Why is Min/Maxing a bad thing?

[barsoomcore]

It would be possible for someone to play a fighter with the stats 18 18 18 4 4 4. That's what I mean by min/maxing.

Me, too. When a player puts extra-low values into abilities that they think won't affect gameplay.

So for example, you can put a 4 into Intelligence and then just PLAY your fighter intelligently. Since your fighter's not going to have to make many Int-based checks (and Intelligence doesn't affect any saves), you're not going to suffer that much, game-wise. Sure you don't get much in the way of skill points but you'll still get one per level. With your 18's in Str, Dex and Con that more than balances out.

Keep in mind I have nothing against a player creating incredibly stupid characters -- if they play them stupid. To me, that's just creating interesting characters. "Min/Max"-ing is what I call players trying to get bonuses by taking on penalties that won't affect them. Which is lame.

 

[jdavis]

A fighter taking power attack is not min/maxing, a Half Drow Ninja/Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger/Cleric who at 5th level decides he wants to be bitten by a wererat and/or become a vampire, because it would be cool, is min/maxing. Your fighter should be able to fight, your wizard better be good with spells, but if you have one guy who can do everything and turn into a dragon at will then why does he even need the rest of the party? The problem with min/maxing is that it tends to be addictive for many people, they don't want a really good fighter, they want a unstopable killing machine and they want it by 5th level. If everybody in the game is up for powergaming then there is no problem the sky is the limit (you all can be wererats or vampires) but if one guy is powergaming and the other 4 to 6 people want to roleplay out barganing for a good rate at the local inn, then you are going to have problems. Extreme cases are not all that rare when you talk about min/maxing, it's not a case of picking a couple of feats that help my fighter, it's characters who wish to create demi-gods of battle. Who would make a min/maxed diplomat character, or the greatest healer ever? What DM would complain, but the guy with 6 classes at 6th level and his father is King so he gets unlimited wealth to buy magic weapons, and his mother was a god who watches over him and he wants to become a Ninja in a Dark Ages Europe setting, ............ well you get the picture.

This was a actual character concept from a guy from several years ago, "Ninja, Master of Disguise, Hit Man, Senator from Hong Kong." Yes the guy was serious that was his concept for the character.

 

[Henry]

...a Half Drow Ninja/Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger/Cleric who at 5th level decides he wants to be bitten by a wererat and/or become a vampire, because it would be cool, is min/maxing.

Except that the hypothetical character above would probably want to get lycanthropy because he is being slaughtered in group combat due to his sloppy attempt at power-gaming. He's a lousy stealth character, he can't heal at a competent level for a mid level cleric, and he can't fight worth a darn for a 5th level warrior-type. If he doesn't get his lycanthropy, he's gonna die.

 

[kenjib]

Since we use point buy in my games, it would be possible for someone to play a fighter with the stats 18 18 18 4 4 4.

You would give extra points when they drop them below 8? My interpretation of the DMG is that they spend/get zero points for any score 8 or lower. If they want lower than 8 for roleplaying reasons, that's fine but they get no compensation in return. I don't mean to sidestep your point, but I think this is a mechanism already built into point buy to reduce this type of min/max behavior. Sorry for the tangent. I'm just wondering if I read that part of the book wrong.

 

[Mordane76]

I always focus my characters on one or two particular aspects or around a particular theme and in doing so end up min/maxing. The character, as a result, has strengths AND weaknesses. How is this a bad thing? How does this in any way detract from my ability to roleplay such a character? If anything, it gives me MORE to roleplay, not less because my character isn't some cookie-cutter, average Joe but rather a person with specific goals and aspirations.

So why is min/maxing a bad thing?

What you describe above doesn't bother me. What bothers me is the construction of a character that is ALL strengths and NO weaknesses, because that strikes me as completely unrealistic, and also as dull and drab from a literary standpoint. I want to see characters that can't answer EVERY question -- that's what a party is for, so that people rely on each other to be able to answer all the questions and meet all the challenges. Characters buffed out at every possible Ability and made to be unstoppable juggernauts of death-dealing are boring, boring, BORING.


Also -- the statements of characters with SUPER stats and SUPER non-stats that are not played luckily isn't happening as of late. The last time I saw this problem I was running World of Darkness... and those off-the-wall Flaws for points...

 

[F5]

The problem with min/maxing is that it tends to be addictive for many people

That's another good point. Once you've played an uber-character that's been tricked out in every concievable way, when you roll up your next character it's going to feel weak in comparison. If it's important to you to have the most powerful character possible, you're gonna be let down if the new one doesn't match up to the old one. So it escalates. Often to the point where the half-dragon template is involved...

PS: thanks for the kind words, Tallarn, but regardless of my justification I must go through the rest of my gamer days with the sobering knowlege that I took a level of ranger just for the 2x weapon fighting. Oh, the shame! But when I flank some poor fool and do 3d6 damage with both my weapon-finessed short swords at 4th level, I get over it...

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

PS: thanks for the kind words, Tallarn, but regardless of my justification I must go through the rest of my gamer days with the sobering knowlege that I took a level of ranger just for the 2x weapon fighting. Oh, the shame! But when I flank some poor fool and do 3d6 damage with both my weapon-finessed short swords at 4th level, I get over it...

You're welcome. I myself once created a cleric with a transmuter cohort just so that he could enter the battle with the following spells running:

Haste, divine favour, divine power, greater magic weapon, magic vestment twice (on armour and weapon), bless, divine shield and maybe a couple of others I can't remember. Probably endurance. So you're in good company.

 

[Sanackranib]

min/maxing

IMO anyone who has gamed for a while will min/max to a certin degree. the longer they have played the more likly this is to occur.

some combos work better togather so in the end min/maxing is about efficency. the more efficent the character the better its survivability and chance for mission success. one thing that I have always disliked about the class system in d&d (well since the 1st time I ever played champions anyway) is that its too rigid and structured. I like the ability to buy any special ability want to customize my character. in 3e this is done through multiclassing and PrC's

my current character as a player is a lev4 rogue/level2 fighter/level 1 temple raider/level1 lasher. that might seem extreme to some of you but that was the only way to build the character to do what I wanted (going for the Indianna Jones/relic hunter feel) I will have to continue to advance in 3 classes to mantain what I was going for (rogue and both PrC's) It meens I wont be as good as a rogue skill wize and with sneek attack though I hit better and have more feats. I'm not frontline material due to 5 levels of d6 hit points and so am a weaker fighter. these are both offset by the fact that I use a whip and get 2 attacks at +14/+9 from a roll playing standpoint the character has a rich background and history, but its min/maxed class and skill wize, and stat wize to the hilt. the really funny part is that my character is just what the group needs

 

[Henry]

...Once you've played an uber-character that's been tricked out in every concievable way, when you roll up your next character it's going to feel weak in comparison. If it's important to you to have the most powerful character possible, you're gonna be let down if the new one doesn't match up to the old one. So it escalates. Often to the point where the half-dragon template is involved...

In my experience, I don't see it, because each campaign/game is different. Some have high-power characters as standard, some have lower powered characters. It's all in the base level set when we play. But it is true the group has to match relative power, or it becomes the "Bill and his cohorts Story Hour..."

 

[kenjib]

Re: min/maxing

my current character as a player is a lev4 rogue/level2 fighter/level 1 temple raider/level1 lasher. that might seem extreme to some of you but that was the only way to build the character to do what I wanted (going for the Indianna Jones/relic hunter feel)

That's why I like the idea of letting players create their own new classes if the current ones don't work for their concept, so they don't have to jump through hoops like this.