Why is Min/Maxing viewed as bad?

[wayne62682]

Right, and I agree, but where is the line drawn? At what point does the DM have the right to step in and tell me what MY character should pick based on "something big" that happens along the way? For that matter, what constitutes "something big"?

librarius, the point I was making is that generally the people opposed to min/maxing are the ones who refuse to do it or aren't good at doing it, so they seem to think because THEY won't do it it's a sin for anyone else to do it. It's like someone saying "I'm not that great at football so you shouldn't play as good as you can because you'll show me up."

 

[DragonLancer]

I agree with most of what you say mate - but am going to take the opportunity to disagree with this one. I don't think planning a 20 level build for a campaign right from the start is a 'poor' style, but I do think that rigidly sticking to that plan in spite of what happens in the campaign is.

Agreed. Its a good idea to plot ideas for further down the campaign but players should be aware that unforeseen events and encounters may change the direction of the campaign and the character.

 

[Goblyn]

I agree with most of what you say mate - but am going to take the opportunity to disagree with this one. I don't think planning a 20 level build for a campaign right from the start is a 'poor' style, but I do think that rigidly sticking to that plan in spite of what happens in the campaign is. Yes plan where you think the character wants to go from the start, but if something big happens along the way then you should reflect that in your character. Rigidly sticking to your build to optimise the character in a way that doesn't reflect on what's happening in the game is (IMO) the difference between the roll and role of our hobby.

That said - I'm not opposed to min-maxing... absolutely you should work toward your character being as effective as he should be. But if the campaign has a significant impact on your character then a player should respect the effort their DM has put into the campaign enough that they will reflect it in their character.

Cool I have a hoard! I should probably get a horde to protect my hoard, unless all the available hordes have already been whored out.

Jeez, what the hell. I'm hijacking my own thread with nonsense.

 

[Felon]

"orthogonal" ? had to go look up that word LoL

Check out "vehical" while you're at it.

You seem to have complete missed the point lol

see my last post

Other than repeating what you said in your first post ad infinitum, and trotting out some dog-eared cliches like "that's not role-playing, that's roll-playing", you don't really have much of a point. For the "cart and horse" analogy to amount to anything more than pretention, you have to actually explain how playing the game the way you think it should be played constitutes the superior method, and other ways are backwards.

 

[librarius_arcana]

Right, and I agree, but where is the line drawn? At what point does the DM have the right to step in and tell me what MY character should pick based on "something big" that happens along the way? For that matter, what constitutes "something big"?

librarius, the point I was making is that generally the people opposed to min/maxing are the ones who refuse to do it or aren't good at doing it, so they seem to think because THEY won't do it it's a sin for anyone else to do it. It's like someone saying "I'm not that great at football so you shouldn't play as good as you can because you'll show me up."

Not trying to be rude or anything, but like I said "A munchkin can't even imagine that"

it is a completey different way of thinking


okay..simplest thing is

1) Explain what a "munchkin" is

2) Why this is seen as a bad thing

 

[Goblyn]

Right, and I agree, but where is the line drawn? At what point does the DM have the right to step in and tell me what MY character should pick based on "something big" that happens along the way? For that matter, what constitutes "something big"?

librarius, the point I was making is that generally the people opposed to min/maxing are the ones who refuse to do it or aren't good at doing it, so they seem to think because THEY won't do it it's a sin for anyone else to do it. It's like someone saying "I'm not that great at football so you shouldn't play as good as you can because you'll show me up."

While I did not intend for a debate on playstyles, I suppose that such is inevitable with such a question.

Anyway, I think now that part of the hatred for min/maxing is that it, like many(possibly all) gaming styles has varying definitions between gamers. I view it as a character trying really hard to be good at one thing, possibly and probably to the detriment of one or two other things; trying to be as 'effective' as possible overall is what I would consider powergaming, but maybe I'm just wrong in my understanding of the terms.

I believe 'munchkin' to be simply an insult used against powergamers and ocmbat min/maxers alike and not so much a gamer style classification.

Comments?

 

[Goblyns Hoard]

Wayne - that's impossible to say - each group, or rather each player needs to make up their own mind. As a DM i'll never force someone to build their character a certain way - though I will make suggestions about what I think is reasonable. I also do things like award bonus skill points in specific skills - enough to reflect what the characters would be picking up. This is mainly to reflect character development during long periods of downtime. When we spent 3 months of downtime in my current game the paladin spent most of his time helping the local farmers rebuild after the recent battle, so he got some points in profession farming and knowledge-local.

However if it comes down to it and I feel a player is breaking the feel of the game I spend a lot of time working on (and a lot more than the players do) then I won't invite them into the next game I run... that's my call

 

[Felon]

Not trying to be rude or anything, but like I said "A munchkin can't even imagine that" it is a completey different way of thinking

Yes, and you seem to have trouble respecting ways of thinking that differ from yours. Like most "purists", you are quick to deride and slap a label on others.

There's nothing inherently noble or great about making inefficient character choices. If a fighter wants to put his 16 in Charisma and his 10 in STR, then that's his choice, but how does it constitute some kind of superior approach to the game?

okay..simplest thing is

1) Explain what a "munchkin" is

Well, you're the one tossing the label around, so go ahead and explain. But you should try actually supporting your point-of-view rather than just stating it as if it were factual.

 

[Goblyns Hoard]

Cool I have a hoard!

My master you have returned at last... long have I waited for you.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Other than repeating what you said in your first post ad infinitum, and trotting out some dog-eared cliches like "that's not role-playing, that's roll-playing", you don't really have much of a point. For the "cart and horse" analogy to amount to anything more than pretention, you have to actually explain how playing the game the way you think it should be played constitutes the superior method, and other ways are backwards.

I'm just trying to work out whether librarius_arcana has the tongue firmly in cheek or not.
I'm getting a feeling not. (librarius_arcana: some clarification needed dude )
You see this is where these threads tend to fall apart. There's always someone who thinks that their way is the right or correct way and that other ways are inferior, silly or whatever. Just remember people that when it comes down to it, all you can do is voice your opinion. To cross the line where you pretend that your opinion is fact is stepping over the mark.

Surely the greatest thing about this hobby of ours is that so many people can enjoy it in so many ways. How can there be a wrong or inferior way of playing?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise