Why is Min/Maxing viewed as bad?

[Goblyn]

But the character is not created for that "role" if it was that would be fine,

but people create those types of characters simply because it gives the most system advantage, no other, which is all of the difference,

But I don't think the label for said people is 'min/maxers'. Possibly Abhorrent, sure, but I'm just talking about min/maxers. Or trying to

Edit: Hi, Rystil Arden!

 

[librarius_arcana]

Yes. The fact that it is a cliche means nothing about if the statement is valid or not. A cliche can be good or bad. It can be neither or be both good and bad at the same time.

Now you seem to "get it" so why focus on it being a cliche?,

does it matter one way or other, it only matters if it's true

 

[librarius_arcana]

...

WHAT?!?

Man, I shouldn't need to explain this,

okay, if it say in the book it's a rpg then it should be used as a rpg, not something else, sure you can use it in other ways, (but you could also turn the book in to a chopping board if you like) but it's meant to be played as, "a roleplaying game"

 

[FireLance]

The system is meant to be there to "SUPPORT CHARACTER PLAY" hence rpg, and not board game

And Coca-Cola was initially sold as medicine. However, its medicinal properties (if any) are not what made it popular. It's certainly not what it's used for these days.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Please reread my prev posts,

The system is meant to be there to "SUPPORT CHARACTER PLAY" hence rpg, and not board game

See, I have read your posts and it's difficult to get past the snark and you trying to be clever instead of stating pretty plainly what you mean in some of those cases. But I get enough of what your trying to say, I just disagree with you as do a few others here.

The system is there to be used to play a GAME. A Role-playing Game, but a game none the less. Characters are a componet of the game. If you dont have "characters" you dont have much of a game, although technically you can still play. How? Make a bunch of stats which by your terms would normally be "characters" and play wargame style or DDM style. You still have a game hence without characters.

Get rid of the game/system part, and you basically just have free-form acting. Which is cool, if that's what you want to do.

See that last part? The part where I didnt deride people for enjoying something that I may not particularly care for? That last part is important around these parts, it fosters dialouge and mutual respect as opposed to antagonism(sp?) and potential flame wars.

People with different play styles can co-exist as long as you dont tell each the other person that thier perspective style sucks.

 

[librarius_arcana]

And Coca-Cola was initially sold as medicine. However, its medicinal properties (if any) are not what made it popular.

That was fake, it had cocaine in it in those days so made people feel better,

and yes it did make it very popular,

 

[D.Shaffer]

I dont have a problem with Min/Maxing myself to a degree. However, when I DM, I try to make it clear I'd prefer my players to have characters who are more then just a collection of numbers and so long as they keep that in mind (And can explain some of the more interesting combos) I dont really have that much of an issue with it. I do warn the more combat focused builds that there's going to be times where they wont be fighting and to not complain about it if they take a pure fighting build. IE, no whining 'I dont get to do anything!' when they're sitting in the middle of a ballroom.

 

[OstogVin]

Well if I buy a can of beens, I expect "beens" to be in the tin,

Even if it is jellybeans?

 

[librarius_arcana]

See, I have read your posts and it's difficult to get past the snark and you trying to be clever instead of stating pretty plainly what you mean in some of those cases. But I get enough of what your trying to say, I just disagree with you as do a few others here.

No haven't been snarky yet, but it would be easy, ..must resist temptation, if I took these comments more seriously, I could get very snarky, it would be like shooting fish in a barrel

(yes another cliche)

The system is there to be used to play a GAME. A Role-playing Game, but a game none the less. Characters are a componet of the game. If you dont have "characters" you dont have much of a game, although technically you can still play. How? Make a bunch of stats which by your terms would normally be "characters" and play wargame style or DDM style. You still have a game hence without characters.

Get rid of the game/system part, and you basically just have free-form acting. Which is cool, if that's what you want to do.

See that last part? The part where I didnt deride people for enjoying something that I may not particularly care for? That last part is important around these parts, it fosters dialouge and mutual respect as opposed to antagonism(sp?) and potential flame wars.

People with different play styles can co-exist as long as you dont tell each the other person that thier perspective style sucks.

Okay going to say this for the last time, as it is labeled a "Roleplaying game" that is what it was desgined for, therefore "use" outside of "Roleplaying", is really a "misuse"

It may be doable, but doesn't make it right

 

[librarius_arcana]

Even if it is jellybeans?

if I was looking for jelly been that would be okay, but if expecting baked beens, not so good