Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dragonblade" data-source="post: 5248859" data-attributes="member: 2804">I know exactly what you are talking about Imaro. The subtle promotion of system mastery was a stated design goal in 3e.Monte Cook and others have gone on record as saying that some feats, spells and so on were deliberately created to be more or less effective than others of a similar level. This was done so that gamers could feel a sense of accomplishment when they learned the system and realized some choices were flat out better than others.I agree that is probably something that young boys might enjoy. After all, they don't see deeper into the game's construction or philosophize about the merits and flaws of metagame construction. They just like to talk about how they took this feat and it made their character better than this other feat would have.There is some overlap with the concept of "powergaming". But everyone powergames to some extent. Everyone wants to make the best choice when given a range of options to choose from. It is simply human nature.Diamond Cross, I disagree with your, or rather the Mongoose definitions of powergaming and min/maxing. I'm old school. I started with 1st edition and my games predate anything conceived by Mongoose Publishing. These are the definitions I have used for years and are generally shared by everyone I have ever gamed with. What mongoose labels "powergaming" is what I would label a "munchkin".Min/Maxing - Simply the concept of constructing a character to deliberately minimize weaknesses and maximize their effectiveness and advantages. Min/maxing itself in and of itself is neither positive or negative.Powergaming - Somewhat overlapping with min/maxing, powergaming is making a conscious effort to make the best or most effective character possible given the constraints of the system or the DM's rules. Many gamers powergame and again it is neither positive or negative. It also has nothing to do with role-playing. I have gamed with powergamers who were amazing role-players. They could do voices, mannerisms and wrote tens of pages of background for their characters.Munchkinism - Is the focus on "winning" the game, by simply breaking the rules whenever possible. Munchkins are the players that want an 18 in every stat (or higher if they can get it). They "overlook" rules that they don't like, and always interpret vague wordings in the rules text in their favor. The Mongoose definition of a powergamer is one that I would apply to the munchkin. Munchkins definitely have a negative impact on games.In a well designed rules system like 4e where system mastery is minimized, powergamers won't have a large advantage over other players who don't focus as much on making the perfect character. In a rules mastery based system like 3e, it is quite easy for a powergamer to make a character that far outstrips the effectiveness of another PC created by a player who doesn't understand the system well enough to make better choices. This can cause a game to break down because challenges may be too easy or too hard depending on which PCs the DM is designing the adventure for.DMs who may not understand that this is caused by inherent imbalances that are literally and intentionally built into the system, may blame the players they perceive as causing a problem. These players may or may not have a tendency to optimize their characters, but even by subconsciously making better choices due to a better understanding of the system than another player, the game can fall apart.Or a DM may become restrictive by disallowing other books which limits options, or by avoiding high level play where superior choices in making a character can have a more dramatic effect on game balance.Many gamers are content with playing or running games this way. That's perfectly fine. There is no right or wrong way to game.Personally, I would find a core rulebook only E6 game extremely unsatisfying. But I tend towards the powergamer model. I like choices and options. I like to find power combinations that make my character more effective. But I also recognize that some players don't want to put the same time and effort into character building that I do so I like to play a game where my choices are meaningful and make my character better, but that don't cause me to make dramatically superior characters to another player who doesn't know all the ins and outs of the system. For this reason, I personally prefer systems where the concept of rules mastery was not an intentional design goal.</blockquote>

Verification