Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="evildmguy" data-source="post: 535977" data-attributes="member: 6092">Munchkin - an "evil" word?Greetings!Good discussion all!  Thanks!  btw, yes, I may have put it in the wrong area.  I wasn't thinking when I hit New Topic.  If it gets bumped, that's fine.   In the end, this was my point.  I will try and clarify it a bit more but that was my point.  Perhaps I have a secondary point.  The DM, in looking at our characters, probably should have either pointed this out to me, so I, and a few others like me, would have known it.  Having said that, I don't find min/maxing bad, we probably do that in life.  I think that we, as people, play to our strengths and try and minimize our weak areas.  I did do some min/maxing of the character.  As a rogue, he had very good move silently and hide skill checks.  Doubtful that anyone but a rogue or ranger with high spots or listens could have heard him.  I just didn't take it to the extreme.  I just think that this player took it to the extreme, perhaps too far.  Perhaps this is me pointing out what is "legal".  Since the d20 rules allow this, five people all created radically different characters, possibly at different power levels.  For example, the Sorcerer that I was talking about, my rogue was the only one in the group who had a chance (and it was < 15%) of making any Relfex saves that Sorcerer character would impose.  Does that still mean that two 16th level characters are equal?  Which is "right"?In this case, does that mean that players should "patrol" themselves more?  I agree that since the DM allowed it, it stands.  My point is, I also think that the DM should understand what that means for the other characters and either disallow the "extreme" min maxed character or let the rest of us know.I agree with this 100%.  I usually give my players numbers for attributes and let them use them.  That way, before racial adjustments, they are the same.  Okay, I partially disagree here.  In the sense that I think most systems define an average attribute as well as average skill for a professional, I think that the adventure and adversaries can, in a relativistic fashion, make a character seem "average".  Yet, when compared to the baseline, they are obviously very good.  So, yes, a person who ends up with the "average" of 6 in skills seems to do no better than anyone else.  Yet, when compared to the baseline of 2, they are very good.  In other words, in a world full of Supermen, it is Bicycle Repair Man that stands out!  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I completely agree that DND (can't decide if this can be said about d20 games) puts as much OR MORE emphasis on the items a character has besides the classes they have.  I personally don't like it but it is part of the system.As for the rest of Archer's comments, well, we will just have to agree to disagree.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I am not trying to comment on *your* style.  I think that what you have posted above are comments on a type of style that does exist.  I don't think there is anything wrong with this style of play.  I know that players find it quite fun and I try to give them that as a DM.  I also try to keep them as "even" as I can in abilities.  I do think, though, that most of the above comments are subjective.  If that's your experience, okay.  My mileage has varied.  I have seen games where 15th level people have no attribute higher than 18, with most in the 10 - 12 range.  (That started at 1st level, btw.)  I have also seen games where 12th level people have no less than 13s and a few 20s or more.  (again, 1st level)  There is nothing wrong with any of it.  The game is about having fun and people did, that's all there is to it.  My point, though, again is that one person who doesn't fit into the relativistic "average", seems to "imbalance" the game.  It isn't necessarily bad.  Again, perhaps my point is more that it is too bad that the game rules allow two "equal" level characters to be radically different.  I won't completely argue except to say, yes I did min/max in what I thought were the characters strengths.  I think the difference in my character is that I like having characters with fatal flaws, or at least weaknesses.  Perhaps that just makes me rare.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Thanks to all those who replied!Perhaps, I should refine my questions after the responses.Is it the DMs duty to make sure that all characters are "equal" within class, race and item scope?  Or are all characters automatically "equal" since they all had the same choice?  Is extreme min/maxing bad?  Is that something players should avoid, even though the rules allow it?  Again, I am not trying to attack anyone.  I also don't feel defensive about anything that was said in response to me.  I am just curious as to what other people's thoughts and experiences on this topic are.Thanks!edg</blockquote>

Verification