How intense do you play?


Gamer Life General Discussion

Wayfinders

Many of my players are very competitive, to the point where they know the system very well.

I bring up this thread because of a simple idea. My father is a dedicated RPG veteran, however, when I started he was really into this game. He has become a serious power gamer.

One of my other players is more into the role-playing aspect of the game and is also a veteran of RPGs. He only power games when he thinks he needs to.

Lastly, there is one player who is simply there for the story, them and character development. He does not power game at all.

So, out of those three, we'll name them A, B, and C. Which one do you typically play as?

Scarab Sages

I am totally a B in fact I almost refuse to min max anything. Although some power games can be fun. I just get tired of them them.


I'm at the table for C which I derive from B and I only mildly A where I enjoy min/maxing the character stats to match the C & B vision that I have of the character.


I'm a C with a heavy appreciation for rules. I try to role play to my best ability while working within the scope of the rules. But because of this I tend to gravitate towards rules light or streamlined mechanics and learn them to the point where the rules simply disappear in the background. I hate power gaming but find myself doing so in certain Pathfinder/D&D games because that's what everyone else is doing, and if I don't, I would become irrelevant.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My answer is "yes," or "D, all of the above."

These things are not opposite ends of a single spectrum with "power game" at one end and "role-play" at the other, nor such simple things as to be all or nothing.

I am at the table for the story and the character development, but I am absolutely aware of which options are most mechanically potent and will build my character with the utmost care to make sure that it is strong enough to get the largest variety of jobs done, while not having one bit of what I refer to as "wasted strength" (an example of such wasted strength: a character that can already kill most enemies faced in a single round choosing an option to kill things better, rather than improving something they don't already almost always succeed at).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I play so intensely that it warps local spacetime.


thenobledrake wrote:
...but I am absolutely aware of which options are most mechanically potent and will build my character with the utmost care to make sure that it is strong enough to get the largest variety of jobs done...

Totally! The person that studies hard to get into the school with the best computer science program, dives into their school work gets and internship with a local software company can't reasonably be attacked for their life choice to do so...Maxing out their computer programming. For job experience and security, how they want to play, it's a good thing and making their Dex their dump stat just is what it is.

Same thing for making/advancing a character...what are the best choices to make them the most effective person in their profession/class. Bonus points for using role-playing and character development overlays to guide those choices.

I personally can't conceive of how to advance my characters until I actually reach the next level as much of my level-choices are dependent on what happened to them over the course of gaining the level. For example, a ranger I play was nearing 5th level and I had no idea what I was going to choose for 2nd Favored Enemy. Then we were attacked by undead one night and one of them dealt my character a critical hit, which I turned into a facial scar, and my 5th level choice was solidified to undead.

On the other hand I have players that on day one of starting a campaign they will have their character worked out from 1st to 20th level, each individual level detailed. When I DM them, I do my best to give them reasons to modify their future plans.

Umbral Reaver wrote:
I play so intensely that it warps local spacetime.

:D

Sovereign Court

C although I usually unconsciously optimize and my characters are usually the most effective in the party. I have to force myself not to optimize on occasion.

Wayfinders

Personally, I am a B, lately I have been on an extreme Character Development fanatic streak. (Especially with the Governor from the Walking Dead [406 - 407]).

I remember, when my father DMed he tended to make the game as hard as he could with there being a chance to succeed, and he tried to encourage us not to power game, but when in fact we needed to.

Now, I have played in a couple of other DMs games and I have tried my best to go against it, and try out a new way of creating characters. Although, in the back of my mind there is a little voice telling me the best way to make a character I know how.

Luckily, player C has been helping me with Character Developments of my own, so I am a happy player at the moment, as well as a happy DM.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I learned to roleplay by reading Jack Chick's Dark Dungeons and watching Tom Hanks in Mazes and Monsters.

I roleplay so intensely that when I die in the game I die in real life.

I ROLEPLAY WITH THE INTENSITY OF A THOUSAND EXPLODING SUNS!

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I used to be intense, and then I mellowed. I'm just here to roll dice and crack jokes.


TOZ wrote:
I used to be intense, and then I mellowed. I'm just here to roll dice and crack jokes.

Me too.


It really depends on the rest of the table.
In one group, it's more of a beer and chips type game where we're just getting together to kill some monsters and shoot the fecal matter.
In my main group, it gets pretty serious. So serious, that I've gotten pretty uncomfortable when two "characters" were arguing with each other. Kinda creepy, but they seemed to be having a good time.


Mr_Nevada wrote:
So, out of those three, we'll name them A, B, and C. Which one do you typically play as?

One? Nope. Can't do just one. \

I power game my character to best of my ability (often actually getting it right and making a powerhouse!) but if he's just a collection of numbers on a page without a fully developed personality I lose interest almost immediately. I have to have some backstory (often I keep it to myself and only bring it up in game when it actually seems important - if the DM really wants to look at it - so be it) but even more important I have to be able to get inside my character's head and think like he does. I often play PCs that are completely unlike me in real life (no surprise there - I think this is extremely common to RPG players) so I have to put myself in the PCs situation and figure out how, given the already established personality I am going for, he would react to a situation. This, for me, is the meat and potatoes of RPGs and why I love 'em. I make the PC mechanically sound because combat is always important and I like to be able to be good at it when needed - otherwise I really feel like a 'fifth wheel' and will get too bored with combat to keep me fired up for the RP parts. I find that if I'm equal parts good at all aspects of the game my enjoyment level skyrockets.

This false division of power gamer (whatever the heck that means anymore), role player and even casual player really should be stopped. It is extremely unrealistic to how 99% of games I have ever been in, run or heard about have actually been played.


I doubt my style of playing can be characterized.

I just play my character. If my character is focused on being a damage dealing machine, then I play them that way. If my character is focused on conniving the local townsfolk into giving him free food and drink, I play them that way.

The second time I play with someone I almost always get a "Wow, you play totally different than I expected based on the game we just played" comment.

To me the whole point of the game is to play my character as honestly, sincerely and accurately as possible. So that's what I try to do.

Sovereign Court

PsychoticWarrior wrote:
Mr_Nevada wrote:
So, out of those three, we'll name them A, B, and C. Which one do you typically play as?

One? Nope. Can't do just one. \

I power game my character to best of my ability (often actually getting it right and making a powerhouse!) but if he's just a collection of numbers on a page without a fully developed personality I lose interest almost immediately. I have to have some backstory (often I keep it to myself and only bring it up in game when it actually seems important - if the DM really wants to look at it - so be it) but even more important I have to be able to get inside my character's head and think like he does. I often play PCs that are completely unlike me in real life (no surprise there - I think this is extremely common to RPG players) so I have to put myself in the PCs situation and figure out how, given the already established personality I am going for, he would react to a situation. This, for me, is the meat and potatoes of RPGs and why I love 'em. I make the PC mechanically sound because combat is always important and I like to be able to be good at it when needed - otherwise I really feel like a 'fifth wheel' and will get too bored with combat to keep me fired up for the RP parts. I find that if I'm equal parts good at all aspects of the game my enjoyment level skyrockets.

This false division of power gamer (whatever the heck that means anymore), role player and even casual player really should be stopped. It is extremely unrealistic to how 99% of games I have ever been in, run or heard about have actually been played.

Then you don't powergame. You make powerful characters. There is a huge difference between the two.

You characters aren't disruptive to the game. And you don't do it to the detriment of fun of other players. Plus you roleplay.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

You know how some people bleed from their nipples while running marathons?

That intense.


A friend once said "We game more than we should and not as often as we'd like"

If I had the time, I would game every day of the week for as many hours possible. ....and that still wouldn't be enough. Of course I would have to sleep. I would dream of all the games I didn't get to play. Yet.

The Exchange

To me it's straight up C. Never got the point of going on a power trip from being good in a social game.

That is not to say I can't or won't build powerful characters, but it's not about making the *best character* - something sufficiently powerful that fits an idea I have is all I look for.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:


Then you don't powergame. You make powerful characters. There is a huge difference between the two.
You characters aren't disruptive to the game. And you don't do it to the detriment of fun of other players. Plus you roleplay.

So now power gamers are the disruptive type of gamer? Out to ruin everyone else's fun? I really have to keep up with this stuff better - back 7-8 years ago 'power gamer' wasn't nearly as negative. What you're describing would have been a 'munchkin' (does anyone use that one anymore?). I just can't keep up!

Sovereign Court

Munchkin is a different kind of power gamer. He purposefully seeks every single hole in the rules and exploits them to "win". He also detracts from the fun.


PsychoticWarrior wrote:
So now power gamers are the disruptive type of gamer? Out to ruin everyone else's fun? I really have to keep up with this stuff better - back 7-8 years ago 'power gamer' wasn't nearly as negative. What you're describing would have been a 'munchkin' (does anyone use that one anymore?). I just can't keep up!

Take your pick http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=power+gamer

Pretty much you have to ask every person that uses the term, "what do you mean by that?"

Though nearly all versions include something about how power gamers, through their power gaming, tend to frustrate or ruin the fun of the other players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I prefer to be in the present tense when I play, but I suppose I could be in the past or future tense just as easily, um, uh, wait...

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So intense nobody is allowed to play their characters in third person (a huge pet peeve of mine)


I love quality, competitive, interested gamers. What ticks me off though are pouting crybabies who try to bully the gm when they don't get to be jerks about the game. :)

That said, both of my groups tend to be pretty good, but we've got one guy who pretty much keeps me from showing interest in GMing again.(see above)


In my neck of the woods, Power Gamer didn't mean like you were excersizing (taking a power break etc.) A power gamer was someone who over powered his character. The word actually made sense. Munchkin actually sounds small and doesn't make much sense. It was around at the same time as we were using Power Gamer. Such as the guys who were power gamers in Champions, but we never referred to them as munchkins in Champions. Actually, now, when I think of Munchkins, I think of a certain card game....


Fizzygoo wrote:
PsychoticWarrior wrote:
So now power gamers are the disruptive type of gamer? Out to ruin everyone else's fun? I really have to keep up with this stuff better - back 7-8 years ago 'power gamer' wasn't nearly as negative. What you're describing would have been a 'munchkin' (does anyone use that one anymore?). I just can't keep up!

Take your pick http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=power+gamer

Pretty much you have to ask every person that uses the term, "what do you mean by that?"

Though nearly all versions include something about how power gamers, through their power gaming, tend to frustrate or ruin the fun of the other players.

I guess my disconnect is that making powerful characters, through power gaming (I don't know what else you could call it) shouldn't ruin anyone elses' fun. I guess if 2 players were making the *same* character and one 'power gamed' it and turned out to be more effective in the role than the other that could frustrate people.

It just sounds too nebulous and subjective is what I'm getting at I guess. It also still isn't something that should be separate from roleplaying and making the game enjoyable for everybody. Maybe I power game my role playing too - I do tend to hog the spotlight but when the whole table turns to look at you, with your 11 CHA thief, when your group has to negotiate with ship captain for passage (despite having a LG cleric (15 CHA) and a paladin (17 CHA)) - ya gotta go with it!


Hama wrote:
Munchkin is a different kind of power gamer. He purposefully seeks every single hole in the rules and exploits them to "win". He also detracts from the fun.

See I always thought munchkins were the ones who actually tried to bend or even break rules in their own favour. Not *look* for holes but create them from wholecloth.

back in the 80s we just called them cheaters and laughed at them until our throats were sore.

Hama wrote:
So intense nobody is allowed to play their characters in third person (a huge pet peeve of mine)

That would honestly bug the crap out of me too. "Bob the Fighter moves here to attack the goblins" "Bob asks the merchant how much the platemail is". It would sound like Bob didn't speak and had an interpreter walking around for him doing all his talking. I'd insist on stats for the interpreter if someone wanted to play a PC like this (not that anyone ever has - heck I'm not sure I've ever played with someone who did this).


I don't like to be pigeon holed.

It really depends on the group and game...

Though I tend to get very intense about the character and Role-playing aspect of the games.


> I create a Schwarzschild radius of intensity! <

hmmm... I think you have a character that expresses some archtype and the details flesh out that character, which is always part self projection. I play to survive and thrive as the character would, this is their life. So part acting...

Some would say I powergame, sure... all humans game the system, but you try not to step on other people's toes, play nice and have some fun.

Nothing you do in the game is going to benefit you in real life other than learning some social skills and how to think on your feet. You do haveta step back and say it's not important sometimes. Being quiet is the hard part.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I play pretty laid back. I'm also a backgroundy survivalist caster type. I play often in the mindset that my character isn't really here to hurt anybody. He just wants to achieve his personal goals and show off a little bit to the locals.

I'm happy to step aside and let the munchkin murderhobos have their fun while I drop a haste on them so they can really get goin and a planeshift on them if they bite off more than they can chew.
I'm not the party leader or the party ambassador...I'm more of an accountant/administrator.

Do I optimize? Do I want the best attribute scores and saving throws the game has to offer? Sure... Do I want to slap a tarrasque and make him cry? Not particularly. Do I want to subjugate the masses under my thrall? Not particularly. I'm the dude lebowski of gaming. I'm just here to have my kinda fun and occasionally get my mitts on a nice carpet. It really ties the room together.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

The name of the thread and the questions within asked feels to me like two different questions.

Intensity to me is more like how "into it" you are--and you can be "into it" whether you tend to veer more toward being roleplay heavy or mechanics heavy. In fact, I usually think of someone who is an "intense" player as someone who gets deeply into character (their build skills can be masterful or negligible, it doesn't matter) and doesn't like OOC distractions.

As to what style of gamer am I.... all of the above? I prefer to build my character according to concept and certainly love the stories and roleplay, but likewise pay attention to tactics and try to build my characters effectively. I wouldn't say I'm a "power gamer" but I certainly do pay attention to my builds.


I agree. I think the fact that I was interested in getting to a 45 skillbonus in singing on a non bard character tells both sides of that story about me... Sure I bothered to optimize... But I really went to the nines for an ability that doens't have much to do with effectiveness. I'd like to say I'm 'optimized for flavor' and geared for self preservation.

Survival and style are tied for being job 1. Killin stuff, breakin stuff, ruling stuff... Really aren't necessarily even on my top ten. I'm just along for the ride. I'm here to save princesses, restore kingdoms, help people stay alive and look good doing it. Cancer sun, Leo moon, Scorpio rising! I'm at my best when I can caring and compassionate and looking cool at the same time. I'm at my worst when I Don't care, Look stupid, or when Being caring or passionate results in me looking stupid.


If I had to answer the OP's question in the way it was originally positied I'd have to say I'm a C, but I can only comfortably do so because I'm in a party with 2 A's and an A/B hybrid that leans heavily toward A.


I agree; to me, "intensity" is described by type C, not type A. Powergaming is laziness, not commitment.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / How intense do you play? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion