Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1437329" data-attributes="member: 6398">Specifically, the Low Magic/GnG thread, although my point extends to any preference of style or taste.&nbsp; For instance, your comment about the Min/Maxer also being a jerk doesn't make Min/Maxers jerks relates to the idea that a low magic game run by a bad GM doesn't make all low magic games bad.&nbsp;You find any debate between two differing preferences within the game and apply this same reasoning, and suddenly you wonder what all the debates are about...&nbsp;&quot;Someone who says they are heavy RPers that try to hog the spotlight with elongated speeches and Shakespearian prose doesn't make all RP-centric players spotlight hogs...&quot;&nbsp;&quot;Having played with a Min/Maxer that only made two-dimensional characters doesn't make all Min/Maxers poor role-players...&quot;&nbsp;etc.&nbsp;etc.&nbsp;etc.&nbsp;I think we've all probably had a bad experience with someone taking a facet of the game too far, and likely their sense of teamwork and sportsmanship was skewed (thus the reason they took it too far).&nbsp; It's an unfortunate side of Human nature to take these singular or limited experiences and make them symbolic of related issues.&nbsp;Example: One Min/Maxer was a jerk and ruined an earlier game for you, so when you realize the guy next to you at the table is a Min/Maxer, you become nervous that the game is about to go down the drain like the other one did...&nbsp;Another Example: You played in a Low Magic game that involved a lot of railroading and screw-overs from a poor GM, and now the new GM you just met has announced that his game is low magic and you fear the same issues are going to arise.&nbsp;With all the debates over tastes, styles, and methodology lately, I'm really starting to believe that this is the real issue that's been bubbling up.&nbsp;For instance, I used to be heavily anti-min/max until the individual that proposed the earlier described &quot;theoretical&quot; and &quot;practical&quot; min/max methods took a gander of my rules and setting and told me exactly how he would min/max a character in my game.&nbsp; And while a smidge more potent than what my own players generally produce, it wasn't anything so outrageous or beyond the scope of the campaign parameters that I wouldn't allow it or fear that the other PCs would have been overshadowed.&nbsp; And thus, having had this done for me, I became more acceptable of the notion of min/max (although I certainly favor &quot;practical&quot; over &quot;theoretical&quot;, I see value and worth in both).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bendris Noulg, post: 1437329, member: 6398"] Specifically, the Low Magic/GnG thread, although my point extends to any preference of style or taste. For instance, your comment about the Min/Maxer [i]also[/i] being a jerk doesn't make Min/Maxers jerks relates to the idea that a low magic game run by a bad GM doesn't make all low magic games bad. You find any debate between two differing preferences within the game and apply this same reasoning, and suddenly you wonder what all the debates are about... "Someone who says they are heavy RPers that try to hog the spotlight with elongated speeches and Shakespearian prose doesn't make all RP-centric players spotlight hogs..." "Having played with a Min/Maxer that only made two-dimensional characters doesn't make all Min/Maxers poor role-players..." etc. etc. etc. I think we've all probably had a bad experience with [i]someone[/i] taking a facet of the game too far, and likely their sense of teamwork and sportsmanship was skewed (thus the reason they took it too far). It's an unfortunate side of Human nature to take these singular or limited experiences and make them symbolic of related issues. Example: One Min/Maxer was a jerk and ruined an earlier game for you, so when you realize the guy next to you at the table is a Min/Maxer, you become nervous that the game is about to go down the drain like the other one did... Another Example: You played in a Low Magic game that involved a lot of railroading and screw-overs from a poor GM, and now the new GM you just met has announced that his game is low magic and you fear the same issues are going to arise. With all the debates over tastes, styles, and methodology lately, I'm really starting to believe that this is the real issue that's been bubbling up. For instance, I used to be heavily anti-min/max until the individual that proposed the earlier described "theoretical" and "practical" min/max methods took a gander of my rules and setting and told me [i]exactly[/i] how he would min/max a character in my game. And while a [i]smidge[/i] more potent than what my own players generally produce, it wasn't anything so outrageous or beyond the scope of the campaign parameters that I wouldn't allow it or fear that the other PCs would have been overshadowed. And thus, having had this done for me, I became more acceptable of the notion of min/max (although I certainly favor "practical" over "theoretical", I see value and worth in both). [/QUOTE]

Verification