Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6075701" data-attributes="member: 87792">If power-gamers are a problem then this proves only one thing.  Either the game designers or the game developers have done a bad job.  Power gamers (as opposed to munchkins) are people who want to use and work with the system to get as awesome results as possible.  And to quote from a <a href="http://dconstructions.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/les-mis-smallville-style/#comment-381" target="_blank">Smallville illustration I've been citing recently</a> "Eponine is a mother<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />ing powergamer. But nobody gives a damn because in Smallville, powergaming = drama."A game that makes powergamers into a problem is a game that takes the best gamers and gives them all the wrong incentives.  The problem can therefore be squarely laid at the feet of the game itself.  (Munchkins, who cheat, intentionally misread rules, and try to pass off characters like Pun-Pun who violate the spirit of the game are a whole different story).Yay, sexism.  After this comment I won't be replying further to you.  There's a reason I don't play 3.X.  It has to do with me wanting to actually roleplay my in character choices - which means that when I care about the stakes my character tries as hard as possible to work things in their favour.  This involves a powergamed spell selection because that is what gives my character the best chance of survival they think they can have.  I want to know what people who don't do this when they are playing a wizard think they are roleplaying as.  A very smart person who won't try their hardest because they don't care about the stakes?  Someone with blind spots that are required because of the metagame?When I play 3.X hard but fairly without in any way violating the spirit of the game it collapses like a house of cards.  This is a distinguishing feature of 3.X.  oD&D was tested on Wargamers - poster children for playing hardball.  When I play 1e (even with Unearthed Arcana, the game wobbles slightly but doesn't fall over.  When I play hardball 4e with one single exception (consumable spam, including Paragon overuse of Heroic Tier rituals) the game gets more awesome as the monsters go flying and end up in, on, over, or under any interesting terrain, I provoke opportunity attacks left right and centre, and stunt like a madman.  When I push 4e to its limits the game only gets more awesome.  Awesome play in Fate Core is explicitely defined as setting yourself up to get more plot points.  In Marvel Heroic Roleplaying, in Smallville, in Monsterhearts, in Dogs in the Vineyard the more I push the more awesome the game gets.  This is because these are all well designed games, intended to reward people's effort and understanding with a more positive play experience. In 3.X to play it I have to work out "What's pushing and making sure my character is trying without actually pushing the system past some nebulous limits that can be passed through some simple in character choices?"  This is a level of metagaming I find ridiculous.As for your complaints that I mentioned that you hadn't done anything about the single biggest problem class.  Mr. "<a href="http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0346.html" target="_blank">I have special abilities that are more powerful than your entire class.</a>"  I also gave a flexible and effective spell loadout (which, ultimately, is what the wizard is about) that could handle your entire range of options even with the ridiculous limits you placed.  And I'm unsurprised having had your challenge destroyed you are talking about how I mentioned the druid.But I'm not.  Trying to break the system is something like Ur Priest/Nar Demonbinder/Mystic Theurge ridiculousness.  Or Pun-Pun.  You are accusing me directly of a bad faith approach which is entirely absent.  I am using core elements of the system in the way the game indicates you should use them and rewards you for and the system still collapses.Indeed.  If players don't invest in their characters or care whether they live or die, and don't engage with the system on its own terms, there isn't a problem.  I'd be bored stiff DMing or playing at such a table.  And am glad that I have games designed for players rather than to exist without them.  When I DM, one of the reasons I like having players is because they throw creative monkey wrenches and utterly misuse and subvert things, which adds layers to the story and to the roleplaying.  To say that this is a problem is, to me, anathema.</blockquote>

Verification