Munchkins vs. Powergamers?

[KrazyHades]

OK, this stems from a discussion I had earlier with one of my players about the definitions of munchkin and powergamer. He assumed that they were the same thing, and I've certainly seen many EnWorld posts that act as if they are synonyms. However, I think that they are subtly different. Here's what I always thought was the definition (but DON'T assume this is "right"...that's the whole point of this thread)

Powergamer
To me, a powergamer is a player who plays DnD for the fun of playing, and to augment that works at creating a strong character. This player may plan the future of his character (class levels, feats, spell selection), but largely out of the enjoyment of having a character that can really pull his weight in an encounter (note: NOT just a fight). This person plays to win, but NOT to try and find "broken" rules, feats, spells, skills, etc. In fact, to a "good" powergamer, these ideas are abhorrent, because they seem "unfair", making his character overpowered through a trick rather than powerful (but not unfairly so) and non-cheap character.

Munchkin
Munchkins are, in my definition, like powergamers gone wrong. They try to exploit any and all rules they can to make an overpowered character that is technically legal. They may try to influence a DM towards a particular houseruling in order to take advantage of it, or just seize on such opportunities as they arise. To me, a munchkin essentialyl makes a character unscrupulously, metagaming make a character to dominate combat (or perhaps something else) rather than the powergamer who wants to excell in but not overwhelm in fights.


I'm sure that these definitions will incite some anger, but I'm not trying to insult people. Please tell me what YOUR definitions of these are, and help resolve this argument.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Warning: very quiet day here at work. I'm probably going to crap on for ages.

KrazyHades: These strike me as clearly stated definitions. And when it comes down to it that's enough. If there's one thing I learnt from my liberal arts degree it's that definitons are defined through the process you are starting here. Thesis+ Antithesis = Synthesis. Another thing I learnt from said degree is that you will never get everyone to agree with your definition. The more esoteric the circles (like for instance a bunch of literature professors arguning over which is the greater epic, Beowulf or the Chanson de Roland, a RL example) the less agreement. And gamer's messgae boards are very, um, esoteric.

So on to my own views.

I broadly agree with the OP's definitons. Obviously there's over-lap. And no one player is necessarily always be one or the other. eg: A friend of mine is an inveterate power-gamer who at times slips into munchkinism.

And of course any one person's definition of "broken" and "good" is going to effect the definitions even as stated. (Which you obviously understand from your use of parenthesis.) I'd go so far as to say that certain feats/spells/etc can be defined as broken or not in different ways by by the same person in different circumstances: what is fine in one campaign is not fine in another.

So one element I would like to make explicit is the degree of pushing of the envelope seems to be the defining point. Making the line between a Power Gamer and a Munchkin one of degree only rather than any fundamental difference.

not as long as I feared.
cHEERS.

 

[Gothmog]

There is a lot of overlap with a munchkin and a powergamer, so they are often confused- and the line between powergamer and munchkin is razor-thin. Powergamers can be drawn to the munchy side very easily unless they are careful.

You pretty much have it right KrazyHades, with the caveat that munchkins also don't care if they impact anyone else's fun at the table, and often are condescending to other players whose characters aren't as twinked as they are. Munchkins are ALWAYS disruptive though, in some way or another- and they often completely fail to see what they are doing as wrong. Munchkins also tend to get VERY defensive and obnoxious when called on their behavior, often exploding in childish fits of geek rage that often expose deep personal issues of the person.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Powergamer = Good
Munchkin = Bad

???

I'm not too sure I totally agree with the OP's definitions. If you throw an "Optimizer" into the mix, then things perhaps get even more grey.

IMO, munchkins, optimizers and powergamers are all under the same umbrella. The thought of having a character's primary abilities under-optimized gives such players a sense of unease.

Some further "definitions" for debate:

Optimizers generally don't care what other people do, they just take pride in their "creation". Fitting a concept of their character perfectly or at least very well is paramount.

Powergamers do care what other people do. They like to have their character be "the best" at something. In fact, almost nothing annoys a power gamer more than finding out that another player at the table has built a character using exactly the same concept. Even worse if their opponent's character has a greater "to hit". Their enjoyment is primarily derived from being the best at something (and perhaps more importantly: being seen to be the best).

Munchkin is a derogatory term for an optimizer or powergamer who annoys others in the group that they play in (or who would be annoying if they played in your group). As such, munchkin is a more relative than the other two. The spectrum of optimizer and powergamer is broad with those at the bottom end of each normally being titled "munchkins"

In the end, people enjoy playing how they play - and as long as they and the group that they play with are enjoying themselves, who cares.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Celebrim]

A power gamer is a gamer who plays to win and treats the game much the same as a competitive game. 'Power gaming' is for the most part socially nuetral. Power gamers that are socially disfunctional need additional labels: ei 'cheaters', 'rules lawyers', 'cry babies', etc. The presence of a limited number of power gamers in a group is usually beneficial both to the other players and to the DM. Having a power gamer on the team means that you have someone who can get the party out of trouble no matter how deep it gets. Socially positive traits that power gamers should exhibit are: willingness to forgo broken rules (that render winning trivial), answering the DM's rules questions to keep the game going quickly, 'losing' gracefully, reminding the DM of rules that would be a detriment to themselves, and honesty in general.

Brian from the 'Knights of the Dinner Table' is a somewhat exagerrated but still pretty definitive portrayal of a power gamer.

A munchkin is an (emotionally) immature player. They can exhibit a variaty of traits, including being a power gamer.

Both Bob and Dave from 'Knights of the Dinner Table' are munchkins, or would be if they didn't inhabit a world were everyone is exagerratedly disfunctional for humerous effect. By comparison to the members of the Black Hands, they are emotionally well rounded and functional players.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Ah, interesting. A couple of arguments for Munchkin being unrelated to power gaming per se and instead being related to player maturity/ability to interact well in a social setting. I can go with that.

Gothmog wrote:
"the line between powergamer and munchkin is razor-thin. Powergamers can be drawn to the munchy side very easily unless they are careful."

I can see it now: "Come over to the munchkin side, young Skywalker. We have +12 Vorpal Weapons." heh heh heh

 

[IceFractal]

My definitions are slightly different:

Powergamer - Someone for whom character power is a major goal. Not their only goal, but definitely an important factor. Sometimes they know how to get power, sometimes they don't. There are definitely powergamers who don't actually know how to make a powerful character ("This Half-Fiend Half-Dragon Sorcerer is going to be so uber!")

Optimiser, Min/Maxer - Someone who knows how to optimise a character for its purpose, whether that purpose is doing massive damage in combat or being a really excellent basket weaver. The fact that an optimiser can create ridiculously strong characters doesn't mean that they will actually use those in a game.

Munchkin - Someone who obtains character power through, basically, cheating. This can be blatant dice-cheating, pressuring the DM to adopt rule interpretations that favor the munckin's character, or bringing in homebrew material that they know to be broken.


Of these, Powergamers and Optimisers overlap, but neither is a subset of the other. Munchkins are a subset of Powergamers, which doesn't usually overlap with Optimisers (why cheat if you can get power legitimately, and vice-versa).

Note that this doesn't cover whether someone uses overpowered characters to ruin a game. That's because that decision is a different factor: being a jerk. It's no different from other ways of being a jerk, like trying to backstab everyone's character in a non-PvP game, or insisting on using a character whose personality everyone else hates.

Interestingly, while many munchkins are jerks, not all of them are. Sometimes people turn to the path of the munckin because they feel overshadowed and their optimising skills are lacking.

 

[Doug McCrae]

In roleplaying circles, munchkin is a strong insult word. I've never seen anyone use it to describe themselves, only other people or one's past self - 'I used to be a terrible munchkin in my early teens'.

As such its principle meaning is 'not me, other people'. All other definitions are slippery, the speaker will change all other aspects of the meaning of munchkin to ensure it doesn't apply to himself. For example - 'Sure I was cheating, but I'm not a munchkin. I hardly ever cheat, it was just this one time to get back at a real @sshole.' Or - 'Sure I was cheating, but I'm not a munchkin. I was cheating for the good of the game.'

I'm an optimiser. You're a powergamer. He's a munchkin.

 

[Phlebas]

.........

I'm an optimiser. You're a powergamer. He's a munchkin.

Perhaps the best definition so far

its all relative to person(s) and game....

 

[DragonLancer]

To me they are one and the same, even with the slightly different definitions. Both are bad if the rest of the group doesn't play the same way. If they dom then it makes no difference.