-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Munchkin bashing [rant]
- Thread starter Eternalknight
- Start date
- Status
Realistic?
To me, an example of a realistic roleplayer is one who's character inherited his father's nonmagical sword and feels it is his duty to use it in battle. He cherishes it, calls it by its name...but it's just a normal sword. Then one day he comes across a magical sword in a treasure trove. The character takes the magical sword, but it does not replace his father's sword as his primary weapon. Rather, he saves it for emergencies where he might need it (vs damage reduction creatures)... or he might sell it.... The point is he's doing something the character would do, not the player. Perhaps a good idea would be to commission a mage to enchant father's sword...
The unrealistic roleplayer would always use the most powerful sword he has without giving it a second thought. Note, I am not saying you are a munchkin for always using your best weapon, but that not always using your best weapon could classify you as a "realistic" roleplayer.
SIDE NOTE / RANT: Whenever the word "realistic" comes up in a debate, there's always someone who brings out the arguement: "It's fantasy! How can things be realistic? We have dragons, magic, etc.!!" And that makes my head want to explode.
To me, an example of a realistic roleplayer is one who's character inherited his father's nonmagical sword and feels it is his duty to use it in battle. He cherishes it, calls it by its name...but it's just a normal sword. Then one day he comes across a magical sword in a treasure trove. The character takes the magical sword, but it does not replace his father's sword as his primary weapon. Rather, he saves it for emergencies where he might need it (vs damage reduction creatures)... or he might sell it.... The point is he's doing something the character would do, not the player. Perhaps a good idea would be to commission a mage to enchant father's sword...
The unrealistic roleplayer would always use the most powerful sword he has without giving it a second thought. Note, I am not saying you are a munchkin for always using your best weapon, but that not always using your best weapon could classify you as a "realistic" roleplayer.
SIDE NOTE / RANT: Whenever the word "realistic" comes up in a debate, there's always someone who brings out the arguement: "It's fantasy! How can things be realistic? We have dragons, magic, etc.!!" And that makes my head want to explode.
Last edited:
Zappo
Explorer
Re: Realistic?
am181d, they are cool concepts combatwise no doubt, but cool characters? I can't tell, because I haven't the least bit of information about who they are and what they do and why they do it. If their players (as I suspect) haven't even thought about that... then there is rather little to roleplay. If they have fun, good!, but a player more interested in character development and story would not feel at ease in their group.
am181d, they are cool concepts combatwise no doubt, but cool characters? I can't tell, because I haven't the least bit of information about who they are and what they do and why they do it. If their players (as I suspect) haven't even thought about that... then there is rather little to roleplay. If they have fun, good!, but a player more interested in character development and story would not feel at ease in their group.
kamosa
Explorer
Let me throw out some words and see if it sheds any light on the topic.
First off I think "realistic" is an ambigous choice to describe what Zappo is objecting too. After all casting a fireball isn't very "realistic" and quite frankly none of us are looking for too much reality in our fantasy.
I think what he is trying to draw out is a problem with characters that either lack strong internal motivation, or go against their internal story.
Example, is it believable that superman would rob a bank? Of course not, he is a hero and as a hero he has a certain set of internal morals and motivations that we all understand. {The person who plays superman is a powergamer, the person that plays superman and robs banks is a "munchkin"?}
Anyway I think when Zappo says it isn't realistic, what he means is that the character is acting against their backstory, or without a back story. I think he has a good point that we should discuss without the flames.
First off I think "realistic" is an ambigous choice to describe what Zappo is objecting too. After all casting a fireball isn't very "realistic" and quite frankly none of us are looking for too much reality in our fantasy.
I think what he is trying to draw out is a problem with characters that either lack strong internal motivation, or go against their internal story.
Example, is it believable that superman would rob a bank? Of course not, he is a hero and as a hero he has a certain set of internal morals and motivations that we all understand. {The person who plays superman is a powergamer, the person that plays superman and robs banks is a "munchkin"?}
Anyway I think when Zappo says it isn't realistic, what he means is that the character is acting against their backstory, or without a back story. I think he has a good point that we should discuss without the flames.
Last edited:
Zappo
Explorer
Thanks Kamosa for helping to clarify. When I say realistic, I mean realistic within the setting. So, a character who tosses fireballs is perfectly acceptable..
The rules try to enforce a certain level of realism on what the character can be and do. That's what the rules are for. But then there is realism in how the character behaves, and no ruleset can define that. Luckily, the psychology is less or more the same in every setting, and that's the same as in RL. So, we don't have rules for that (and myself, I don't even want them). We are free to make completely unbelievable characters and characters who have no detail at all outside of combat. Should we do so? It depends on the campaign.
The rules try to enforce a certain level of realism on what the character can be and do. That's what the rules are for. But then there is realism in how the character behaves, and no ruleset can define that. Luckily, the psychology is less or more the same in every setting, and that's the same as in RL. So, we don't have rules for that (and myself, I don't even want them). We are free to make completely unbelievable characters and characters who have no detail at all outside of combat. Should we do so? It depends on the campaign.
Wikidogre
First Post
Good Times
this is very funny, i just cannot grasp on how poeple, can bitch so much on how a or a collective of people role-play, funny to me. If any blame is to be out on anyones shoulders it would have to be the DM, for allowing his/her game get out of hand where thier is in-fighting between pc's. just an opinion, but opinions are like A@@-holes and everyone has one.
every just get along and role-play
this is very funny, i just cannot grasp on how poeple, can bitch so much on how a or a collective of people role-play, funny to me. If any blame is to be out on anyones shoulders it would have to be the DM, for allowing his/her game get out of hand where thier is in-fighting between pc's. just an opinion, but opinions are like A@@-holes and everyone has one.
every just get along and role-play
Desdichado
Hero
Geez, have you read the thread? Who's bitching about how other people play? The thread was started because someone claimed that there was a lot of bitching against "munchkins" and he interpreted that to mean bitching against power-gamers. This thread is bitching about complainers, not "munchkins." And for that matter, it's pretty badly timed: I haven't seen any type of anti-power-gamer post on these boards in a long time. The entire thread is kinda outta left field. And your comments are even moreso.
Bonehoard Taffer
First Post
The Greeks were the original power gamer/munchkins. They had people shooting arrows at the sun cause it was shining to bright, guys crashing to the ground cause they flew too close to the sun and the wax holding their feathered wings together melted. Oh, and if you think a half dragon is a munchkin tool, try making a character up with the half diety template.
Something to consider. Learning to role play is just that. Learning to role play. I started playing D&D back in the 6th grade. The kid who introduced me to the game would come to school and tell me ablout his latest adventure. Finally I bought the boxed set. We started playing at recess. Those first adventures one of us was a minotaur, another was a lizard man, and we had a spaceship. After I stopped D&D with that group, I bought the Greyhawk, Blackmoor, and Eldritch Wizardry suppliments. Well, it wasn't two weeks time after buying those where I had a first level magic user that I made for myself. His posessions included one copy of each magic item listed in those three suplements. He stored them in a secret chamber in his castle, which was The Keep on the Borderlands. When his wife was killed, he buried her in a section of The Tomb of Horrors that his familiar (a Type V Demon) built for him. The point is I was new to the game. I was learning. I was having fun. And there was a certain magic about the game. Would I do any of those things now? My stars no!!!! I think the majority of players who start out the way I did have one of a few things happen. They never change and grow out of the game. Or, they tire of that particular game and try another one. Finally, they learn that playing as I did does not ultimately lead to the most amount of enjoyment and they change their style of play. I no longer play that way, but I wouldn't trade that first year of D&D for anything in the world. Between the playing and the using of my allowance to buy a new book every other week was the best time of my life.
Something to consider. Learning to role play is just that. Learning to role play. I started playing D&D back in the 6th grade. The kid who introduced me to the game would come to school and tell me ablout his latest adventure. Finally I bought the boxed set. We started playing at recess. Those first adventures one of us was a minotaur, another was a lizard man, and we had a spaceship. After I stopped D&D with that group, I bought the Greyhawk, Blackmoor, and Eldritch Wizardry suppliments. Well, it wasn't two weeks time after buying those where I had a first level magic user that I made for myself. His posessions included one copy of each magic item listed in those three suplements. He stored them in a secret chamber in his castle, which was The Keep on the Borderlands. When his wife was killed, he buried her in a section of The Tomb of Horrors that his familiar (a Type V Demon) built for him. The point is I was new to the game. I was learning. I was having fun. And there was a certain magic about the game. Would I do any of those things now? My stars no!!!! I think the majority of players who start out the way I did have one of a few things happen. They never change and grow out of the game. Or, they tire of that particular game and try another one. Finally, they learn that playing as I did does not ultimately lead to the most amount of enjoyment and they change their style of play. I no longer play that way, but I wouldn't trade that first year of D&D for anything in the world. Between the playing and the using of my allowance to buy a new book every other week was the best time of my life.
- Status
Similar Threads
