Powergaming, who is on board?

[Shadeydm]

Sounds like the "Real Roleplayers" who would purposely have a pathetic character to "prove" they aren't powergaming and therefore superior roleplayers.

Geoff.

This was not a scenario of my creation don't drag me into it.

 

[Shadeydm]

Uh, I'm a roleplaying powergamer, and I dont like 4's in my ability scores, not even in charisma. I dont see where this characterization comes from.

Not my scenario dragging 4s into the conversation.

 

[Nifft]

WOOO HOOOOO!!!!!!

I haven't seen this much real passion in a post since I came (mind you that isn't long at all)

Just a gentle note: posting specifically to incite passion can earn you an infamous seat under a bridge.

Cheers, -- N

 

[ThePublic]

Just a gentle note: posting specifically to incite passion can earn you an infamous seat under a bridge.

Cheers, -- N

... I don't think you would believe the amount of times I've been sized up for concrete shoes as a youth... darn things just won't stay on my feet!!!

I incite passion when I can because it is one of the few times people will respond honestly. It is so refreshing to find honest. unfettered opinion here.

Can I rules lawyer up a megakiller, sure. Do I? No, kinda takes the challenge outta the game for me. Are my PCs taking feats just for flavor, by level 6- always, on initial build- no. I am the same wanker that spends his valuable mage feat on improved familiar to make his story cooler (or fill in a concept) instead of Still or empower spell. But hey, that's me (and I feel most of the metamagic feats are to broken to take considering that I like my Magic Users classic like my Coca Cola). but this isn't about me and what I do, it is about You as a communtity and what you do and why you do it.

I am but a humble drunk throwing that empty bottle into a packed room of drunks overserved , and over capacity on St. Patty's in any large US city. The fact that I am not doing this to be destructive is the thing that maybe some folks can't get over.

I ask hard questions for good reasons. Clarity is its own reward and frankly on this topic I wanted to see which way the wind blew nationally and internationally (hence I came here)

but thats enough from me for now...

The Public

 

[Nifft]

... I don't think you would believe the amount of times I've been sized up for concrete shoes as a youth... darn things just won't stay on my feet!!!

All I meant was: I don't think you're trolling.
Trying to incite people can be considered trolling and is generally bad.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Thurbane]

As I find myself creating more and more PCs and NPCs for D&D, I find myself slipping further and further away from character concepts and personalities, and more into a "Hmm, how do I max this guy out as a blaster/tracker/dragonslayer" type mindset.

Not saying this is neccessarily a bad thing, or endemic to the current rules set, just an observation of my own behavior.

Most of the other guys I play with are much less focussed on the rules and more on character development, so more and more I'm finding myself being "at odds" with them over goals and methods...

 

[DarkJester]

I find myself going the other way Thurbane. I use to be one to "tweak" all my characters and NPC's alike but now days I find it easier to just think up characters and then jot down basic stats later that seem to fit at least well enough.

One thing I don't mind as a DM is rampant multiclassing. I know some people have problems with this and see it as poor form, but to me a class is just a manner of focusing your abilities in the same way that a feat grants you a choice of where to take your character. As such, I'd have no objection to someone taking a dip of ___ to pick up some ability they think their character should have. As customizable as the system currently is, it still lacks certain fine tuning elements that can be satisfied by multiclassing. Prestige classes I am a bit more picky about, but still don't mind cherry picking so much.

 

[Shadeydm]

I find myself going the other way Thurbane. I use to be one to "tweak" all my characters and NPC's alike but now days I find it easier to just think up characters and then jot down basic stats later that seem to fit at least well enough.

One thing I don't mind as a DM is rampant multiclassing. I know some people have problems with this and see it as poor form, but to me a class is just a manor of focusing your abilities in the same way that a feat grants you a choice of where to take your character. As such, I'd have no objection to someone taking a dip of ___ to pick up some ability they think their character should have. As customizable as the system currently is, it still lacks certain fine tuning elements that can be satisfied by multiclassing. Prestige classes I am a bit more picky about, but still don't mind cherry picking so much.

For some reason I am really put off by the whole class dipping thing. It just feels wrong to me not so much having two classes but when you have 3 or more and start throwing in prestige classes etc, I find myself wondering how does it all make sense in game? Do you just throw together any old excuse for the various dippings in order to justify the build you want regardless of the logic or lack thereof? Does it not need to make sense in context of the campaign world the end justifies the means and nothing else matters? I just don't get it. Does Bill the fighter/mage just wake up one morning after a harrowing adventure and suddenly he has a level of rogue? Then he can wake up a few weeks later and add a level of Ranger just because he has accumulated x amount of exp... where does the madness end?
Am I saying its WBF nope just that I don't understand the appeal or the flavor of such choices.

 

[KarinsDad]

I personally interview gamers before entering my group and weed out the powergamers beforehand (we are a heavy roleplay, low number-crunch group and if you can't get in character, then you can't expect to hang out here long enough for pizza for example). I find Powergaming to cheapen the gaming experience as a whole and should be limited to those that just want to walk around and kill things (and hopefully just doing that in a LAN or MMORPG setting) and be quashed and beaten out of new players at every chance a good group gets (powergamers can be converted folks, I have 14 to my credit so far!)

I view Powergaming and Roleplaying to be, like Patlin said, different Axis. Similar to Lawful/Chaotic verus Good/Evil.

Using the axes Powergaming/Sissygaming and Roleplaying/RoleLessplaying, we have the following PC players in our current group:

Powergamer/Neutral
Neutral/Roleplayer
Sissygamer/Neutral
Sissygamer/RoleLessplayer (this happens to be KarinsMom who sits in and has fun, but dislikes roleplaying or figuring out the rules, that's what her husband is for I guess)
Neutral/Neutral

Given this, you would get rid of our best tactical player. You would also probably get rid of my wife (as a RoleLessplayer).

Personally, I think many different player styles make for an interesting group, not many of the same or similar styles. YMMV.

 

[DarkJester]

Do you just throw together any old excuse for the various dippings in order to justify the build you want regardless of the logic or lack thereof?

I don't really feel there is a need for an excuse. Classes are a metagame concept. People can cast spells, or they can't. People pray to their god and he answer's their prayers - or he doesn't, and people can shape shift into wild animals - or maybe not. The characters background and his attitude towards learning new things should decide which classes he takes and for what reasons, as levels in a class show advancement to the ideas and abilities presented as class features. I see no problem with a heavily armored fighter training in unarmed martial combat and taking a level of monk to show for his efforts. In a perfect world there would be a nice feat chain out there to prevent the need for such things, or perhaps something along the lines of the generic classes in Unearthed Arcana would fit my style better. As things exist though, this is acceptable for me.

As long as class changes don't come completely out of the blue I have no problem accepting almost anything.

Does it not need to make sense in context of the campaign world the end justifies the means and nothing else matters?

It's not a matter of the ends justify the means. Aside from wizards, clerics, and paladins their is little direct in game impact of where your class abilities come from. I might not be so fond of someone taking a level of wizard without appropriate training, or cleric and paladin without some religious aspect of their character being prominent but otherwise I'm fairly open to these things. I don't introduce people as "Bob the wizard" or "Joe the cleric" and so I certainly don't introduce "Rick the Fighter Rogue Monk Ranger" even if that is what he is. What I might do is "Bob, who is known to be a fairly competent magician, Joe who is known for his strict faith and discipline, and Rick the stealthy martial bounty hunter". I feel most people tend to this style as well, but I could be wrong.

To me a class is less of an archtype, and more of a means to pursue an archtype, in the same way that taking weapon focus and weapon specialization help your fighter pursue the goal of filling a master swordsman, multiclassing enables you to fill out what you think your character should be capable of.