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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gorgon Zee" data-source="post: 9695031" data-attributes="member: 75787">So, I do a lot of optimization for my day job, and a couple of concepts there I think are useful in the context of this discussion.The second is CONSTRAINTS. You must have constraints to optimize within, and although those can be just the rules system, many players optimize within a self-imposed constraint. Here's some I've done, and my son has done, playing 4E<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I want to play a very drow-y drow, every feat or item that I take should be drow-related if at all possible.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I want to play a paladin/thief who can switch between defender and fighter role at any time.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You pick the two classes that work least well together, and I will build a hybrid of them</li> </ul>The first turned out to be extremely effective at mid-levels as the feats were awesome (clouds of darkness thrown 60' with a free teleport into them? yes please!) and attacking will is stupidly effective. The second was a mediocre defender, but at epic levels was a great striker, able to do 12 full-strength attacks in an alpha strike. The last my son and I both had terrible characters that underperformed the rest of our group, but not so badly as toy cause an issue.So, if you find you are GMing for an optimizer, maybe suggest a constraint for their character. Maybe ask them if they have the skills to build a character that can buff any other character to be a powerhouse? Or see if they can build a cleric that can wipe out he nastiest hit point loss you as a Gm can throw at the party? Most "bad" optimizers want to be the kill-monkey, but you never know, maybe one might accept the challenge!</blockquote>

Verification