The association of min-maxing and munchkinism

[Ice9]

Yeah, this is a stupid differentiation.

Because Munchkin and Min-Maxer... and Powergamer and Rules lawyer and blah blah blah ALL mean the the same thing and no it isn't some elaborate specific level of "acceptable" awesome rules use.

While I've seen the first three inter-mixed, Rules Lawyer generally refers to how much you reference/enforce the rules in play, not how you build your character. Also, while I admit it's not universal, a lot of people do make the distinction between Min-Maxer/Optimizer and Munchkin.

But really the attempts by some communities to "take back" Min-Maxer and Power Gamer (and the relative lack of attempts to "take back" Munchkin and Rules Lawyer) is pretty much pointless. We don't need the label. The label remains tainted, and ultimately the conversation with those that insist on using those labels has only ever been successful in the limited number of cases when it has when you talk about how to actually productively improve the game rather than having shit fights over whatever the hell it is you and the three people you game with have subjectively interpreted to be proper insulting role playing gamer labeling.

As a label for players? Sure. As a label for campaigns, it can be useful though - specifying that a campaign is low-op / high-op / go nuts is a handy reference and prevents a lot of arguments down the line.

[Maj]

See, all the terms - munchkin, powergamer, min-maxer... They get jumbled up by people who don't understand them.



For me, munchkin holds a special place in my heart for those people who plow over the other players (and the DM) with their superior "knowledge" of the game. They are in it to win it, even though how to win and what objective must be achieved to win aren't exactly spelled out.

That player who joins your pick-up game who says they were an original playtester when the game was being written up and claims the DM is doing it wrong... They're a munchkin.

The player who demands that the party cleric stop fighting heal them in combat instead of killing the bad guys... They're a munchkin.

The player who joins a homebrew game and expects the monsters to be the same as what's in the book, blowing up everything they deem "wrong"... They're a munchkin.

The player who decides it's better to kill the shopkeeper and take all the stuff in the store than it is to buy it... They're a munchkin.

[Username17]

As for the 4th edition player labeling bit, I'm wondering why something like that is truly all that bad? Don't other RPG's already do label players in a way, least, I believe even 3rd edition did so. Mentioning preferences, that those prefer to just mingle socially with friends, murder stuff 24/7, others might be into the in player dramas more. Anyway, even the Den has called certain players the Jimmy/Girlfriend, the ones, that the Tome Barbarian Class was apparently made for. Seemed to recognize that there are the casual kind of player that's just kind of there, and thus would want a simple character type to play. Believe 4th edition instead called them the "Watcher", so that type exists to say the least. So why is it bad that 4th edition is putting labels to players, that we already do anyway?

Putting labels on players is not necessarily a bad thing. People do play for different reasons and there are different things you can do to keep different players engaged.

However, herp derping out to these differences and then putting them into arbitrary categories and then herp derping out about those categories is basically GNS all over again. Just a series of deepisms that serve to act as a mealy mouthed endorsement of their favored playstyle by passive aggressively insulting the fuck out of everyone else. For example, here is their actual description of "The Instigator":

An instigator enjoys making things happen. She has no patience for careful planning or deliberation. She’ll open an obviously trapped chest “just to see what happens.” She provokes authority figures and opens dungeon doors to bring more monsters into an already difficult fight. The instigator loves the vicarious thrill of taking enormous risks and sometimes just making bad choices.

The instigator can be disruptive, but she can also be a lot of fun for the other players. Things rarely grind to a halt with an instigator in the group, and the stories that get retold after the game session often revolve around whatever crazy thing the instigator did this week.

See, the claim is that they are being all non judgmental and shit. But actually they basically just said that players who want to do things and ignore the demands of railroady NPCs are problem players by conflating players who are being purposefully disruptive to players who are proactive. It's not just that it's a list of meaningless deepisms, it's that it's actually corrosive to player dynamics by insulting people who don't play "right". It's just like a White Wolf rant about how rollplayers are bad or a Privateer Press rant about how meticulous players lack balls, or a Games Workshop rant about how people who know the fucking rules should be punched in the face. Just, by James Wyatt instead of one of those other assholes.

-Username17

[Prak]

Generally, I go with the idea that munchkinism involves cheating. Minmaxing and optimization entail creating your character to do something specific really well. And that something specific can be "everything," you just need specific builds.

[shadzar]

minmaxxing and optimizing is a tool used often by munckins to get an advantage over the game to create a win condition where none should exist.

observing themselves as the single player of the game and ignoring the rest they tools are often used to make sure the munchkin player can achieve the game goals on his own and either for success of the game or just to show off, complete the game without aid form others.

minxmaxxing and optimizing is looked down upon because of its heavy use within munchkinism.

D&D isnt about having the right stuff all the time, but trying to figure out what to do when you have the wrong stuff to do the task. the entire game is a giant logic puzzle.

this is how so much anger gets tosed out by the various groups aobut how to play, because nobody will meet int he middle. minmaxxers calling something not-optimized as gimped. and minmaxxers/optimazers being considered munchkins.

the game isnt about making everything impossibly hard for yourself, or trying to use the rules of it to make everything easier. the rules exist as a framework to create the playspace. once inside the playspace is where you have to overcome challenges. doing so before you ever play is akin to munchkinism. it is one thing to be a boy scout and "be prepared" but also a character can be too prepared that it looks and feels faked.

[Dogbert]

I use the same definition for all those words that nowadays have lost all meaning anyway. It's in my sig.

Still, even if those terms have lost all meaning, I still have a use for them. The frequency with which people use them in regular conversation helps me identify players and GMs I'd rather avoid. Funny how basket weavers and GM-is-God talifans think of it as some sort of trump card that automatically disqualifies the opposition.