Post/Author/DateTime	Post
hiroshimahamster 03-07-05, 08:50 AM	Right, I know this is probably nothing new, but one person I know is a complete powergamer. He is the only one in an entire group with good stats and his weapons are very powerful (moreso than the others). For example, one of the characters can only turn undead twice a day because of a low charisma. Come on! This certainly isn't fair. What should I tell the players to do to him, without doing away with him? I've been racking my brains for ages and can't come up with anything. Please help!
chocobochicken 03-07-05, 08:55 AM	It would help if you gave more specific examples of where his methods are interfering with your experience. All I can gather from your first post is that your party has a cleric who didn't know what to do with his Charisma.
likuidice 03-07-05, 09:15 AM	please list the levels and classes of your party, feats too if possible, just an overview. I tend to find that these groups are split due to players not building effective characters. Ie, the bard pc expects to fight as well as the fighter or barbarian, despite his class not being made for this niche. No one class can do everything. The "powergamer" you describe may have a powerful combat character, but its likely that he cant bluff, disable traps, identify monsters with any degree of usefulness. Is it fair on him (or her) that you might have better skills or spells than him, if its unfair that he can fight better than you? If your cleric has a low charisma, what does he expect? if you want to be good at turning, emphasise charisma. If you dont take the class/feats/put stats in the "right" places, why are you complaining that someone else is better than you at the niche he has chosen? choose a different path that doesnt conflict with the powergamers.
Solidcobra 03-07-05, 09:28 AM	Why are you mad at him? Praise him! The powergamer, and his powerful character, keeps your weak butts safe from the DMs wrath! You survive things you couldn't POSSIBLY survive without him. Unless he's an ass about it, selfish and tries to make the other partymembers worse to be relatively better, that's a munchkin. not a powergamer.
Cold Napalm 03-07-05, 01:41 PM	So from your post, you calling somebody a power gamer because the cleric player was stupid and made a bad cleric?!? Umm right...more details please or stop trolling.
Wizard 03-07-05, 03:42 PM	Hmmm...I think a list of check-offs for so-called "powergamers" that are just breaking the rules is in order. They'd include things like, "Have you applied his racial HD and LA to his ECL?" and "If he's a psionic character, you know he can only blow a # of points equal to his manifester level at once(no matter what), right?" Or maybe something like "You didn't happen to give him a point buy above 25, or a stat roll higher than 4d6 drop lowest, and then run him against monsters that were written using the above methods?" Hmm...I sense a long post coming sometime in the future.
viski 03-07-05, 04:22 PM	While I don't consider myself a powergamer, I do believe some optimization should be used to make a good character (unless, of course, you're looking for a challenge). There really isn't anything wrong with equiping the most suitable armor, or taking a penalty to str when all you're going to be doing is casting spells and it isn't in character to duke it out with your fists. Something is wrong when rules are horribly bent, broken or abused, but if the only problem you're running into is he is more useful than you, you should consider revamping the functionality of your character or make up for stat defeciencies in good roleplay. On a similar note, any good game or DM will recognize the talents of every chatacter. I can remember one game where the party ninja could take care of anything and everything combat, but the party bard was needed for any negociations(Please forgive my terrible spelling ^^;) with npcs, and was extremely useful in combat by using bardic music to boost everyone else's stats. Try not to focus on combat as the only source of usefulness in your character. There are far too many other aspects of a game to make that your focus. =)
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-07-05, 06:42 PM	Why are you mad at him? Praise him! The powergamer, and his powerful character, keeps your weak butts safe from the DMs wrath! You survive things you couldn't POSSIBLY survive without him. Unless he's an ass about it, selfish and tries to make the other partymembers worse to be relatively better, that's a munchkin. not a powergamer. same could be said about a powerfull DMPC who's constantly stealing the spotlight. Let's face it, the players (all of them) want to be heroes, not the powergamer's sidekicks. I powergamer doesn't deserve praises. He just had more time to lose making his character. Let's face it, some of us DO spend gazillions hours poring over their books looking for the most powerfull combos available. Should they be praised? Nope. THE question to ask is: Is the alleged powergamer substantially more powerfull than the group? If so, is it bothering the other players? If you answer yes, then the guy's a munchkin and deserve to be nerfed mercilessly. If not, no big deal. but in this case, I'd agree with the board... send us a bit more details. Can't really judge from what you told us.
UltimateReality 03-08-05, 01:16 AM	Right, I know this is probably nothing new, but one person I know is a complete powergamer. He is the only one in an entire group with good stats and his weapons are very powerful (moreso than the others). For example, one of the characters can only turn undead twice a day because of a low charisma. Come on! This certainly isn't fair. What should I tell the players to do to him, without doing away with him? I've been racking my brains for ages and can't come up with anything. Please help!A good point was made about the poor cleric being that player's fault, and not the so-called powergamer. With the very little info you've given us, I'm more inclined to guess that this "powergamer" is actually an expierienced player. Is the cleric's player new to the game? (BTW, he can always take the feat Extra Turning, or get a Cloak of Charisma.) As for what to do, assuming the player in question is simply better at min-maxing the rules: When he does stuff, ask why. Ask him to help with your guys' character generation. Figure out how and why he's doing this stuff, and learn from his example. Watch for where he screws up and learn from that too. (I.e., he may have a tricked out Barbarian, but check on his Will save -- a classic weak point of the class. If he's truly a good min-maxer he'll have a decent save.) Players who do "better" than others in D&D are generally very tactical. Some are tactical with the rules: they squeeze them for every last bit and end up with stuff that really is amazing. Others are tactical with the game: they know what the DM likes and rewards, and they consistently provide that while still maintaining a fun experience for themselves and the other players (usually DMs like other players having fun too). My fiance is more the first type, and I go for the second, although I'm picking up some of his skills.
Kulthos 03-08-05, 03:15 PM	Sounds like the good gamer needs to find a better group. The people who make up gimps and whine about the non-gimp are the problem, not the person who knows what he or she is doing.
Nuntius128 03-08-05, 09:46 PM	Yeah, I agree. Its nobodys fault that the 'powergamer' rolled well. Honestly, you'd think I were one too, the way I have rolled in the past. My first character didn't have anything lower than 13 rolled. I can't help it, the dice fell that way. Just like a friend of mine rolls really poorly, picks a fight with my character, and loses without doing any real meaningful damage. I'm not a powergamer, I just have good stats.
MadScientist!! 03-08-05, 10:37 PM	If someone rolls all 18's it isnt his fault (one reason I like point buy systems though, makes it more balanced). It seems like the character was more experienced and probably better, but unless I see something like the hulking hurler, I think it is probably your fault. If you made a halfling barbarian who wields a bastard sword, it isn't my fault that you were stupid. (unless you like it for RP reasons. If you put your lowest roll into strength, then you are truly stupid).
Encard 03-08-05, 11:25 PM	THE question to ask is: Is the alleged powergamer substantially more powerfull than the group? If so, is it bothering the other players? If you answer yes, then the guy's a munchkin and deserve to be nerfed mercilessly. If not, no big deal. Either he's a munchkin, or he's just the only one who made a character that wasn't totally useless in combat. From what little we know so far, I'd place my bets on the latter option. Now, honestly... So far we know that the character has good stats (which is completely unrelated to powergaming, most likely) and is more powerful than a cleric who sounds very poorly-designed. As for his weapons being more powerful... Well, we have no details there so far, but unless he's using some sort of broken abilities that weren't specified that'd be the DM's fault and not the player's. Here's my suggestion, hiroshimahamster: don't do anything to this player. Nothing you've told us indicates that he's done anything wrong; instead, it sounds like the other players just got unlucky and/or don't have a clue how to design decent characters. Is it fair that he's more powerful, based on those two factors? Yes, yes it is - dice give everyone an equal chance, and it seems rather silly to penalize him for being vaguely competent.
allenchan 03-08-05, 11:29 PM	:confused: How did he get better weapons then everyone else without having more money or the dm giving them to him???
Eytan 03-09-05, 01:25 PM	I'm inclined to agree with what most people are saying. More than one, I've played in situations like this. I'm an experienced player, having player for 14 years in 3 editions. I wouldn't call myself a powergamer, but I do like to build effective characters. I've played under a couple of GMs who, because they were control freaks or just completely inexperienced, changed all the rules, didn't play with some key points of the game, and didn't help the newbie players to make decent characters. The newbies complained that my TWF rogue was better than them. It's true that I rolled better and because we did random magic items (IMO that's a sign of a weird DM) I happened to get good stuff. So their Druid - and even a basic Druid is still powerful - sat around doing nothing. The cleric did nothing. The wizard was like me and thus we both ended up doing everything. We got constant complaints that the PCs didn't know what they were doing. This whole time, I was also trying to emphasize roleplaying, not sitting around eating. After a year of playing every week and still being only 7th level, I quit. I couldn't take the whining and unwillingness to learn - nor can I stand GMs that change absolutely everything about the game (get rid of AoO, make it so you have to earn an extra level of experience to go up, no flanking). I've had another experience recently that is somewhat similar. The players aren't quite as green, though still green. The DM is a bit better with RPing, but is still a control freak. I made a whisper gnome rogue/warlock. We had a big combat against a band of halfling thieves, one of which used a wand of lightning. I was the only one who attacked out of the 5 characters for 6 rounds. So of course I looked great. Our invoker could have ended the battle in 1 or 2 rounds. I am really thinking of leaving this one too. I am currently in a really remote area, so it's next to impossible to find games. If players are inexperienced, they should be willing to learn, or just shut up about it. I guess I have to say that I don't have a terrible lot of patience for new gamers. It's not a great trait in a gamer, but I prefer to play in a game where rules are known so they are not important.
DM Denubis 03-09-05, 05:23 PM	Wait... Hold the phone. You're saying that it's this guy's fault that your cleric put an eight or a nine in Charisma? Look, I understand that it can be fairly annoying to be overshadowed in combat, but if your cleric's olayer put a nine into Charisma, there are some problems with the rest of the players. You know what? The other day, someone on this board said that a powegamer is simply defined as anyone better than you. And you know what? A few of us laughed. But the sad thing is, it's becoming a reality. People are constantly blaming someone else for their own ineffectiveness in combat. Well, guess what? If you're a full plate wearing, greatsword toting wizard, you can expect that you're going to be fairly ineffective in combat. If you put your cleric's lowest score into Charisma, you can expect him to be terrible at turning undead. But obviously, if a well-built barbarian comes around, he's powergaming because he's actually fairly effective in combat. Look, I'm not saying my way of playing is the best. There's no way to best play the game. Go and make your wizards with a higher strength score than an intelligence score. Have fun. Maybe you'll enjoy it. But you know what? Don't blame the fact that you're weak on other party members. You knew the boat you were getting into when you first laid eyes upon it. If you want to learn how to build somewhat effective characters, ask experienced players. Don't ask them to make your character, ask them to teach you how to do it yourself. If you don't want to learn, don't complain that someone can build a halfway decent character. A character that can fight decently with good weapons is not powergamed. It's effective. I can get 9th level arcane and divine spells by level 20. I can make a Thri-Kreen throw thirty daggers a turn, and apply Sneak Attack to all of them, along with his intelligence bonus. And here's the great thing... I'm only a DECENT powergamer. There are people who can make a character that can break one trillion damage with a single attack. (I'm not bragging, just giving examples.) And this one's for everyone. Think twice before slinging the word powergamer around, would you?
sirgar 03-10-05, 06:34 AM	Why is the term powergamer such a stigma, anyways? I am a "power gamer/min-maxer" and proud of it. I read through rules books and manuals to find the best combination for what I want the character to do. Often, I create combinations I want to see in the game to see how effective they are. I will pour through all the possible accessory books to see every possible feat chain, skill set, and magic item possible to get what I want. Then I build a story around that character. I simply have another way to do things. Why exactly does this impede on other people's fun? I say that's the OTHER person's problem. When they curse and cry and complain that I spent a week creating my character because I wanted it to be the best it can be, it ruins MY fun. How about THAT, eh?
GoofsterStud 03-10-05, 11:53 AM	Right, I know this is probably nothing new, but one person I know is a complete powergamer. He is the only one in an entire group with good stats and his weapons are very powerful (moreso than the others). For example, one of the characters can only turn undead twice a day because of a low charisma. Come on! This certainly isn't fair. What should I tell the players to do to him, without doing away with him? I've been racking my brains for ages and can't come up with anything. Please help! He is a power gamer and he is not using his turning attempts to do Divine Metamagic Persistant? :-P If he was a true power gamer he would have it!
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-10-05, 06:25 PM	Why is the term powergamer such a stigma, anyways? I am a "power gamer/min-maxer" and proud of it. I read through rules books and manuals to find the best combination for what I want the character to do. Often, I create combinations I want to see in the game to see how effective they are. I will pour through all the possible accessory books to see every possible feat chain, skill set, and magic item possible to get what I want. Then I build a story around that character. I simply have another way to do things. Why exactly does this impede on other people's fun? I say that's the OTHER person's problem. When they curse and cry and complain that I spent a week creating my character because I wanted it to be the best it can be, it ruins MY fun. How about THAT, eh? If everybody does as you do, fine, no problems. If you're the only one, there IS a problem. One player's fun ruin a group's fun and a DM's fun? A single player's right to have fun cease where the other's right to have fun begin. Making a powergamed character means making it as powerfull as possible (wether you go to a munchkin's lenght or not is a matter of degree). Effectively, your PC's gonna be more powerfull than an ordinaruPC of the same level. Let's say you powergamed enough so that you can easily beat challenge ratings 3 level higher than yours (not at all uncommon). You're effectively 3 level higher as far as power is concerned. Now, would you accept it if a player said: since I know the loopholes and the combos better than you gguys, I'm gonna make a PC 3 level higher than you. Probably not. You wouldn't think it's fair and you wouldn't like having the spotlight constantly on the same character. As for the "hard work" and "better knowledge" argument, I don't buy it. You devoted a whole week to create a PC as powerfull as you could. make it. Some of us happen to have other things to do beside spending untold hour designing the mechanics of a PC. Should we cease to care about play balance merely because you've bought more books and have more free time than the rest of the group? nope.
sirgar 03-10-05, 06:37 PM	If everybody does as you do, fine, no problems. If you're the only one, there IS a problem. One player's fun ruin a group's fun and a DM's fun? A single player's right to have fun cease where the other's right to have fun begin. Making a powergamed character means making it as powerfull as possible (wether you go to a munchkin's lenght or not is a matter of degree). Effectively, your PC's gonna be more powerfull than an ordinaruPC of the same level. Let's say you powergamed enough so that you can easily beat challenge ratings 3 level higher than yours (not at all uncommon). You're effectively 3 level higher as far as power is concerned. Now, would you accept it if a player said: since I know the loopholes and the combos better than you gguys, I'm gonna make a PC 3 level higher than you. Probably not. You wouldn't think it's fair and you wouldn't like having the spotlight constantly on the same character. As for the "hard work" and "better knowledge" argument, I don't buy it. You devoted a whole week to create a PC as powerfull as you could. make it. Some of us happen to have other things to do beside spending untold hour designing the mechanics of a PC. Should we cease to care about play balance merely because you've bought more books and have more free time than the rest of the group? nope. You still haven't told me why my pouring over books and finding just the right mechanics and "loopholes" (a loose term if ever there was one) to make my character perform as though he was 3 levels higher ruins other people's fun OR the DM's fun. You use the example "What if I just made a character 3 levels higher" Well that arguement is moot. If my PC is the exact same level as your PC, but mine performs his/her job better than you do at your role, WHY does that ruin your fun, exactly? Unless YOU feel inferior, and that's YOUR problem, not mine. You created your character because you wanted a dwarf fighter with a strength of 10 and a phobia of anything with scales because it would make a good story. Fine, do that if you want to. Play the PC as you designed him. I created my elven warlock to maximize use of his Eldritch Blast and help out the fighter in melee combat. We are fighting Yuan-Ti, and the dwarf fighter is cowering in a corner soiling his armor. Why am I making ANYONE's day/session any less fun because I can take a couple hits due to my stat allocation and use my Eldritch Blast up close because I took the right feats so the snakemen wouldn't be able to AoO me in combat? I still have not heard one single valid arguement of "You ruined MY fun because...<insert facts here>
Roguemaster39 03-10-05, 07:37 PM	There is a simple quick save to never let this happen again. If you looked in the Dungeon Master's Guide it shows an alternate way to do stats (besides the luck of dice). The other method is this: All of the characters stats start at 8 and are give between 23 and 28 points (depending on the campaign difficulty). They must spend there points according to these stipulations: To increase a stat to a nine it costs 1 point to a 10-2 points 11-3 points 12-4 pts 13-5pts 14-6 pts 15-8 pts 16-10 pts 17-13 pts 18-16 pts This will make sure no character is to powerful. I've used this method for 3 campaigns and its worked out beutifully. Characters begin to rely on each others help rather than 1 extremely strong character do all the work. Edit: To correct the problem in game, put in tasks that rely on an individual's skills and talents and not brute force. EX) A trap ridden dugeon requires a rogue, or even some locked doors that can't be broken through. Even a pure long range battle can do the trick...its all about the DM to solve problems like these.
sirgar 03-10-05, 08:37 PM	Ahh, the challenges of a min/maxer. Ability Scores? Who was talking about ability scores!?! I will simply take Feats that make up for it, stack ranks on skills that make up for ability checks, try to tailor my gear/magic items to suit me, etc....there are almost INFINITE ways for a player to get around ability scores. The only way to stop powergamer PC's? A stubborn DM. If he's the only DM around, you play by his rules or you don't play. (Mini Max) : Hey Gary can I have a half-drow half-tiefling with the insectile template and use the Unearthed Arcana rules to buy back the Level Adjustment, thereby giving my ability scores ungodly boosts for no penalty? (Gary) : No. (Mini Max) : Ummm well then can I...... (Gary) : No. I said PHB races/classes only, unless you give me a one-page essay on why your Warlock fits into the campaign that we have ALL approved prior to the gaming session. You have not done so. Try again. I think we can all get the point I am trying to make. If your DM allows it, its really HIS fault for allowing us to min/max as we see fit. If he gives us guidelines to work by, we will put our min/max skills to use within his parameters, satisfying our need to tweak/twink and satisfying his requirements.
UltimateReality 03-11-05, 12:36 AM	One player's fun ruin a group's fun and a DM's fun? A single player's right to have fun cease where the other's right to have fun begin. So if everyone else whines that my perfectly legal min-maxed (not even powergamed) character is ruining their fun because they can't build effective characters and have no interest in learning how, I should intentionally gimp mine so they're all happy? :censored: that. Effectively, your PC's gonna be more powerfull than an ordinary PC of the same level. Let's say you powergamed enough so that you can easily beat challenge ratings 3 level higher than yours (not at all uncommon). You're effectively 3 level higher as far as power is concerned. In some areas -- not all. Part of min-maxing and powergaming is choosing something to be good in, and trying to make everything else not suck. If you can get yourself toa +3 LA equivalent, your DM has probably given you godly gold, xp, MagicMart access, or stat gen. Otherwise, you have to specialize. Everything's a tradeoff. As an example, I just built a drow rogue/bard, ECL 5 with 32 point buy, whose final modifier to Diplomacy is 17. The rest of my skills are pretty godly too, and I've got something like 22 of them that have a +5 or better total modifier due to feats, racial bonuses, synergies, etc. My Charisma is through the roof and I have a ton of skills with +13 and +15 to them. My AC, though? 17. Hit points? 16 (I rolled real good). I rely on the party to support me when it comes to combat. They rely on me to fast-talk my way into and out of any situation. Now, would you accept it if a player said: since I know the loopholes and the combos better than you gguys, I'm gonna make a PC 3 level higher than you. No. What I would do is ask him how to pimp out my PC so I was as effective as his. And it wouldn't be the player saying it, it'd be the DM giving it to him for free. (Slight difference, but meh.) As for the "hard work" and "better knowledge" argument, I don't buy it. You devoted a whole week to create a PC as powerfull as you could. make it. Some of us happen to have other things to do beside spending untold hour designing the mechanics of a PC. Should we cease to care about play balance merely because you've bought more books and have more free time than the rest of the group? nope.Should we be penalized for the amount of time we put into building our character AND developing our personalities and backstories? Nope. Hey, I work 30 hours a week, take classes full time, soon will be tutoring ESL for landed immigrants, planning my wedding, and I still manage to make a not-ass character. It's not that hard. You can do it too....
On_the_wings_of_TPK 03-11-05, 12:46 AM	If you're the only one, there IS a problem. One player's fun ruin a group's fun and a DM's fun? A single player's right to have fun cease where the other's right to have fun begin. So....let's say you, me, and a friend are playing tag. I'm a fat, lazy bastard so I can't run fast, and my friend has arthritis in his knees. You, however, put the hard work in and train to run marathons. In order for the game to be fair and fun for the majority of people (i.e. us), we should kneecap you or break your shin. Sound fair?
sirgar 03-11-05, 12:55 AM	Here, here. Glad to hear that some people agree with me. Why should I have to gimp my character just because I put extra effort into creating it? I have a life too, I am in the military stationed overseas, work 12 hour days most of the time, go to school to get my degree, spend a day a week camera-conferencing with my son back in the states, and have about a 16 hour day each week actually PLAYING D&D. So, yeah, anyone can have time to put the effort into their character and their story if they apply themselves. You chose Monkey Grip and Weapon Proficiency for your wizard because honor demands that he carry and use his half ogre great grandfather's greatsword for his entire life? That's fine, its a wonderful story and has great character. But should my Rogue be penalized because he chose Weapon Finesse and Two Weapon Fighting in order to dual wield daggers more efficiently? I think not, and I think many people would agree with me.
Wizard 03-11-05, 12:56 AM	/\ II II II Aww...that's what you call true love. :D (Yes, I'm aware that I'm a snot.) I agree completely. "Oh---you're playing a cleric with Wis 8? Well, gosh, it would really be unfair of me to put some points into STRENGTH, heaven forbid. I mean---wow, it adds a point to hit AND to damage! I think I'll put this scary 'PHB' down and go work on my backstory." If other players have an inferiority complex, that's their problem. If the "powergamer" (Oh, those scary people!) strays into munchkinhood or some ridiculous background, then it's both the player's (as in singular: the guy playing the fittest---and I use that term on purpose---PC)and the DM's problem. In other words---players, you can check my character sheet over, but if the books and the DM agree that it's legal, stay the **** away.
sirgar 03-11-05, 01:00 AM	A single player's right to have fun cease where the other's right to have fun begin. By the way, what exactly does this mean, anyways....? I am confused. Does that mean because I have fun playing my "engineered" character, other people will not have fun playing what they created with backstory? That's rubbish. If they are not having fun playing what they made up, then they should take the character in a different direction, or create a new character, or rework the character to the original intent of the player, if the DM allows it.
Kulthos 03-11-05, 01:04 AM	What I can't stand is DMing a group that makes terrible characters. When the monk has a str of 12 and the entire party of 4th level characters can't hurt something with a DR of 10, I know I need to nerf down every encounter to avoid a TPK. I offered the monk to exchanhe his high int score with his low str, but he refused. This same monk whines about not being able to hit anything, BTW.
sirgar 03-11-05, 01:28 AM	If the "powergamer" (Oh, those scary people!) strays into munchkinhood or some ridiculous background, then it's both the player's...and the DM's problem. Yes, but that's where the confusion lies. Lets clarify here that powergamers (or min/maxers, if you prefer) are NOT always munchkins. Munchkins are there simply to dominate character creation. To have the entire campaign focus on them because their PC can do EVERYTHING better than your PC can do. I will agree that THAT ruins everyone's fun and is detrimental to any campaign/gaming group. Powergamers (Min/Maxers) are there to simply create the best possible PC they can in whatever parameters their DM decides is legal. They do it for their own enjoyment, to see if certain spell/race/class combinations will be effective, and to test the limits of the rules and loopholes presented in official WotC materials, INCLUDING official errata from this board and from the WotC site. Here's an example of the differences between the terms, using allocation of a Barbarian's attribute scores as an example..... Powergamer: Applies points to attributes to maximize combat effectiveness STR 16 DEX 16 CON 18 INT 10 WIS 8 CHA 8 Munchkin: Spreads points to attributes he knows will be used in the game such as Spot, Listen, Search, Concentration, etc... STR 14 DEX 14 CON 16 INT 16 WIS 12 CON 4
sirgar 03-11-05, 01:44 AM	What I can't stand is DMing a group that makes terrible characters. When the monk has a str of 12 and the entire party of 4th level characters can't hurt something with a DR of 10, I know I need to nerf down every encounter to avoid a TPK. I offered the monk to exchanhe his high int score with his low str, but he refused. This same monk whines about not being able to hit anything, BTW. I say bring on the TPK! j/k I have to say that yes, you may need to scale down your campaign to not completely wipe the party. Tailor it to be challenging, for sure, but try not to TPK if you can help it. Although, that monk may have benefitted from high wisdom or strength instead of high intelligence, so if he gets himself into a situation where it gets him killed, go over the death with the player and explain to him why the monk could have survived with just a bit more STR, or a few more hp with higher CON, etc.....remember, too, that its all about having fun. Perhaps having the smartest monk in the world was fun for him, but the rest of the party may have suffered if there were no other fighters. You can't please everyone all the time.
UltimateReality 03-11-05, 01:55 AM	Powergamers (Min/Maxers) are there to simply create the best possible PC they can in whatever parameters their DM decides is legal. They do it for their own enjoyment, to see if certain spell/race/class combinations will be effective, and to test the limits of the rules and loopholes presented in official WotC materials, INCLUDING official errata from this board and from the WotC site. I've found that min-maxers and powergamers often start with a specific character concept as well, and see how effective they can make it within the rules provided. Min-maxers will complain for a short while if you take away source material, but they will quickly adapt to the challenge: and that's what it all is. A challenge. What combinations best fit my concept and make it the most effective mechanically? STR 16 DEX 16 CON 18 INT 10 WIS 8 CHA 838 point buy, hmm? I'd lower the Con to 16 -- I get godly hit dice, after all -- and up that Wisdom to at least a 12, probably a 13 or 14. Dump the leftovers in Charisma so you don't scare off normal people. DMs love to throw Will saves at barbarians...Also, someone has to make the Survival checks when the ranger and druid are absent. Also good for flavour reasons, as I think of barbarians as fairly intuitive fighters -- not a lot of formal training, but a lot of experience.
sirgar 03-11-05, 02:01 AM	But, according to my very last post, you would fall into the category of MUCHKIN! You are thinking METAGAME instead of IN-CHARACTER. You're a BARBARIAN, you aren't SUPPOSED to have a good will save. Also, if you are the one making the survival checks because the ranger and druid are "absent", then something is wrong with your party. Although I would agree with the WISDOM flavor story...Barbarians are cunning combatants. That's why they get Uncanny Dodge.
hiroshimahamster 03-11-05, 05:00 AM	Most of you lot seem to think that I'm sore because I rolled low a few times. But tell me this: how does a 1st level elf get 18 con? Huh? My wizard ended up with 11 at 1st level but she's still around! :mad: The player is a fighter 4/sorcerer 2 so he's ok in combat, but not so good in combat. Fair enough. He seems to think he's part rogue though, and if the rogue can do sleight of hand, so can he. If the rogue goes off stealing, so does he. It's not on. I admit my necromancer often goes off with the rogue, but only to magic him up a bit :mage: and cause distractions so he can do his job better. I've nothing personal against the player himself, just the way he plays his characters. All off them are uber and he seems to think that stats are more important than the process of giving the character life! :rant: This is the third time we've had this happen from him and it's not just me that has had enough. While the rest of us are using the basic player's handbook, he's off using the extensions getting items and spells that not of us have ever even heard of. The DM is unhappy too, but he hasn't got the confidence to say so to his face. The player always creates his characters in private, and when you do see him rolling, he can turn an 8 into an 18 quick as a flash. He is always trying to steal the thunder from the other characters and he wonders why his characters meet a sticky end, often the result of the other party members in some way. Oh, and that cleric is a half-orc. His player is a bit strange but even so, thinks that he can roleplay his character better that way - how many half-orcs do you know that are oozing with charisma? After that small rant, I think I'll go stick my head in a bucket of water... :twitch:
sirgar 03-11-05, 05:34 AM	Most of you lot seem to think that I'm sore because I rolled low a few times. But tell me this: how does a 1st level elf get 18 con? Huh? My wizard ended up with 11 at 1st level but she's still around! :mad: The player is a fighter 4/sorcerer 2 so he's ok in combat, but not so good in combat. Fair enough. He seems to think he's part rogue though, and if the rogue can do sleight of hand, so can he. If the rogue goes off stealing, so does he. It's not on. I admit my necromancer often goes off with the rogue, but only to magic him up a bit :mage: and cause distractions so he can do his job better. I've nothing personal against the player himself, just the way he plays his characters. All off them are uber and he seems to think that stats are more important than the process of giving the character life! :rant: This is the third time we've had this happen from him and it's not just me that has had enough. While the rest of us are using the basic player's handbook, he's off using the extensions getting items and spells that not of us have ever even heard of. The DM is unhappy too, but he hasn't got the confidence to say so to his face. The player always creates his characters in private, and when you do see him rolling, he can turn an 8 into an 18 quick as a flash. He is always trying to steal the thunder from the other characters and he wonders why his characters meet a sticky end, often the result of the other party members in some way. Oh, and that cleric is a half-orc. His player is a bit strange but even so, thinks that he can roleplay his character better that way - how many half-orcs do you know that are oozing with charisma? After that small rant, I think I'll go stick my head in a bucket of water... :twitch: After translating that into my version of english, I have come up with a few things.... One: He is definitely a munchkin. He has to be the center of focus, so he tweaks and plays his character as such, not letting anyone else receive the spotlight. Two: It sounds like your entire group is inexperienced, including your DM and he might be a veteran player of some years. This often can lead to strife. Three: Its just as much YOUR faults for not curbing this player's behavior as it is his for acting that way. Not once did you mention that you or any of your other players OR your DM has talked to him about this behavior. He doesn't seem to KNOW you are all unhappy about this. Four: Are YOU all limiting yourselves to the PHB because you don't know or don't have any of the other books? If that's the case, you could ASK him about the books to explore and do a bit of your own research. If it's NOT the case, then its not his fault for seeking outside sources for his character. If your DM says PHB only, then its PHB only. My rule is that you can do whatever you want with whatever parameters I have set for the group, as long as DM gets final character approval over EVERYTHING. If your DM doesn't set the limits for his own campaign, you should talk to him about that. Five: Are you rolling straight ability scores? Meaning, first roll is always put to strength, second roll is dex, third roll is con, etc.....?? If so, how is he tweaking his ability scores to create his character? If he's cheating, CONFRONT HIM or have the DM do it. Six: He shouldn't be getting any ITEMS you haven't heard about unless the DM gave it to him or he has enough money to afford it. These items also really shouldn't be kept a secret, because that causes tension between the other players and the player in question or the DM. Solution: You, or your DM, or preferably your entire group, needs to grow a spine and confront this person on how his play style makes you feel. Explain to him that his character has a certain ROLE to PLAY (go figure, you are roleplaying...) and not to overstep his boundaries. If his role is secondary thief/trapfinder, then that's different....let the boy find the traps when the Rogue's not around....but...if you are simply angry because he always maximizes the potential of his characters through ability scores, skills, and feats, then you have no real standing to change him. Some people, myself included, simply do that all the time, to all our characters. I build my character FIRST, tweak the stats, and THEN make the story later. Its simply how I do things. Is it wrong?? Certainly not. Just different. Why this makes YOU feel inferior is a different problem. If this person, through his character, is TRYING to make you feel inferior, or himself superior, then that is his fault. If you simply feel inferior because you kept yourself to the PHB/basic books for simplicity, then that's on YOU...
hiroshimahamster 03-11-05, 06:44 AM	After translating that into my version of english, I have come up with a few things.... One: He is definitely a munchkin. He has to be the center of focus, so he tweaks and plays his character as such, not letting anyone else receive the spotlight. I agree. Two: It sounds like your entire group is inexperienced, including your DM and he might be a veteran player of some years. This often can lead to strife. Actually, I've been roleplaying since I was 13. This is quite long enough, don't you think? Three: Its just as much YOUR faults for not curbing this player's behavior as it is his for acting that way. Not once did you mention that you or any of your other players OR your DM has talked to him about this behavior. He doesn't seem to KNOW you are all unhappy about this. All the players HAVE spoken to him. It's DM that's the nervous one. Four: Are YOU all limiting yourselves to the PHB because you don't know or don't have any of the other books? If that's the case, you could ASK him about the books to explore and do a bit of your own research. If it's NOT the case, then its not his fault for seeking outside sources for his character. If your DM says PHB only, then its PHB only. My rule is that you can do whatever you want with whatever parameters I have set for the group, as long as DM gets final character approval over EVERYTHING. If your DM doesn't set the limits for his own campaign, you should talk to him about that. None of us others can afford to get all the books. When we do ask to look, he says no. The DM doesn't like it, but he has known the player for many years and doesn't want to cause trouble. Five: Are you rolling straight ability scores? Meaning, first roll is always put to strength, second roll is dex, third roll is con, etc.....?? If so, how is he tweaking his ability scores to create his character? If he's cheating, CONFRONT HIM or have the DM do it. No. We roll the scores 8 times and discard the lowest and highest ones then decide where they go. Six: He shouldn't be getting any ITEMS you haven't heard about unless the DM gave it to him or he has enough money to afford it. These items also really shouldn't be kept a secret, because that causes tension between the other players and the player in question or the DM. He come up with all this background to explain away and the sad truth is the DM is a bit of a pushover. Solution: You, or your DM, or preferably your entire group, needs to grow a spine and confront this person on how his play style makes you feel. Explain to him that his character has a certain ROLE to PLAY (go figure, you are roleplaying...) and not to overstep his boundaries. He makes us all feel like rubbish sometimes. If his role is secondary thief/trapfinder, then that's different....let the boy find the traps when the Rogue's not around....but...if you are simply angry because he always maximizes the potential of his characters through ability scores, skills, and feats, then you have no real standing to change him. Some people, myself included, simply do that all the time, to all our characters. I build my character FIRST, tweak the stats, and THEN make the story later. Its simply how I do things. Is it wrong?? Certainly not. Just different. Why this makes YOU feel inferior is a different problem. If this person, through his character, is TRYING to make you feel inferior, or himself superior, then that is his fault. The rogue is good enough - see the thread "To kill a sorcerer". This is the same rogue as in this one. He always has to have the best stats, items and spells, so we do all feel inferior. We like the element of roleplaying the character we created, give them little quirks and the stats are a sideline. Oh, and don't say I "rise from the dead" - my wizard's a necromancer. That's just what she would do. That bucket of water needs refilling... I need to put my head in it again.
sirgar 03-11-05, 08:56 AM	It sounds like your DM is giving favor to this person because he's a known friend. That is NO GOOD for an adventuring party. If you others cannot afford to buy the books, and Mr. Munchkin won't let you look at them, have your DM disallow all but the core books (PHB,DMG,MM). That way ALL players will be on an even keel, and this guy won't get any favoritism. If the DM won't budge, and won't speak up for the group, you may have to get a new group. Sad but true, not all groups work out. Its not worth ripping your hair out over.
Daefyre 03-11-05, 10:04 AM	Ok, here's how you take care of 'em...Powergamers like power, am I right? Well, here's a little trick I read about, some time ago. First, the gamers that you get along with and yourself need to obtain a dead person's head and locate a deep long cave(Make sure the powergamer is off killing some orcs or something, while you do this). Set the head on a pedestal in the back of the cave and set some convincing traps on your way out. Hire some bards to tell stories about "The Head of Vectra". Sooner or later this powergamer will here the tales of Vectra's head and will want to go find it. Hire a blind begger to sit outside y'all's tavern and claim to have a map to "Vectra's secret cave". Let the powergamer get the map from the begger (the powergamer should be really excited by now). When you "find"the head make a little fuss 'bout who gets to try it on, but let the powergamer win. Lop off his head and laugh.
sirgar 03-11-05, 10:39 AM	I'm sorry, there's no other way to describe that. First of all, plotting to kill a member of your own team is an unspeakably evil act, and for those that are simply neutral, I would question an alignment shift for doing so. So far all this character has really done is show off a lot. He didn't lead anyone in the party to their deaths, he hasn't caused catastrophic plot failure, nothing. Just be a litte overzealous. So you.....kill him? Secondly , this fellow is a munchkin, not to be confused with powergamer, see above post by me. Anyone who thinks they are the same is either inexperienced at gaming with each one, or simply ignorant and doesn't care to distinguish. Either perspective is awfully closed minded and would cause me to question my judgement to play with you. Munchkins ruin the fun of others by placing THEIR fun paramount over everyone and everything. Powergamers (min/maxers) simply have optimized characters. Thirdly, doesn't tricking him and ruining HIS fun kinda put you in the same shoes and make you just as bad? I mean, I am all about fighting fire with fire, but that's going a bit far. *disregard this entire post if the above post was a sarcastic joke....hehe*
UltimateReality 03-11-05, 10:58 AM	You are thinking METAGAME instead of IN-CHARACTER. You're a BARBARIAN, you aren't SUPPOSED to have a good will save.If you're a barbarian and you've survived in the wilderness with a low Int, Wis, and Cha....you're either very lucky or everything is afraid to come within 50 miles of you. If you're not smart and you survive, it stands to reason that you're either blessed by the gods, or extremely intuitive and react well to situations -- hence, high Wis. Will my Wisdom be as good as a Cleric or Druid? No. Should it be? Not generally speaking. Also, if you are the one making the survival checks because the ranger and druid are "absent", then something is wrong with your party.You got it. I just always wanted to see a barbarian beat the pants off a druid or ranger in that area. ;P No one ever thinks of the Barbarian as having Survival as a useful skill... In any case, if I was a munchkin, I'd be focussing instead on bumping Str-Dex-Con up to 18 at first level if possible, and getting insane magic items (mostly weapons and armor, and then Str and Dex boosters) first. Also, I don't think I've ever played a barbarian as a PC. Ever. So I don't know a whole lot about them (not that there's much to figure out :P).
sirgar 03-11-05, 11:08 AM	If you're a barbarian and you've survived in the wilderness with a low Int, Wis, and Cha....you're either very lucky or everything is afraid to come within 50 miles of you. If you're not smart and you survive, it stands to reason that you're either blessed by the gods, or extremely intuitive and react well to situations -- hence, high Wis. Will my Wisdom be as good as a Cleric or Druid? No. Should it be? Not generally speaking.). You are assuming that you are alone, in the wilderness, and not as part of a hunting/raiding party, which barbarians often do. Mostly, unless they are exiles, the only time a barbarian faces a challenge alone is some kind of tribal test of manhood or ascension. That's where your combat skills usually pay off. In any case, if I was a munchkin, I'd be focussing instead on bumping Str-Dex-Con up to 18 at first level if possible, and getting insane magic items (mostly weapons and armor, and then Str and Dex boosters) first. How is THAT being a munchkin as opposed to powergaming? I am stressing the fact that these are, in fact, two different styles of play. I will proudly walk around being called a powergamer, but call me a munchkin (generally accepted as being a term to PURPOSEFULLY ruin other people's fun and hog the spotlight with the ubertwink character) and I will be upset. Oh, and how does one propose getting insane magic items at first level without a Monty Hall/Santa Claus DM? If you DO have that type of DM, that might explain why some of the players are unhappy in the first place LOL....
Mikal 03-11-05, 11:50 AM	But, according to my very last post, you would fall into the category of MUCHKIN! and of course, by typing it in all caps and spelling it wrong, it automatically makes it true. :rolleyes: You are thinking METAGAME instead of IN-CHARACTER. You're a BARBARIAN, you aren't SUPPOSED to have a good will save. Also, if you are the one making the survival checks because the ranger and druid are "absent", then something is wrong with your party. Yup, thats why Barbs don't get will save bonuses when raging, and don't have survival/wilderness lore as class skills... oh wait, they DO! Although I would agree with the WISDOM flavor story...Barbarians are cunning combatants. That's why they get Uncanny Dodge. It seems to me that you aren't really against meta-gaming, but prefer to promote sterotypes of character classes. A barbarian can easily be a wise warrior, just like the druid can be a bumbling idiot, if they choose to be. And tossing around terms like munchkin, meta-gamer, etc, don't serve to actually illustrate anything beyond your own bias towards those who actually like to make characters that work WELL within the rules framework, rather then what you think is the one, true way to play DnD.
DM Denubis 03-11-05, 12:07 PM	Santa DMs? The fact is, you could take away all his splatbooks and alternate material, and he's still going to be more powerful than you are. Why? Because he knows the tricks of the trade. Chances are, you could stick him with a 25 point buy, core only, and he'd still make a powerful character. By the way... If your DM allows him to make his character alone... You guys deserve what you're getting hit with. Even if my players are allowed to make a character ahead of time, they can't do anything but buy equipment, choose spells, fill in base attack bonus, and the like, unless I'm using a point buy system. Now, this person is not a powergamer, nor a min/maxer, like sirgar and I. He is a munchkin. The telltale signs are not allowing you to use his books, and faking his die rolls. We min/maxers, almost as a rule, don't mind sharing our expertise and teaching you a few tricks. We almost always share material that we have. And we NEVER cheat on our die rolls. If we're going to do it, we're going to do it legally. There's a major difference. We enjoy the challenge of making an effective character with limited resources, while a munchkin will whine about it.
UltimateReality 03-11-05, 12:58 PM	Firstly: DM Denubis, your post is god. :bow: You said it all better than I could. You are assuming that you are alone, in the wilderness, and not as part of a hunting/raiding party, which barbarians often do.True, but even that hunting party made of barbarians has to keep from getting lost somehow....who's to say I wasn't the guy or gal that looked at the moss on the trees and grunted "That way home"? Oh, and how does one propose getting insane magic items at first level without a Monty Hall/Santa Claus DM? If you DO have that type of DM, that might explain why some of the players are unhappy in the first place LOL....You'd be surprised what some DMs allow. *shakehead* I agree with this, though. If your DM is fair and balanced, s/he won't do this, and if s/he does, then there's other issues to look at first. We had a DM sort of like this -- very permissive, very rules-lite. The powergamers of the group are the first to pop up and explain the rules around something they want to do, even if the rules are heavily against their favour. It seems to me that you aren't really against meta-gaming, but prefer to promote sterotypes of character classes. A barbarian can easily be a wise warrior, just like the druid can be a bumbling idiot, if they choose to be.And for me, part of being a min-maxer/powergamer is trying out the non-stereotypical concepts and seeing how well I can make them work within the frame of the rules. I mean....it's easy to be a barbarian that hits stuff. But a bard that's not "complete ass"? That's a bit more fun and challenging. ;) (Lately I've been playing with the Fochlucan Lyrist PrC, but I'm wondering if I just don't want to go for a rogue/spy/assassin-y type instead. There's so many mechanics to choose from for that flavour concept it's kinda daunting to me.) In any case, I like the idea of the stereotype-with-a-twist: you have to be good at the traditional things your race/class is "good" at, but with added flavour (requires expending more resources to represent it mechanically). An example would be a wizard of mine that was very interested in dragons. She paid in time and gold to learn those spells from the Draconomicon (which ALL players had access to), which came in handy during a few parts of the campaign, but otherwise remained un-used. When I made the drow bard, I was totally crippling her abilities with the LA (her Fort save was a 0 *wince*), but I wanted the flavour (her backstory involves geisha training as repayment to a patron who saved her family from imprisonment due to debt, btw). I wanted to give her a masterwork harp, even though a lute would've made way more sense (effectively negates one of her LA for bardic music). Anyway, I guess the thing to remember is that to a min-maxer or powergamer, the concept is paramount. The mechanics will always morph to fit the concept. To a munchkin, the mechanics are paramount, and character concept is unimportant. I can spend days just thinking up the right name for my character (and believe me, it had to be the right name). A munchkin, if he fills that line in at all, will either pick something short, historical, or humourous.
On_the_wings_of_TPK 03-11-05, 01:57 PM	But, according to my very last post, you would fall into the category of MUCHKIN! You are thinking METAGAME instead of IN-CHARACTER. You're a BARBARIAN, you aren't SUPPOSED to have a good will save. Also, if you are the one making the survival checks because the ranger and druid are "absent", then something is wrong with your party. Although I would agree with the WISDOM flavor story...Barbarians are cunning combatants. That's why they get Uncanny Dodge.Ok, now I have to speak up. Why wouldn't a barbarain have a high wisdom? Just exactly where in the class does it say you have to use your dump stat for Wis? Do they take penalties in Wisdom? Nope! It is just one of their stats that they don't use very often. But that doesn't mean they should just plain forget about their already low Will save. A warrior would undoubtedly recognize his weaknesses and try to compensate for them. Any DM who penalizes a Barbarian for having a high Wisdom is just plain uncreative and afraid that they will not be able to challenge said Barbarian without Hold Person. Any player who feels their Barbarian has to have a low Wisdom score is being uncreative in concept and deserves to get Dominated. Secondly how is it METAGAMING to place ones states as one feels would be most beneficail to ones character. "I'm playing a wizard. And just so that I know I am not METAGAMING I'll make sure that I have a low CON and STR. well wizards aren't known for being very dextriouse either, so I guess that means I have to dump my DEX as well." Is that how you honestly think that characters should be created? Does that make any sence? Lets ask Dr Retardo. "Dr Retardo, is it METAGAMING if I place my stats in way that best covers up any weaknesses I have and yet at the same time maxing out the flavour and mechanics of my character. Like say giving my wizard a high INT and DEX and say a low wisdom (high base will save) yet at the same time giving my self a medium STR (carrying capacity) and CON (who doesn't like hit pionts?) witch I guess would make my dump stats CHA. Witch if you think about it, my wizards is a bit of a book worm and would come off a little socially awkward but yet isn't a lazy fat bastard either." Dr. Retardo: "Ahh gee why do you have to play something like a wizard they are so hard to understand. Why can't you just play gimpy the Dumb cleric who heal me after that dire bear chews me up?" Honestly if want truly non-METAGAMING go 3d6 organic. Here lets try that with our barbarain friend: Str 10, Dex 8, con11, (truly the makings of a legendary barbarain.) Int 12, wis 6, cha 7, Actually i think this is re-roll country, yep -3 over all mod re-roll time. Here we go: Str7, dex 14, con 10, int 14, wis 7, cha 11. Most poeple would make a wizard out of that. But if I had my heart set on Barbarain I would just have to make him a barbarian who perfers to use his bow instead of his axe(mind you with feats like weapon focus and a high bab I may be able to over come that 7 in str. Rage in this case would help, a lot. But that might be construed as METAGAMING) Also he would be a miserable hunter, but would be very smart and most likely do something like keep records for his tribe. Cheers, I'm off to go get my hammer, and then find someone to play a wonderful game of tag with.
UltimateReality 03-11-05, 01:59 PM	A quick note, Sirgar, that you appear to be using two or three different definitions of a munchkin: Munchkins are there simply to dominate character creation. To have the entire campaign focus on them because their PC can do EVERYTHING better than your PC can do.[...]He has to be the center of focus, so he tweaks and plays his character as such, not letting anyone else receive the spotlight. Munchkins ruin the fun of others by placing THEIR fun paramount over everyone and everything Munchkin: Spreads points to attributes he knows will be used in the game such as Spot, Listen, Search, Concentration, etc...[...]You are thinking METAGAME instead of IN-CHARACTER. This is called the fallacy of equivocation if you care; if you don't, I'm just happy my logic prof taught me something useful. I propose that in order to have a meaningful discussion on whether or not someone is a munchkin, we need to define the term first. Here's my shot at it: A munchkin is a player who fundamentally feels that D&D is a competition and they must be "better" than everyone else in the game. They often measure this success in terms of combat ability and how much time the spotlight lingers on them during play. Munchkins will often willingly resort to tactics such as rules-bending; bribing, whining, and manipulation of the other players and DM; and outright cheating, if they feel this will help them reach their goal. I'd do up power-gamer and min-maxer right now, but I have to get back to work. Will probably do them up tonight when I get home.
Carrie91812 03-11-05, 02:01 PM	So....let's say you, me, and a friend are playing tag. I'm a fat, lazy bastard so I can't run fast, and my friend has arthritis in his knees. You, however, put the hard work in and train to run marathons. In order for the game to be fair and fun for the majority of people (i.e. us), we should kneecap you or break your shin. Sound fair? Why would these people be playing tag together in the first place??? Such is the same with balancing players. I happen to agree with the vegetable. I play a campaign with this one guy who has totally and completely cheezed out his character because all he does in his spare time is look up ways to do so. This guy is a second level paladin who is already maxing out skills for his mount he won't get until level five! We breeze through encounters that should be at least slightly challenging only because of this guys cheesiness. The rest of us have well made characters, we just don't devote our lives to optimizing our characters at low levels because most of the fun is earning it through encounters (at least that's what I think). To do otherwise is bad roleplaying, in my opinion, and very inconsiderate to the group to constantly strive to be the "center of attention" so to speak. It is also selfish. One way I see around this is for people who play with less experienced playes to offer help with optimizing their PCs as well. It's not a problem if everyone's a bad arse. The DM should also design encounters that utilize all of the players abilities to give everyone their time to shine. There are some things that a normal caster can handle better than a cheezed out fighter. Ok, I'm done with my rant lol, and no offense meant to anyone, sorry guys !
On_the_wings_of_TPK 03-11-05, 02:22 PM	Why would these people be playing tag together in the first place??? Such is the same with balancing players. Perhaps becuase we are freinds and enjoy each-other' company? Just a thought though. I happen to agree with the vegetable. I play a campaign with this one guy who has totally and completely cheezed out his character because all he does in his spare time is look up ways to do so. This guy is a second level paladin who is already maxing out skills for his mount he won't get until level five! (Nope can't say as I've ever heard of a night in shinning armour who rides a horse.) And while Sir Rides-A-Lot may not have horse yet. He may know that that is something he would like to get and is learning how to ride it before he gets it. I knew how to drive a car long before I ever owned one. We breeze through encounters that should be at least slightly challenging only because of this guys cheesiness. The rest of us have well made characters, we just don't devote our lives to optimizing our characters at low levels because most of the fun is earning it through encounters (at least that's what I think). (Naa I'd rather not overcome the encounter, TPKS are always so much more fun!) And wow you mean the paladin is able to defeat monsters? What, that is unheard of! He must be METAGAMING. To do otherwise is bad roleplaying, in my opinion, and very inconsiderate to the group to constantly strive to be the "center of attention" so to speak. It is also selfish. I fail to see how making your character the best it can be is in anyway bad rollplaying. Most healthy poeple poeple strive to be the best they can be, why wouldn't my D&D character do the same. I mean, am I not adventuring to gain wealth and fame/glory and honour? I also still fail to see how your lack of of knowledge is my fualt, or, why I should be penialized for putting the time and the effort in when you refuse to. One way I see around this is for people who play with less experienced playes to offer help with optimizing their PCs as well. It's not a problem if everyone's a bad arse. So as long as you have a bad arse character it's ok, but as soon as mine starts to be good it is a bad thing? And honestly have you thought of asking for optimization help? Most powergamers are more then glad to offer any kind of assistance you want. Heck when I DMed I offered advice on tricking out PCs. I wanted my party to be strong, in all aspects. The DM should also design encounters that utilize all of the players abilities to give everyone their time to shine. There are some things that a normal caster can handle better than a cheezed out fighter. Have you ever tried that? Seriousely it gets difficult when you have a party full of "Bad arses" that have most-to-all of their bases covered. (or in my case 8 Bad-arses who knew what they were doing, and even doubled up on the more important areas.) But as for the fighter thing and the mage thing. Well at lower levels the encounter is called black pudding. And even Dr Retardo knows that wizards are goddly at levels 15+. Ok, I'm done with my rant lol, and no offense meant to anyone, sorry guys ! Yaa I have more NPCs to build, and well there is that game of tag I've been meaning to play, now were did that hammer get to?
DM Denubis 03-11-05, 03:15 PM	Firstly: DM Denubis, your post is god. :bow: You said it all better than I could. I like you. Anyhow, on an entirely unrelated note, everyone calm down. We don't need to get into flaming here, now do we? People, it's fairly sad when I'm the voice of reason, so let's exercise our sanity, alright? People are always going to have different ideas on how to play the game. Some people view the game as a competition, some like to make a powerful characters, and some others like to almost phase out combat entirely, and just roleplay. The fact is, none of these ways is wrong, and none is any better than any other. It comes down to your preference. Nothing more, nothing less. Personally, I enjoy min/maxing. I enjoy making a character that's powerful in his own way. For example, maxing out social skills can be considered min/maxing, and you better believe that I've done it. I've talked enemies into becoming allies. Nobody's way is right, and nobody's way is wrong. These are the kinds of arguments that give D&D players a bad name. You know, I should really write an article on this sort of thing... I did take that damned journalism class.
Wizard 03-11-05, 03:16 PM	Give everyone access to the same material, distribute stats fairly, and play three one-shot adventures. Your problem is solved. Now start a campaign.
Cold Napalm 03-11-05, 04:09 PM	Okay so... 1) he's most likely NOT a power gamer... 2) reason being?...using splat books and what not fighter 4/sorcerer2 = VERY weak. 3) he's cheating and it's the DM's job to fix it. I personally as a DM go, if I don't have the book, you can't use it...even if I do, you might not get to use it. This means the DM has one book the group can use and everything is fine.
UltimateReality 03-11-05, 04:12 PM	I like you.Aw. I feel...liked. ;) Some people view the game as a competition, some like to make a powerful characters, and some others like to almost phase out combat entirely, and just roleplay. The fact is, none of these ways is wrong, and none is any better than any other. It comes down to your preference. Nothing more, nothing less. My view is that if some of the players see it as a competition amongst themselves or the DM, and others don't -- then there's a problem. Conflicting goals tend to create friction within a group. So if your group and DM are all "more points for the kizzills!" (I got that somewhere on these boards, but forget where), then you're good. If your group is all cooperative, consensus-oriented, then you're good. Mix the two and you get problems. LOTS of problems. Like the player who pretty much tore our last group apart. For example, maxing out social skills can be considered min/maxing, and you better believe that I've done it. I've talked enemies into becoming allies. Really fun when the DM isn't expecting it. Tends to earn you bonus rp xp too. :D (We were supposed to kill this NPC who was evil and trying to kill us. Unfortunately, I'd written her into my backstory as a former best friend who'd disappeared. So we took her with us and redeemed her. He had to redo a significant amount of the campaign as she was originally a LBEG.) FWIW, I was thinking about min-maxing and powergaming and am not sure there's really a line between the two for me now, except maybe to call a powergamer a more effective min-maxer. To me, these people share certain characteristics: they view rules and source material limitation as a welcome challenge to be worked with, they try to build the most effective character possible within the rules, they consider team survivability and try to help it (usually with the whole minimizing weaknesses, maximizing strengths bit), and they include a character concept. Perhaps we should just define munchkin as "video gamer" :P. Seriousely it gets difficult when you have a party full of "Bad arses" that have most-to-all of their bases covered. (or in my case 8 Bad-arses who knew what they were doing, and even doubled up on the more important areas.)Aw, thanks for the compliment, love. :) *feels warm and fuzzy and competent and all 1337-gamerish* Mind you, balancing my campaign for you guys was hard too...low levels are like insta-stomp one way or the other. *shakehead* Better than 2 hour combats, I suppose, though.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-11-05, 04:16 PM	You still haven't told me why my pouring over books and finding just the right mechanics and "loopholes" (a loose term if ever there was one) to make my character perform as though he was 3 levels higher ruins other people's fun OR the DM's fun. You use the example "What if I just made a character 3 levels higher" Well that arguement is moot. If my PC is the exact same level as your PC, but mine performs his/her job better than you do at your role, WHY does that ruin your fun, exactly? Unless YOU feel inferior, and that's YOUR problem, not mine. I still have not heard one single valid arguement of "You ruined MY fun because...<insert facts here> Let's say you create a level 5 character. You powergame it so he's able to easily defeat CR 8 chalenges/monsters. Powerwise, your PC's not really diffrent from a level 8 PC (both you and the standart level 8 PC are of equal power). In theory, your PC is still level 5. Practicaly, he can be considered a level 8 one. The rest of the party are effectively level 5 while you're effectively level 8. Possibility one: Your DM sends you CR 5 monsters. You slaughter them easily while the rest of the party take notes and finaly manage to bring down the odd survivor. The rest of the party feel useless and resent the powergamer because he's always stealing the show. Possibility two:The DM want to challenge you a bit. Being tired of having his monsters slain easily, he send you a CR 9 monster. This is a tough fight for you. The monster's challenging and you have trouble taking him down. It's not an easy fight. for the rest of the party, this fight is dangerous as hell. Either they play it safe and stay away to provide cover or they get slaughtered against a foe clearly too powerfull for them. The rest of the group feel useless and resent the powergamer for stealing the spotlight or they resent the DM because he send too much at them. See the problem? So....let's say you, me, and a friend are playing tag. I'm a fat, lazy bastard so I can't run fast, and my friend has arthritis in his knees. You, however, put the hard work in and train to run marathons. In order for the game to be fair and fun for the majority of people (i.e. us), we should kneecap you or break your shin. Let me introduce you to a strange concept: respect for your friends. Let's assume for a bit that in your above example, I am your friend and therefore care about wether or not you have fun. I'll try to make the game of tag fairer. Wich means I'm not gonna run as fast as I could. (I speak from experience. As a summer camp councellor, when I play tag with kids, I don't run as fast as I could run. I want them to have fun, you see.) Let's apply this to D&D: It's a game. You want to have fun and want the other players to have fun too. You're gonna curb your powergaming tendancies and won't make too unbalanced a character. So if everyone else whines that my perfectly legal min-maxed (not even powergamed) character is ruining their fun because they can't build effective characters and have no interest in learning how, I should intentionally gimp mine so they're all happy? that. Never said that. Talked about unbalanced characters. If there's only a slight difference in powerlevels, there's no problem. Kindly read my post before replying. Should we be penalized for the amount of time we put into building our character AND developing our personalities and backstories? Nope. not penalise. Yet, on the other hand, should the other players be penalised because they A): don't have as much free time as you? B): Don't own as much books as you? C): Don't visit the CO board? D): Don't have the same powergaming knowledge as you? No. The game has to be balanced or it's not fun to play. And fun is the most important part. As for "weak" PCs, we have to use logic. Of course, you can't complaint about power if you are a charisma 3 sorcerer, a low str/dex/con fighter, an inteligence 3 wizards or other stupid combinaition. Yet, you can't say that a PC's too weak if he's not build to his complete powergaming potential. Too often, powergamers refer to anything not powergamed as too weak. This is an hypocritical argument. ( I'm not powergaming, YOU are playing wusses.) A balanced game is one in wich one character doesn't dominate over the rest because of a choice he or she made (race/feat/skill/spell/etc..) I rest my case.
Steenie the great 03-11-05, 05:18 PM	Well I happen to be in the same DnD as the delightful hiroshimahamster :w00t: and I must say I am the groups resident human fighter and I was draged though the trees while tied to a eagle by our delightful elf while he attempted to get money, or as I had none, my weapons and full plate....I said "No!" Due to the heroics of our rogue (I NEVER thought I would put "heroic" and rogue togther but..) he dosn't want payment. However he took glee in reminding me that as I had avrage stats I couldn't stop him if I wanted to :help: However we all could kill him, but I can't muder...being "lawful nuatral". If the party could fix it so I only saw the elf attack someone I could defend them...
TMX 03-11-05, 05:36 PM	Thats me he's talking about :) *feels all warm and fuzzy* EDIT: I didn't realise the full content of this post befoe I posted. By no coincidence this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=390737) thread is (by me) regarding the same player. I had no idea the others felt as strongly as I did...
On_the_wings_of_TPK 03-11-05, 06:23 PM	EDIT: This is UR, not TPK. (I coulda sworn I saw a "d'oh" smiley here...) Let's say you create a level 5 character. You powergame it so he's able to easily defeat CR 8 chalenges/monsters. Powerwise, your PC's not really diffrent from a level 8 PC (both you and the standart level 8 PC are of equal power). In theory, your PC is still level 5. Practicaly, he can be considered a level 8 one. No, because he doesn't have the XP or base class abilities or gold of a level 8 character. Possibility one: Your DM sends you CR 5 monsters. You slaughter them easily while the rest of the party take notes and finaly manage to bring down the odd survivor. The rest of the party feel useless and resent the powergamer because he's always stealing the show.The party then proceeds to improve their characters to the point where they're as good as yours. I should know. I started out as one of those rp-kids. :P (I still love RP, I just didn't have the mechanics down pat then. Time and practise is mostly what it takes to learn them inside out.) I wish to also present: Possibility Three: seeing as you are a combat character, obviously, having defeated CR 8 monsters single-handedly, your DM throws a CR 6 or 7 NPC, trap, or puzzle encounter at you that requires you NOT solve it through combat. Oh look, the other players get a chance to shine and everyone does some RP. Wow. That was so hard on the DM's part. That was so hard on the other players and you. Yet, you can't say that a PC's too weak if he's not build to his complete powergaming potential. Too often, powergamers refer to anything not powergamed as too weak.Well, you could, but it's not a very nice thing to say to your friends, and I happen to agree with you that "less than optimal Mach One Bazillion tweakage" does not equal "immediate deathz0rz!" This is an hypocritical argument. ( I'm not powergaming, YOU are playing wusses.)Erm, I believe it's actually called the diversion technique. In any case, neither term is really fair to use, as they both have heavy connotations. (Hypocricy is when you say you believe one thing but do another, contradictory to it.) TMX and Steenie: have you guys considered banding with hiroshimahamster and telling the DM to grow a spine or you'll all walk and form your own group without him or the problem guy? (How good is the DM besides this whole spineless thing?) I guess what it all boils down to is playstyle, and conflicts thereof. It sounds like this guy has a wildly different "playstyle" than you guys. If that can be resolved peacably as mature individuals, great. If not...maybe he should find a group that suits him better.
sirgar 03-11-05, 06:48 PM	Ok, lets get this post back on track. Everyone, myself ESPECIALLY included, have turned this into almost a rant and flame session on munchkins/powergamers and defense thereof. The real point of the thread, now expressed by 3 gamers in that same group, seems to be what to do with this person who is a complete and total munchkin. The popular suggestion has been to talk to the DM.. That was refuted, saying the DM and this player are long time friends, and that the DM always cows to this player. Another suggestion is to have one of the other players in the group become the DM, so that you can impose fair limits on what this person can/cannot do in character or WITH their character. It will also let the DM get firsthand experience on how this person ruins the experience for the rest of the group. My other suggestion beyond that would be to disinclude both of these people and start your own gaming group. Since that is generally harsh and involves possibly alienating some of your friends, people don't normally do this but as a last resort. My first post still stands. Tell the DM what he is allowing is unfair, and if he still doesn't listen to the group, find a new group.
sirgar 03-11-05, 07:03 PM	Let's say you create a level 5 character. You powergame it so he's able to easily defeat CR 8 chalenges/monsters. Powerwise, your PC's not really diffrent from a level 8 PC (both you and the standart level 8 PC are of equal power). In theory, your PC is still level 5. Practicaly, he can be considered a level 8 one. No, he cannot. That's a cop-out on your part. He doesn't have the skill points, exp, BaB, feat access, etc....of a level 8 character. That's why he's level 5. The rest of the party are effectively level 5 while you're effectively level 8. Absolutely untrue. You are all level 5. Period. End of story. Just because I made different choices and can do certain things better than a "normal" PC my level does NOT give me a higher level in any capacity, shape, or form.[/QUOTE] Possibility one: Your DM sends you CR 5 monsters. You slaughter them easily while the rest of the party take notes and finaly manage to bring down the odd survivor. The rest of the party feel useless and resent the powergamer because he's always stealing the show. Possibility two:The DM want to challenge you a bit. Being tired of having his monsters slain easily, he send you a CR 9 monster. This is a tough fight for you. The monster's challenging and you have trouble taking him down. It's not an easy fight. for the rest of the party, this fight is dangerous as hell. Either they play it safe and stay away to provide cover or they get slaughtered against a foe clearly too powerfull for them. The rest of the group feel useless and resent the powergamer for stealing the spotlight or they resent the DM because he send too much at them. See the problem? Yes, I see the problem. One person is dealing with all the monsters while the rest of the party stands back and watches. No wonder he had to min/max. Let me introduce you to a strange concept: respect for your friends. Let's assume for a bit that in your above example, I am your friend and therefore care about wether or not you have fun. I'll try to make the game of tag fairer. Wich means I'm not gonna run as fast as I could. (I speak from experience. As a summer camp councellor, when I play tag with kids, I don't run as fast as I could run. I want them to have fun, you see.) Allow me to twist that one a bit. Let's say you had the ability to teach your friends to run faster by giving them pointers and tips to optimize their running. Is this lack of respect for your friends, or helpful to their game of tag? Hmmmmm..... Yet, on the other hand, should the other players be penalised because they A): don't have as much free time as you? B): Don't own as much books as you? C): Don't visit the CO board? D): Don't have the same powergaming knowledge as you? No. The game has to be balanced or it's not fun to play. And fun is the most important part. How exactly are the other players being penalized because I have more "powergaming knowledge? I still have no good answer to this. How do I ruin your fun because I have feats that allow my Rogue to find traps AND fight as well as the group's warrior? And by the way its not up to the players to balance the GAME its up to the DM. A good DM can balance the gaming experience even if he has one powergamer and/or munchkin in the group. The key is not to focus on the powergamed/munchkin...ized (is that a word?? LOL) PC, its to keep the focus on everyone equally. Your quote from the DMG is right on. The DM should keep the game balanced. The very problem here, with this post, is that the DM is not doing that, and a player is being allowed to run rampant and out of control. That's why its not fun for the rest of his group, NOT because he has a powered PC.
MadScientist!! 03-11-05, 08:10 PM	One thing that you fail to understand is that the "Munchkin" (hate that word, when I think of it I think of the H.I.V.E., or something similar) is playing the game too, and he should not be penalized for the other players being poor character designers. Everyone should have a role, and everyone should be at least somewhat useful in combat. I fail to see how you are all useless unless you guys seriously suck, so I am for the powergamer here.
sirgar 03-11-05, 08:14 PM	Again, I must stress my personal distinction between munchkin and powergamer. If he is simply powergaming to optimize his character, then fine. He steps over the line when he out-rogues the rogue or out-heals the cleric, or out-tanks the fighter, or out-sings the bard. Otherwise, why are those other party members even there if this guy can do it all? THAT is where he ruins the fun for everyone, and anyone who outshines the rest of his group ON PURPOSE, simply to have his character be the primary focus of the party, doesn't deserve to game.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-11-05, 11:56 PM	No, he cannot. That's a cop-out on your part. He doesn't have the skill points, exp, BaB, feat access, etc....of a level 8 character. That's why he's level 5. He's level 5. But let's say you had to judge his power rating. How powerfull his he? He's about as powerfull as a level 8 PC would be. Even if he doesn't have all the doodads of a level 8 PC. Beside, the important thing is not from where his power come (skills, stats, feats, magic items), only the end result, his power. As I said, he's level 5 on paper. But, as far as evluating his CR, he's level 8. Absolutely untrue. You are all level 5. Period. End of story. Just because I made different choices and can do certain things better than a "normal" PC my level does NOT give me a higher level in any capacity, shape, or form. Let's say I make a Barbarian6/Hulking Hurler3/War Hulk4 in a "normal" (average power level) level 13 party... and refer to the above reply :D Yes, I see the problem. One person is dealing with all the monsters while the rest of the party stands back and watches. No wonder he had to min/max. You're reversing the problem. SINCE he powergamed, only one person CAN deal with the monsters while the rest of the party got no choice but to stand and watch. Allow me to twist that one a bit. Let's say you had the ability to teach your friends to run faster by giving them pointers and tips to optimize their running. Is this lack of respect for your friends, or helpful to their game of tag? Hmmmmm..... By trying to milk the rules for all they've got to give you more power, you're sacrificing play balance. It's like teaching your friends what performance enhancing drugs are not yet on the banned list and are therefore legal to use in the World's Tag Championship. It's 100% legal. But it's a travesty. How exactly are the other players being penalized because I have more "powergaming knowledge? I still have no good answer to this. How do I ruin your fun because I have feats that allow my Rogue to find traps AND fight as well as the group's warrior? And by the way its not up to the players to balance the GAME its up to the DM. A good DM can balance the gaming experience even if he has one powergamer and/or munchkin in the group. The key is not to focus on the powergamed/munchkin...ized (is that a word?? LOL) PC, its to keep the focus on everyone equally. Because you're far more powerfull than the rest of the team. You're constantly overshadowing everyone. Nobody like to watch a powerfull PC do everything. Most people want their PC to have an important part to play in the adventure. Your quote from the DMG is right on. The DM should keep the game balanced. The very problem here, with this post, is that the DM is not doing that, and a player is being allowed to run rampant and out of control. That's why its not fun for the rest of his group, NOT because he has a powered PC. As I said before, the fault his shared. DM's for having allowed the unbalancing PC, player for having conned his DM. Again, I must stress my personal distinction between munchkin and powergamer. If he is simply powergaming to optimize his character, then fine. He steps over the line when he out-rogues the rogue or out-heals the cleric, or out-tanks the fighter, or out-sings the bard. Otherwise, why are those other party members even there if this guy can do it all? THAT is where he ruins the fun for everyone, and anyone who outshines the rest of his group ON PURPOSE, simply to have his character be the primary focus of the party, doesn't deserve to game It's a question of degree. That's why you have to take into account the rest of the party's level. What's the ultimate difference between a powergamer and a munchkin? The powergamer's gonna make a powerfull PC that won't overshadow the rest of the party too much. The munchkin's in it for himself.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-12-05, 12:04 AM	EDIT: This is UR, not TPK. (I coulda sworn I saw a "d'oh" smiley here...) [QUOTE]I wish to also present: Possibility Three: seeing as you are a combat character, obviously, having defeated CR 8 monsters single-handedly, your DM throws a CR 6 or 7 NPC, trap, or puzzle encounter at you that requires you NOT solve it through combat. Oh look, the other players get a chance to shine and everyone does some RP. Wow. That was so hard on the DM's part. That was so hard on the other players and you. True, but this doesn't sort the problem, merely delay it until the next combat. If you've got other combat-oriented (not powergamed as much as you ) teammates, they'll want a fight. Yet they know the next fight is gonna be boring for them.
sirgar 03-12-05, 01:42 PM	It's a question of degree. That's why you have to take into account the rest of the party's level. What's the ultimate difference between a powergamer and a munchkin? The powergamer's gonna make a powerfull PC that won't overshadow the rest of the party too much. The munchkin's in it for himself. Thank you for making that distinction and finally agreeing with me....now what we have here in this thread is a munchkin who should be dealt with accordingly.
sirgar 03-12-05, 01:53 PM	[QUOTE=Ze_Mighty_Vegetable]You're reversing the problem. SINCE he powergamed, only one person CAN deal with the monsters while the rest of the party got no choice but to stand and watch. If the rest of the party stands back and watches then there's a bigger problem at hand, is my point. If they don't contribute to the battle because they feel "overshadowed" I believe is the term you prefer, then they aren't doing their jobs properly either. For instance, in our current campaign we have a thief that constantly demands to be on point. When we are about to go into battle. Yes. Our group has two barbarians, two fighters, and a fighter/bard. Yet he still finds it necessary to "overshadow" us and take our fighter role away from us, and we have to sit there and bail him out of a battle there's no way he can handle alone. We do not sit along the sidelines and watch him die. [QUOTE=Ze_Mighty_Vegetable]Because you're far more powerfull than the rest of the team. You're constantly overshadowing everyone. Nobody like to watch a powerfull PC do everything. Most people want their PC to have an important part to play in the adventure. But I am only more powerful at the role that I play. I don't try to keep the party healed, that's the healer's job. I don't try to be our main tracker, that's our ranger's job. I do have SOME skill in SOME other areas, but that's in case I need to be a backup. I don't try to take primary role in anything other than a second line fighter/minor buffer that I am as a bard. I fit a role, I optimize that role for where I think the character is going, I don't step over certain boundaries. That shouldn't ruin fun for anyone.
Cold Napalm 03-12-05, 03:43 PM	Okay the munchkin ins question is a fighter 4/sorcerer 2... If the party cant oushine this build at some point one of 3 things happened. 1) the party REALLY sucks 2) the guys is cheating MAJORLY. 3) the DM should not be the DM since he can't seem to throw a trap or an npc at some point.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-12-05, 06:36 PM	Thank you for making that distinction and finally agreeing with me....now what we have here in this thread is a munchkin who should be dealt with accordingly I've made that distinction in my first post... But I am only more powerful at the role that I play. I don't try to keep the party healed, that's the healer's job. I don't try to be our main tracker, that's our ranger's job. I do have SOME skill in SOME other areas, but that's in case I need to be a backup. I don't try to take primary role in anything other than a second line fighter/minor buffer that I am as a bard. I fit a role, I optimize that role for where I think the character is going, I don't step over certain boundaries. That shouldn't ruin fun for anyone. YOU see it that way, and probably even feel that way. But for the others, a powergamer who's significantly more powerfull than the rest of the party is bothersome. Let's say your role is offensive magic. If you blast the ennemy in the first round without your party ever needing to help you, you've taken the role of the fighter, the barbarian and the paladin. I think the best way to check if you are too powerfull for your team is to ask the other players. If they constantly feel overshadowed, there is a problem. The next best way would be to ask yourself: If my PC was a DMPC, would I resent him or like his presence? As for the powergamer in question in this thread... Talking to the DM is not an option (it was tried and didn't work, I think). Talking to the munchkin has probably been tried. Leave the game. better yet, take the rest of the group with you (if they're fed up with the powergaming). I'm not advocating this to get even with the DM, but to make him realise that blatant favoritism toward one person is gonna cost him a game.
Mirikon 03-12-05, 06:58 PM	Having a powerful character is not the same as being a powergamer. If you are rolling stats, having good stats does not mean you are a powergamer. It means you were lucky. If you have a barbarian with his three high rolls in STR, DEX, and CON, and the other guy has a Cleric with a CHA of 9, this doesn not mean you are a powergamer. It means the other guy is an idiot. If you are playing a Warlock using point buy with an 18 Dex, 18 Cha, and tens in everything else, using a Spiked Chain and and Weapon Finesse, with perhaps the Improved Trip feat, you're probably a powergamer. There is a difference between having a character that doesn't suck, and being a powergamer. Don't nerf the player who doesn't suck just because you can't put together a decent character. Lack of stupidity does not a powergamer make.
Cold Napalm 03-12-05, 11:34 PM	Okay so I wanna know something...can you find his stats/major items/spell list/ etc etc so we can see if he actually IS a powergamer/muchkin? I'm sorry but so the example of him being a power gamer is that he is a fighter 4/sorcerer 2 (which is a WEAK build BTW) and that the cleric of the party sucks and he follows the rogue around. I still fail to see HOW he is broken. Does he have +32 to his sneak and hide and diable device or something? Does he cast healing spells spontaneously somehow? What is it EXACTLY that makes you think he is broken?
Dalin 03-14-05, 10:52 AM	DM of the campaign in discussion here. I agree that some of the players past characters in the campaign have been overpowered but this character isn't. His statline is very good, yes but the rest of the party pretty good statlines too. Currently he hits more things than the pure fighter, but thats due to the +6 Str spell that he can cast on himself. Next level the fighter's better BAB will be greater than the +6 Str that the sorcerer can gain, and gains an extra attack. The magic items that you are getting arn't distributed evenly around the group (the half orc doesn't like using magic weapons, and a wizard has no use for a greatsword +2) but the character in question hasn't got a bigger than his fair share. From now on i'll enforce that all spells/feats/classes and races come from the players guide only, as your killing his character off in 2-3 sessions time there seems little point getting him to change all his spells now.
Cold Napalm 03-14-05, 12:04 PM	DM of the campaign in discussion here. I agree that some of the players past characters in the campaign have been overpowered but this character isn't. His statline is very good, yes but the rest of the party pretty good statlines too. Currently he hits more things than the pure fighter, but thats due to the +6 Str spell that he can cast on himself. Next level the fighter's better BAB will be greater than the +6 Str that the sorcerer can gain, and gains an extra attack. The magic items that you are getting arn't distributed evenly around the group (the half orc doesn't like using magic weapons, and a wizard has no use for a greatsword +2) but the character in question hasn't got a bigger than his fair share. From now on i'll enforce that all spells/feats/classes and races come from the players guide only, as your killing his character off in 2-3 sessions time there seems little point getting him to change all his spells now. Okay my opinion might be changing as to his character and CHEATING. He's a level 2 sorcerer...i.e. no bull strength which gives +4 to strength. What pray tell is a FIRST level spell that gives +6?!? No 3rd party book would be THAT broken...would it? He's lied, he's cheated...go kick him and NEVER let him use anything other then core from now on...even if you let other people use other books.
Dalin 03-14-05, 12:12 PM	Fist of stone is the spell, from the complete arcane book. +6 Str and give you a natural slam attack. I haven't got the book that it's from, but i have seen the spell description etc. I didn't realise it was from a different book, or that he was using non-phb spells untill he pointed this out to me.
UltimateReality 03-14-05, 12:20 PM	Edit: This is TPK, not UR. DM of the campaign in discussion here. I agree that some of the players past characters in the campaign have been overpowered but this character isn't. His statline is very good, yes but the rest of the party pretty good statlines too. Currently he hits more things than the pure fighter, but thats due to the +6 Str spell that he can cast on himself. Next level the fighter's better BAB will be greater than the +6 Str that the sorcerer can gain, and gains an extra attack. The magic items that you are getting arn't distributed evenly around the group (the half orc doesn't like using magic weapons, and a wizard has no use for a greatsword +2) but the character in question hasn't got a bigger than his fair share. From now on i'll enforce that all spells/feats/classes and races come from the players guide only, as your killing his character off in 2-3 sessions time there seems little point getting him to change all his spells now. Ok I think I see what's going on here, and since the DM was kind enough to pop in I'll just address this to him. The spell in question sounds to me like Fist of Stone, found in the Complete Arcane. The spell does indeed provide a +6 to Str, but only if you're using it to smack someone/something unarmed. So it does not confer the +6 to str when you are using a weapon. Also, you do gain a slam attack that can be used as your primary attack if you do not have the feat Improved Unarmed Strike, or you may use it at as a secondary attack at a -5 to the attack roll, provided that you do have Improved Unarmed Strike. The slam attack granted by the spell has a d6 damage, and is considered a light weapon for the purposes of Two Weapon Fighting. What this means for our fighter friend, unless he has Improved Unarmed Strike, is that he only gets one attack with the +6 Str bonus while the spell is in effect, and that attack is an unarmed slam that deals d6+modified Str. The +6 is an enhancement bonus and will not stack with Bull's Strength or a Belt of Giant Strength, or anything else with an enhancement bonus to Strength. Now, onto the killing of PCs every 2-3 sessions. This is a serious problem that needs to be fixed immediately! There are some hurt feelings somewhere and some people are definitely upset over something. It is your job as DM to find out what they are un-happy about and fix it. I recommend that next session you have a frank talk with your players about all the PvP and whatever else seems to be on your mind. Then open it up for them to tell you what their beef is. This may or may not result in the loss of one or two players, but if you do not do this, you will lose all your players and your game will crumble and go down in flames. Cheers.
Daefyre 03-14-05, 12:25 PM	*disregard this entire post if the above post was a sarcastic joke....hehe* yes, it was a joke...hope ya liked it...personally i'm a bit more straight forward in dealing with a problem in my group...compile info for complaint, confront, resolve, and move on
UltimateReality 03-14-05, 12:28 PM	NEVER let him use anything other then core from now on...even if you let other people use other books.Hey now. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. A DM shouldn't be using different rules for different players. If he's that bad, you should just politely suggest he might find another group matches his playstyle better. A DM should not be partial. It will only breed resentment, hostility, and eventual group explosion.
likuidice 03-14-05, 01:04 PM	what happens with this character outside combat? I doubt he has much in the way of interaction skills, so his only role is to be party tank. I've had this in my own group, I made a fighter, the others were bards, rogues, rangers et al. for some reason, these guys expected their characters to be as good at fighting as...the fighter. It's silly, if you deliberately make an ineffective character for roleplay purposes, or simply because you cant make good characters, don't blame anyone but yourself. If you want to be good at combat, use a primary combat class, if you want to turn undead, have good charisma, it's not rocket science. Don't blame other players if you make choices that reduce your combat abilities, nobody forced you to play a bard with a strength of 3, or whatever. If its not fun for you to watch the party FIGHTER actually do his his job, then do something about it, it was your choice to play combat ineffective characters, why does this so called "powergamer" get the blame for your poor choices? I'll bet you have better skill ranks than him, maybe you should put your skill points into craft: toilet so that he doesnt feel overshadowed by your skill use. Then again, I'll bet he's quite happy to let you use the abilities your character has, does he complain that you dominate non combat scenes? I'll bet he doesnt. With regard to material from other books, it should always be given permission by the dm, before it's used.
Steenie the great 03-14-05, 01:30 PM	Edit: This is TPK, not UR. Ok I think I see what's going on here, and since the DM was kind enough to pop in I'll just address this to him. The spell in question sounds to me like Fist of Stone, found in the Complete Arcane. The spell does indeed provide a +6 to Str, but only if you're using it to smack someone/something unarmed. So it does not confer the +6 to str when you are using a weapon. Also, you do gain a slam attack that can be used as your primary attack if you do not have the feat Improved Unarmed Strike, or you may use it at as a secondary attack at a -5 to the attack roll, provided that you do have Improved Unarmed Strike. The slam attack granted by the spell has a d6 damage, and is considered a light weapon for the purposes of Two Weapon Fighting. What this means for our fighter friend, unless he has Improved Unarmed Strike, is that he only gets one attack with the +6 Str bonus while the spell is in effect, and that attack is an unarmed slam that deals d6+modified Str. The +6 is an enhancement bonus and will not stack with Bull's Strength or a Belt of Giant Strength, or anything else with an enhancement bonus to Strength. Cheers. You see THIS is why we don't like when he picks spells from books that we don't have...we can't check. The reasonable thing would be to borrow the books and make notes...but no-no-no, his books are never to leave his side....it's annoying and silly.
On_the_wings_of_TPK 03-14-05, 01:51 PM	You see THIS is why we don't like when he picks spells from books that we don't have...we can't check. The reasonable thing would be to borrow the books and make notes...but no-no-no, his books are never to leave his side....it's annoying and silly. Ok well you could always say, "NO"! Do not let him use anything that you yourself can not look at and use yourself. IE If he can the complete cycle then you should as well. If he is the only one who can use these books then that is simply unfair and the DM should not let it continue. Also if you have any questions regarding material found with those pages, just ask and we'll let you know.
Mikal 03-14-05, 02:08 PM	While this guy isn't a cheater or (words I choose not to use because they're derogatory, inflammable, and in the end character judgement, not true titles), the fact that he's using books that no one else in the group has access to, and doesn't allow the others to even LOOK at those books does create an unfair advantage. I agree with the others who say just use the core books, if those are the books everyone else has access to, until he lets you all use the books he has. If a book can't be potentially used be everyone in the group, then it shouldn't be allowed.
Merestil Haye 03-14-05, 02:39 PM	My thoughts, for what they are worth. I would tell everyone that allowing Fist of Stone was a mistake, as I had not realised it was a non-PHB spell. The player can keep that one, but it sets no precedent for the future. In future, either refuse to permit a character to select options from outside the PHB at all without your prior permission, or insist that non-core books only be available if (a) you can borrow the book and read it before making any decision, and (b) if it is available to him, it is available to any character. If that means him lending his book out to others, so be it. I would also consider telling him that if he ever fails to produce Complete Arcane for you to check the wording of the spell, he can't use it until he does produce the book.
eRaz0r 03-14-05, 05:58 PM	If the player wants a spell/power/feat/skill use etc from any book - even the DMG/PHB/etc, then the DM has to be able to read that spell description at any time,and ok or refuse it. Firstly, it's his responsibility to be familiar with the power in question. Secondly, it's just what has to happen before the player gets to use it. Any player so asinine as to suggest that the DM cannot refer to a sourcebook that the player owns, if the player wants to use something from it in the game, can just sit that session out. Not everyone can afford to buy every book, and if the player wants to use something from a book the DM doesn't own, he's obliged to let the DM refer to it whenever he wants. Otherwise, he need not use the power at all. It's just good manners, if nothing else.
UltimateReality 03-14-05, 06:33 PM	You see THIS is why we don't like when he picks spells from books that we don't have...we can't check. The reasonable thing would be to borrow the books and make notes...but no-no-no, his books are never to leave his side....it's annoying and silly.This player wouldn't last a session in our group. Firstly, we have all the books, and secondly, such childish, selfish behaviour would not be tolerated. Thirdly, if he did try to do it anyway, the DM would deny everyone access to the book and commence character sheet auditing. And then we'd kick him out. There may be hope for this guy if your DM has the cojones to force him to play within the group -- Dalin, come down on this guy and enforce the "share it with the group, I get to see it first, or it's automatically banned" rule. Also, keep everyone's character sheets between sessions. (This is actually really useful for determining how much gold and XP you should give out, appropriate encounters vs. ones that will smash them, etc.) Don't let this guy dominate your group, abuse it for his own sense of "fun", and ruin the experience for your players. Besides, if they get fed up enough, they start complaining to you and then you have to deal with that, too. :P If they get even more fed up, then you might not have those players much longer. I know I wouldn't put up with what this guy's pulling for more than half an hour. If you are mid-campaign, I would consider a couple options: a) let everyone stay as they are. HOWEVER. He must share his source material with others if he's using it. If he doesn't want to share, he has to make a new character at the appropriate level using Core only -- like everyone else's character is made from. b) TPK. Kill everyone, announce that they can use Core Only(tm), and threaten to smite anyone who tries to sneak something else on their sheet. Review all character sheets after each session. Keep all character sheets. c) Announce you will be using Core Only(tm) from now on. A session or two later, find a way to kill his character (before your players do). Review all character sheets after each session. Keep all character sheets between sessions. Some people need to be told explicitly how to behave in a social setting such as D&D. This player needs to realize that the game is NOT like Neverwinter Nights or another online game, and he and the party are working together -- not competing against each other. Emphasize that if he wants to be the centre of attention, the only hero, and just have a bunch of sidekicks...he really should go back to playing video games. D&D is a group activity.
DM Denubis 03-14-05, 07:16 PM	I agree with UltimateReality. This guy would get what's coming to him at my gaming group. See, we once had a guy do that with the Book of Vile Darkness, and the DM let him do it. Well, as evil characters usually do, he started in with the party, going so far as to kill the party wizard's familiar. So, in the middle of my watch, I murdered him with a dagger I found on an elf about three sessions ago. He opened that book again, to make his new character, and the DM cracked up. Now, you don't necessarily need to kill him. But you do need to get rid of the character, and make him make a new one, Core only. It's not right for him to not allow the DM to see that kind of thing. As a DM, I'd throw him out in about the time it took him to say, "No, they're mine.". If he won't comply, well, good riddance.
sirgar 03-14-05, 07:27 PM	Apparantly, just getting rid of his character isn't enough. I am glad you are saying you will stick to Core books only, and I hope for your group's sake you stick to your guns and not just put up a false facade with us. I say this because the players are saying this isn't the first and only time you have allowed him to go to splatbooks while everyone else has to use Core only. I agree with Ultimatereality and DM Denubis. This guy wouldn't have a prayer in my group. When we all get together and play, there are probably 5 copies of each core book, and several copies of each spat book floating around. When new character time comes about, these books are passed around the table faster than the mashed potatoes. If we saw him hording his books so no one else could see/use them, his character wouldn't make it to the playing session.
DM Denubis 03-14-05, 08:30 PM	We all agree. You will be assimilated.
sirgar 03-14-05, 11:37 PM	Resistance is futile....
Cold Napalm 03-15-05, 01:13 AM	Hey now. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. A DM shouldn't be using different rules for different players. If he's that bad, you should just politely suggest he might find another group matches his playstyle better. A DM should not be partial. It will only breed resentment, hostility, and eventual group explosion. No it's called you've been caught cheating...SMACK.
illiterate 03-15-05, 01:21 AM	Let me introduce you to a strange concept: respect for your friends. Let's assume for a bit that in your above example, I am your friend and therefore care about wether or not you have fun. I'll try to make the game of tag fairer. Wich means I'm not gonna run as fast as I could. (I speak from experience. As a summer camp councellor, when I play tag with kids, I don't run as fast as I could run. I want them to have fun, you see.) Let's apply this to D&D: It's a game. You want to have fun and want the other players to have fun too. You're gonna curb your powergaming tendancies and won't make too unbalanced a character. When you're playing tag with the kids, you're going up against someone that has a clear disadvantage. They're younger, weaker, less experienced than you are. How does this translate to rpgaming? ermm, I'm starting a new thread on that. later.. if i feel like it. My friends are my age. They are my peers. Playing with or against them, I think it would be disrespectful to pull my punches hirosh -- Your group apparently has an ineffective dm and a dice cheat. Tell your dm he needs to control the table or let someone else run. Tell the munchkin that dice cheating won't be tolerated, and dump him if he persists. I've seen more than one game disintegrate because of a bad player. Usually it's emotional outbursts, but the scene-stealing antics of a dice-cheating jerk could just as easily do it.
sirgar 03-15-05, 03:55 AM	Illiterate, The DM of said group has posted on here, and said upon new character creation from now on he will restrict said munchkin to core rules only. IMO this is the only fair way to do it, since cheater-boy is stingy with his books. We'll see if this actually pans out as truth.
UltimateReality 03-15-05, 09:51 AM	No it's called you've been caught cheating...SMACK.See, we just kick cheaters out of the group. Saves more time and trouble that way. (When they stop feeling the need to cheat, they are welcome to come back, though.)
Dalin 03-15-05, 11:39 AM	One possibility that I did think about introducing now is saying that any new characters were to be created by the DM, with the player being able to pick a couple of aspects about the character, ie they could choose either their alignment race or class, but not all 3. This goes against a lot of good things about D&D, and I strongly believe that a player should be able to choose his or her own character. (The other players agree that this is not a perfect solution but have agreed that it would solve problems). It would afterall be intresting to see him come back as a Gnome Bard with a strength below 18. Edit: On second thought that would be a really bad idea, i think. I guess i'll just force him to use the phb next time.
illiterate 03-15-05, 03:10 PM	Illiterate, The DM of said group has posted on here, and said upon new character creation from now on he will restrict said munchkin to core rules only. IMO this is the only fair way to do it, since cheater-boy is stingy with his books. We'll see if this actually pans out as truth. It's tough being the dm, and I hope he can keep control better in the future.
Cold Napalm 03-15-05, 05:05 PM	See, we just kick cheaters out of the group. Saves more time and trouble that way. (When they stop feeling the need to cheat, they are welcome to come back, though.) WOW your nice to your cheaters...we make ours suffer.
Cold Napalm 03-15-05, 05:06 PM	One possibility that I did think about introducing now is saying that any new characters were to be created by the DM, with the player being able to pick a couple of aspects about the character, ie they could choose either their alignment race or class, but not all 3. This goes against a lot of good things about D&D, and I strongly believe that a player should be able to choose his or her own character. (The other players agree that this is not a perfect solution but have agreed that it would solve problems). It would afterall be intresting to see him come back as a Gnome Bard with a strength below 18. Edit: On second thought that would be a really bad idea, i think. I guess i'll just force him to use the phb next time. Just go if you wanna use it, I need a copy of it. If you have a copy, you can read up on it, check it and give it to other players to use and there is NOTHING he can do about it. If he REALLY wants to use something, it also means he has to buy you a book...bonus for you hehe.
DM Denubis 03-15-05, 05:17 PM	Well, don't make him buy books for you... I mean, that's not cool. But if he won't let you see it, Dalin, it's not to be used. Also, monitor his stat rolls. Don't let him, or anyone else for that matter, generate characters in private. If he shares his books with the peple around him, fine. He can use them. But the second he hoards, forget it. Alternatively, keep everyone to core. Sometimes it's an easier game.
UltimateReality 03-15-05, 07:16 PM	WOW your nice to your cheaters...we make ours suffer.Now I'm curious....of course, if you mean you deal with them by restricting them to core when other people can have goodies, really all I can see that accomplishing is making the cheater feel (rightfully) humiliated and leaving -- which I figure could be done by just telling them "buh-bye". If you have other methods, however, I'm curious to hear.... :plotting:
Cold Napalm 03-15-05, 08:30 PM	Now I'm curious....of course, if you mean you deal with them by restricting them to core when other people can have goodies, really all I can see that accomplishing is making the cheater feel (rightfully) humiliated and leaving -- which I figure could be done by just telling them "buh-bye". If you have other methods, however, I'm curious to hear.... :plotting: Well...there is DM making sure ALL the pranks just happen to hit the cheater...not sharing food...basically making him wanna quit and leave...and then we don't let him...we tempt him with oh look goodies from the draconomicon. We're mean.
Lord Schpungus 03-15-05, 09:56 PM	Alternatively, keep everyone to core. Sometimes it's an easier game. But often not as interesting or fun. I agree to the 'browse it or ban it' tactic, though. If he won't let the DM see what feats/classes he's taking, there's a real possibility he's deliberately misinterpreting said feats/classes.
illiterate 03-15-05, 10:29 PM	If the gm doesn't have access to the book, it can't be used in the game. I can't see how this is even a question.
UltimateReality 03-16-05, 12:34 AM	Well...there is DM making sure ALL the pranks just happen to hit the cheater...not sharing food...basically making him wanna quit and leave...and then we don't let him...we tempt him with oh look goodies from the draconomicon. We're mean.Heh, I might've engaged in that in earlier days, but find I just want to get on with my goblin smashing/government infiltrating/working for the mafia now, and simply wish the whiner would leave. If we just boot him, he's out of my house faster, won't call or IM me/the DM/the other players incessantly, and I get to be rid of another person who irritates me in as short a time as possible. I don't have much fun in toying with stupid people anymore. :(
DM Denubis 03-16-05, 01:33 PM	Heh... See, I don't just boot them right away. I find nice, humiliating ways to kill them. Then I boot them. Now, why do I do this? One, because I'm usually angry at the person, and it's better I do it in game than out of game. Two, to make an example of cheaters. Three, because my particular gaming group hates cheaters, and they support me in what I do.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-16-05, 01:40 PM	One of my favorite tactics to deal with munchkins wannabe is to let them get noticed. In the game world, the munchkin's as powerfull as a hero of legend. Such power is bound to get noticed sooner or later. And it won't just be nice organisations that does. He's gonna be constantly pre-emptive striked/manipulated/framed/courted by so many people he's gonna have a hard time surviving, let alone enjoying himself. Plus, it's at the same time annoying to the munch and funny as hell to the other players. Of course, if it doesn't make him understand the problem after a sesion or 2, he's out.
Cold Napalm 03-17-05, 05:02 PM	Hehe...I haven't outgrown the joys of torturing stupid people yet...and neither has the rest of the group hehe. As for wannabe munchkins...yeah we have one in our group who seems to think I'm broke. I power game...i.e. heavy optimization and rules as written person. I have broken tricks that I will not use because it will ruin a game and he goes and play a fatespinner/wild mage so he can try to "control" the wild magic. Before that he was a shapeshifting druid with 8 str and 8 dex. Oh and 3.0 he was the persistant meta magic cleric. The worst I ever threw at this group is a spellstoring sword with vampiric touch that with a spell channeled empowered vampiric touch and a quickend vampiric touch in a round...just because I nearly killed myself by doubling my hp doesn't mean it's broke.
DM Denubis 03-17-05, 05:48 PM	Bah. That all requires a high level. Give me a seventh level wizard and equivalent money for my level, and let me have fun. Shrink a bunch of greatswords down, drop them all on the floor, and telekinesis them all into the enemy. Ouch. Obviously, I don't do this sort of thing when I play wizards anymore. Not since a DM actually cried.
eudas 03-24-05, 02:08 PM	He just had more time to lose making his character. Let's face it, some of us DO spend gazillions hours poring over their books looking for the most powerfull combos available. Should they be praised? Nope. Actually, Mighty Vegetable, people who are willing to invest time in learning the game *should* be rewarded. Here's a quote from one of the game designers: Magic also has a concept of "Timmy cards." These are cards that look cool, but aren't actually that great in the game. The purpose of such cards is to reward people for really mastering the game, and making players feel smart when they've figured out that one card is better than the other. While D&D doesn't exactly do that, it is true that certain game choices are deliberately better than others. Toughness, for example, has its uses, but in most cases it's not the best choice of feat. If you can use martial weapons, a longsword is better than many other one-handed weapons. And so on -- there are many other, far more intricate examples. (Arguably, this kind of thing has always existed in D&D. Mostly, we just made sure that we didn't design it away -- we wanted to reward mastery of the game.) So, while people who just want to be the most powerful character ever shouldn't necessarily have it handed to them on a silver platter, you should bear in mind the people who are willing to study the game should be rewarded with greater success than those who don't touch the book except 1 saturday night a month. if you don't want to put any work into learning and playing D&D, maybe you should play a different (and easier) game. eudas
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-24-05, 02:31 PM	They should be rewarded, fine, but not at the expanse of the other players. The whole issue is play-balance. If I play a game, I'd like to be as powerfull as the others. If I'm too underpowered, it's boring. Wether they are more powerfull because they helped the DM (XP reward for OOC work toward the game), better powergaming knowledge, access to more books, being the DM's girlfriend is irrelevent. They ARE unbalanced compared to the rest f the party. It's about respecting your fellow players. Oh, as for the if you don't want to put any work into learning and playing D&D, maybe you should play a different (and easier) game. I want to play a game. I want to have fun with my friends. I want to live a story. I don't want to study the rulebook for 15678 hours to look for loopholes and more powerfull combinaison. There's a HUGE difference between knowing how to play the game and knowing how to twink a character. You seems to forget this is not competitive play, it's cooperative play. Yet the confusion IS frequent amongst powergamers...
DM Denubis 03-24-05, 03:17 PM	Not at all. No powergamer considers it a competition, unless they're also a jerk. It's the jerk part that causes that. Now, sure, sometimes we min/maxers hold contests, or fight over records on the CharOp boards, but for the most part, we don't do it in game. Most of us are fairly sensible (If somewhat insane.) people, and won't go overboard if it means ruining the game. Also, nobody's telling you to learn the loopholes like we have. But at the same time, if you can't make a competent character, and won't ask for help, what do you want us to do? Purposely gimp our characters? For the most part, we love helping people, and sharing our knowledge. If people don't ask, though, we don't say anything.
On_the_wings_of_TPK 03-24-05, 03:31 PM	They should be rewarded, fine, but not at the expanse of the other players. The whole issue is play-balance. If I play a game, I'd like to be as powerfull as the others. If I'm too underpowered, it's boring. Wether they are more powerfull because they helped the DM (XP reward for OOC work toward the game), better powergaming knowledge, access to more books, being the DM's girlfriend is irrelevent. They ARE unbalanced compared to the rest f the party. It's about respecting your fellow players. Oh, as for the if you don't want to put any work into learning and playing D&D, maybe you should play a different (and easier) game. I want to play a game. I want to have fun with my friends. I want to live a story. I don't want to study the rulebook for 15678 hours to look for loopholes and more powerfull combinaison. There's a HUGE difference between knowing how to play the game and knowing how to twink a character. You seems to forget this is not competitive play, it's cooperative play. Yet the confusion IS frequent amongst powergamers... Ok, first off, I wholeheartedly believe that this game is coooperative. That's one of the reasons I like it some much: no matter what happens, everyone who had fun wins. I have been playing for 2 years straight. If I were to have studied the books on a ratio of 1 hour of play to 1 hour of reading source material, and assuming that each seesion I attended lasted 6 hours, that means I have spent 312 hours studying rulebooks -- roughly 6.5 days out of a 365-day year. That isn't too much time spent at all. Trust me, getting to know the loopholes isn't hard, and we will gladly teach you.
Alluvian 03-24-05, 03:41 PM	I cannot BELIEVE how this can be so seemingly complicated. Don't people learn in first grade that if you don't bring enough for the class you can't have it? This kid never learned how to share. First, there should be no problem using splatbooks assuming the DM has okayed every choice you made. The caveat to this rule is that you act like a SECOND grader and share your *#$%#% books. I would extend this to not allowing anything on a character sheet that the DM does not have immediate access to. Second, characters IMO should NEVER be made in private unless time was a critical issue when the campaign started. Everything put on the sheet should start with "Hey, DM, mind if I go with..." followed by a yes or no. Caveat here is that when all is done the DM can look at the character as a whole and decide if it fits with his campaign's power level/setting. Third, this kid can't follow 1 or 2, so don't let him deviate from the PHB. All stat rolls are to be made in front of the entire gaming group. If you think he is lying with dice rolls, the DM rolls for him. I recently decided to make a zen archer psychic warrior. Nothing crazy, no PrC or anything, but I made damn sure that it was fine with the DM each step of the way. But maybe the DM didn't like psionics. Maybe psionics don't exist in his world or are too rare to allow in a PC. Maybe he thinks zen archery is too cheesy (I don't think so since you still need good dex to qualify for most good archery feats). I was starting late in the campaign, the DM gave me 1000 gold and I went over each odd item I wanted to buy, making sure that spending 400 gp on +3 str adjusted composite longbow was okay. My background more than explained access to decently made non-magic weapons, heck, it explains good reason for me to have easily stolen some, but I still bought it. My main concern with the character was to not be an overly powerful or overly weak character. It is NOT the job of the rulebooks to balance all classes, it is the job of the DM to balance the existing characters with each other and the group of the whole with the campaign setting. Anything from players to magic items that are in the game that are too strong is a DM error. Not a fatal error, but one that a good DM should address. My solution as a DM in this case would be a simple ultimatum. The player in question MUST allow the other players full and eager access to all material used in creating his character (within reason*) or they must start a new character with nothing past what is used in the PHB and any book another player owns and is willing to share. None of this, I will allow it for now, but no more. Share or drop the character. *What is within reason? Players should be able to expect this character to bring that material to EVERY gaming session. Letting another player go home with the material is excessive to me. DM however should be allowed to make any notes/copies of any of the material used on your character sheet. I have a feeling that this stone fist spell has been used incorrectly in the campaign, but maybe he was punching with his fist once a round. As a DM if I don't have the rule within arms length of me it does not belong on any character sheet. And the DM holding on to character sheets is prudent as well. People can be very tempted to cheat to fudge more gold, exp, another few skillpoints, etc... As much as I love looking over my character sheet between sessions I understand fully why the DM really should keep them.
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-25-05, 01:53 AM	Not at all. No powergamer considers it a competition, unless they're also a jerk. It's the jerk part that causes that. Now, sure, sometimes we min/maxers hold contests, or fight over records on the CharOp boards, but for the most part, we don't do it in game. Most powergamers are not jerks. But most D&D jerks are powergamers. Most of us are fairly sensible (If somewhat insane.) people, and won't go overboard if it means ruining the game. Therein lies the diference between a powergamer and a munchkin. That's my whole point. I said that if a PC's too unbalanced, it's gonna make the game boring for the rest of the group. Also, nobody's telling you to learn the loopholes like we have. But at the same time, if you can't make a competent character, and won't ask for help, what do you want us to do? Purposely gimp our characters? 100% Right. But remember, a competent PC doesn't mean a min/maxed one. It's all about respect. If you're a bit more powerfull than the group, but not so as to dominate, there's no problem. For the most part, we love helping people, and sharing our knowledge. If people don't ask, though, we don't say anything No problem. If they want to up the power, fine. The balance is preserved (...), game's still fun. Be carefull not to make it a competition. It's easy to start the one-upping...
Cold Napalm 03-25-05, 04:27 AM	A competitan PC is not make a 8 CHR cleric for undead slaying... Nor a strength 8 fighter. Nor an int 11 wizard. That cleric was seriously badly made...not that the power gammer isn't a problem since he can't seem to share and he seems to cheat. But somebody who makes SERIOUSLY gimped character like above is as much a problem as any power gamer.
armygamer26 03-25-05, 11:20 AM	Min/Maxing is fine to a point. But, roleplaying is usually sacrificed in the process. That was one of the good things about 2nd edition, everything was somewhat set in stone, and you differentiated your character by ROLEPLAYING him, adding flavor stories, backgrounds, etc... NOT becuase it gave you a bonus somewhere (or as an excuse to have something ridiculous like a savage species in a humanoid campaign, etc). Now, all many characters seem to be concerned about it just how they can make their character more powerful. And, if one person has a character who is blatantly more powerful than other players (and building a more powerful character is NOT a sign of one's gaming skill, being able to play a "gimped" character is) then every encounter will be either too easy for that character, or every other character will contribute little to the battle, and face a much greater chance of death. Luckily, most of the people I play with are good at balancing roleplaying and ROLL playing...
DM Denubis 03-25-05, 11:59 AM	God, do I hate the roleplaying vs. ROLLplaying argument... I mean, I really hate people saying that. Roleplaying is sacrificed? In what way? Numbers do not add to or take away from roleplaying. Currently, in an online campaign, I'm playing a Changeling Fighter focusing in the spiked chain, heading for Warshaper. By level eight, I'll be immune to critical hits, have a 20ft. reach naturally, be able to grow natural weapons at will, and have Fast Healing 2. Ad let's not forget the +4 to strength and constitution. And the penalty? I lose out on one point of BAB. This character spends his life in a human form, because he's afraid of what people would think of him if they knew he was a changeling. As a result, he's going to take the mage slayer feat, because he knows that high level mages can determine what he is. His best friend, and the only other person in the party, is a human wizard. Even his best friend does not know what he truly is. The two are prone to bickering constantly, more often than not about the smell of Yilus' (The wizard.) spell components. Just because I'm min/maxing doesn't mean that I don't roleplay. It just means that my character is more powerful than the average character, which has very little to do with roleplaying.
Wizard 03-25-05, 12:41 PM	If I play a game, I'd like to be as powerfull as the others. If I'm too underpowered, it's boring. You seems to forget this is not competitive play... :confused:
Ze_Mighty_Vegetable 03-25-05, 03:03 PM	:confused: ...and wanting to be at the same power level as the others preclude cooperative play? What exactly is confusing, here? :confused: