Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 7081058" data-attributes="member: 6775031">I guess we are disagreeing after all, then. I consider min-maxing to be synonymous with optimizing, where the former is adopted as a term of disparagement by those who find it as an illegitimate form of role-playing (for whatever reason). System mastery is just a term for how well a player understands the game mechanics, which is a pre-requisite if you want to optimize successfully, but the degree to which it matters is going to vary wildly between games and editions. Pathfinder has no real limit on the degree to which system mastery increases your ability to optimize; as you spend more and more time learning the system and its options, you can continue to build characters that are more and more optimized. Basic D&amp;D offers much lower benefit from system mastery, mostly because there are fewer moving parts and the player has fewer choices to make.If a character is optimized so efficiently that challenges are trivial, then I would say that's an inherent problem with the game, but that's only because I've moved beyond the part of the cycle where I appreciate spending countless hours poring over freshly-printed arcane tomes. I would rather play a game that doesn't reward system mastery to that extent. I would never think of making a weaker character than I could, though, because this is a group activity and the expectation is that every player will make an honest effort toward contributing to the common goal. If I'm going to play an archer, then I'm going to make the best darn archer that I possibly can, because I know that there may come a time when the whole campaign comes down to what I do, and I owe it to the group to give us the best possible shot at saving the world rather than dying horribly.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Crimson Binome, post: 7081058, member: 6775031"] I guess we are disagreeing after all, then. I consider min-maxing to be synonymous with optimizing, where the former is adopted as a term of disparagement by those who find it as an illegitimate form of role-playing (for whatever reason). System mastery is just a term for how well a player understands the game mechanics, which is a pre-requisite if you want to optimize successfully, but the degree to which it matters is going to vary wildly between games and editions. Pathfinder has no real limit on the degree to which system mastery increases your ability to optimize; as you spend more and more time learning the system and its options, you can continue to build characters that are more and more optimized. Basic D&D offers much lower benefit from system mastery, mostly because there are fewer moving parts and the player has fewer choices to make. If a character is optimized so efficiently that challenges are trivial, then I would say that's an inherent problem with the game, but that's only because I've moved beyond the part of the cycle where I appreciate spending countless hours poring over freshly-printed arcane tomes. I would rather play a game that doesn't reward system mastery to that extent. I would never think of making a weaker character than I could, though, because this is a group activity and the expectation is that every player will make an honest effort toward contributing to the common goal. If I'm going to play an archer, then I'm going to make the best darn archer that I possibly can, because I know that there may come a time when the whole campaign comes down to what I do, and I owe it to the group to give us the best possible shot at saving the world rather than dying horribly. [/QUOTE]

Verification