Munchkin bashing [rant]

[Snoweel]

Drama Queens?

Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!1!!!

Now tell me, what about the term for those who look down on both munchkins and drama queens?

Personally I don't like either at my table. Munchkins ruin the mood of the game, and drama queens hog the limelight.

Though I'd prefer a drama queen over a munchkin. At least they don't ruin the mood. (Unless they're way over the top.]

 

[jontherev]

Drama Queens?

Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!1!!!

Now tell me, what about the term for those who look down on both munchkins and drama queens?

Personally I don't like either at my table. Munchkins ruin the mood of the game, and drama queens hog the limelight.

Though I'd prefer a drama queen over a munchkin. At least they don't ruin the mood. (Unless they're way over the top.]

That's easy, DraMunchQueens!

I played with one guy who changed his stats around so he could be less powerful. His Paladin had an 18 cha, and he dumped his 4th highest stat in strength. Gimme a break. I see the 18 Charisma obviously, but the 11 Strength? When he has a few 14's or 15's to throw around? I enjoyed this more in depth ROLEplaying campaign (a change of pace from my other more powergaming/hack n slash, but NOT bereft of ROLEplaying campaign), but we managed to play one session for 4 hours without one combat, and that's a bit too SLOW for me. One can easily roleplay DURING combat as well.

The munchkin invasion problem I just don't understand. I hear people talking about munchkins with +50 swords of slaying/frost joining drama queen campaigns. I'm afraid that would be against the rules by a large margin. If someone joins your campaign, they still have to follow the rules and any house rules that are added. If they are someone who likes to play outside the rules, they will leave on their own. Otherwise, leave them alone. So what if they can't fake an English accent to make their Elf sound different. If they are starting battles every time you are trying to negotiate a deal, well, that's a character problem that has nothing to do with munchkinism-talk to the player about that. But, it's just as annoying if you are trying to negotiate EVERY SINGLE BATTLE. If they start breaking rules later on, then the DM steps in. No - munchkins joining drama queen's campaigns is something I don't ever see being a problem.

What IS a problem is the drama queen (MAN I like to type that) that joins a campaign that is more hack and slash (not munchkin by the purest sense). He slows the game down with his 100 questions (what color was the door?), and brings the party down with his weakness. Just a hint...it doesn't take a high CHA to roleplay well! Roleplaying is fun, but you don't need a weakling to do it. And I'm 100% sure that not all drama queens are alike. I'm sure there's a few Jack Nicholson wannabes out there who have +50 swords too.

Can't we all just get abong?

 

[WizarDru]

Tom, the problem is, as others have mentioned, that different people believe in different terminolgies. To me, not all powergamers are munchkins, but all munchkins are power-gamers. A powergamer, IMHO, uses his characters and the system to his best advantage. A munchkin, IMHO, attempts to use the system, not play it. The munchkin sees the DM as an opponent, and tries to find ways within the rules[/i] to 'beat' the DM. A powergamer cooperates with the spirit of the law, but still attempts to get the most bang for his buck.

While I'm sure it's not impossible to run a mixed group, it doesn't seem worth the effort, to me. IME, as in dinkeldog's, the presence of a munchkin can cause a disruption due to the potentially disparate power-levels and attention that needs to be focused on that character. The same is true of a hardcore roleplayer amidst a group of more Gygaxian gamers. Any situation that causes the DM to do more work for one player, or when one player's character causes the DM to tailor every adventure around his strengths and weaknesses, it disrupts the game, and reduces the enjoyment for all.

The problem is more prevalent with munchkins because they tend to be individualists. In general, a role-player enjoys the journey, while a munchkin enjoys the goal. Whether that goal is treasure, a combat victory or a political campaign, this remains true. Four munchkins in competition with each other is fine, as they all enjoy that style of play. But three characters who aren't and one who is creates a recipe for disaster.

For example, if one character can kill a Retriever in one round, the threat rating goes up for the whole party in reaction to it. To create a challenge, three retrievers have to be used, not one. However, it's not much fun for the rest of the group if they can't keep up. This creates one of two reactions...either animosity because now it's a competition, and the others have to scramble to keep up, or apathy, as they tend to disassociate with the munchkin's activities.

Again, this isn't saying that a metagame approach is better or worse than a dramatic approach...but the two rarely mix well, IME.

 

[Zappo]

I agree with WizardDru.

I'd like to point out that roleplaying isn't about negotiating 100% of the fights of playing as weak a character as possible. It's about playing a realistic character in a realistic way. You can roleplay well a combat monster, but once you realize that you've done it before a million times and it's always the same friggin' thing, it's simply boring as hell. Usually, I enjoy playing characters that are good at fighting (because they are adventurers) but without exploiting the bugs of the system and without turning them into murderous psychopaths.

 

[kkoie]

It's about playing a realistic character in a realistic way.

Sorry to burst your bubble Zappo, but roleplaying is not about playing a character in a realistic way, its about having fun. That is the bottom line. So what if someone plays a character in an unrealistic way? Are you saying that is not roleplaying?

How do you even differenciate between realistic and unrealistic roleplaying? What defines realistic? Something that reflects the real world? Well if that were true, then anyone who roleplays any steriotypical D&D character, is not roleplaying realistically. In the D&D universe, if you wanted to roleplay a personality that would react and act in a realistic manner, by our standards, then you'd probably end up roleplaying someone like Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever (for those not familiar with that name, I suggest you pick up a book by Stephen R Donaldson). Since he thinks that the fantasy element he is in, is a figment of his imagination, that would be a very realistic reaction to have when faced with say, magic, Orcs, Dragons, etc etc etc.

K Koie

 

[Mallus]

well designed character!=weak

The central mistake some gamers {the ones who frequently get get into the powergamer/dramagamer debate} make is equating weaker {in terms of base game mechanics/stats} characters with well designed characters with 'roles'.

If high stats don't automatically make a 'good' character, then low stats don't either. A character designed solely to excel in one area, say combat {its a popular area}, is flavorless, in my book. But a character designed to be some kind of quasi-Medieval Special Olympics contestant is equally uninteresting.

There is no shame in playing a fighter strong enough to lift a bastard sword. Or in a character than actually has a few useful feats and spells.

A good character comes from a good use of the players imagination. Its the kind of thing you can't reduce to rules and numbers. And that's the real heart of this issue: how do you quantify 'winning' in a game that is one big exercise of the imagination. Actually, its easy. You don't try...

 

[Atreus]

(this may double post)

Munchkins are like profanity. You'll know 'em when you see 'em.

I live in a dorm, and there is a ranging munchkin infestation downstairs. I was talking with my roomate yesterday (who does not play RPGs, but does like RPG computer games), and he told me what he heard the ppl downstairs had in their game.

Apparently, a girl in this group is playing a Half-Dragon/Half-Elf, Ranger that has six diffrent min-maxed magical scimitars and uses quickdraw feat so she can perform any attack with any scimitar. Oh, and being as a half-dragon, half-elf, dual weilding six diffrent min-maxed magical scimitars wasn't enough, they invented a new feat for her, that lets her make a dex check in order to perform extra attacks, so she keeps attacking until she fails a dex check.

I also had one of the ppl in this group try and explain to me his minotaur that was blessed by the gods and is dual weilding +6 vorpal greatswords of returning, yes, they have returning because he apparently uses his pair of +6 vorpal greatswords as THROWING weapons.

Their gaming sessions are pretty much all about the DM opening the monster manual, and having some totally undefeatable monster appears that is unkillable until the DM gets board with lording his monsters invulnerability over the players, and has it simply fall over dead, only to have a magic portal open up and have another totally undefeatable monster walk in.

That is NOT 'kick in the door' power-playing. That is munchkinism.

Personally, I got bored with that kind of entertainment some time between pre-school and kindergarden.

 

[Zappo]

Sorry to burst your bubble Zappo

I don't think I have any bubble at all currently

, but roleplaying is not about playing a character in a realistic way, its about having fun. That is the bottom line.

Ahem, actually we can't talk about anything at all unless we get the definitions clear, and I've already stated what's roleplaying for me. I don't think I've ever even got close to saying something like having fun is wrong, and by the gods shoot me the moment I say it.

So what if someone plays a character in an unrealistic way? Are you saying that is not roleplaying?

Shortly, yes. Notice the difference in the English word "playing" between "playing a game" and "playing a part". That doesn't make whatever he is doing any less worthy of his time, though!

How do you even differenciate between realistic and unrealistic roleplaying? What defines realistic? Something that reflects the real world?

Realistic within the setting, of course. But the toughest bit about making a character that feels real is getting the psychology right, and that's almost the same for all settings. The rules take care well enough of the rest.

 

[kkoie]

Realistic within the setting, of course. But the toughest bit about making a character that feels real is getting the psychology right, and that's almost the same for all settings. The rules take care well enough of the rest.

Well then, playing a character or part realistically within the setting is all that is nessessary for "roleplaying." Then by your own definition, there are no non-roleplayers. 0. Because there is no standard judgement of what is or isn't acceptable within a setting. The only judge of that is the Game Master, and as long as a players performance is accepted by the Game Master, then his or her roleplaying fits within the setting, and is there for realistic.

Argue against that paragraph all you like, but its entire interpretation is taken directly from your own statement.

K Koie

 

[Eternalknight]

(this may double post)

Munchkins are like profanity. You'll know 'em when you see 'em.

I live in a dorm, and there is a ranging munchkin infestation downstairs. I was talking with my roomate yesterday (who does not play RPGs, but does like RPG computer games), and he told me what he heard the ppl downstairs had in their game.

Apparently, a girl in this group is playing a Half-Dragon/Half-Elf, Ranger that has six diffrent min-maxed magical scimitars and uses quickdraw feat so she can perform any attack with any scimitar. Oh, and being as a half-dragon, half-elf, dual weilding six diffrent min-maxed magical scimitars wasn't enough, they invented a new feat for her, that lets her make a dex check in order to perform extra attacks, so she keeps attacking until she fails a dex check.

I also had one of the ppl in this group try and explain to me his minotaur that was blessed by the gods and is dual weilding +6 vorpal greatswords of returning, yes, they have returning because he apparently uses his pair of +6 vorpal greatswords as THROWING weapons.

Their gaming sessions are pretty much all about the DM opening the monster manual, and having some totally undefeatable monster appears that is unkillable until the DM gets board with lording his monsters invulnerability over the players, and has it simply fall over dead, only to have a magic portal open up and have another totally undefeatable monster walk in.

That is NOT 'kick in the door' power-playing. That is munchkinism.

Personally, I got bored with that kind of entertainment some time between pre-school and kindergarden.

But as long as those people are having fun, more power to them right? I realize that some people will not want to play with roll-players, just as some people will not want to play with role-players. My point is why do people have to put roll-players (or power-gamers or munchkins or whatever) down? There is no right or wrong way to play thet game, as long as everyone is having fun.