Munchkin bashing [rant]

[Weeble]

If you are a DM, see p.8 DMG: Determining Style of Play.
Out of the three styles, none are rejected as invalid by WotC.
If you don't like one or two of these, DONT USE THEM.

I like to combine switching from a Kick in the Door adventure or session to something in between. If you discourage metagaming, which to me is the highest form of munchkinism, then there shouldn't be a problem with using all of those dice that you bought, right? Follow the rules. Munchkinism is more a DM problem than anything. See Table 5-1: Character Wealth by Level. If you adhere to this as a DM, there shouldn't be too many problems. I have modified it by x3/4 to put value in gold and limit slightly the number of magic items in my campaign (and put emphesis on creation of magic items). So even if I have a kick in the door adventure, the wonder twins won't activate. Have a good plot and campaign story to draw those stat hungry gamers in, but keep the action moving and require your story loving gamers to follow the technical rules.

 

[kamosa]

As one of my old players/DM used to say, "You can always role play a min/maxed character."

My problem with strict "roleplaying" players is that they are often are more into their own characters then into solving the adventure at hand. I don't understand why it is "better" to roleplay a background that makes you unwilling to go on dangerous missions, unable to work with a group, or unable to contribute to a clever plan to solve some mystery/problem. In my world view, you can roleplay a background that is heroic, adventerous, willing to help others, and part of an effective group. You can have flaws, quirks and weaknesses galore and still have a history that involves being part of the group and trying to solve the adventure.

Note: this is not a rant against making bad decisions based on your character background or against roleplaying a character . That is very cool and I strive to get players to think in terms of what their character would do, not what they as players would do. However, some people take it to far and lose site of the fact that it is a team game, and they are there to participate in a group activity. Yes you can play an anti-social coward that is only in this for the money and robs the party at every turn, but in the end that is only fun for one player.

In the end analysis I dislike "strickly roleplayers" for the same reason I dislike the "strickly rollplayers". Both try to grab the spotlight and hold it on themselves in a way that isn't fun for the rest of the group.

The game is best played when everyone gets a chance to enjoy some of the spotlight and all the characters are working together to solve adventures.

 

[Eternalknight]

Here, here!

 

[Jeremy]

<quotes his similar post made in response to the ubiquitous weenie list of useful items that only powergamers would use, like +1 swords>

<changes his mind and just heartily agrees>

Powergames play one way, role players play another way. A person can be comprised of both aspects, a group can be composed of both aspects or just one.

But the endless derogatory slander of powergamers sometimes by other powergamers who are trying to minimize other's perception of them as such, or just by gamers who feel that their gaming style is better (as per Monte's rant), is hurtful, unproductive, and an immature small thing to do.

You like the way you game, we like the way we game. We're having fun, which is the point of the hobby. Does calling us munchkins and belittling us make your game any more fun? Then why do it?

You don't see us laughing at sT00p1D RP3r's... That would liken us to those poor folk in Ultima Online. We respect your gaming style for it's strengths and it's benefits. We also respect our gaming style for it's excitment, heroism, fine degree of skill, tactical aspects, and all around escapism.

I think many role players simply need to grow larger imaginations, or at least simply be more open minded and tolerant. I'm glad that most role-players are in fact necessarily imaginative and see in their mind's eye tremendous cinematic scenes when a powergamer accomplishes a fantastic feat. It's just you don't hear from them, because they're not posting to decry people. You hear from the ones who feel the need to, as Monte put it, decry "gamers who aren't as good as me".

My $2.00...

 

[Orco42]

Most of the time I am a munchkin.

Being a munchkin I use the rules to my advantage.

For example using the chart that shows how weapon damage increases as the size gets bigger I can make a large spiked gauntlets that do massive damage (2d6 I think). Using monkey grip I can use them one handed. They can not be disarmed and I can hold other things in that hand.

I would of course expect that to be rule 0'd but you not munchkins can see how we think.

But I am not a pure munchkin. There are times I make a munchkin character that was too powerful for the other players to have fun. When this happens I will tone the character down or make a new one. And in other campaigns I will not even try to be a munchkin.

And while I am a munchkin I do like to "role-play" a lot. There have been no problems with the other "role-players" in fact I have started to convert one to a munchkin.

So play how you want as long as it is fun for you and the other players.

 

[Snoweel]

If he can find a group of players to play with that will enjoy the game, well isn't that the point of playing? Enjoyment?

Nobody's saying munchkins can't enjoy D&D however they want.

We're saying if that's how you want to play, then stick with your own kind and don't spout the !33+ness of your character in public forums where decent folks are trying to pontificate.

 

[Snoweel]

Note: this is not a rant against making bad decisions based on your character background or against roleplaying a character . That is very cool and I strive to get players to think in terms of what their character would do, not what they as players would do. However, some people take it to far and lose site of the fact that it is a team game, and they are there to participate in a group activity. Yes you can play an anti-social coward that is only in this for the money and robs the party at every turn, but in the end that is only fun for one player.

I'm with you.

That's why I think role-playing (or theatrics/acting to use less confusing terms) should take a back-seat to the group and the story.

Sure one of the PC's might want to spend an evening romancing an NPC, but if it'll bore the group and add little to the story, then that evening will be solved with 2 minutes of dialogue and some skill checks.

If it adds to the story, I might let it go on for 10 minutes.

 

[hong]

Why, you might as well ask why killing orc babies is such a bad thing.


Hong "pouring oil on the fire" Ooi

Hmm. I can see that adding fuel to the fire turned out to be a rather superfluous act.

 

[shadow]

Preach on brother Eternalknight! I enjoy role-playing, but I also really like "roll-playing" and powergaming. For this fact, I've always been considered a "munchkin" by some people. Come on everyone, this is a game! The purpose of a game is to have fun. If you're having fun inflicting uber-amounts of damage on monsters, is there anything inherently wrong with it? If you don't like powergaming and "roll-playing", find another group to play with, don't try to "reform" your players for playing the "wrong" way.
To tell the truth some of the most troublesome games I've been in came from role-players, not "munchkins" For example:
1. I had one player who tried to make every D&D game a therapy session. His character was chronically depressed after losing his lover to some tragedy. He always wanted to avoid fights and adventures because his character "had seen to much violence killing, and greed" and generally slowed down the game for everyone else. (The player, by the way, was really into White Wolf Games.)
2. The DM in one game that I played in was so into role-playing that we had to get permission to speak out of character. He abolished social skills in favor of completely role-playing the encounter. I was playing a gypsy bard who was supposed to be charismatic. However, since I am naturally shy and have somewhat of a stutter, I always ended up failing any fast talk, or bluff attempt. I felt like I was being punished for not being charismatic enough. (Needless to say, I left his game after a few sessions.)
3. One player I had got so into the game that she started taking it way to seriously. She would write fan-fiction about her characters and all her characters had some 500 page background story that really sounded as if it were out of a bad soap opera (her character was betrayed by so-and-so, her character was cheating on so-and-so's lover, etc.) She started complaining the game was too "lame" because there wasn't enough drama and passion for her character. Last time I heard from her, she is now playing Mind's Eye Theater's Vampire LARP.

The aforementioned players may have been appropriate to certain groups. But I just enjoy dungeon crawling, hack 'n slash, and powergaming. Is there anything wrong with this?

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

Why, you might as well ask why killing orc babies is such a bad thing.

No, hong, stay good! Stay good, hong! Killing orc babies is always evil! You are being sucked into the dark side of pansy roleplayers...bleh...

shadow---

Come on everyone, this is a game! The purpose of a game is to have fun.

Devil's advocate:

Some people take their fun seriously. DnD is not just a game. and it, and RPGing in general, are instead, an artform to these people. They construct massive amounts of campaign/character material and to have it belittled as "just a game" is to invalidate their hard work and feelings. To have a random munchkin come in and destroy the fabric of a well-fleshed out campaign world can be heartwrenching.

I see RPG as akin to poetry. If a person enjoys "high-brow" nature poetry, they become miffed when somebody spouts a raunchy limerick and says that all poetry should be fun.

The above is why I don't take the, "It's just a game, games are fun so get over it" route.
.
.
An alternative is to suggest that both the munchkin and the roleplayer both can and often do take the game seriously. They also both spend inordinate amounts of time creating their masterpieces, be it a five-page background or a complex interlinking of abilities.

I advocate that both are creative, both are good and that both sides can and should see the game from the other's point of view. Hence why peace and patience are crucial in this discussion.

(I just wish the Israel/Palestine conflict could end with this conclusion. But that's another thread and way off topic. Ignore this paragraph. Ignore this paragraph. Ignore this paragraph. *grin*)