Optimized and Non-Optimized in the same group.

[AbdulAlhazred]

The problem I see with this is that out of combat abilities are much more reliant on the class you pick than how much or less one comb at optimizes in 4e.. A player could combat optimize a Ranger, Rogue, Wizard or Cleric and still have way more out of combat options (extra skills and free rituals) than a Fighter or Barbarian, unless he invests heavily (optimizes) out of combat abilities.

Yeah, you can box yourself in because fighters and a couple other classes lack equally good starting skill options. OTOH the skills the fighter DOES have can be monster useful. Being able to drop a +15 Athletics roll at level 1 is certainly feasible, +12 is trivially easy, and there are a lot of ways to get an extra +5 when you really need it. That will cost you basically a skill power or a level 5 item. I agree it would be BETTER if skills were all baselined at 4 per class (rogue probably still needs 5 since they can't even touch doing their 'thiefly' function without at least 3 specific skills and they really should have a bit of choice).

Anyway, I agree, OO combat stuff is pretty variable and it isn't as easy for arbitrary characters to excel at that. It also requires less resources, so the more optimized characters can usually shift gears and pick up that stuff later, whereas it is somewhat harder or sometimes impossible to really optimize for combat purposes later.

 

[Pentius]

I haven't really had a problem with it, outside of oddball cases like if we rolled for stats and people got wildly disparate scores, or if someone's not quite playing by the rules and stacks a bunch of modifiers that shouldn't stack.

I did have one slight brush with the issue when I brought a well-optimized Barbarian to a game, and another player brought a poorly optimized one. The gap really wasn't all that big, but being of the same class made it stick out more. As per what Abdul said above me though, I was able to shift focus to more non-combat and oddball things(move speed comes to mind) and it smoothed things out considerably.

 

[Imaro]

Would you say that's a big problem though?

I can forgive some degree of latitude for someone willing to spend some time optimizing as long as it doesn't completely destroy the need for the other non optimized players...

I remember some older edition games where the rest of the party would kind of just be able to stand on the sidelines and wait until the optimized player killed everything.

THAT I cannot stand. It makes planning adventures a nightmare.

I think the size of the "problem", like it is with any edition, is really dependant upon the group and the particular people playing the optimized vs. unoptimized characters.

The thing is, for good or bad, that by explicitly calling out roles 4e makes a player more aware when there is a discrepancy. If I'm a striker and the book is telling me I am the big kahuna compared to other roles as far as being a damage dealer... then the Fighter shows up and is doing as much or more damage than my striker... it feels like a serious problem, especially since he's a defender.

Honestly, in my opinion, the optimized 4e Fighter is very, very close to the uber-character of combat in this edition... I've started wondering lately why can the Fighter out damage some strikers (and get close in damage to even some of the best) and also defend better than almost any defender.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the size of the "problem", like it is with any edition, is really dependant upon the group and the particular people playing the optimized vs. unoptimized characters.

The thing is, for good or bad, that by explicitly calling out roles 4e makes a player more aware when there is a discrepancy. If I'm a striker and the book is telling me I am the big kahuna compared to other roles as far as being a damage dealer... then the Fighter shows up and is doing as much or more damage than my striker... it feels like a serious problem, especially since he's a defender.

Honestly, in my opinion, the optimized 4e Fighter is very, very close to the uber-character of combat in this edition... I've started wondering lately why can the Fighter out damage some strikers (and get close in damage to even some of the best) and also defend better than almost any defender.

Agreed. And yes, the fighter is certainly a very strong class. Actually the PHB1 classes in general tend to be pretty strong. Ranger is clearly the strongest striker all around (you can trick out other strikers to surpass it slightly, but only with fairly niche builds). The fighter is clearly the strongest defender class all around. The wizard (at this point certainly) is a top notch controller, credible striker, and has excellent utility/generalist capability. The warlord is clearly right at the top of the leader heap too. Even the weaker PHB1 classes, Paladin and Warlock in particular, have benefited from massive support and are definitely at-par options, while clerics seem to have waxed and waned some they are still solid choices. Rogue has been a good choice all along, gaining a bit here and there but still just a half notch short of the ranger.

OTOH fighters still lag in non-combat situations.

 

[OnlineDM]

I've had enough problems with it that I go out of my way to avoid groups with some highly optimized characters and some non-optimized characters. All of one or the other is fine; a mixture is not great.

My oft-repeated motto on this topic: Balanced-power parties are ideal.

 

[mkill]

D&D is a teamwork game. The better each player understands this, the better the party will work together. Power differences don't matter much, then - each PC has his assigned role, and will be able to shine.

The problems start when players stop contributing, and this can happen at both the optimized and non-optimized end.

At the optimized end, when the player starts treating the game as a one-man show. This is really lack of social skills. The game is not about who has the highest stats, kills more monsters than the other characters, or who gets the most attention from the DM. It gets worse when the player starts bending the rules or even cheats.
If you like to optimize characters, a good way to avoid this problem is to take a role that centers on supporting other PCs. Defender and Leader are good choices. Also, no matter how much you think that other players should optimize their characters or play more tactically sound, shut up about it (unless asked) and let them enjoy the game.

At the non-optimized end, the problems start when a player completely neglects the tactical combat aspect of the game. Yes, there are many things to enjoy about D&D, like character interactions and world exploration, but at its very heart, it's a tactical combat game. It doesn't require you to be Napoleon, but at least you should learn it to the point that you are able to contribute.
If you're a player who really doesn't enjoy this aspect of the game, at least accept the help of other players. You will learn gradually and you'll get the hang of it eventually.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The problems start when players stop contributing, and this can happen at both the optimized and non-optimized end.

alot of D&D games sees this problem...

If you like to optimize characters, a good way to avoid this problem is to take a role that centers on supporting other PCs. Defender and Leader are good choices. Also, no matter how much you think that other players should optimize their characters or play more tactically sound, shut up about it (unless asked) and let them enjoy the game.

I agree, but when the optimzed player has the warden who throws as much damage as the 2 strikers...

 

[Raikun]

This really is a problem that's not hard to solve with a bit of intelligent and creative DMing.

 

[Kzach]

I put the blame for this disparity squarely on the non-optimisers. Clearly they aren't serious enough about the game.

 

[Raikun]

Anyways, now that I'm home I can elaborate a little. But in my experience how I handle it depends on the reason for the disparity in optimization. If it's because the unoptimized characters are run by new players, then just a little flexibility will allow the problem to resolve themselves a lot of times. As the player learns, if he wants his character to become more like the optimized characters in the group, I ease up on the retraining rules, or work in a reason into the story what brought on the change (a few weeks under the tutelage of a master is an obvious one).

If it's because the player wants to play a themed character that isn't an optimized build, then I just play it by ear.

One example was my GF who wanted to play a tiefling ranger who was a former acrobatic circus performer. Her at-wills were ones picked to allow her movement, no twin strike, and a dagger as her primary weapon. She dug in her heels when the rest of the group tried to tell her how badly she was gimping herself by not having twin strike, etc, but I worked out a solution into the story.

As the campaign went on, I just allowed that she'd gotten so skilled with the dagger, that if she had combat advantage against her quarry, then she would add the rogue sneak attack damage into her damage rolls. (With a few further tweaks as we went on but that was the biggie). The build she played was such a mechanically disadvantaged theme that adding the bonuses did not overpower her character, and it fit perfectly into the storyline, and her character ended up being played rather like the Essentials Thief...many months before the Thief existed.


The other example that comes to mind was a Paladin in the group who had an oddball theme that made him mechanically far inferior a defender than our Fighter, who overshadowed him pretty much constantly in his tanking ability.
So, through divine influence, the Paladin as a "Weekly" power could channel some form of elemental power, giving him huge resistance to a chosen damage type.

So most of the time, the fighter was the lead tank, but every now and then the group would face something where the Paladin's power was the only thing keeping the group from sudden and immediate demise.

It worked out quite well.