Min Max is the Devil

[infected slut princess]

Whoa dude calm down. But yeah, should a DM with more system mastery help "bad" players who have less system mastery? Like, "yo, don't take that feat, it sucks!", or "if you want to be a powerful holy warrior character, you should use this class instead of that class..." I would say, YES. I mean, that is not a lot of work, and you are contributing to the overall enjoyment of the group. Why are you bitching so much?

There are a lot of unwarranted assumptions in your post based on things we don't actually know. Like, we do not know what expectations and guidelines were set by the the DM at the game's outset. It seemhs like before the game even started, the DM fucked up by letting hyper-strong characters play the same game with shit characters.

Likewise, we do not know that the hardcore optimizer in Wrathzog's game is trying to "ruin the game" for anyone else. I mean, is he exploiting bad rules? While everyone else does "normal" stuff? Or is he just a good character in a party that otherwise totally sucks ass? Maybe I am just too charitable, but my experience of generally not gaming with fuckers leads me to think that most gamers do NOT want to ruin the game for anyone. (But that might be possible in this case, nonetheless.)

Now, it does sound like the hardcore optimizer is going a little over-the-top, i will grant you. Evidence being that the DM has to set up encounters at 4-6 CR higher than normal specifically just because of this dude. But again, why is this happening in the first place? If you are going to play an RPG that is unbalanced as such, the DM has to take some responsibility for maintaining balance.

Now, if it is true that the hardcore optimizer is just an asshole, I would just kick him out. But assuming it is a group of friends playing the RPG, I assume people aren't trying to ruin the fun of others, and things can be worked out. You could work to tone down the hardcore optimizer, or you could to help the bulkrate nonoptimizers. Either way, the DM must in principle be willing to help make the game work.

[TheFlatline]

As the Mister Cavern, Flatline, you are also a master of ceremonies, which means the onus is on you for your players having a good time. Part of that is teaching them some of the neat shit they can do within a system. You don't have a responsibility to teach your players the ways of optimization, but you do have an obligation to help them play the game on equal footing. Whether you do this by kneecapping the optimizer or bringing the others to that guy's level is up to you.

Again, RPGs are collaborative. As in, the responsibilities lie on everyone to create a good time, not just the MC. The MC is the catalyst but everyone's gotta bring enough to the table to have fun with. That means the players need to not give the MC shit, the MC needs to communicate with the players, and an implied or explicit social contract needs to be formed.

The best MC ever with players who just don't give a shit will still result in a shitty, unfun game.

[Wrathzog]

aren't you responsible for this? If you have a top-level optimizer as a player in your game, and a bunch of bulk-rate non-optimizers for all the other players, should you not help out the poor optimizers so they can contribute more?

I'm as responsible as every other player at the table. I'll admit that while I occasionally act like it as the DM, I don't own the campaign. My only guidance for PC creation was to, "Not be retarded."

Anyhow, Two of the three other players are at least as good as I am as far as optimization goes and it would actually be insulting for me to offer them help.
The Third has has had every other player at the table ask him if he wanted help making his character but he always refuses. He knows his character sucks but will not accept assistance. It's very frustrating.

Unless, of course, like you say, the everyone WANTS to play The Hero and His Retarded Friends.

As far as I can tell, no one is unhappy about it. Personally, I'm simply concerned because this describe a situation that most people find unappealing. But until someone says straight up, "this is not a fun situation," I am not going to force a change on the party dynamic.

-e-

The best MC ever with players who just don't give a shit will still result in a shitty, unfun game.

I just got done talking with Player Three which basically went, "Well, I don't need to make a backstory for my character because he's boring and he sucks and I don't want to play him anymore."
So, at this point I'm really not sure what motivates him as a player.

[TheFlatline]

Whoa dude calm down. But yeah, should a DM with more system mastery help "bad" players who have less system mastery? Like, "yo, don't take that feat, it sucks!", or "if you want to be a powerful holy warrior character, you should use this class instead of that class..." I would say, YES. I mean, that is not a lot of work, and you are contributing to the overall enjoyment of the group. Why are you bitching so much?

There are a lot of unwarranted assumptions in your post based on things we don't actually know. Like, we do not know what expectations and guidelines were set by the the DM at the game's outset. It seemhs like before the game even started, the DM fucked up by letting hyper-strong characters play the same game with shit characters.

Likewise, we do not know that the hardcore optimizer in Wrathzog's game is trying to "ruin the game" for anyone else. I mean, is he exploiting bad rules? While everyone else does "normal" stuff? Or is he just a good character in a party that otherwise totally sucks ass? Maybe I am just too charitable, but my experience of generally not gaming with fuckers leads me to think that most gamers do NOT want to ruin the game for anyone. (But that might be possible in this case, nonetheless.)

Now, it does sound like the hardcore optimizer is going a little over-the-top, i will grant you. Evidence being that the DM has to set up encounters at 4-6 CR higher than normal specifically just because of this dude. But again, why is this happening in the first place? If you are going to play an RPG that is unbalanced as such, the DM has to take some responsibility for maintaining balance.

Now, if it is true that the hardcore optimizer is just an asshole, I would just kick him out. But assuming it is a group of friends playing the RPG, I assume people aren't trying to ruin the fun of others, and things can be worked out. You could work to tone down the hardcore optimizer, or you could to help the bulkrate nonoptimizers. Either way, the DM must in principle be willing to help make the game work.

Here's the thing. Maybe it's because I usually MC and so I actively look for these things:

If I'm playing a character who is so frickin overpowered that the rest of the party is bitching (see my pathfinder alchemist of all things), I'll tone him down so that it's not The Dude game. It's unreasonable to expect 5 other people to conform to my expectations in this case without me being willing to come down to meet them.

I will agree that MC has responsibilities here. Namely, it started with him saying "yes" to the character, and "yes" every time something bullshit piled onto the uber-character. And with balls and spine, the issue can stop at any time. You can say "no" as the MC, you can say "I'm really sorry but we're going to have to tweak this. When you asked originally it didn't *look* like you were going to dominate the game but since you are we have to address this". You *can* give toys to other PCs, but usually that doesn't catch up the power imbalance as much as you'd think.

I don't see Twink 101 as the solution. Helping avoid dead-end character choices (toughness as a feat blows!) is fine. That's not twinking or min-maxing in my book. Even "optimizing" falls somewhere in the middle. Playing an elf so you get an int boost for an int-based character isn't up to the level of min-max. That's just optimization. Twinking or min-maxing symptoms in my experience have included a dozen obscure rulebooks of varying quality choice-picked from here and there, and often at least one "I know I can't take this but can we make an excuse just this once?" moment. I don't want to encourage looking for abusive loopholes in a gaming group.

[shadzar]

The only time I have a problem with min-maxing is when it creates a situation where there's some serious intraparty balance problem

This is the exact issue that I'm running into in my game currently. We have one guy who is awesome at optimization and then we have the rest of the party who play about average power level characters.

To provide a "Challenge" to the party I have to regularly set them up against CR+4-6 encounters or the awesome guy rapes everything. The rest of the party ends up using up all their resources in pretty much every fight and are more or less ineffectual. As far as I can tell, there's no way to set up an encounter that would be fair for everyone else without being completely arbitrary about it (oh shit your level 4 character just got mazed for 10 rounds).

have you tried getting rid of the problematic player?

this min-maxer IS a problem that YOU as DM should have recognized, and told him his character isnt working in this group. you should have offered to let him make a character more fitting to the rest of the group.

you cant force the other players to optimize or whatever if they dont want to, so you have the option of extra work making the game less fun for the majority, or fixing the single problem you have identified.

this is a group problem, NOT a game problem. well the fact things CAN be optimized in such a way is a game problem, but moreso the players that seek out those things neglecting that it isnt the point of the game, and only works when EVERYONE seeks out those things.

you ahve to treat this like ANY other disruptive player problem, and find a way to fix the disruptive player.

[shadzar]

No, it's not my duty as the GM. I'm not there to hold hands, or create masturbatory theater. I'm not there to justify an asshat player who is screwing the game over. If the "hardcore optimizer" is willing to disrupt/ruin the game for everyone else, he is the problem, not the rest of the group. He should probably find a different game, and in reality I'll punt his ass out of the group before I increase my already overwhelming workload another 400% because he's a disruptive player. I don't owe him an ego stroke or power trip.

seems i was ninja'd by flatline....

[rasmuswagner]

The only time I have a problem with min-maxing is when it creates a situation where there's some serious intraparty balance problem, or when a character's power level makes the type of story we want to play untenable. If we're playing a game where typical, Hollywood-style werewolves are supposed to be scary, then I'm not going to be happy if you bring a world-warping spellcaster to the table.

But that's an example of MC being a fucking moron. I'll assume we're still talking about a D&D derivative here, but the point stands even if we're playing GURPs without adult supervision: Don't use a gonzo fantasy supers system for your low-fantasy concept, you mouth-breathing, basement-dwelling, barely literate subhuman retard.

[NineInchNall]

Um, no. You can absolutely use a system that allows for high-powered characters to run a game that is not about high-powered characters. It's not even difficult.

[Juton]

Um, no. You can absolutely use a system that allows for high-powered characters to run a game that is not about high-powered characters. It's not even difficult.

Can you give some details about how you pulled this off? Did you ban certain classes, did you cap levels or just have a massive list of houserules? This problem would crop up quite a bit in my old 3.5 group, a few of them would want to be gritty assassins then one player would come around with a Druid and start dropping dire wolves on people's heads, it invariable went out of control. Not even once we hit double digit levels, we left the realm of low-fantasy by around level 5 depending on who was playing what. So how did you keep D&D working for low-fantasy games?

[TheFlatline]

The only time I have a problem with min-maxing is when it creates a situation where there's some serious intraparty balance problem, or when a character's power level makes the type of story we want to play untenable. If we're playing a game where typical, Hollywood-style werewolves are supposed to be scary, then I'm not going to be happy if you bring a world-warping spellcaster to the table.

But that's an example of MC being a fucking moron. I'll assume we're still talking about a D&D derivative here, but the point stands even if we're playing GURPs without adult supervision: Don't use a gonzo fantasy supers system for your low-fantasy concept, you mouth-breathing, basement-dwelling, barely literate subhuman retard.

Let's run with D&D. Being an open system, there are some terrible, TERRIBLE books out there. Hell there are terrible books from WOTC that break things over their knee and throws semblance of balance into the fire.

I have a simple rule of thumb. The more books you use, or the more obscure the book is, the more I'll expect an abusive character. The rule is accurate about 90% of the time.

[Wrathzog]

Can you give some details about how you pulled this off? Did you ban certain classes, did you cap levels or just have a massive list of houserules? ... So how did you keep D&D working for low-fantasy games?

It basically comes down to play style, setting, and making sure that everyone is in on the game plan.

Like Nall said, it's not difficult. You just have to show some restraint.

[Antariuk]

The only time I have a problem with min-maxing is when it creates a situation where there's some serious intraparty balance problem, or when a character's power level makes the type of story we want to play untenable. If we're playing a game where typical, Hollywood-style werewolves are supposed to be scary, then I'm not going to be happy if you bring a world-warping spellcaster to the table.

But that's an example of MC being a fucking moron. I'll assume we're still talking about a D&D derivative here, but the point stands even if we're playing GURPs without adult supervision: Don't use a gonzo fantasy supers system for your low-fantasy concept, you mouth-breathing, basement-dwelling, barely literate subhuman retard.

Let's run with D&D. Being an open system, there are some terrible, TERRIBLE books out there. Hell there are terrible books from WOTC that break things over their knee and throws semblance of balance into the fire.

I have a simple rule of thumb. The more books you use, or the more obscure the book is, the more I'll expect an abusive character. The rule is accurate about 90% of the time.

Well, if for example you are playing D&D 3rd edition, and you ban all PHB classes (and possibly spells) but use classes from the Complete series instead, the game would be less "broken".

[TheFlatline]

But that's an example of MC being a fucking moron. I'll assume we're still talking about a D&D derivative here, but the point stands even if we're playing GURPs without adult supervision: Don't use a gonzo fantasy supers system for your low-fantasy concept, you mouth-breathing, basement-dwelling, barely literate subhuman retard.

Let's run with D&D. Being an open system, there are some terrible, TERRIBLE books out there. Hell there are terrible books from WOTC that break things over their knee and throws semblance of balance into the fire.

I have a simple rule of thumb. The more books you use, or the more obscure the book is, the more I'll expect an abusive character. The rule is accurate about 90% of the time.

Well, if for example you are playing D&D 3rd edition, and you ban all PHB classes (and possibly spells) but use classes from the Complete series instead, the game would be less "broken".

Aside from being completely unintuitive (Throw out the core books!) and probably highly arguable...

What's your point?

[shadzar]

Um, no. You can absolutely use a system that allows for high-powered characters to run a game that is not about high-powered characters. It's not even difficult.

Can you give some details about how you pulled this off? Did you ban certain classes, did you cap levels or just have a massive list of houserules?

rather easy with doing nothing except just not playing with high powered things.

not the original statement says "allows for high-powered characters" not "requires high-powered characters".

this is why there are some D&D and AD&D games that have lasted a decade and are still not too far above 10th level. they just arent "powergaming".

[Antariuk]

Let's run with D&D. Being an open system, there are some terrible, TERRIBLE books out there. Hell there are terrible books from WOTC that break things over their knee and throws semblance of balance into the fire.

I have a simple rule of thumb. The more books you use, or the more obscure the book is, the more I'll expect an abusive character. The rule is accurate about 90% of the time.

Well, if for example you are playing D&D 3rd edition, and you ban all PHB classes (and possibly spells) but use classes from the Complete series instead, the game would be less "broken".

Aside from being completely unintuitive (Throw out the core books!) and probably highly arguable...

What's your point?

That expectation of an abusive character shouldn't be based on the amount of supplements used. This isn't news and I am totally with you that any new supplement brought into the game increases chances of something abusive, but gaming without PHB classes ist totally doable.

I got the idea from someone who created a non-PHB game just for the fun of turning things upside down, balance and power abuse weren't even a concern to him. The only real problem I see with this is that you might struggle to fill out the classic party rules so many official modules require. also, it is by no means a foolproof safeguard against the known problems, but certainly one way to approach the topic.

[tussock]

Min-Max is where you buy your Cha all the way down to 3 for an extra 5 build points, and take a limitation that stops your Fighter casting spells in exchange for an extra couple of feats. Swapping bad things that don't matter for good things that do. Min-Max is a character in the goblins webcomic who does this.

Munchkin is where you find a million gp gem in the dirt so you can be 20th level already, all totally legit, because wealth-by-level works in reverse too. Kill all the gods, take their stuff, and wonder what's so hard about D&D. Also, Ranger 1 + Fighter 2 + Paladin 3 + Barbarian 4 is a 4th level character with BAB +10, and magical plusses from two-weapon fighting stack (and get two-handed power attack, on account of using two hands), don't you know.

Powergamer is where you build Tome-like characters strait from the core books without hardly any Munchkinism at all and the DM responds with APL+6 encounters with optimised feats and gear as the norm. And you die a lot, which is what all the clones and wishes and genies and stuff are for: at 6th level. Three round fights sometimes take five hours to play out, as various rule interpretations are checked and re-checked. Everyone else is doing it wrong.

[Fuchs]

Munchkins are best represented here. Read the story that started it all.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

Min-Max is the devil because it's a stupid buzzword intended to vilify people who don't play in a way the person using it approves of.

If someone in your party who is either so far above or below the party's power curve that they're making the game less fun for others, then they are a problem player and need to be spoken to. Railing against meaningless bullshit and pining for days that didn't exist where all D&D sessions looked like longform dramatic improv sessions won't get you anywhere.

[Dean]

Munchkins are best represented here. Read the story that started it all.

WHAT THE FUCK DID I JUST READ!!! WHAT THE SHIT WAS THAT ABOUT!

[Fuchs]

Munchkins are best represented here. Read the story that started it all.

WHAT THE FUCK DID I JUST READ!!! WHAT THE SHIT WAS THAT ABOUT!

A satire of munchkins/rules lawyers, written from the point of characters talking about rules as if those were in character, Order of the Stick Style. A rather famous one, I remembe reading it first in the 1990s.

[Seerow]

Yeah I can't be assed to read that.

[fectin]

It's a generic dick-wavey DM adventure, including basket-weaving Gary Stu, except that most of the dick-waving comes from exploits and cheating instead of DM dickery. That's pretty much it.

[nockermensch]

Munchkins are best represented here. Read the story that started it all.

WHAT THE FUCK DID I JUST READ!!! WHAT THE SHIT WAS THAT ABOUT!

What a classic. I read this many, many years ago. I'm glad to see it's still online.

And it shows exactly how the Munchkin mindset works. The tragic main character, Ringman, would be extremely powerful in any other campaign (see the guy's sheet, he's a monster) but he's completely outclassed because he never accepts munchkinism.

[ishy]

I find that story weird. They are concerned about rolling 1s with loaded dice and dice that don't even have ones on them.

[Dogbert]

I'm not sure if other countries have this joke but:

There was this guy walking at the market when he finds someone selling crabs. The crabs were in two buckets, but only one of them had a lid.

"Why is only one bucket lidded?" asked the man.

"You see" said the salesman. "The bucket with a lid contains swede crabs, and the one without a lid contains mexican crabs."

"What's the difference"?

"That's easy. If I leave the swede crabs unsupervised, they'll climb on top of one another until reaching the top, then help the rest escape."

"And the mexican ones?"

"Not an issue, The moment any of them starts climbing up, he gets tugged back down by the rest."

......................

Having said this, when I have an overachieving player surrounded by well, I won't say scrubs but I'll say... "less than ideal performers" I have two choices:

1) Nerf the overachiever and have to deal with one frustrated, antagonistic player.
2) Help everyone else make the most out of their characters and catch up.

I want my players to fulfill their characters' expectations. Players are happier, adventure runs smoother. I do this since chargen, but it doesn't stop there, and whenever I can help a player be happier with his character, I will.

Progress is done by bringing everyone up to speed, not by holding back those ahead.