OK, this word has gotten way out of hand, seriously. In no means do I support the 'power gamers' or cheesy players, but wow, if someone has a +1 longsword, then it's BAM "Munchkin!!!"
I know it's deserved about 50% of the time. I mean I just read a thread from a guy who says nobody can show him hard proof that 'being a lich is not allowed in the PF rules'... must ...resist..temptation..."munch..."
But to call munchkin on every rule you don't agree with, is a little, dare I say it, Munchkin-ish. Oh well, I just did it myself
But becoming a lich is allowed, isn't it?
I don't know if that's munchkinism. We're all looking to make cooler characters. Munchkinism starts when your power-acquisition fun treads on someone else's fun of any kind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Munchkin is like porn, you know it when ya see it. When it crosses that line is different for everyone.
OK, this word has gotten way out of hand, seriously. In no means do I support the 'power gamers' or cheesy players, but wow, if someone has a +1 longsword, then it's BAM "Munchkin!!!"
I know it's deserved about 50% of the time. I mean I just read a thread from a guy who says nobody can show him hard proof that 'being a lich is not allowed in the PF rules'... must ...resist..temptation..."munch..."
But to call munchkin on every rule you don't agree with, is a little, dare I say it, Munchkin-ish. Oh well, I just did it myself
It has nothing to do with disagreeing about rules. It is more along the lines of trying to break the rules.
Working within the rules for extraordinary result=powergamer
Ignoring or willful misreading of the rules=munchkin
PS: Nobody said RD could not be a lich. We are saying he can't do it by the rules, without getting a level adjustment of some sort.
Good RP'ing does not do away with mechanics is the point we are trying to make.
|
OK, this word has gotten way out of hand, seriously. In no means do I support the 'power gamers' or cheesy players, but wow, if someone has a +1 longsword, then it's BAM "Munchkin!!!"
I know it's deserved about 50% of the time. I mean I just read a thread from a guy who says nobody can show him hard proof that 'being a lich is not allowed in the PF rules'... must ...resist..temptation..."munch..."
But to call munchkin on every rule you don't agree with, is a little, dare I say it, Munchkin-ish. Oh well, I just did it myself
He also goes on to say that he is holding his gaming group hostage by holding all of their character sheets, hosting location, and most of the resources they are using right now to intimidate them into seeing his way.
Cool guy imo.
But becoming a lich is allowed, isn't it?
I don't know if that's munchkinism. We're all looking to make cooler characters. Munchkinism starts when your fun treads on someone else's.
having seen his stats I would call munchkin on that one myself.
Munchkin is like porn, you know it when ya see it. When it crosses that line is different for everyone.
LOL!
You get my nod for best quote of the month! Well done, sir!
He also goes on to say that he is holding his gaming group hostage by holding all of their character sheets, hosting location, and most of the resources they are using right now to intimidate them into seeing his way.
Cool guy imo.
I don't think he phrased it quite like that. Which is beside the munchkin point anyway.
|
|
I don't think he phrased it quite like that. Which is beside the munchkin point anyway.
He may not have phrased it as such but the message of what is really going is apparent.
If I were in his group, I would be hard at work on a clean warm place to throw some dice next game without that kind of bullying.
Munchkin is like porn, you know it when ya see it. When it crosses that line is different for everyone.LOL!
You get my nod for best quote of the month! Well done, sir!
I just found my new hero. That is down-right hilarious
if the guy wants to become a lich - and is going to take the level adjustment - then that's not being a munchkin.
I swear some people think a "munchkin" is anyone that's not a human fighter with all 12's and all of his feats are skill focus.
Edit: If he ain't gonna take the level adjustment, then fie on him for being dumb >:|
|
If I were one of the group, I'd just sidle over to the scanner, during next session.
BINGO; problem solved. (Well, one of them, anyway)
I keep a copy of half the PC sheets, but that's a totally different situation;
1) I'm the DM,
2) some players can't always make it.
I don't see a problem with him keeping the sheets, if it's his house the game is hosted at.
Hosting a regular game is a big load of work, even if your not the DM, you have to clean up, etc. You can't turn that around into 'holding the other players hostage', unless he's actually threatened to shred the only copies.
Here's an interesting psychological question:
Are the people who are most annoyed by the frequent, flagrant, or abusive use of the word "munchkin" generally the same people to whome the word is most frequently, fragrantly, or abusively applied?
(no, I'm not making that accusation; I'm just posing a question on the gamers' psychology)
I daresay we'll likely never know, but I find the notion intriguing.
But becoming a lich is allowed, isn't it?
I don't know if that's munchkinism. We're all looking to make cooler characters. Munchkinism starts when your power-acquisition fun treads on someone else's fun of any kind.
Well, I don't disagree with your opinion actually. Are lich's allowed? They're not a PC option per the core rule book. the Beastiary states 'Monsters are not designed with the rules for players in mind, and as such can be very unbalancing if not handled correctly.'
Can or should a GM allow them is a different matter, and if you're of the opinion 'yes', then you can argue not allowing them is just stopping the game from being fun. If you're of the opinion 'no' then you can shot munchkin abuse. I don't know the right answer, hence my point of reservation before throwing judgement around so loosely.
Salutations on this fine morning to all posters on these messageboards.
I am legal counsel representing an organization known as the Lollipop Guild, and they have requested that you all cease and desist using the word "munchkin", hereafter referred to as The Term. Use of The Term often denotes negative connotations and has greatly damaged my clients reputation and ability to find employment.
Any further use of The Term may consitute grounds for increasingly severe legal actions.
Thank you, and have an excellent day.
Salutations on this fine morning to all posters on these messageboards.
I am legal counsel representing an organization known as the Lollipop Guild, and they have requested that you all cease and desist using the word "munchkin", hereafter referred to as The Term. Use of The Term often denotes negative connotations and has greatly damaged my clients reputation and ability to find employment.
Any further use of The Term may consitute grounds for increasingly severe legal actions.
Thank you, and have an excellent day.
hilarious
Mr. Fishy is very upset! He brought a stick and everything where the HELL is the munchkin we are going to abuse!
This thread sucks...How can you promise Munchkins for abuse then not deliver thats like a, Bowl with no water its just wrong.
To me, "munchkin" refers to what someone is seeking to get out of the game.
If you ask a player, "what do you want to see happening to your character over the next 5 levels" and they reply, "I want the character to get magic item X, PrC Y, and magical pet Z", then you've found yourself a munchkin.
I'd *almost* object to this assessment ... but only based around the idea in general of "planning a character" really. I mean, shouldn't you *have* an idea of where you're going w/the character? If you can spout off the items, PrC's, and pet (WTF!?!?! Druid or something?) then, IMO, it's a player w/a clear handle on mechanics and knows how to get there.
I do like the way this was phrased overall, though, and can back it.
I mean, if I, as GM, asked someone "what do you want to see happening to your character over time." {forget levels as that's sort of framing a game-mechanic response already and *kind* of setting up a player w/lots of mechanic knowledge up to answer w/mechanics in response.} And he/she answered in game mechanics like you broke it down above, then yes - they fail the test.
I'm asking about "character development, growth arc, and/or goals or interests" and the player just spit back mechanics to me. Yeah ... that's a warning flare, IMO, right there.
If, however, I'm asking that question and frame it with levels (ie: mechanics) then I'm not that surprised to see the player respond w/mechanics (since I brought it up first).
Subtle difference there, but I totally back the theory behind your question and think it really *can* be a telling question to pose to a player and right there you'll find out what he/she's all about. I just think the person asking the question needs to steer clear away from mechanics or else you're inadvertently making the question about mechanics over "character growth/arc/whatever" overall.
How dare you call my paragon human gestalt 60th level fighter/cleric/sorcerer/witch/wizard demi-lich a munchkin? I ahould smite you with my +12 brilliant energy keen vorpal adamantium greatsword.
You are being way to nice Mr.K. Just have them be in your chaotic presence for 24 hours. That'll show em.
Now now guys, this thread is for the protection of munchkins from abuse. I mean, look at how their very name, "munchkin", is now synonymous with so many negative things. I mean, if you were the one trying to get the GM to give you a staff of the magi at 1st level to go with your 168 point buy, wouldn't you be mocked despite your noble goal of power acquisition? Really now, no violence in the sanctuary.
Oh, cmon!! WTF is this? Here I was ready to do some munchkin beatin!
Thats what Mr. Fishy said!!! They promised us a munchkin to beat.
Munchkin is not what you play it more about the how and the why.
You want to play a one legged goblin elder that has a 2 strength and a cough, to piss off the party your just as much a munchkin as the guy playing a half fiend vampire lycanthrope.
Your bending the rules to break the game or annoy the group. If your enjoyment of the game comes from everyone else misery then you sir are a munchkin and Mr. Fishy is going to his car to get his stick.
Munchkin is not what you play it more about the how and the why.
You want to play a one legged goblin elder that has a 2 strength and a cough, to piss off the party your just as much a munchkin as the guy playing a half fiend vampire lycanthrope.
Your bending the rules to break the game or annoy the group. If your enjoyment of the game comes from everyone else misery then you sir are a munchkin and Mr. Fishy is going to his car to get his stick.
How do fish drive cars? or even carry sticks? i guess you must be a mutant among your kin. maybe a Sahuagin?
Half celestial emperor pengiun and Mr. Fishy is a mutant?
Half celestial emperor pengiun and Mr. Fishy is a mutant?
yes i am a mutant.
I am 6 feet tall, I have 6 black feathery seraphim style wings that look like 2 3 layered wings, my feet and beak are black, and my flippers have fringe like appendages that work like fingers. and technically i am a full celestial, i just have the half celestial template applied on top of that for little more than the wings to fly and the bonuses to strength, constitution and wisdom (my +4's). and i have the advanced template too. i am an epic level munchkin monstrosity. i took the advanced template purely for the stats. but i am not a pc. i am made for DMS to punish munchkin players with.
There used to be a great "list" that floated the internet awhile back describing "Real Roleplayers, Real Men, Loonies, and Munchkins." That will provide the wisdom and answers you seek.
I'll second this list.
IMHO, the difference between powergamers and munkins is that munchkins are powergamers who can't roleplay.
I run a roleplaying-heavy game. A number of times players have actually ratcheted back their characters to make them mechanically on par with the rest of the party so the battles wouldn't be so one-sided and the 4th wall would get broken less often.
Pre-planning a characters levels is fine by me, as it's the way to get a character who can do various things. But player planning and character goals are two different things, or at least should be.
My current character took a little rogue, a bit more druid, and then prestiged into wildwood crafter, one of the old Monte Cook 3.0 prestige classes. As a player, I'm planning on him continuing with that. As a character, he's just finding himself getting more in touch with nature and making stuff as he travels around with his friends and wants to eventually find his family and tell them he's not dead mixed with the problem of him being a shipwrecked deserter from the evil empires navy and his family are still peasants in part of the evil empire, unless some of his brothers or cousins also got conscripted, which is a very real possibility.
I was once accused of being a munchkin (back in 3.5 days) by pointing out that creatures in a Grease spell's area had to make an acrobatics check, thus losing their Dex to AC and opening them up to the knife-throwing rogue's sneak attack. I was using some obscure rule (according to the DM) to try to get one over on a monster that was meant to be challenging.
Just saying. Munchkin can be Pun Pun or it can just be doing something the DM didn't think of. Like beauty, munchkin is in the eye of the beholder.
I was once accused of being a munchkin (back in 3.5 days) by pointing out that creatures in a Grease spell's area had to make an acrobatics check, thus losing their Dex to AC and opening them up to the knife-throwing rogue's sneak attack. I was using some obscure rule (according to the DM) to try to get one over on a monster that was meant to be challenging.
Just saying. Munchkin can be Pun Pun or it can just be doing something the DM didn't think of. Like beauty, munchkin is in the eye of the beholder.
I think a lot people dont understand that just becos the rules allow something that does not mean you should do it. Those that call them munchkins don't see how they can't see that.
Some people also just have a poor view of balance.
I was once accused of being a munchkin (back in 3.5 days) by pointing out that creatures in a Grease spell's area had to make an acrobatics check, thus losing their Dex to AC and opening them up to the knife-throwing rogue's sneak attack. I was using some obscure rule (according to the DM) to try to get one over on a monster that was meant to be challenging.
Just saying. Munchkin can be Pun Pun or it can just be doing something the DM didn't think of. Like beauty, munchkin is in the eye of the beholder.
That was a pretty standard tactic back in 3.5, since few people had 5 ranks in Balance back then (which negated it). I believe that in Pathfinder, there is no amount of Acrobatics that negates the flat-footed while Balancing, so it's even more powerful.
That was a pretty standard tactic back in 3.5, since few people had 5 ranks in Balance back then (which negated it). I believe that in Pathfinder, there is no amount of Acrobatics that negates the flat-footed while Balancing, so it's even more powerful.I was once accused of being a munchkin (back in 3.5 days) by pointing out that creatures in a Grease spell's area had to make an acrobatics check, thus losing their Dex to AC and opening them up to the knife-throwing rogue's sneak attack. I was using some obscure rule (according to the DM) to try to get one over on a monster that was meant to be challenging.
Just saying. Munchkin can be Pun Pun or it can just be doing something the DM didn't think of. Like beauty, munchkin is in the eye of the beholder.
Right, the thing is that the spell doesn't say "rogues can sneak attack" yadda yadda. You have to know what balancing means, and look it up under the skill, and use that in conjunction with the sneak attack rules. How dare one use rules to defeat an encounter!
|
|
That was a pretty standard tactic back in 3.5, since few people had 5 ranks in Balance back then (which negated it). I believe that in Pathfinder, there is no amount of Acrobatics that negates the flat-footed while Balancing, so it's even more powerful.
Ouch. You're right. Having said that, there may be a case for putting that defence back in, by allowing a check at a higher DC (like for fast tumbling), if you want to move fast and recklessly enough to not be sneaked, but if you fail, you fall on your ass and provoke an AoO, even if you were trying for a 5' step.
Is it munchkin if the DM allows it?
Yes.
Is it roleplaying if the DM disallows it? If I sit at the table and speak in a funny accent as I assume the role of my character, tossing out "thee" and "thou" as I stroll through the marketplace, chatting up every vendor, in-character the whole time, then it's roleplaying. Even if it's cheesy and cliche. And if the DM says "Stop roleplaying!" or if he says "Start Roleplaying!", it's still roleplaying either way.
Whether or not the DM allows a thing doesn't change the label by which we call that thing.
In many of these cases, there are solutions that can be applied that have not been used.
In this case -- and a (slightly unrelated one of the Ghaele Eladrin) there were solutions to that particular issue.. In 3.5.
I suspect a level progression was made for the onset of Lichdom, even if it was rarely used, broken down into levels for ease of advancement. The hard part? Finding and converting -- mostly converting. If they want it, make 'em produce the info and conversion into PF. After all the GM need not be "disinclined to acquiesce to a request", but if the work is going to be more than one would want, put most of the burden of producing an acceptable progresson onto the player that wants it. Problem solved.
Is it munchkin if the DM allows it?Yes.
Is it roleplaying if the DM disallows it? If I sit at the table and speak in a funny accent as I assume the role of my character, tossing out "thee" and "thou" as I stroll through the marketplace, chatting up every vendor, in-character the whole time, then it's roleplaying. Even if it's cheesy and cliche. And if the DM says "Stop roleplaying!" or if he says "Start Roleplaying!", it's still roleplaying either way.
Whether or not the DM allows a thing doesn't change the label by which we call that thing.
Sure it can. Bad acting may still be acting but we don't call it acting because it's bad. Ditto bad roleplaying is not roleplaying in my book because it's disruptive to actual good roleplaying.
I've had games where very good roleplayers have even cried in character during a particularly emotional and intense scene. It's much more difficult for this to happen if someone's wandering around doing bad cod Shakespeare impressions or other farcical accents if you're not doing a completely farcical game.
Munchkin abuse?
Poor munchkins... Stop abusing them >:(
You guys can abuse all the munchkins you want. I'm hunting Gungans
Puts down his +5 Unholy Banhammer "Can I help? I always wanted to extinct a whole species, that and I hear they are good eating"