When is okay to min/max?

[Dynel]

I am running a game now. In this game, I have three players. One of the players is a min/maxer to the core. He contributes to the game in a constructive manner, but he takes all the feats/skills/spells necessary to make sure he can overcome just about anything he thinks I'm gonna throw at him (and the party).

This guy, whom I'll call Mark, gets the itch to DM every once and a while - and he's getting the itch now. My campaign isn't over yet, but within about 4 or 5 months it will be. In the past 4 years he's DMed twice, each game lasting approximately 6-7 months. Although I've known him for about 15 years, his DMing style just hit me like a ton of bricks during this campaign with him as a player.

He DM's exactly like he plays. Power gamer.

Mark loves combat, and loves to throw monsters at us constantly. He doesn't care much for "in-depth" roleplaying encounters, mysteries, puzzles, and the like. He pretty much tells us the scenario and expects us to jump at the chance to go on whatever quest he has designed for us.

Don't get me wrong...he tries to be a good DM. I have no authority to say, "sorry, Mark, no one like your style of DMing, so I'm gonna keep running the game," when if fact they have come to me and wonder why I don't keep running. But I'd like to play, too.

I couldn't believe the similarities until a couple of weeks ago when I was really paying attention to what he had been doing over the past few game sessions and drawing a similarity to his DMimg style.

My question is this. If I know that he's going to be running a power game, do I use that to my advantage and create a badass character, min/maxing him out? The last game with him as DM I was playing a thief (same four people - one guy was a wizard and my wife was a fighter) and I had to constantly get into combat and help our fighter because we were always outnumbered (numerically and/or powerwise). My thief eventually died (a third time) and I told my party not to get him raised and was allowed to roll up a new character - a 10th level cleric (party level was 12). I think I'm a good enough roleplayer to contribute to the game and create some good times, even though my character is min/maxed, but is this just inviting Mark to throw even bigger and badder stuff at us? I don't think I've min/maxed a character in 12 years, and it's not really what I want to do (I'd really like to have a go at a bard or maybe a druid) but I'm thinking maybe its necessary for the survival (and enjoyment) of the party.

So, I ask again...when, if ever, is it okay to purposely and deliberately to min/max a character if you expect a DM's game is heading that direction?

 

[EricNoah]

Your choices, as I see them, are a) adapt to his style of play; b) get him to adapt to your style of play; or c) find some middle ground. C is the hardest because you'll have to talk to and convince the DM, and you'll have to express that you don't like his style. A might get you somewhere in the short run but you might end up frustrated since you're not getting what you want. But yeah, if his style "demands" some min-maxing then to adapt to it you'll almost certainly need to do so.

 

[Scotley]

So, I ask again...when, if ever, is it okay to purposely and deliberately to min/max a character if you expect a DM's game is heading that direction?

I'll preface this by saying that I am of the belief that a little min/maxing to make a character more effective is not a bad thing in any game. I do think that some players get carried away at the expense of other aspects of the game. Min/Maxers tend to be problems in games where they are the only one playing that style. Given the small size of the group it shouldn't be a problem to all agree to take the DM's approach this time.

I think the problem is a bit more than just a difference in playing style. The game assumes a four character party with the 4 core areas covered. In a smaller group you are going to have to min/max just a bit to cover all these needs. Unfortunately, some classes find a better fit with larger parties. Bards in particular seem to work better in a bit larger group. If you really want to play one consider a few levels of Ranger or Fighter. I expect that if your Rogue in the previous game had enough levels of Sorcerer to cast some blink and invisability spells his effectiveness would have been much improved. Is it min/maxing? A little bit. But the important question is would you have had more fun if your character had been a little better equiped to handle the kind of encounters you were given. I've been in games where other players have felt obligated to make their characters nearly useless in a fight in the interest of "roleplaying". Was their character more interesting? Did he have a better story to tell? No and no. Instead everyone else had to work their characters that much harder to take up the slack. We just resented the guy. Had we been going into a game with little combat and more than the usual emphasis on story and role that would have been fine, but in a more balanced game it didn't work.

The second issue is that you know what kind of game you are getting into. There is no right or wrong way to play. In my opinion if the DM is running a powergame and you want to play then you'll have more fun playing his way.

The alternative is not to play and with you and your wife making up half the group I assume that will cause too many problems.

Think of it as and excuse to polish your own skills. Min/Maxing or powergaming involves knowing the rules and the options. You may find that after a bit of powergaming you can better balance encounters in your own game. Sounds like you'll be getting a lot of combat practice which may help you run fights in your own game more quickly and smoothly. Additionally, your group may benefit from the change of pace. After a few months of maxed out combat heavy gaming they may be ready for a game you are more comfortable with. Have fun and don't be afraid to try a different approach once in a while.

Scotley

 

[Nifft]

Perhaps he could DM a series of one-shots intermingled into your game, for whenever you're not in the mood to DM / sick / unprepared / whatever. Thus, he has no requirement to do anything beyond "hey look! it's another monster!", and your campaign won't have to actually end for him to scratch his itch.

-- N

 

[Henry]

I'd sit down as a GROUP and discuss it. Discuss what everybody wants out of the game, not just one player.

If the other players welcome this as a chance to crunch and min-max, then go for it! But just talking beforehand about what to expect out of the game he'll be running will solve a LOT of problems and misconceptions. For all you know, he could be really wanting to run something you guys will like, and if you go down the route of heavy combat, he may assume that's what you want, too. Just find out for sure - not talking is the REAL sin, not powergaming.

 

[Dynel]

You guys have all made some good points.

Thing is, we've tried to talk to him. It was a long time ago, and it didn't go over terribly well. In the last game he ran, the one where I was playing a rogue, he wanted a "character update" when we were around 9th level (basically just a write-up about where we were wanting our character's direction to head). In that update, I told him that Celedor (my rogue) was considering retiring from the profession, because the life of an adventurer was too dangerous for him. He asked me what that meant and I told him that the monsters we fought were too dangerous for Celedor and he was beginning to fear for his life. He was a rogue to the heart, and originally he saw adventuring as an easy (to some extent) way to acquire wealth, but he was getting in over his head. Mark told me that the encounters CR's were right for our level, but I reminded him (as Scotley mentioned) that an X CR was geared towards four characters of X level.

The encounters slowed for about four sessions. In the fifth session, Celedor died and I rolled up a cleric.

I guess it is his style of DMing, and as Eric stated, I must adapt, if I want to play. In that last game we (as in all three of us) had more grandiose ideas for our characters beyond fighting battle after battle. The wizard wanted to become a candle caster, the fighter wanted to become a cavalier, and I was hoping to found a guild. We never got to those ideas, ideas the DM was aware of.

I guess I just always looked at min/maxing as a way to try to "beat" the DM, even though that is never possible. My gaming experience consists almost entirely of DMing, and I was never particularly fond of min/maxers. And now I'm considering becoming one. :\

 

[scourger]

Lots of good advice here! I'll add my two cents. You are correct that people DM the same style they like to play. A good frame of reference is the study Breakdown of RPG Players found at this link:

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/BreakdownOfRPGPlayers.html

From that perspective, I found that I was more of a Power Gamer playing & DMing among friends who are more Thinkers, Character Actors & Storytellers. I don't think anyone is all one "type", but I find most people favor one style. The import of all this is that people play for different reasons and with different styles. More fundamentally, each player & DM draws more enjoyment from a particular style.

So, it sounds as if your player and future DM enjoys the Power Gamer Style of play (with some Thinker thrown in). Character Acting and Story telling seem less important to him than to the rest of your group. He is just fine with min/maxed PCs and NPCs going head-to-head with each other and monsters for the immediate gain of winning the current combat.

The good news is that it's okay. I find that, once acknowledged, the different style don't have to conflict but can be complementary. For instance, I have had more fun once I adjusted my style of play to be less Power Gamer and more centered; and (I think) the other players are still having fun without as much style conflict. You may find similar enjoyment from altering your style away from Character actor and Storyteller toward Power Gamer and Thinker for his game.

Incidentally, I also find that most players are fully in touch with their Strategist (or min/maxer) side when constructing a character. Most of the players I know that profess to be Storytellers are more Strategists than they care to admit. So, I am not quick to condemn min/maxing because everyone does it to some extent; and it can add enjoyment to the game.

You might also share the article with him (as we did in our group). The dialogue can be helpful.

 

[fafhrd]

Just find out for sure - not talking is the REAL sin...
Precognitive Telepath for adventuring Partnership. You know where to apply.

You sure send some mixed messages

 

[Thumper3333]

He was a rogue to the heart, and originally he saw adventuring as an easy (to some extent) way to acquire wealth, but he was getting in over his head. Mark told me that the encounters CR's were right for our level, but I reminded him (as Scotley mentioned) that an X CR was geared towards four characters of X level.

First, the proper time to min/max is up to you. Personally, I only do it when I have a character concept that requires it. And by concept, I don't mean "I want to deal ubber damage."

Second, and I know we don't know each, so don't take this the wrong way. But not everyone runs games in a vacum, where a gorup of 4th level people will only EVER encounter an EL 4 obstacle. A group of 4 PCs, all 4th level can handle an EL 6 encounter....IF they work well as a team. True, they won't be doing much else that day.....or they could flee.....always an option. Life doesn't always throw easy hits. But to be accurate, you should run into some easy ones too. Why would you never see a goblin again after 3rd level? Did you wipe them all out?

My suggestion....if you're like me, you play to have fun. Can you have fun doing nothing but powergaming? If not, you're gonna have to find some middle ground.....or drop the game.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

I don't see how one can't min/max to a certain extent. Your character is going to try and be good at whatever he wants to be good at. Weather thats combat or picking locks.

No character who wants to be uber at picking locks isn't going to max out the open lock skill or have a low dexterity and if they want to be ridculously good at it they'll take skill focus.



Now as far as there not being much depth to his role playing and his expecting you to just to jump into any adventure isn't good DMing IMHO as you've stated (my players, nor myself just jump into any adventure there needs to be something to get our characters interested).

You should have a group meeting as others have suggested but try not to single him out. You should ask your group what they want out of your current game and future games as far as combat/RPing goes and see if he takes the hint.