times they are a changen....

[sfgiants]

I agree that any game can be turned into a powergaming affair and that it all depends on dm's and players. However, I feel that with choices comes more powergaming (unfortunately). It is natural that feats etc get combined in the most favorable way. I agree that CRPG's are the bane of all real rpg's (EQ, isn't even the worst, I think BG is a problem as well). I have run 3 groups of 3e and most have been firmly focused on maximizing advantages and hoarding wealth (ie in BG, I had a Holy Avenger, when do I get one in d+d?). What bothers me most, and may not be a result of CRPG's or 3e is the rules bending that goes on. Example: Reading a rule, knowing what the intent of the game designers was, and manipulating it to most advantage. This is the biggest problem I have faced and will eventually force me away from 3e back to 1e (just my opinion, not meant to rile anyone up)

 

[The Cardinal]

yep - I can only agree: I'm playing in a D&D3e campaign where two of the players are young (19 & 20) and avid players of Counterstrike, Quake, etc. They also love to play CRPGs like Baldur's Gate, Wizardry 8, Grandia 2, etc. - but they never finish those games! They are totally absorbed by the "cool factor" of a feat, class, race, or item - and it's *really* hard to keep them focused during a session. Luckily one of them (he's the one with a brain, even if his attention span is measured in nanoseconds) plays a Githzerai monk with Int7 and Cha9 - and he roleplays him wonderfully...

 

[Sammael99]

Both my husband & I came to D&D via CRPGs. And neither of us has munchkin tendencies. I'm not sure why you think the 3E rule set is inherently munchkin, but I beg to differ.

IMC, I have one two players who have been playing for many years, one who has been playing for a year, my husband, who has been playing for 4 months, and a new player joining us Sunday who is also an old hand. There are no munchkins at my table. None of them have magic items other than healing potions, and we once spent a whole session without any combat! This session may well be another like that.

I would certainly be ridiculous to think that all the roleplayers who have played MtG or CRPGs ended up being munchkins.

That being said, I definetely have the feeling, if only from these boards, that there is a "MtG" mentality more prevalent than it used to be.

I'm not saying gamers didn't use to optimise their characters in 1E. But it seems to me it was less of a systematic endeavour. The 3E system certainly encourages that in the sense that it relies a lot on options and combinations (of feats, spells, etc.)

So I'm not sure the "MTG" influence is from the fact that people who played MTG approach the game that way or the fact that the 3E designers themselves decided to give MtG type options and combinations.

All in all, though, if you like roleplaying and the players don't, you can either move them gently towards rping or find other players.

I remember my first group of players in the UK. All they had played was Warhammer RPG and ADD and I guess they would have qualified as munchkins at the time. Since I didn't want to GM that kind of game, I ran a Jorune campaign. It was painful, they called it "Stingy Gits of Jorune", but in the end I think they loved it... After that, moving to Vampire was a breeze, and when we shifted back to more conventional fantasy, the level of play was wholly different...

 

[jester47]

I think muchkinism is a phase you go through when you start playing the game. It is the way you learn how things work. Once you understand that you settle into a roleplaying groove. One thing you can do it throw some non-combat problem solving encounters at them. Lots of puzzles and situations that use non-combat skills.

Computers have a lot to do with it and we are ever more living in a utilitarian hacker culture. People that grew up on console games are likely to min max and munchkin right away. I saw this in my group. We had a lot of MUDers and CRPG people in the group. Every situation wound up being resolved by combat. So I changed my format to have only one combat a session. They figured it out pretty quick then.

Aaron.

 

[jgbrowning]

jorune

I remember my first group of players in the UK. All they had played was Warhammer RPG and ADD and I guess they would have qualified as munchkins at the time. Since I didn't want to GM that kind of game, I ran a Jorune campaign. It was painful, they called it "Stingy Gits of Jorune", but in the end I think they loved it... After that, moving to Vampire was a breeze, and when we shifted back to more conventional fantasy, the level of play was wholly different...

Jorune was a great game. Hehehe it was, IMHO, completely unlike anything i'd seen before. and well seen after pretty much.

Not to give the wrong impression here, i loved both my groups, even the somewhat ninkapoopic young guys and had fun doing both, and i tried to gently steer them toward what i view as a better understanding of the potential of RPG's vers MTG or CRPGS.

joe b.

 

[Apok]

Regarding "Effective v. Concept" character creation:

My personal feeling is that these two concepts are not mutually exclusive. You can build a character which adhere's to a certain concept while still being effective from a purely game-mechanics point of view. The whole argument, I think, stems from the old "role v. roll" debate that occasionally rears it's ugly head around these boards. The "role" fanatics seem to insist that a character built to be effective in a combat situation is "overpowered" and somehow "broken" whilst the "roll" fanatics seem to see their character as a pile of stats used to kill things & get treasure. Most of the people that I know and that post here lie somewhere inbetween. The idea is to create a character that is interesting and fun to roleplay with but who is capable of holding his own mechanically, weather that means combat or being highly skilled at certain things.

 

[TiQuinn]

I think it comes down to how people perceive D&D and what they expect out of it. Just as many people are drawn to a story as they are to the combat aspects of the game. Whether it was 1e or 2e or 3e, there have always been "munchkins"...folks who want to use the rules to their advantage to make their characters as strong as possible.

Sometimes it's a phase that people go through. I know quite a number of players who swore off min-maxing when they realized that, in the end, it's disruptive to the game. The DM needs to consistently challenge the players, and min-maxing tends to make the game more of a Player Vs. DM scenario. Eventually, people get bored of it.

Sometimes it's just a matter of the DM not providing enough roleplaying or story for the players. It happens. It happened to me and my friends pointed it out. Yeah, that's a little bit of an ego crusher, but sometimes the players will go with whatever the DM provides them. Provide them a great story, they'll get into it as roleplayers. Give them a hack and slash with little story, all that's left for players is making their characters the best they can be by using rules to their advantage. I'm not saying it always works this way, but I think it happens quite a bit, and not a lot of DMs are willing to admit this either.

Finally folks may revel in "munchkinism"! And more power to them! If that's the style they enjoy, who am I to say it's wrong? But if the DM doesn't like that style of play, then they should consider letting someone else DM or find another group (depending on the circumstances). DMing should not be a chore, and if you are having zero fun, then it's time for someone else to step up to the plate and let you have some fun as a player instead.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

do you think the prevelance of new players growing up on CRPG's and Magic style card games (cant remember that abbreviateion) has created a pardigmn shift in the style of DnD

None of my players are from that group, and in every rpg we have played- they have found ways to maximize their strengths and minimize their weaknesses.

And you know what- I would be disappointed in them if they didn't.

I work hard in my real life to do the same thing, and I don't have to deal with goblins, necromancers, and dragons. Their heroes do- and would work hard to maximize their stengths and minimize their weaknesses.

Does that mean they don't have character flaws? No, but that has nothing to do with making a capable character for the game.

Oh boy, I can imagine the fun of dm'ng a group of inept characters.

FD

 

[Wicht]

Re: munchkin

thanks for the replys but im looking for people who have familiarty with all editions of DnD.

I have played at least 4 editions/variations of the game and I have encountered this mentality in all 4 editions (probably displayed it myself at times) and doubt it has a lot to do with the prevalence today of computer games. It is a natural style of play for younger or less experienced players in any edition of DnD.

 

[Mistwell]

Send your PC's through something like Golgordand's Gauntlet, or any of the Challenge of the Champions modules, and see if they change their minds about powergaming being so important. Yeah, that sword will be really helpful in solving that riddle!