Munchkin bashing [rant]

[Dinkeldog]

The problem with munchkins

is that they look at the game as a competition between them and the DM. Then the DM does something like throw out entire supplements like Relics and Rituals because one player insists on constantly exploiting every rule possible. And then the munchkin and DM get into a power issue, and the next thing you know there's a nightshade (that was in the module, btw), and then there's what could be if not a TPK, at least a 3/4-PK. And then the players that were playing the game and not being overly competitive with the guy who's got a pair of axiomatic dragonnes in the wings start getting frustrated because the game can be aimed at the average player in the group or the player whose character can wipe out the average player in one blow.

 

[Zappo]

Ah-hem... I wanted to answer ConcreteBuddha right after he posted, but the boards went down. I hope that I am still in time to better explain my position.

I said "most of the time" and "usually" munchkins and roleplayers don't get along, and all of that according to my definitions of munchkin and roleplayer.

Luckily, many players fall somewhere in-between and can in fact get along. But the extremes, the real thing - the characters who will kill their grandmother if it gives enough XP, and those who will spare an evil NPC's life for personal reasons even if they *know* he will come back for vengeance - well, I've just never seen them playing in the same campaign for more than a week.

 

[reapersaurus]

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

So I see.
When noone bites at your bait, you re-quote yourself.

Bad troll-form, Hong.
Subtract 5 points.

That said, after I laughed out loud at the original post, just before i looked to see who it was, I thought it was gonna be you.

Here's my flammable lob:
"Role-players" are more limiting AND intolerant in gaming than "rollplayers."

3 reasons:
1) In a group of roleplayers, a rollplayer will be more disruptive than if it's one roleplayer that joins a group of rollplayers.
2) Usually, the roleplayers are MUCH more vocal, critical, and looking-down-on rollplayers than vice versa.
3) A PC that was developed for rollplaying can always be roleplayed. A PC that was developed for roleplaying cannot suddenly "become" an effective character games-mechanic-wise.

Therefore, I have proven that roleplaying as your prime focus is a sub-standard and less versatile way of approaching gaming as a whole.

Thank you.

I'll be here all week.

 

[Zappo]

Here's my flammable lob:
"Role-players" are more limiting AND intolerant in gaming than "rollplayers."

True

3 reasons:
1) In a group of roleplayers, a rollplayer will be more disruptive than if it's one roleplayer that joins a group of rollplayers.
2) Usually, the roleplayers are MUCH more vocal, critical, and looking-down-on rollplayers than vice versa.
3) A PC that was developed for rollplaying can always be roleplayed. A PC that was developed for roleplaying cannot suddenly "become" an effective character games-mechanic-wise.

True

Therefore, I have proven that roleplaying as your prime focus is a sub-standard and less versatile way of approaching gaming as a whole.

Not true. Not unless you explain what "sub-standard" and "less versatile" mean.

Anyway, your 3 reasons further prove that real roleplayers and real munchkins don't mix.

My usual opinion is that if everybody got along nicely, life would be too boring.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

I said "most of the time" and "usually" munchkins and roleplayers don't get along, and all of that according to my definitions of munchkin and roleplayer.

Luckily, many players fall somewhere in-between and can in fact get along. But the extremes, the real thing -

I would say that:

1) "Some of the time" munchkins and roleplayers don't get along, according to your definitions of munchkin and roleplayer.
2) Luckily, most players fall somewhere in-between and can in fact get along.
3) But the extremes, the real thing, cannot.
4) I propose that their are fewer of the "extremes" than both sides would like to believe.
5) It helps all sides involved if peace and patience are the norm instead of negative ranting and raving.

Oh yeah, and the above is IMHO, and IMX...

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Heh...

...you mean like "If computers worked perfectly, life would be boring" ?

 

[GravyFingerz]

I'm 9% Min-Maxer, 50% Story Teller, 40% Role Player, 1% Munchkin

Someone is being overly generous of their self assessment of their own abilities

 

[Dark Jezter]

I think the role playing community is afflicted with a degree of cultural elitism, where one way of doing a thing is automaticly seen as superior to the other ways. Just my 20 öre.

Amen to that! Many times while browsing the Wizards of the Coast, rpg.net, and even these forums, I've heard such things like...

"You allowed a 6th level fighter to get a +2 sword? What kind of twinkish campaign are you running?"

"I don't allow my PCs to play as Drow. I'll have no Drizzt-clones running around in my campaign."

"People who min/max are just kids who haven't learned what role-playing is all about."

"Forgotten Realms has gotten too popular. Anybody who plays it is a sheep. Real D&D fans play Greyhawk."

"I shall now retreat to the safety of my comic book store, where I dispense the insults rather than absorb them."

Sadly, it seems that many people have forgotten that D&D is supposed to be fun for all involved. If a person has fun being a "munchkin", who is to say that he is wrong? Yes, it can be fun developing a deep, realistic character. However, it can also be very fun to strengthen your character and equip him with powerful items.

 

[Zappo]

I would say that:

1) "Some of the time" munchkins and roleplayers don't get along, according to your definitions of munchkin and roleplayer.
2) Luckily, most players fall somewhere in-between and can in fact get along.
3) But the extremes, the real thing, cannot.
4) I propose that their are fewer of the "extremes" than both sides would like to believe.

I've never, ever, seen a real powergamer play happily in a narrative campaign - or vice versa. I can't say it's impossible, of course. I've seen a few groups where someone will grudgingly adapt in order to play, but never a group where people who enjoy storytelling and people who enjoy +1 keen vorpal pre-errata bladed gauntlets both were having fun consistently. I frankly have no idea about how many munchkins and sorytellers there are in the general RPG population. The only thing I know is that I've never seen two in the same group for very long.

5) It helps all sides involved if peace and patience are the norm instead of negative ranting and raving.

As always. I haven't seen much ranting and raving in this thread (well, except for humorous ones).

 

[I'm A Banana]

Bah!

I think the drama-munchkins are worse than the mechanics-munchkins, personally. Bloody insecure attention-hogs. ^_^

I feel sorry for those who are subjected to campaigns where the game is used as a "creative outlet" for someone's B-grade fantasy fiction, or C-grade acting. I hate it even more when these people adopt a sort of false elitism that says that unless you're using the game like this, you are obviously not as creative or artistic as them.

Pheh. Some people need too much to assure themselves that they're talented in some respect.

Anyhoo, that's to add a bit of rant.