D&D 5E Where does optimizing end and min-maxing begin? And is min-maxing a bad thing?

[iserith]

Now we have another dilemma: What is "Telling others what to do" and what is "Showing others a good way to do it"?

I think that should be self-evident. If I'm playing my low Intelligence character as a little slow and it's leading to good times and good stories, then that's showing others a good way to do it. If I'm telling you that you're not playing your low Intelligence character as stupid enough by whatever standard I've decided upon, then I'm telling you what to do.

 

[Manabarbs]

I think the disconnect is less "some people think that the numbers on your character sheet affect what your character is like and some people don't", and more "some people believe that for some reason there's a HUGE gulf in competence between what an 8 represents and what a 10 represents, and some people recognize that +1 is not that big of a deal and roleplay accordingly."

If you roleplay your Int 8 cleric as being incomprehensibly stupid, you are actively roleplaying your int stat badly. That's because Int 8 does not cause you to be so dumb that you're totally helpless and feebleminded. It causes you to be imperceptibly less likely to succeed on an int check. If you play a game where int-based checks are actually an important part of the game in any way at all, it becomes immediately obvious that Int 8 is not incompetence. An Int 8 character will roll better than an Int 10 character almost half of the time, and the Int 10 character is supposed to be average. They'll even roll better than an Int 16 character on a pretty regular basis. If you're insisting that Int 8 means that you can barely string a sentence together and are just a total wreck at any and all intellectual tasks, you're going to create comedy moments pretty regularly as a result of the uselessly dumb guy doing better on intelligence tasks than people who are supposedly average or better.

Of course, this isn't an issue if you're playing a game where knowledge checks are never tested, and it's only a small issue if you're playing one where it rarely matters. In any game where knowledge is actually a relevant and important thing to have, though, you can't play an Int 8 character as being significantly below average in intelligence without regularly breaking the fiction, because they're not much less likely to roll high than a supposedly average character. Because -1 is basically imperceptible. To whatever extent there is a correct way to RP Int 8, it's to RP the character as being of average intelligence, because they basically are. (Most people who believe that 8 Int is Talks-Like-Cookie-Monster-Can't-Tie-Their-Shoes don't seem to think that 12 Int means that you're an incredibly gifted savant who wows everybody with their intellect, even though it's the exact same difference.)

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think that should be self-evident. If I'm playing my low Intelligence character as a little slow and it's leading to good times and good stories, then that's showing others a good way to do it. If I'm telling you that you're not playing your low Intelligence character as stupid enough by whatever standard I've decided upon, then I'm telling you what to do.

I agree with you.

It sometimes seems that people here conflate ANY attempt someone makes to suggest a good way of doing anything as telling them what to do. (And vice-versa, really).

My point was meant for people ti draw your very well made conclusion.

Although I would say that suggesting that others try it is also not the same as telling them what to do. One does not have to lead ONLY by example.

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app

 

[JonnyP71]

I bet not many people would object to a player making such choices. Rather, the objection is some people telling other people that their portrayal of a character with a given ability score isn't correct.

I guess I didn't quite get my complete point across - if someone joined our group, dumped Intelligence, and then proceeded to try to play a clever character it *would* be picked up on, gently at first, but a DM might for example, eventually insist the stats were rearranged to better suit the way the character is being played.

... because the numbers do exist when creating a character, his/her strengths and weaknesses, and so on...

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think the disconnect is less "some people think that the numbers on your character sheet affect what your character is like and some people don't", and more "some people believe that for some reason there's a HUGE gulf in competence between what an 8 represents and what a 10 represents, and some people recognize that +1 is not that big of a deal and roleplay accordingly."

If you roleplay your Int 8 cleric as being incomprehensibly stupid, you are actively roleplaying your int stat badly. That's because Int 8 does not cause you to be so dumb that you're totally helpless and feebleminded. It causes you to be imperceptibly less likely to succeed on an int check. If you play a game where int-based checks are actually an important part of the game in any way at all, it becomes immediately obvious that Int 8 is not incompetence. An Int 8 character will roll better than an Int 10 character almost half of the time, and the Int 10 character is supposed to be average. They'll even roll better than an Int 16 character on a pretty regular basis. If you're insisting that Int 8 means that you can barely string a sentence together and are just a total wreck at any and all intellectual tasks, you're going to create comedy moments pretty regularly as a result of the uselessly dumb guy doing better on intelligence tasks than people who are supposedly average or better.

Of course, this isn't an issue if you're playing a game where knowledge checks are never tested, and it's only a small issue if you're playing one where it rarely matters. In any game where knowledge is actually a relevant and important thing to have, though, you can't play an Int 8 character as being significantly below average in intelligence without regularly breaking the fiction, because they're not much less likely to roll high than a supposedly average character. Because -1 is basically imperceptible. To whatever extent there is a correct way to RP Int 8, it's to RP the character as being of average intelligence, because they basically are. (Most people who believe that 8 Int is Talks-Like-Cookie-Monster-Can't-Tie-Their-Shoes don't seem to think that 12 Int means that you're an incredibly gifted savant who wows everybody with their intellect, even though it's the exact same difference.)

Absolutely. 8 is a only little below average, even if you cared a great deal about role-playing stats. You would only be "wrong" if you plopped down and 8 and went about playing your character as a genius. (Even then, if she had a high charisma, she could be pretending to be a genius!)

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app

 

[Caliban]

I guess I didn't quite get my complete point across - if someone joined our group, dumped Intelligence, and then proceeded to try to play a clever character it *would* be picked up on, gently at first, but a DM might for example, eventually insist the stats were rearranged to better suit the way the character is being played.

... because the numbers do exist when creating a character, his/her strengths and weaknesses, and so on...

I applaud you for continuing to indoctrinate new members in the proper ways of thinking and playing, comrade. Proper play cannot exist without proper thought. Those who think or play improperly must be made to change, for the good of all.

 

[Nathal]

I guess I didn't quite get my complete point across - if someone joined our group, dumped Intelligence, and then proceeded to try to play a clever character it *would* be picked up on, gently at first, but a DM might for example, eventually insist the stats were rearranged to better suit the way the character is being played.

... because the numbers do exist when creating a character, his/her strengths and weaknesses, and so on...

This. Exactly the point here. I wouldn't seek to make it a game stopping issue, because fighting ain't fun (unless I'm rolling against enemies) but it would personally annoy me. So I agree don't force people to play stats in a way that feels like a straightjacket, and don't make it a game killing issue, but at the same time, it feels odd to entirely ignore the numbers aside from what bonuses or penalties it grants to rolls. It would also be humorous for a player to roll a 6 INT, role-play the PC like a genius yet frequently fail on INT skill checks. Heh.

I feel like both sides of the issue have legit points. Gotta find the happy middle ground, which differs by group.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[JonnyP71]

Granted, 8 is only a little below average, but you should still play 'a little below average' - not blithering idiot, not genius, not even 'quite clever'.

But if, as most tables still do, you roll stats and get something like 16, 15, 13, 11, 10, 5 - and put the 5 as Intelligence, surely then you are talking about a character who at the very least, struggles to read and/or write. They may have a terrible memory and/or be incapable of adding up. They would certainly struggle to form a tactical plan!!!

In my old grognard head, to play an Int in the range of 3-6 as anyone other than intellectually lacking in some way is wrong.

edit - and thankfully I've yet to encounter any of the 'who cares how you arrange 'em, play whatever you want, stats only matter for bonuses so min/max away!' types who seem to chirp in here. We've never needed to address this issue at the table, because it seems, the quieter majority DO like to roleplay what they get in a sensible manner.

 

[JonnyP71]

This. Exactly the point here. I wouldn't seek to make it a game stopping issue, because fighting ain't fun (unless I'm rolling against enemies) but it would personally annoy me. So I agree don't force people to play stats in a way that feels like a straightjacket, and don't make it a game killing issue, but at the same time, it feels odd to entirely ignore the numbers aside from what bonuses or penalties it grants to rolls. It would also be humorous for a player to roll a 6 INT, role-play the PC like a genius yet frequently fail on INT skill checks. Heh.

Agreed, or my low Charisma Wizard who insists on doing the talking - who interrupts, belittles, and backchats anyone or anything he meets.

The game's a lot of fun when you create flaws, grab 'em by the scruff of the neck and roleplay them - regardless of optimal chance of success.

 

[76512390ag12]

First rule of internet forums: Don't feed the trolls.

Anyone who doesn't believe in numbers is an obvious troll.

Really? Am I 1 troll, a troll or 109kg of troll?

Sent from my SM-G901F using Tapatalk