Moderator edit.
Insults, attacks, using masked profanity as a weapon, and more. Completely unacceptable. It's also really long. I'm putting it in an sblock.
-Darkness,
EN World moderator
[sblock]
I have been following a thread, where some diametrically opposing views on how a D&D (non specific on edition) should be played. The Power gaming faction wants to exclude characters and even their weapon choices f they aren't max out to the most powerful possible, even down to calling character creation a "build". As can be imagined, this has created some not so polite responses from traditional role players. The key thing that has come out, is the two factions are not playing the size game. The fact the system can be used for the two games is a credit to the system, however doesn't, change the validity of both types of games and the position taken on both. I think we all need to take a step back and realise the two games actually are mutually exclusive, with alot of grey in between. It does however put a responsibility on DM to explain how his game will be played, and also to advise new players the game is played a variety of different ways. Would hate neophytes to be put off completely, as the as the style of play ill suits them.
Power-gaming is fine, as in optimizing your character to fit a certain "build" or niche. Role-playing is something that is, obviously, a soft skill instead of a hard skill like good stat combos. Generally, your average player is not likely to be good with this (if they were, they probably wouldn't be playing RPGs being 100% real) As a result, role-playing should always be considered a great-to-have but not absolutely critical. At the end of the day, the most important aspect of "RPG" is the *game* part and even if the given game a particular table heavily emphasizes cooperation, you are all ultimately trying to *win* it and *prevail* against obstacles and challenges the GM throws at you.
My response to those who wish to argue, always remember the first rule of D&D: Never tell a player how to play their character.
If you are a power gamer, then be a power gamer. If not, then not.
Sent from my XT1096 using Tapatalk
. Of course you can tell a player how to play their character -- especially as GM.
Power gaming and role-playing don't have to be in opposition, though sadly you are right that they often are. Some of the best role-players I've met were also power gamers. The key take away from such discussions is, first, that each player only has a right to say how his own player character should be built and played. And second, when you have players at the table with different aesthetics of play (the formal name for the two different 'games' you've noticed), that each side needs to compromise just a little bit to ensure everyone has fun. That means that the role-players have to at least not make incompetent characters, but play characters that can legitimately contribute to party success and which try to contribute to party success. And it means that the power gamers have to role-play in situations were role-play is warranted and at least not try to disrupt role-play when it occurs. Often I find that powers gamers will realize at some point that role-playing is a very powerful tool for advancing their character's interests and problem solving, and that role-players will realize that competent characters live longer and as a result are more likely to have the grand story arcs that they desire.
Some of the players at my club have come up with a phrase that describes the right way to play RPGs: "Don't split the Skills!"
You need to have that mindset going in. Across all games I've GM'd and played in (I'm swinging it a heavy 80/20 bias here in terms of "games", where actual sessions *played* would marginal compared to GM'd). It doesn't matter if it's World of Darkness, Pathfinder, Edge of the Empire, HERO, Shadowrun or any other system, this is a golden rule throughout and it's something that is based in real-world If you're a day trader, you're going to be REALLY
ING GOOD at spotting trends in the maket to capitalize on instead of just so-so because you, like, have a thing for botany as well.
This is not saying you CAN'T do different things game-wise, this is simply saying if you're going to swing a sword,
ing know how to swing a godamm sword,
! There will be no compromise on that AT ALL.
Optimized or non-optimized, all I care about as a DM is if you’re having fun, not infringing on the fun of anyone else (including me), and your character is interesting to DM for. If your character has no personality, no hook, or is just a collection of numbers and abilities designed solely to “win the game,” that's when I have a problem.
Celebrim is right about compromise being a part of it. Regardless of play styles, the players need to know that everyone has to have their moments in the spotlight and people have different definitions of what’s fun in the game.
Spotlight is fleeting. If I as GM am having to *force* spotlight on players, there's a problem there. Now, most times if I have a player like that, I look at them like the military might look at a raw recruit: you gotta break em' down so you can build em' back up! Get them playing with the team, get them to think how to help out, get them planning what actions to take and, most of all, get their confidence up. This works most of the time -- in those cases where it doesn't, I've done what I can and that player is just not going to make the cut. Thankfully, this is not a regularly occurrence in the slightest and those players that have been successfully upgraded have gone on to upgrade other players and their own games.
To keep it simple: spotlight is earned, not given.
Yeah, I still don't understand why you can't powergame and roleplay at the same time. I can say as a fact that they are NOT mutually exclusive, because in my groups we play like that almost all the time.
In my experience, what people often disagree on is what constitutes roleplaying. Usually if someone is roleplaying the way another person thinks is "correct," they don't care so much if they're powergaming/minmaxing/optimizing/whatever. Not to try to place blame or take sides, but in actual games I've played in, what I see more often is self-proclaimed "roleplayers" complain about others not roleplaying the way they expect. Only one time in a game did I have someone get really upset because a few others weren't optimizing/powergaming the way they expected them to, and even that turned out okay in the end. Usually, the people I play with are the kind of folks who just naturally tend to have the same philosophy as I do about the game ... you can do one or the other a lot, or both, or neither, and we'll all work together to help you to have fun playing the game the way you like to play it.
Not trying to say one way or the other is right; it's just my observation. Like I said, I see no reason whatsoever why someone can't optimize the heck out of their character and still roleplay - they're two entirely different parts of the game that are in no way mutually exclusive, and to me that's one of the reasons I love RPGs.
Unfortunately, you have to break your average experienced player out of that mindset. A lot of them have had
GMs or have gamed alongside
players.
Also, the fragile "artiste" type or undercover snooty crybaby is just generally someone to boot from your games anyway. SUCK IT DOWN!
I find spotlight hogging to be bad form regardless of whether it manifests as excessive powergaming or excessive incompetence, no roleplaying or entirely selfish roleplaying. RPGs for me are about coperation and collaboration more than competition and adversarial play.
Everyone in a group needs to be sufficiently compatible to sustain the game for its duration. There are no hard and fast rules to ensure this, I've seen groups that seemed fine on paper explode in practise, and groups that never should have worked gel together somehow. On the other hand, these are the rarities, normally careful groundwork and player selection based on similar mutual RPG preferences do help to produce a successful group.
One of the best things about running a club is -- most of the time -- my players act as a "filter" just by themselves. They are so bloody friendly and so about bringing people in and getting them right into the game but if they smell
, they're going to call that person on it (this is usually somebody who ISN'T new to RPGs). Now that could be polite remarks or full-blown "WHAT THE
!" (god, I love those moments) but it means
players are usually dumped pretty quickly. Most awesomely, 90% of people walking through our doors are great people, decent blokes and ladynerds but there are just some who come in and would have been better off in a circlejerk. I have zero tolerance for
and the continued success of the clubs means that's obviously the tight approach.
Being - or self-defining as - a power gamer is a philosophical background to how one approaches the game as a whole (which, in my opinion, can be argued), rather than just how one plays an individual character (which, as you correctly note above, cannot). Big, big difference.
Lanefan
Philosophical how?
..Regardless of whether you choose to build an 'optimized' or 'cool concept' PC, I have always found that the role-playing is done AFTER character creation.
No
.
Best thing to do is make sure BOTH are reconciled BEFORE starting the game, though.
In my opinion, it totally depends on your group. As long as everyone is having fun, then mix and match playstyles at will. If someone doesn't overly enjoy roleplaying in character and is a beast in combat, then why not? As long as said player doesn't interrupt the flow of non-combat activities or belittles other players who don't play their characters as effectively as he does.
For my own enjoyment, I would prefer players who play an actual *character* and not what MMORPGers call a "toon" or a stick with stats. I'd also want to have players make cohesive characters who actually make sense. As strong and interesting as your character build might be, it doesn't make too much sense to use backgrounds that contradict each other or to belong to two factions who openly oppose each other. I'd also stay away from playing quarter-races if they are only included to allow a certain build. But that's my personal red line on munching and over-constructing a character.
On the other hand, I'd also be careful to not have a "klutz character" in your group that someone builds as a polar opposite to the seemingly bad power-gamer. Playing a character with weaknesses is great, playing a character that's weaker in combat or outside a city or without bodyguards (hello bard!^^) is fine as well, but having a character "sabotage" certain areas of play just because they are not his or her main interest just isn't fair to others. If you don't enjoy combat or want to solve stuff diplomatically, totally legit. I'm a diplomancer myself. I also enjoy a good fight. Just sort it out in character, help your group and discuss it afterwards.
I've received "concerns" from over a dozen different players throughout my time GM'ing and I always find myself simply telling those players to figure it out. Again, if you want to play your "amazing" concept then that's fine but don't then come moan and whine about other players overshadowing your PC mechanically -- honestly, they'd most likely overshadow you anyway (and that's actually been the case more than once!).
At the end of the day, the most I could ask for in terms of background for a character and why they do what they do is "I need dat bread: I got rent to pay". That's it -- that's all! If that's the reason you're running home invasions on orc strongholds, murdering them, grabbing their
and then pawning it off while LOLolloing away into the sunset and back to town,
ing A. That's, like, one of the best, most simple, most authentic reasons ever. Nobody gives a
if you want to play persuasionator with a really fa-un-cy background and then you play like
and
up the game for everyone else when it counted (tense negotiations over major trade disputes between kingdoms, perhaps?).
I don't understand why people seem to think these are on the same axis. They are independent. How well you roleplay and how much you apply system mastery are not related.
I love to roleplay. I can be overheard having conversations with myself as I try our voice, nuances, and beliefs for a character. I can spend the whole session having in-character conversation with other players, and perhaps do it too often. I'll do things that are awesome and in-character. I'll skip doing things that are awesome but not in character. I've done plenty of stupid things and lived (or not) with the consequences because that's what my character would do. The main place I pull it in is if it impacts other peoples fun - I try not to grandstand or grab the spotlight too much. And while some intra-party drama like convincing the honorable paladin to ambush someone can add some good RP if everyone is up for it, I avoid PvP like the plague.
I also enjoy having a high level of expertise in the mechanics. I build effective characters. I can optimize and min-max, and my characters are usually very good at whatever I want them to do and also good at surviving. Sometimes it's acting as a force multiplier for the party like a great battlefield controller, amazingly durable tank (not as much in 5e), or support character that brings everyone up to 11. Sometimes it's more direct, like a damage-focused archer. The main place I pull it in is if it impacts other peoples fun - I try not to grandstand or grab the spotlight too much here either. I've detuned characters to match the general party level of effectiveness, I've avoided combinations that are cheesy even if my character could do them.
I usually ended up more "Real Roleplayer" than "Real Munchkin" if anyone remembers those lists, though more of both of them than "Real Men" or "Real Loonies".
So I rate myself highly on both roleplaying and optimization. They are not mutually exclusive, diametrically opposed, or opposites.
Oh, and I encourage all players to become better in both, and also not to be jerks with either.
This is a good starting point and it's great to see you've tipped your hat to mechanical efficacy since that's the point of all this "role-playing" at the end of the day. You are most likely probably quite well liked among your group/s and a go-to guy of sorts, I'm guessing?[/sblock]
