Role/Roll Playing

[Jimlock]

In those moments the other players are greatful, not resentful. Without building such characters, we'd all end up rerolling new ones much more often that we currently do.

So what you're saying is that your party survives because of your powerful/optimized character?

i don't get this really...

well i wouldn't like playing in a game, or DMing in one, where there is a powerful character that can save the day.

In fact, if i was your co-player or your DM, i would have been offended if you ever told me this.

 

[Aluvial]

I picked role-playing but now that I think about it a bit more, and after reading the other posts... I bet I would be a roller...

The tactical options of combat have pushed us into that direction. We still role in the game, but when combat dominates the sessions, my group rolls.

Aluvial

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

If you really want to see who is a "roleplayer" and who is a "roll player", have people honestly answer if they'd play in a game where their character had only 1 hp at 1st level.

That seperates the men from the boys.

Those who honestly tell you that they wouldn't play a character with only 1 HP are not true roleplayers. They lean more towards roll playing, often citing that they can't have "fun" playing a character with only 1 HP.

Hehe. What I recall is roleplaying a bunch of dramatic (or not) death scenes-- usually in the first one or two rooms of the dungeon. Enough first-hit-kills can turn any player into a veritable Shakespeare!

Fortunately, rolling up another piece of meat for the grinder was easy enough back then!

 

[Dandu]

So what you're saying is that your party survives because of your powerful/optimized character?

i don't get this really...

Possible in situations where the DM wants to throw tough encounters at the party because those are cool (fighting dragons is more awesome than fighting garden snakes) and most of the party is not able to handle it.

For example, in the Red Hand of Doom, I had a party that simply could not damage the hydra under the bridge towards the beginning of the game, so my sorcerer simply level drained it to death. This is an example of a optimized character ensuring party survival.

 

[Jimlock]

Possible in situations where the DM wants to throw tough encounters at the party because those are cool (fighting dragons is more awesome than fighting garden snakes) and most of the party is not able to handle it.

For example, in the Red Hand of Doom, I had a party that simply could not damage the hydra under the bridge towards the beginning of the game, so my sorcerer simply level drained it to death. This is an example of a optimized character ensuring party survival.

when i said i don't get it, i did not mean that i do not understand how this can happen.

I was referring to how can a game group support/accept such a thing in their game?

Personally, it offends my intelligence, if the DM thinks it is better to have such a player in his party.. so that his plans can go as planned... If he does/allows that, he is simply a bad DM.
If the players are good enough they are gonna make it, if they make the wrong choices, and luck rains a few 1s... well, something bad might happen... so what? That's how the game is. I don't have to feel safe under the wings of an optimized character so as to enjoy my game! I don't want to pick up Gordon's red phone to call batman when my encounters get difficult!

The game is supposed to be fun for all. Where's the satisfaction...the feeling of accomplishment for the rest of the players when there's this one guy who "can take care of things" when things turn ugly?
If there are players with non-optimized characters, who feel safe with the presence of optimized characters in the game, instead of getting angry!!... well i really feel sorry for them... and their judgement.

A balanced party (as in a party with balanced PCs) is not restricted to fighting garden snakes. When the dragon comes, they will be able to face one, at the right time and level.

 

[Dandu]

I don't want to pick up Gordon's red phone to call batman when my encounters get difficult!

There's "difficult encounters" and then there's the Joker.

While a balanced party where everyone contributes equally is ideal, it is also not guaranteed to happen in the real world for various reasons, one of which being that D&D is full of traps. It is entirely possible that you end up with a party that trips over its own shoes when doing things.

Let's take that gaming session in RHoD for example. The party clearly was not as powerful as my character was. Should I have solo'd the hydra that was ripping apart the party, or plinked at it with Magic Missile until it killed us all?

 

[Jimlock]

There's "difficult encounters" and then there's the Joker.

ok... So batman (optimized character) gets to deal with the Joker (dragon)...

while the robinS get to deal with the gimps back at the warehouse, while Batman watches over in case those lame robins twist the ankles...

what a lovely game...and so much fun for everybody to share...

While a balanced party where everyone contributes equally is ideal, it is also not guaranteed to happen in the real world for various reasons, one of which being that D&D is full of traps. It is entirely possible that you end up with a party that trips over its own shoes when doing things.

Trying to create a balanced party, and finally coming up with some unbalanced characters because D&D is full of traps (to which i totally agree) is one thing.

Trying to make an optimized character when the others don't, is another thing.

Let's take that gaming session in RHoD for example. The party clearly was not as powerful as my character was. Should I have solo'd the hydra that was ripping apart the party, or plinked at it with Magic Missile until it killed us all?

The answer is simple. The game group (yes... not just the DM, the players as well) should have known better, than allowing such an imbalance in the game.
In case this comes in the game and not before (which can easily happen because of inexperience), the game group should find ways to balance things out.

Again, a DM that allows a couple of superheroes into his game so as to assure the story's continuation (without having to break his head over deaths, resurrections and new characters) is not doing his job right.

Players are not that stupid so as to "miss'' how the managed to survive.
If they know it and feel comfortable with it, well... they should feel sorry for their own self esteem... they might as well play "dragon age 2" on extra-super-easy... and get their kicks out of playing that game instead.

 

[Dandu]

The answer is simple. The game group (yes... not just the DM, the players as well) should have known better, than allowing such an imbalance in the game.

An imbalance in classes? The other classes were Druid, Beguiler, and Cleric. I don't think you'll find many stronger classes.

Imbalance in the encounter? It was a pre-made module, which meant that the default encounter should have been workable.

The problem was that the players used horrible spell selection and tactics. Now, you could argue that the DM should have softballed the encounter because of that, but he had no idea that the players would use poor strategy beforehand (obviously; he's not psychic) and he didn't pour over everyone's spell selection either.

Also, he was a busy college student and would not have had much time to adjust the module anyways.

Now, I will agree that building characters to deliberately outshine other people is bad form, but Rumbletiger gave no indication of that. In fact, he seems to be helping rather than dominating, and I feel that this is an acceptable method of playing.

 

[Jimlock]

An imbalance in classes? The other classes were Druid, Beguiler, and Cleric. I don't think you'll find many stronger classes.

Imbalance in the encounter? It was a pre-made module, which meant that the default encounter should have been workable.

The problem was that the players used horrible spell selection and tactics. Now, you could argue that the DM should have softballed the encounter because of that, but he had no idea that the players would use poor strategy beforehand (obviously; he's not psychic) and he didn't pour over everyone's spell selection either.

Ok, that changes things.... You didn't share this info before. In fact, what you previously said:

I had a party that simply could not damage the hydra under the bridge towards the beginning of the game, so my sorcerer simply level drained it to death. This is an example of a optimized character ensuring party survival.

sounded like they were incapable of dealing with the encounter, and that only you (the optimized character) could deal effectively with the Hydra.

I'm sure you can understand the difference between this case and what i'm talking about in my previous posts.

Also, he was a busy college student and would not have had much time to adjust the module anyways.

A classic problem with DMs....time...

...especially when players are experienced and well prepared...

Now, I will agree that building characters to deliberately outshine other people is bad form, but Rumbletiger gave no indication of that. In fact, he seems to be helping rather than dominating, and I feel that this is an acceptable method of playing.

Well, as far as i can understand from what he wrote, he uses his character's 100% whenever things go pretty badly for the party...
This means that he can deal with regular encounters without a sweat.
He's the party's safety belt, and perhaps, the DM's safety belt as well.

Personally:

1-I wouldn't like being the savior. No challenge, no fun
2-I wouldn't like being any other player in the party. I'd feel...well better not say it...
3-I wouldn't allow this as a DM. Every body should get a piece of the pie. I would try to have a balanced party where good ideas and good choices/tactics is what gets the party out of serious trouble. Not some arithmetically perfect design.

I have encountered a couple of cases like this in the past.
In both cases there was a really powerful character in the party, who chose to stay low in general, but really outshined everybody else in the most difficult of encounters. Not because of his good tactics and ideas, but because of the his PCs overpowered abilities.
In one of the two cases. We discussed it, the DM acknowledged it, he even said how he felt somewhat comfortable because of this one PC. We all agreed and the powerful PC got an off-game downgrade.
In the second case, not even the DM liked it. We balanced things once again.
Players with the powerful PCs, did not like the idea of the downgrade, arguing how they do not use their 100% all the time, and one even argued how this is a part of his "roleplaying".
Perhaps they felt safe with such powers at hand...i can think of other reasons here... but there is no point of discussing them right now.
No matter how much those two PCs did not like it, no matter how they did not enjoy the game until their tilt was over...
the game got better, and the rest of the players enjoyed it more.

In each case it was 1 player's fun vs 3players' fun.

 

[PureGoldx58]

I am considered an optimizer among my friends, but the roleplayers in my previous groups never seemed to have any problem with it.

I am in my group too, they don't mind because I generally hold back and don't kill everything before they get to go. That and I am usually in character from the moment I sit down to the moment I get up to let them out of my house.