opening!")

These are of course my own definitions and I think we've established correctly that they vary greatly.[/QUOTE]

 

[Doug McCrae]

For me min/maxing is maximising strengths and minimising weaknesses. It goes beyond legitimate specialisation and indeed may involve creating a generalist *if* that is the most efficient build in that system.

An example of non-specialising min/maxing would be in 1st ed playing an elf thief rather than a human because elves just make better thieves.

Rules raping is IMO an even more extreme form of min/maxing involving an utter contempt for the spirit of the rules and a ruthless exploitation of loopholes.

A powergamer seeks to have a more powerful PC than the other players. Minmaxing/rules rapery are but one technique whereby this can be achieved. A powergamer may also cheat at dice rolls for example or be constantly badgering the DM, demanding better magic items.