D&D 5E New Race Feats Appearing in D&D's 'Xanathar's Guide to Everything

[Mistwell]

Min-maxing is good.

Players who min-max are engaged with the rules of the game. They are paying attention.

It is a great gift to the GM if he can count on his players to min-max. He can design scenarios that best fit his group, because he knows their real capabilities. And if he is not sure, he *still* knows their capabilities, because he can just design around a min-maxed party.

There's no game in which all character concepts work equally well, except those in which the outcome is inevitable. This is true even in well-balanced games, such as chess, in which the white character class is usually considered overpowered compared to black...

Anyway,

Ken

I don't necessarily care if my players are engaged with "the rules". The focus of the game isn't really supposed to be "the rules" it's supposed to be the role playing of the game. I want them to know the basics of the rules, but I don't necessarily think it's a good or bad thing if they know every nook and cranny of the rules themselves and how they all interact with each other. I tend to prefer players who just say what they want their character to try to do and then the DM adjudicates how to do that without a lot of focus on what's on the character sheet. Not "ignoring" the character sheet, but the stuff on the sheet isn't the focus. They are not just staring at their sheet to figure out what's written there about what they can do.

 

[ClaytonCross]

I don't necessarily care if my players are engaged with "the rules". The focus of the game isn't really supposed to be "the rules" it's supposed to be the role playing of the game. I want them to know the basics of the rules, but I don't necessarily think it's a good or bad thing if they know every nook and cranny of the rules themselves and how they all interact with each other. I tend to prefer players who just say what they want their character to try to do and then the DM adjudicates how to do that without a lot of focus on what's on the character sheet. Not "ignoring" the character sheet, but the stuff on the sheet isn't the focus. They are not just staring at their sheet to figure out what's written there about what they can do.

That is not mutually exclusive to a player knowing how to play their own class.

A min/maxer will generally know and other sometimes don't. I have seen players so caught up role play they don't know their own spells. It bogs down the game if everytime a player tries to do something, the GM has to explain... sure your have that spell but it has nothing to do with what you are trying to do with it... player then tries to go through all the spells franticly trying to figure out there turn because their plan was based on abilities they never had. If a player doesn't know there class it drags the game for all players and it basically nurfs them. As a result even a soso build with a player who knows their class will seem like a min/maxer because of the effective power difference. They don't need to know every rule but there is defiantly an advantage if players know the rules that are particularly useful to them and what their class abilities/spells are.

One thing I have noticed is that a lot of people who play D&D love the "Role play" but care nothing for the "table top game" part of D&D and vice versa. I find the game is better when you embrace both parts. They feed on each other. The "Role play" side as purpose, drive, direction and the "table top game" side provides the structure for players not to just escalate into "hu hu you missed me because I said so first and your dead because I shot you with.... my magic arrow of reaper which I just now created" on top of that combat also effects story when a player goes down or an enemy escapes, loot, health, needing to hide, and providing a since of real danger. The table top is an important part of D&D that informs the story, which is something a lot of "Role Play GMs" neglect. On the other hand, Role play gives each fight meaning and with out some back story just killing mobs over and over again gets old, redundant, and uninteresting even as a Dungeon Crawler which is something some "Table Top GMs" forget.

I also feel like min/maxers are sometimes part of a third group (which aren't really about being the most powerful) who simple enjoy "Theory Craft" which can be good. I know I do as a player. I like to build something interesting and useful which leads be create new and interesting backstories and characters. Designing a character initially as a part of function to inform story telling. This I am often told is backwards but I would point out that some authors write their first draft from the end to the beginning to give them direction and other write from the beginning to the end to let the story take its own course. Neither are wrong as long as the story ends up well. I think GMs should mostly leave players alone during character creation at least at level 1. Moving forward I can understand requiring a teacher to multiclass etc... but that's just my opinion.

So back on topic, that's why feats don't seem to shift character power much to me, and neither does min/maxing. In the end, a min/maxer with a good plan and bad role can fall flat on his face while a soso character with a descent plan, a descent role, and some basic knowledge of their class capabilities can shine easily in a group of players that are good at the talking part of the RP but have no idea how to actual follow through with the game play part of the game.

 

[Mephista]

No, min maxing is not good. Its not bad either. What it is? Its just one style of play among several.

Here's the catch, though. Its actually a single style of play of many; its been proven that most people that play D&D aren't interested in min-maxing. And, in many cases, that playstyle can be disruptive to play when mixed with more casual styles.

But then, that doesn't matter if your table is all mix-maxers. So, for your game, its all but required. For most others, it would be against the aim of their game.

Trying to suggest its the right way to play the game is nothing more than elitism.

 

[ClaytonCross]

No, min maxing is not good. Its not bad either. What it is? Its just one style of play among several.

Here's the catch, though. Its actually a single style of play of many; its been proven that most people that play D&D aren't interested in min-maxing. And, in many cases, that playstyle can be disruptive to play when mixed with more casual styles.

But then, that doesn't matter if your table is all mix-maxers. So, for your game, its all but required. For most others, it would be against the aim of their game.

Trying to suggest its the right way to play the game is nothing more than elitism.

I am not saying your wrong. just that you can have just as much or more disruption with 2 "casual" players. Or any player that simply doesn't know how to play his own character and has to be guided/corrected every single match. Also, nothing about a min/maxer playing with casual players means they will cause disruptions. A min/max player could min/max any number of things but no player can truly be good at everything. A min/max player as the face/leader for the group, the healer of the group, the scout of the group, a damage sponge/tank, or a crowd control caster ... will have little to no impact on a game as long as another player does try and do the same job the GM can balance those tasks to that player. If someone does duplicate one of those jobs, then its not a matter of the the min/maxer's build but the duplication of jobs within a group causing them to trip over each other which would still be true if both players were min/maxers or both players were "casual".

The only time people really complain about min/maxers is when it comes to damage per round. But what if everyone else ...took one of the other 5 jobs I mentioned above? (Face/Leader, healer, Scout, Damage sponge/Tank, Crowd control caster) Well unless you have more than 6 players... their is no problem with min/max because they don't conflict. If they do conflict... why not promote that those players break into groups some times? Example, The Twins on Critical role scout ahead as a pear quite alot. When one of them does it the team gets impatient for them to comeback, but when they go as a team its somehow cooler and they have each others backs. It is more necessary because the other players aren't there and its even possible to setup a quest where having a stealth team slide through and open a gate then attack from behind while the other player engage as a distraction could be fun and interesting.

I am just saying what you you started to say, "min maxing is not good. Its not bad either. What it is? Its just one style of play among several." but where I disagree is "And, in many cases, that playstyle can be disruptive to play when mixed with more casual styles." where you contradict yourself. It is just another play style and mixing play styles is where the GM has to come in. Sure your going to have problems once in a while and GMs aren't going to find the perfect answer all the time. But really its the players (including the GM) and how they play with each other as a team or against each other that causes almost all issues except not knowing hot to play their own characters.

If players know their characters and work together as a team from group building, to roles, to tactics then the GM should be able to build a world where they are all useful and everyone has fun regardless of ANY character build. If there is problem because of a character build... It is almost surely a problem between player (GM included) and personal boundaries/opinions they made themselves.

 

[SkidAce]

Knowing the rules and what you can/cannot do is not the same thing as min/maxing.

 

[ClaytonCross]

Knowing the rules and what you can/cannot do is not the same thing as min/maxing.

Never said it was. I said not knowing the rules and how to play your class is far more of an issue.

However, A min/maxing player will know the rules because you can't min/max without knowing the rules. So while it is not the same thing I do see the relation Ovarwa made and it is not wrong. It literally can not be wrong and a player actually min/max.

 

[Elderbrain]

Anybody got a copy of the book and care to list the racial feats that actually got in?

 

[MichaelSomething]

Any roll player can make a powerful character. A real min maxer would play a support class and make their whole party overpowered.

Sent from my VS990 using EN World mobile app

 

[mach1.9pants]

Anybody got a copy of the book and care to list the racial feats that actually got in?