Munchkin bashing [rant]

[Eternalknight]

[/color]
....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.....

Have you even read the thread, let alone the original post? I said on the Wizards boards.

 

[Zappo]

Those first adventures one of us was a minotaur, another was a lizard man, and we had a spaceship.

Sounds like a normal Spelljammer campaign to me.

 

[Ashtal]

Re: Realistic?

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.

Ah, but: Why is one more realistic than the other?

I can come up with a lot of good, realistic reasons why a character may always choose the most powerful weapon he or she possesses.

1) He's a glory hound, and believes so much in his supremacy on the field of combat that only the best weapon he can lay his hands upon will be used. Anything less is insulting to his personal image, like a Prince eating off a wooden plate. It's a matter of pride.

2) Another fighter always uses his best weapon because he wants to end the combat quickly. The quicker it ends, the less chance he or his companions will be hurt, or that outsiders and innocents get involved.

3) Still another fighter uses the best weapon at her disposal to defend herself. Maybe she's been caught ill-prepared, or maybe a supposed 'friend' stole out the magical weapon from underneath her nose and used it at her throat. Better to keep the life-saving treasure close to the heart than let it fall into the hand of an enemy. (Heck, she may even DESTROY older weapons when she comes across something more powerful, to ensure it can't be used against her.)

I think the difference in the two play styles really comes down into how much effort and how much importance a player ascribes to the 'why' of the character's actions. As long as everyone's having fun, tho', and can agree on relative power levels, it's all good.

 

[WizarDru]

And Aquaman was played by the drama twink?

Not if you've read him in the last decade or so, he's not. If anything, he's as much a powergamer as Batman. No, no, you're thinking of Spidey or the X-men.

 

[Desdichado]

EternalKnight:
Have you even read the thread, let alone the original post? I said on the Wizards boards.

Actually, I had forgotten about that. Good call. Still, that was merely an aside on my post.

 

[Eternalknight]

[/color]
Actually, I had forgotten about that. Good call. Still, that was merely an aside on my post.

Sorry if that came off insulting too, bad day

 

[Snoweel]

Hmmph. I was quite offended actually, but since you were just joking... well we Aussies have a sense of humour. Good one Snoweel, you got me!!! (Why are you in Stolkholm by the way???)

I married a she-sven and moved here a couple of years ago.

But now the divorce is all sorted out and I'll be back in Sydney on Sunday. Where in Oz are you?

 

[Eternalknight]

Where in Oz are you?

Ever heard of Gippsland? It's in Eastern Victoria

 

[Forrester]

I don't know. Those both sound like cool, fun ideas to me. And, potentially, cool, fun characters to roleplay. Certainly not stupid by default.

Um, no, they pretty much sound stupid by default.

 

[Henry]

And Aquaman was played by the drama twink?

No, the Sub-Mariner was played by the drama queen who was into munchkining up characters. How else do you explain a being who was super-strong, head of an entire nation, and could french-kiss Susan Richards without Reed getting mad?