Not Everyone is Interested in Powergaming [merged]

[Nonlethal Force]

I have no idea what a ddm build is.

Anyone care to enlighten me?
If i had to guess, it sounds like a character built off of a blue print that maximizes the characters value. Is that about right?

Just for note, and I know it is a typo, but ...

As others have stated, DMM = Divine Metamagic.

DDM, I believe, is a shorthand that some people use for D&D Miniatures.

Like I said, I know you were refering to DMM and not DDM, but I thought the similarities in abbreviation are eerily related.

 

[Crothian]

The only power gamers I know I know through En World.

 

[Kurashu]

I like to spilt somewhere down the middle. If I roll up a a character and peg him as a knight (not the class) from his home region, but he sucks at fighting I really don't have the means to pull off my concept. Or if I want to play a warrior-mage, or a necromancer, et cetera.

On DMM, while I don't think I would ever use it with Persist (or with anything, my Turn attempts are for Divine Might, thank ya much), I wouldn't outlaw it unless it came with abuse.

And nightsticks are an awful item, the best solution is not allow them period or treat them as virtual turnings that can only be used for turning.

 

[WizarDru]

DMM is universally known amongst those who hang out (or just lurk) in the WotC board's Character Optimization forum.

Same deal with the stormwind thingy.

Cheers, -- N

Right, well since you're one of the cool kids, and we're buds...help a brother out, here.

 

[Nifft]

Right, well since you're one of the cool kids, and we're buds...help a brother out, here.

Are you sure? Optimization can be habit-forming...

(On a serious note, as a DM, optimization can be REALLY annoying. No, not in the hands of the PCs, they are just fine. It's all these damn NPCs that I suddenly need to make into sublime ur-theurges... or ascetic mage battle sorcerer swordsage jade phoenix magi... or... Gah! Troublesome.)

Cheers, -- N

 

[chobin foot]

(On a serious note, as a DM, optimization can be REALLY annoying. No, not in the hands of the PCs, they are just fine. It's all these damn NPCs that I suddenly need to make into sublime ur-theurges... or ascetic mage battle sorcerer swordsage jade phoenix magi... or... Gah! Troublesome.)

It's a vexing thing when you want to define something/somebody as "great"... but you have to fill in the blanks with as many creative D&Disms as you have to do the creative storytelling.

 

[moritheil]

Oh, fun, now I get to defend myself out of context.

Which is a pretty small subset of D&D players as a whole I'd imagine. The original quoted post said that pretty much every player who isn't a novice knows it and uses it regularly.

Yes; I said that in a character optimization thread, and subsequently warned people not to take it out of context. As others have stated, DMM is a universally known trick amongst character optimizers. Thus I stand by my statement that "everyone (who matters for the purposes of the original thread) who isn't a novice (at character optimization) knows and uses it, barring DM forbiddance."

Note that Mistwell estimates that 50% or more of DMs forbid the trick.

Been playing since 1988...and I also have no idea what a "DMM" build is. I don't subscribe to the term "build" either. To me, I create a character based on a "concept", not a build. Again, that doesn't mean I look down my nose at folks who play their D&D with "builds"...it's just not the way I play. Oh, and what's a "pun-pun"? All of my NPCs and PCs are based around "cool" factor. My two main bad guys in my campaign right now are horrifically underwhelming in combat effectiveness, but they look cool (half-fiend yuan-ti and half-black-dragon half-orc true necromancer). And, last but not least, what is this "stormwind fallacy?"

Amusingly enough, that's how I create characters. Concept.

It's just that when I want someone to be "a badass," for lack of a more succinct term, I had better be able to back that up mechancially.

 

[moritheil]

Which is a fancy way of saying: If you believe that divine metamagic persistent spell cleric using nightsticks from libre mortis are a minimally competent build necessary for a character to "succeed at tasks, wins fights, and helps the party" then while I cannot be 100% sure you are a munchkin, I do highly suspect that you would not fit well in my game- my game in which players DO succeed at tasks, win fights, and help one another, all without the aid of divine metamagic persistent spells fueled with nightsticks.

I don't know of anyone who argued that it was minimally competent, though it's possible I missed a post somewhere in reading this thread. If you're referring to my statement, it's that in the context of character optimization, DMM is middle-of-the-road. Not super-powerful. Not unbelievably broken. Not "the sky is falling."

DMs who must ban things should ban optimized hulking hurlers who pulverize planets, iaijutsu masters that deal a gift shop full of d6s, and mounted charge builds that deal thousands of damage while retaining 100+AC. Not DMM.

IMO.

 

[Umbran]

Oh, fun, now I get to defend myself out of context.

Folks should, at this point, take into consideration that the OP was out of context. The original words had some assumptions which aren't clear here.

Mind you, it isn't like you are personally on trial here, or anything, that you need to be defended. People here shouldn't be (and basically aren't) making this about you, personally. Even if incorrectly attributed, I've seen the attitude in others, so it may bear a little discussion.

DMs who must ban things should ban optimized hulking hurlers who pulverize planets, iaijutsu masters that deal a gift shop full of d6s, and mounted charge builds that deal thousands of damage while retaining 100+AC. Not DMM.

I kinda have to disagree - DM's ought to ban whatever they feel doesn't work in their game. While you might consider it a moderate optimization, in a low point-buy game, where most of the players spend very little effort on optimization at all, even that modest amount may be an issue.

As you yourself have had to note, context does matter. What counts as "too powerful" will be different from one campaign to another. I think we ought to leave room for individuals to modify for their own particular needs.

 

[BaldHero]

Why is this even an issue?

Aren't we all just going to play the same game anyway?
Given any game group, if there are people that "build" optimally, and people that "craft" characters from pure cool, it is ultimately going to be the DM that has to balance encounter types so that all of the players get what they want out of the game.

Can't players just look around an try to strike a balance that leaves room for everyone to get what they want? Or do we have to label each other and create artificial niches for our already niche demographic to fit into.

For the love of Pete, look at your group, if everyone else is building "optimally" get with the program and build a character that will be able to survive with the others. If people are trying out cool concepts that are not as efficient, consider that the maybe this game is not all about the numbers.