Avoiding a player arms race. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Avoiding a player arms race. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
unrepentantweed
11-28-07, 07:28 AM It seems that in many groups there are some players that like to build their characters off of a concept. Others may focus on making their PC as real as possible. Then you have the players that want to min/max the ever loving hell out of their character.

The problem comes not just from the uber munchkins but the fact that the PCs are not in isolation. The players that did not optimize and say spent points in cooking and profession skill lose out. So you have players that will min/max their PCs just to avoid obsolescence. Every one loses it seems. PCs become less varied and distinct, players sacrifice their ideas for competitive power, and role playing gets compromised.

It doesn't really matter what system, white wolfs D10 storyteller system has the same arms race too, others like RIFTS...
From the crazy amount of effort at optimizing the last drop out of a build that I see on these and other boards I would say that the problem is greater than I thought.

what would you do to avoid the incentive to have this sort of power build up?
Zeffienes
11-28-07, 07:50 AM I run into the same problems.

Try limiting the PC's resources. As far as I know, a lot of munchkin builds require a good amount of magic items in order to prove to be effective (otherwise their build merely gives them a small edge). Additionally limit the amount of splatbooks. Also, require that the character have a roleplay reason as to why they would ever take xx class.

Additionally you can take it at a different angle. Instead of limiting the players, you could attune the battles so that certain characters will become immensely useful during the battle (as in a key component to victory) yet not the sole reason why the party was victorious. Since you are dealing with players whom fear obsolescence, try and gear them towards thinking that no matter what (apart from the most god-awful builds out there) they can still be useful.

'Course, take this with a grain of salt. I believe I count as a newbie amongst all the people here.
Lemurion
11-28-07, 08:23 AM There are a few things you can use to reward the role-players rather than the roll-players.

One thing that helps is changing the way you look at skill purchases. Think of each skill a player buys as a request for you to put something into the game. Put the players in a situation where they need a cook to solve a problem.

Try a scenario like this-- a horde of formians is overrunning the land and the only way to stop them is with a counter army that can be created with the Cauldron of Keridwen. Let the munchkins fight an infinite number of spawning formians while the cook deciphers the recipe to save the day.

If you find ways to reward skills and make pure combat optimization boring you'll see the munchkins move away from it.
icuall
11-28-07, 10:45 AM "The problem comes not just from the uber munchkins but the fact that the PCs are not in isolation. The players that did not optimize and say spent points in cooking and profession skill lose out. So you have players that will min/max their PCs just to avoid obsolescence. Every one loses it seems. PCs become less varied and distinct, players sacrifice their ideas for competitive power, and role playing gets compromised."

If a player want to include some flavor into his PC, I reward them extra XP, or they find items that further enhance the skills, following your example, like cookbooks, exotic spices, etc. Anything I'd know they would appreciate.

You never know when it might have an impact on your game. It also encourages other players to be more creative other than min/maxing. In my past games, it lead to a party with craft/professions of a chef, sculpter, and jeweler in addition to the their class. I never let it seem like a negative, I let them create and sell items and play with it.
TwistedPuppy
11-28-07, 10:59 AM While it is nice when players do round out their characters by spending a few points on skills that are not for combat, the DM then needs to make sure their effort isn't wasted by putting them in situations where those skills are useful.

Of course, the players need to keep an eye out for opportunities to use those skills too.
Dog_O_War
11-28-07, 11:06 AM Some people just don't want to make RP characters. If you think that people that do are "suffering from ineffectiveness" make more encounters for RP.

I was listening to one of the D&D pod-casts (I think it was 11 or 12; ofcourse I could be totally wrong), and one of the guys said that, "while it should take between 15 and 25 encounters to level up, what kind of encounters they are is too often combat." I heard that and the next part where he described that even RPing talking to the town mayor can be an experience worthy encounter. There is no direct challenge rating for this type of situation, so what he did was ad-hoc exp. based on how "tough" it was to be.

Include more of these encounters; include exp. for having a dimension, and give it to those that do. Not everyone can be Conan the Barbarian (who's top skills include killing and looting). Give the cook, who spreads life and joy everywhere he goes experience for plying a trade.

I think you'll see a quick reversal in what some players deem important.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
unrepentantweed 11-28-07, 07:28 AM	It seems that in many groups there are some players that like to build their characters off of a concept. Others may focus on making their PC as real as possible. Then you have the players that want to min/max the ever loving hell out of their character. The problem comes not just from the uber munchkins but the fact that the PCs are not in isolation. The players that did not optimize and say spent points in cooking and profession skill lose out. So you have players that will min/max their PCs just to avoid obsolescence. Every one loses it seems. PCs become less varied and distinct, players sacrifice their ideas for competitive power, and role playing gets compromised. It doesn't really matter what system, white wolfs D10 storyteller system has the same arms race too, others like RIFTS... From the crazy amount of effort at optimizing the last drop out of a build that I see on these and other boards I would say that the problem is greater than I thought. what would you do to avoid the incentive to have this sort of power build up?
Zeffienes 11-28-07, 07:50 AM	I run into the same problems. Try limiting the PC's resources. As far as I know, a lot of munchkin builds require a good amount of magic items in order to prove to be effective (otherwise their build merely gives them a small edge). Additionally limit the amount of splatbooks. Also, require that the character have a roleplay reason as to why they would ever take xx class. Additionally you can take it at a different angle. Instead of limiting the players, you could attune the battles so that certain characters will become immensely useful during the battle (as in a key component to victory) yet not the sole reason why the party was victorious. Since you are dealing with players whom fear obsolescence, try and gear them towards thinking that no matter what (apart from the most god-awful builds out there) they can still be useful. 'Course, take this with a grain of salt. I believe I count as a newbie amongst all the people here.
Lemurion 11-28-07, 08:23 AM	There are a few things you can use to reward the role-players rather than the roll-players. One thing that helps is changing the way you look at skill purchases. Think of each skill a player buys as a request for you to put something into the game. Put the players in a situation where they need a cook to solve a problem. Try a scenario like this-- a horde of formians is overrunning the land and the only way to stop them is with a counter army that can be created with the Cauldron of Keridwen. Let the munchkins fight an infinite number of spawning formians while the cook deciphers the recipe to save the day. If you find ways to reward skills and make pure combat optimization boring you'll see the munchkins move away from it.
icuall 11-28-07, 10:45 AM	"The problem comes not just from the uber munchkins but the fact that the PCs are not in isolation. The players that did not optimize and say spent points in cooking and profession skill lose out. So you have players that will min/max their PCs just to avoid obsolescence. Every one loses it seems. PCs become less varied and distinct, players sacrifice their ideas for competitive power, and role playing gets compromised." If a player want to include some flavor into his PC, I reward them extra XP, or they find items that further enhance the skills, following your example, like cookbooks, exotic spices, etc. Anything I'd know they would appreciate. You never know when it might have an impact on your game. It also encourages other players to be more creative other than min/maxing. In my past games, it lead to a party with craft/professions of a chef, sculpter, and jeweler in addition to the their class. I never let it seem like a negative, I let them create and sell items and play with it.
TwistedPuppy 11-28-07, 10:59 AM	While it is nice when players do round out their characters by spending a few points on skills that are not for combat, the DM then needs to make sure their effort isn't wasted by putting them in situations where those skills are useful. Of course, the players need to keep an eye out for opportunities to use those skills too.
Dog_O_War 11-28-07, 11:06 AM	Some people just don't want to make RP characters. If you think that people that do are "suffering from ineffectiveness" make more encounters for RP. I was listening to one of the D&D pod-casts (I think it was 11 or 12; ofcourse I could be totally wrong), and one of the guys said that, "while it should take between 15 and 25 encounters to level up, what kind of encounters they are is too often combat." I heard that and the next part where he described that even RPing talking to the town mayor can be an experience worthy encounter. There is no direct challenge rating for this type of situation, so what he did was ad-hoc exp. based on how "tough" it was to be. Include more of these encounters; include exp. for having a dimension, and give it to those that do. Not everyone can be Conan the Barbarian (who's top skills include killing and looting). Give the cook, who spreads life and joy everywhere he goes experience for plying a trade. I think you'll see a quick reversal in what some players deem important.