Optimization and optimizers...

[Ruin Explorer]

Because the "bad" optimizer doesn't simply want to win big -- he wants the others to fail. They will be the ones who also point out to the GM that the other striker should actually do half damage because blah blah blah.

I don't think those people exist outside groups of bitter teenagers, who aren't really worth considering in these discussions because they grow up.

The simple fact is, if you were a "snitch" on other people's PCs like that regularly, you'd become persona non grata in most groups within a session or two.

I think you're either exaggerating something that happened once or twice ever, or you're making up a theoretical person to be mad at. I could be wrong, but what group would tolerate that behaviour? In my experience, most people who "snitch" re: DMs failing to enforce properly either:

A) Do it after the session and thus make sure correct rules are followed going forwards but without messing anything up. There's nothing really wrong with that.

or

B) Only "snitch" on themselves - I know I've had to go to DMs before and go "Whoops my PC's ability does not in fact work like that!".

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Optimizers thrive in games that are made easy for them, it is that simple.

This is a nonsensical statement. "Thrive" is relative. Non-optimized PCs benefit more and "thrive" more in a game that is "made easy for them". Optimization is less fun, less interesting, and makes less of a difference in a game where everything is "made easy", so the idea that optimizers "thrive" in such games is extremely strange.

I think you're confusing optimization with extreme specialization. PCs who are built to do one thing extremely well, at the cost of everything else, do tend to play better in relatively "easy" campaigns, because their weaknesses aren't exposed. But that's not how most optimization is - most optimization is directed towards a more general approach to success.

 

[Mannahnin]

If that's what they care about, they should have built powerful characters. I really don't understand that argument.

I mean, it does speak to "play with people who share your playstyle," but in no way is the optimizer to blame if another player a) refuses to build a powerful character, and b) complains about characters more powerful than their own.

Eh. There may be varying levels of self-awareness and of subjective aesthetic preferences involved. They may have built what they thought was a competent but not over the top character within what they saw as a minimal level of self-imposed limitations and not felt until 6 or 10 sessions in that another player's more competent character regularly outshined theirs in their own primary area of competence. And by then they're invested in their character and their place in the narrative and it feels disruptive to change.

I do agree with the overall sentiments that it's not normally a problem if players and GM communicate clearly and maturely and are flexible. In a functional group it's more likely that such a situation could be easily addressed by a) the players of the "rival" characters being more on the same page about the fun level of optimization in the first place, thus avoiding the issue, or b) the GM allowing the player with the outshined PC to make some retroactive adjustments to bring their character up to par.

This morning I remembered this old essay on self-imposed limitations. It's about competitive games, of course, but some of the same internal aesthetic limitations are often in play in situations like these.

Introducing...the Scrub — Sirlin.Net — Game Design

So far you have learned only obvious and mundane things. I know that taking the first step can be the hardest part of the journey, so I wanted to coddle you a little just to get you going. The coddling stops here. You must now understand the cold, hard truth of competition. This is the difficult par

www.sirlin.net

 

[Thomas Shey]

Optimized for me means Optimized within the confines of the entire game, not just a class. I.e. you play Bugbear Polearm Master Sentinel Opportunity Attack Fighter because it is broken because there is a 0% chance this happens naturally without browsing Reddit.

That's far narrower than a lot of people using the term mean by it.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't think those people exist outside groups of bitter teenagers, who aren't really worth considering in these discussions because they grow up.

The simple fact is, if you were a "snitch" on other people's PCs like that regularly, you'd become persona non grata in most groups within a session or two.

Though I'll note there are kind of hardcore gamists groups where its not only accepted, its expected (of course usually in those the player who should have done half damage would snitch on themself).

I think you're either exaggerating something that happened once or twice ever, or you're making up a theoretical person to be mad at. I could be wrong, but what group would tolerate that behaviour? In my experience, most people who "snitch" re: DMs failing to enforce properly either:

A) Do it after the session and thus make sure correct rules are followed going forwards but without messing anything up. There's nothing really wrong with that.

or

B) Only "snitch" on themselves - I know I've had to go to DMs before and go "Whoops my PC's ability does not in fact work like that!".

Like I said, I've seen the other, but it isn't in a "I'm trying to push down person X so I can shine better" but a "I think the GM and person X missed this, and our group is very interested in consistency in rules."

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Optimized for me means Optimized within the confines of the entire game, not just a class. I.e. you play Bugbear Polearm Master Sentinel Opportunity Attack Fighter because it is broken because there is a 0% chance this happens naturally without browsing Reddit.

I mean, I accept that may be how you choose to use the word, but if you interpret other people as meaning that, you're just intentionally confusing yourself. And if you use "optimized" without any clarification, to mean that, you're just confusing others.

It's anti-communication. I mean, it's not totally uncommon for people to do something like this (especially within fan subcultures), but who does it help? Why not use the term in the way it's vastly more widely used, especially given that wider meaning is itself relevant?

Also re: 0% - is it though? I think you're assuming a very uncreative player who isn't actually good at optimizing. If you have a player who is highly engaged with the rules of a game, it's not particularly tricky to work all the major synergistic factors. That's just a MM race with two PHB Feats - the idea that only some sort of demented genius could come up with that, and thus everyone else got it from them is just bloody silly. Sure if a player who'd never shown any aptitude for optimization came to me with that I might be a bit suspicious, but if one of the smarter players did, no. This isn't some 3.5E deal requiring a PrC from an obscure splatbook, 3 Feats from different splatbooks, and a modified version of a base class from yet another splatbook or something. Also, it's not "broken", just annoying (and no longer works, as of 2024).

All that said I tend to dislike that particular kind of build because it tends to rapidly bore players who play it, in my experience. I think this is an optimization issue we've kind of failed to discuss - some optimizers manage to optimize the fun out of the game for themselves! That happens a lot more with videogames than TTRPGs, but I've seen people come up with TTRPG builds that worked really well, didn't break the game, but that the player had clearly like, specialized into a role that wasn't actually how they liked playing. I've seen this even with truly harmless support-oriented characters. So anyone optimizing should watch out that they aren't just making a PC that's going to bore them! Of course this is true of poorly-optimized PCs as well, so it's a balance - I've seen many people get bored of PCs who were just terrible at their job because the person building them hadn't understood how to do so, or made some key Bad Decision (like having a low score in a vital stat for that job). Hell I've been the latter!

 

[Thomas Shey]

This morning I remembered this old essay on self-imposed limitations. It's about competitive games, of course, but some of the same internal aesthetic limitations are often in play in situations like these.

This is one of those things that can land on the rocks of different expectations in both directions. On one hand the "if your character isn't built to my satisfaction you're not holding up your end" is rightly seen as a jerk move. On the other the "Because you want your character to fit your sense of how capable they should be and are willing to do the lifting to get that you're a bad roleplayer" isn't notably better.

 

[Bill Zebub]

but I've seen people come up with TTRPG builds that worked really well, didn't break the game, but that the player had clearly like, specialized into a role that wasn't actually how they liked playing. I've seen this even with truly harmless support-oriented characters. So anyone optimizing should watch out that they aren't just making a PC that's going to bore them! Of course this is true of poorly-optimized PCs as well, so it's a balance - I've seen many people get bored of PCs who were just terrible at their job because the person building them hadn't understood how to do so, or made some key Bad Decision (like having a low score in a vital stat for that job). Hell I've been the latter!

Yeah I've done that: built very effective one-trick pony characters that eventually bored me.

 

[prabe]

All that said I tend to dislike that particular kind of build because it tends to rapidly bore players who play it, in my experience. I think this is an optimization issue we've kind of failed to discuss - some optimizers manage to optimize the fun out of the game for themselves! That happens a lot more with videogames than TTRPGs, but I've seen people come up with TTRPG builds that worked really well, didn't break the game, but that the player had clearly like, specialized into a role that wasn't actually how they liked playing. I've seen this even with truly harmless support-oriented characters. So anyone optimizing should watch out that they aren't just making a PC that's going to bore them! Of course this is true of poorly-optimized PCs as well, so it's a balance - I've seen many people get bored of PCs who were just terrible at their job because the person building them hadn't understood how to do so, or made some key Bad Decision (like having a low score in a vital stat for that job). Hell I've been the latter!

I'm not disagreeing, here, but I've come to the conclusion that often when people say something on the lines of "the players have optimized the fun out of the game" what they mean is that the players have solved a specific problem, or set of problems, and aren't interested in the same old solution/s. Once you've solved (or "solved") melee fighter, you're done with it.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

On the other the "Because you want your character to fit your sense of how capable they should be and are willing to do the lifting to get that you're a bad roleplayer" isn't notably better.

Yeah absolutely.

This idea that optimized PCs and good roleplaying are somehow in opposition to each other is, frankly, not only pernicious and a little bit offensive, but demonstrably and obviously wrong a simple factual level, and even on a basic rational level! At best it's essentially a superstition that denigrates perhaps the majority of people playing TTRPGs. The cold, undeniable fact is that you can good at both, just like you can be a really fit, athletic person, and be really smart, much as some people desperately cling to "dumb jock"/"smart nerd" nonsense.

People can say "Oh well my experience is that..." but come on, that's so much hot air when you're asserting things about entire massive groups of people (again, probably the easy majority of people who play TTRPGs), especially things that are definitely not factual! It is really no better than assuming because someone is sporty/fit/healthy, they're an absolute dunce.

I'm not disagreeing, here, but I've come to the conclusion that often when people say something on the lines of "the players have optimized the fun out of the game" what they mean is that the players have solved a specific problem, or set of problems, and aren't interested in the same old solution/s. Once you've solved (or "solved") melee fighter, you're done with it.

I think that's part of the same issue, but a sort of narrower and more specific take, so I wouldn't use it that way myself without clarifying. As an example, I'd point to the way "optimized the fun out of" is typically used with online videogames, where it is part usually a specific singular solution that's "just better" than other ones (which seems to relate to what you're saying), and in part people getting bored of playing that solution out. Sometimes the solution is so inherently fun that even though there's a "best" way to build Class X in Game Y, then people keep enjoying that "best" way - but sometimes the solution is either drab/boring, or more commonly, tediously overcomplex and fiddly, and people just get terribly bored of it quite quickly*. It can also be very frustrating if the designers have kind of screwed up and not only there is there a clear "best" way to play a character, but that way is not in line with the "class fantasy". That's a relatively rare problem (especially in the last decade), and not quite the same thing as "optimizing the fun out of", but worth mentioning in this context I think. In the end, this is a problem you can generally solve via good game design.

(To be clear most of this applies only to online videogames, not really TTRPGs where you neither "win" nor "farm", so for the most part optimized the fun out of tends to relate to boring-to-play characters, not just "solved" ones)

* = EDIT: I can think of multiple (probably countless at this point, after 20 years!) times this has happened in WoW - i.e. the designers accidentally made one sub-spec of a class spec, like 20-50% more effective than other specs of that class. And like, 30% of the time, it's a really fun way to play and no-one but a few purists cares, but like 70% of the time it's either the most tedious two-button spam or most brain-melting 43 buttons needing to be pressed in a specific, continually-changing order, and if you mess even one up, your DPS is halved nonsense (hello Shadow Priests!).