D&D 5E Power Gamers and Balance - How to handle

[Tony Vargas]

So it is quite common for people to argue this class is weak, that class is OP, only a fool would take this third class.

To me this is lazy on the part of DMs.

That's not fair to DMs in general, at all. DMing is neither simple nor easy, and it's very often a nearly-thankless task.

Yes, 5e gives the Empowered DM latitude to dynamically balance any party, no matter how OP some and how under-performing others, no matter the mix of Class-Tiers the players chose, the mix of system-mastery at the table, the variations in playstyles and personal assertiveness, etc...

...but he does have to be on his game all the time to pull all that off consistently, and he has to know what he's doing. And, if he does know what he's doing in one particular area, game design, one of the ways he can accomplish that is with a tremendous but delicate up-front effort of fixing up classes. But, if he dares to go on line with that objective, he'll be called lazy and incompetent.

Trust me in saying the casual player, the player that does not use excel spreadsheets to eek out that extra point of damage every round. Those players are FAR more likely to find magic items that benefit their character, fit within their build and help them to improve their ability to help the party.

Yep, valid tactic, pointed it out more than once, myself. But, it's not full-proof. What if the casual's 'build' is not that different from the opimizer's (other not being nearly as good, that is)? Mr OP can snag that item and now he's over the top. Queue disenchanter, and back to the drawing board? ;P

Min/maxers are more likely to build reputations and reputations mean opponents, the important ones, are more likely to know what their schtick is and are more likely to plan around it.

What, and the semi-incompetent carrying around the whatsit of power won't draw attention?

Dont like it? Then dont intentionally build your character around loopholes in an attempt to break the game.

You'd think the folks that do that - and the folks that stick up for them - do like that kind of imbalance, a lot, or they wouldn't do either.

Yet it is the rules of 5e. Maybe give advice on actual 5e?

Narrating success or failure is actual 5e. Narrating failure on a persuasion check could quite easily include narrating apparent success while the un-persuaded NPC pulls a fast one on them.

What money are they following?

OK, follow the XP?

It's much more fun when magic is relatively rare and most people view it more like something that doesn't exist. If a normal person was to go and talk about magic like it was real they would be made fun of because everyone knows magic is just a myth etc.

Much more fun for the folks using magic, anyway...

I was just telling you how I'd react if I found myself failing checks after rolling 20+. I'd be thinking I need to up my powergame.

That's why we have DM Screens. Take the roll behind the screen, make a "ooh, what a low roll" face, and narrate failure...

 

[Harzel]

I don't see how what you quoted of mine is wrong based on what you said above.

The reason it would impart "too much information in a totally meta format," whatever that means, is because there's an expectation at your table players can always roll. So if there isn''t a roll, the player may suspect something is up. At my table, that's not the expectation, so if I have the woman in your example rebuff the attempt at seduction without asking for a roll, that's the end of that. At least till I describe something else in the environment or the player describes what he or she wants to do now.

Therefore, to fix this issue, reset expectations as to whether and when players roll dice at your table. As a side effect, if there is no expectation that they roll for most things, then there's less of a reason for them to try to eke out ever little bonus they can so they can push skill rolls.

So let's assume that expectations are as they are at your table (sometimes roll, sometimes not). Assume further that

• The PC's stated goal is seduction, and his proposed method is to use his overwhelming charm to sweet talk the NPC.
• The NPC is utterly uninterested in sex (for whatever reason), but is interested in getting the PC alone for some nefarious purpose.
• In your judgement, there is no chance that the NPC will actually be persuaded by the PC, but she will play a little bit coy for a while, and then appear to give in to the PC's persuasion.

Will you ask for any dice rolls, and whether or not you do, how will you narrate the outcome?

 

[iserith]

So let's assume that expectations are as they are at your table (sometimes roll, sometimes not). Assume further that

• The PC's stated goal is seduction, and his proposed method is to use his overwhelming charm to sweet talk the NPC.
• The NPC is utterly uninterested in sex (for whatever reason), but is interested in getting the PC alone for some nefarious purpose.
• In your judgement, there is no chance that the NPC will actually be persuaded by the PC, but she will play a little bit coy for a while, and then appear to give in to the PC's persuasion.

Will you ask for any dice rolls, and whether or not you do, how will you narrate the outcome?

Why do you ask?

 

[FrogReaver]

So let's assume that expectations are as they are at your table (sometimes roll, sometimes not). Assume further that

• The PC's stated goal is seduction, and his proposed method is to use his overwhelming charm to sweet talk the NPC.
• The NPC is utterly uninterested in sex (for whatever reason), but is interested in getting the PC alone for some nefarious purpose.
• In your judgement, there is no chance that the NPC will actually be persuaded by the PC, but she will play a little bit coy for a while, and then appear to give in to the PC's persuasion.

Will you ask for any dice rolls, and whether or not you do, how will you narrate the outcome?

Can't answer for iserith but my 2cents:

No roll for persuasion. Obviously the NPC is trying to deceive the player so a deception vs insight check is needed there (unless you determine the player has no chance of noticing the deception, though I think there would be plenty of potential clues to be picked up on in this scenario so I would rule a check is needed for this part). How to implement that check? There's not any way that check can be accomplished without the player being tipped off this isn't a normal scenario IMO. I would probably attempt to use PC passive Inisght vs NPC rolled deception. Though as mentioned, knowing the DM is rolling is likely going to tip the player off that all isn't as it seems. I think at this point it's where good faith play comes in. The player should go along with it even if he knows the woman he thought he seduced is up to no good until his character has a moment to realize it.

 

[iserith]

Can't answer for iserith but my 2cents:

No roll for persuasion. Obviously the NPC is trying to deceive the player so a deception vs insight check is needed there (unless you determine the player has no chance of noticing the deception, though I think there would be plenty of potential clues to be picked up on in this scenario so I would rule a check is needed for this part). How to implement that check?

The same adjudication process applies to all actions, right? Therefore, if nothing the player has described would call for such a check, we don't ask for one.

 

[jasper]

You are the dm. This breaks down into 2 parts. And you are being a goober.
OP I not going to place magic items which will help power gamers. Ok you can do that but you are a goober then.
You have two complaints.
1. Players taking advantage of loopholes. You are the dm. USE DM POWER NO! And close the loophole take a note of it and tell your players.
2. If this is a private game, you can tell your group no power gamers. If this an open table, you are out of luck but double check the dudes work to see if he making some mistakes. I caught a power gamer cheating at pole arm master. It was not an honest mistake as the pc was tenth level in Adventure League. Since I mention Adventure League you are empowered to make some changes. I have a power gamer, I either bump the APL of group up 1, or give the monsters max hit points.