Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9692543" data-attributes="member: 20564">One group I'm with is die-hard 5e, with no Pathfinder experience whatsoever for any of the members.  We switched to PF2 Remastered a year ago.I have a head for rules, and a decent memory of them.  The GM and players ask me for what's the right rule all the time.  I often will interject during play, "Hey wait, that's how 5e did it, but Pathfinder does it like this...".  Including to the GM.We've been playing a year, we're not newbies anymore.  But there's a lot of rules in PF, and a lot of unlearning D&D rules as well.By correcting others, including the GM, with what's written in the books I obviously fit the classic definition of Rules Lawyer.  And it's a welcome addition to the table.I bring this up because of the push here about Optimizers and if they are welcome at tables, and if they are obnoxious, and points like that.Obnoxious in presentation, fitting a particular DM's or tables style, and that sort of thing is orthogonal to optimizing a character.  It's not inherent in optimization.  So it can't be part of any honest definition of the word.  Someone can be "obnoxious about optimization and pushing it on other players", but if you just say "they optimize" we see why it needs the extra terms in the quote, because it doesn't carry any of that natively.(Side note about table style: I played at one table 3ed where the players and DM were all serious optimizers.  We all had fun.  A player would have not fit the table's style if they didn't multiclass, pick up prestige classes, and otherwise push the boundaries.  Again, just showing how that's not part of the definition of 'optimizer'.)So now we get to are optimizers and those who break the game the same?  I think part of that lies in the definition of the low end of optimizer.For instance say I definite optimizers in 2014!D&D as players who have would never take a mundane trident as the primary weapon for a martial character.  The trident is generally inferior to the other martial weapons, so it is an optimal choice not to take it.I think many would disagree with such a low bar.  And it is ludicrously low, I did that on purpose.  To show that making a viable character, such as reasonable choices for where to put ability scores, is already making choices that differentiate your character from a suboptimal character.  If you have a higher CHR than DEX as a conman rogue but still have a reasonable DEX, that's a different choice then using DEX as your dump stat for the rogue.  And optimization starts with that sort of thing -- evaluating your options to put together a playable character.So we can see optimization has a spectrum from reasonable character creation up.  It's inaccurate to use that word to only describe the highest levels of powergaming (oh, I'm probably going to get in trouble for that undefined term).  Be it using another term like munchkin or powergamer, or even just separating out a portion of the speectrum with a phrase like "extreme optimization", we end up with clearer communication and also aren't unintentionally insulting to those who do consider themselves optimizers but not game breakers.</blockquote>

Verification