I have seen posts by players on the forums that their group wants to kick a player because he did not optimize and hurts the groups effectiveness. Sad. Gaming is turning into a competitive sport I guess.
Bah, where's the fun in that? We just taunt that character relentlessly for being a burden. :D
Even if it turns out that this guy could play a wizard without evocation spells after all, and can actually influence the outcome of fights in a big way.
It's a matter of course. (And all in good fun, I might add :)).
You endure crappy conditions most of the time, making camp in the wilderness even if it seems as if the weather gods hate you, you don't get to have a proper wash, you have to eat crappy food, and are bored a lot of the time.
And when you're not, you face mortal danger and horrors you couldn't come up even in your worst, bed-wetting nightmares.
You just described every "field" soldier in the world.
|
First off, I have been playing DND for about 5 years, pathfinder since last spring. Played VTM and Starwars. And have tried out most MMORGS, and fairly addicted to WOW.
In my collage play group, all of the players played wow. Sure the language (tank, healer) got used but it was still fun to sit around and play. We did optimize for combat, but our GM has it so we basically teleported to the entrance of a dungeon and then ported right out afterwards. And the Dungeons where set up like Instances with minibosses and a final boss. Was actually really cool. We had to work together to solve the encounters.
My new group isn’t MMO players, and it is different. They don’t optimize for combat, and some don’t communicate their powers to the group as well. Feels less like a team game. They are also unwilling to optimize for the group, to make the group as powerful as possible.
Personally the best thing about 4th is the agro grabbing abilities. It actually makes playing a tank fighter doable, because enemies can’t ignore you. In pathfinder, the feats and gear are around to make an awesome AC tank. That dose almost no damage. In wow, that person would be the Main Tank and would personally hold the boss while the rest of us killed the boss. In pathfinder, you’re the last one killed because the enemies can ignore you.
Heals at range would be great too, because being great at healing usually means you sacrifice elsewhere.
I don’t think Point buy is from MMOs but instead from people seeing low rolls and wondering why they have to play a char who is worse then 99% of commoners (who all get 3 10s and 3 11 for stats).
As a last note, some people like combat games and like to roll dice. Others like to talk. Saying one is fun and one isn’t fun is a personal statement and not a factual one.
Well the thing that keeps me from playing 4th is the specific roles. "Agro" holding works for computer games but in my pnp it only seems to break immersion. Every combat feels identical to the last. I like using environment and coming up with clever ideas for encounters. I have trouble seeing an intelligent monster focusing on the guy he cant hit while everyone else picks him apart.
I like MMOs dont get me wrong, they just seem to have popularized a style in tabletop I dont think is fun for me. I agree with you though this argument is opinion and not factual.
I think the internet in general has contributed alot to the "current problems" we see, rather than MMO's in particular.
I know when I started D&d and through 2nd edition even words and concepts such as "roll vs role players" "optimized" and all that weren't even on our minds. We played the game as we wanted to.
And the group down the road did the same thing. If you had a rules question you asked the Dm and discussed it with the group.
Now days every Dm and player is under the knife from the internet arm-chair quarterbacks lookiing over your proverbial shoulder because every tom dick and harry comes crying to the boards if the DM doesn't go their way and whatnot.
People are far more worried about things now, due to concepts introduced online, that they never even had thought of before.
Don't get me wrong- I'm glad we can communicate globally and chat and such and exchange ideas.. but I remember a day not long ago when the DM, not the rules designer, was the final arbiter of the rules and RAW/RAI were a random jumble of letters that didn't mean anything to 99% of the gaming population.
Not saying its good/bad now compared to then- just that having a global community sitting "in on the game" now has definitely changed it.
WotC is partially to blame, too. Having already stated stealing ideas from MMOs like World of Warcraft (and, in previous months before that statement, saying they weren't emulating MMOs...oh the hypocrisy) in their designer blogs, articles, and in their 2 pre-4E release "Wizards Presents" books (Worlds&Monsters and Classes&Races), the situation is probably worse thanks to 4E. Which has a severely heavy influence of all sorts of MMO-style terms, gameplay, number-crunching, and heavy, tactical combat encounters.
|
The teamwork in an MMO is very different from the teamwork in a PnP game. In an MMO, each character usually has a narrow range of responsibilities. If you're not the tank, for example, you don't need to worry much about armor and HP because if they tank's doing his job, nobody will hit you. But in a PnP, everyone needs to be more flexible. Well-rounded characters with lots of abilities (though perhaps at lower levels) can not only be viable, but extremely beneficial to a party. In an MMO, you're only as good as the thing you do best, but PnP games are often not like that.
We'll see more effects from MMO's coming in when a young generation, to whom MMO's are native ground and PnP games the foreign territory of new ventures, begins to mature.
One thing I would point out is that this only applies to one subset of PnP games, primarily D&D and it's various incarnations. In the past 5 years there has been a movement in the indy game market (small publishers who often do print runs measured in the hundreds) towards a rules light focus. Games like PDQ, Fate, Burning Wheel, Don't Rest Your Head, Dread and many others are almost a counter culture reaction to what you label as the MMO and video game influence.
They use a blend of simple resolution mechanics and mechanics directly related to the story to focus less on how the characters do cool stuff and more on why they do it. I find that playing a handful of sessions of these games has influenced how I play pathfinder more than the 300 days I've logged in WoW over the past 6 years. My theory crafting skills have served me well in explaining mechanics in pathfinder or to see the difference between two rules options, but I'm still more likely to make the choice that makes sense to my character.
Number crunching has been in PnP since at least 1st ed when players used long swords because mathematically they were the most common magic weapon and daggers because they got the highest number of attacks per round from weapon speed.
You know.. some times I kind of miss weapon speed factors.
I see a couple of common threads emerging from this discussion.
First, it seems like there are some in the P&P community that see maximization as a hindrance to good RP. I agree with everyone who said that this cannot necessarily be attributed to MMO culture. Maximization has been around forever and quite honestly is completely irrelevant to whether or not you are playing an interesting character.
I played my first XCrawl game the over the weekend and you bet your tail I min/maxed the hell out of my character but since I am a good roleplayer he was still fun and interesting and not just a block of stats. Good maximizers are not necessarily bad roleplayers. In fact, I encourage my players to min/max because they know that I am going to min/max the hell out of the encounters that I put them up against.
The MMO language that is working it's way into the community is irritating to all of us grognards, to say the least, but I dont think it is detremental to the hobby. If you want to call the orc a "mob," go ahead just make sure you point to the one you are attacking on the map. On the other hand the idea of "aggro," and "tanking," are irrelevant to P&P. I dont know how D&D 4e is but I would think in most situations intelligent creatures will attack the squishiest( see I just did it myself!) and most dangerous characters first, i.e. the sorceror that is spamming (I did it again!) fireballs or the healer that is keeping the beefy fighter at full health. This just makes good sense. The GM's job of course is to make critical decisions and not just enforce some AI macro.
The only reason that I think MMOs have set us back a bit is that players are seeing the game in a different light. It is less about collaborative storytelling and more like a board game when it should really be a bit of both. I think that this leads to illogical decision making because players no longer have the ability to think critically so they do things like loot in the middle of combat and decide to take a nap right outside of the dragon's lair. Failure to apply simple logic to situations makes the baby Cthulhu cry.
I also have noticed that some groups simply consider every...single...npc to be a threat and a source of experience. Maybe it has always been this way. Once I ran a random dungeon for some quick laughs. Each room was about 10x10 feet with a single monster in it. The party got into the habit of opening each door and just flat-out killing whatever was on the other side. No questions asked. I finally got a little frustrated and put a lizard man in one room. When they opened the door the lizard man was holding a flower and smiling. He looked up and in a hopeful gravely voice said "Friend!?" They killed him for the 25 exp.
|
|
My new group isn’t MMO players, and it is different. They don’t optimize for combat, and some don’t communicate their powers to the group as well. Feels less like a team game. They are also unwilling to optimize for the group, to make the group as powerful as possible.
This I find fascinating. All of your statements are valid but they are also built on assumptions that I (never played MMOs) had never imagined.
I can't imagine anyone I've played with saying: "...unwilling to optimize for the group..." I think that may be because we don't feel challenged to beat the most powerful enemies we can, we always try to deal with the situation our characters are in, which isn't quite the same thing.
Personally the best thing about 4th is the aggro grabbing abilities. It actually makes playing a tank fighter doable, because enemies can’t ignore you. In pathfinder, the feats and gear are around to make an awesome AC tank. That dose almost no damage. In wow, that person would be the Main Tank and would personally hold the boss while the rest of us killed the boss. In pathfinder, you’re the last one killed because the enemies can ignore you.
Until the internet told me otherwise I would have thought a 'tank' was a fighter who was well-armoured and did good damage... like a tank.
I've had the backpack effect occur many times in my games. A player will be in a ball room looking for a spy, and when I tell him that he spots the spymoving past him he will declare his attack of opportunity--to which I respond, "You've had your sword in hand while canvasing a room full of innocent people and anal guards?" (who are no more friendly to the PCs than they are the spy).
I've also had PCs claim to walk around for HOURS with their crossbows loaded and at the ready.
Doesn't matter where they go, some players assume their characters are always wearing their armor and have weapons/spells at the ready.
Disrupted a funeral once because they showed up in full adventuring regalia. They were ridiculed and thrown out with things like "Where's the war at fellas?" and "Sammy was killed by dangerous men and yo mock his memory by showing up dressed for violence!?"
I also have noticed that some groups simply consider every...single...npc to be a threat and a source of experience. Maybe it has always been this way. Once I ran a random dungeon for some quick laughs. Each room was about 10x10 feet with a single monster in it. The party got into the habit of opening each door and just flat-out killing whatever was on the other side. No questions asked. I finally got a little frustrated and put a lizard man in one room. When they opened the door the lizard man was holding a flower and smiling. He looked up and in a hopeful gravely voice said "Friend!?" They killed him for the 25 exp.
Though I don't think this is because of MMOs, it has certainly been made worse by MMOs. I've had to deal with this mentality all the time. Not so much killing everything in site, but the PCs don't trust anybody with a name (or even without).
Number crunching has been in PnP since at least 1st ed when players used long swords because mathematically they were the most common magic weapon and daggers because they got the highest number of attacks per round from weapon speed.You know.. some times I kind of miss weapon speed factors.
Thanks for reminding me. My mind just barfed!
;P
Disrupted a funeral once because they showed up in full adventuring regalia. They were ridiculed and thrown out with things like "Where's the war at fellas?" and "Sammy was killed by dangerous men and yo mock his memory by showing up dressed for violence!?"
Rule number one: Don't make people angry when they're armed and armoured and you are not!
The whole has already been dug...
Plus, depending on the circumstances, NOT showing up like that could be an insult to the departed.
My example is he is about to get hit by a monster and he yells out "I TURN INVISIBLE!"
Oh, come on, that should have at least been a -2 penalty on the monster's hit roll from being startled and/or confused by some insane person yelling, "I TURN INVISIBLE!" at them.
Until the internet told me otherwise I would have thought a 'tank' was a fighter who was well-armoured and did good damage... like a tank.This is a good example of how MMO's are changing our words and how we communicate.
And people's perceptions. For I know I've seen proper tanks. Characters with awesome AC AND awesome damage output. And those tanks made sure they got noticed, too.
That's today's wimpy "tanks": Can't focus on more than one thing (even though fighting's always about both taking and giving) and can't make others notice them.
I haven't seen this so much...
But what I have seen, especially on these boards, the effects of MMO number crunching has had on table top RPGs.
MMO's run on computer code, and finding weapon and combat ability combos do X is every given situation, has lead people to do that with core rules for a pen and paper RPG, that is not hard coded so to speak.
This kind of work, can be helpful, when used to pan out character concepts to determine synergy in abilities and such.Overall though, it seems to lead to a "I'm right, I did the math, you're wrong" situations in theory crafting, when PnP RPGs are not hard coded. There are too many variables (play style, DM, PLAYSTYLE etc.), and I find it's ruining alot of the fun for people who just want to roelplay and have fun (which is why it's a game), as opposed to being told some x class "is teh suxxorz cuz it got nerfed" BS that is prevalent in MMOs...this has leaked onto my PnP RPG experience.
Get yur freaking chocolate OUT of my peanutbutter.
Number crunching has been in PnP since at least 1st ed when players used long swords because mathematically they were the most common magic weapon and daggers because they got the highest number of attacks per round from weapon speed. 3.0 added in a lot of number crunching, and all of it transparent to the players (it is in the PHB). If you want the math out of your roleplaying, maybe you should be looking at something like Amber diceless.
You are upset that the mathematical facts are shattering your illusions. Get used to it. Stop complaining that people are telling you your fast red car isn't faster because it's red, but actually slower because the red one's transmission has the wrong gear ratios.
Player immaturity has also been with the game long before computers got popular. You are just seeing it's latest common cultural manifestation.
Two things you can definitely...
I think you've missed the point somewhat. Number crunching isn't a bad thing, but some of the mathematical analysis people are doing is inherently flawed, and spewing out a string of numbers and claiming that it makes someone "right" is elitist and annoying. No efect in Pathfinder exists in a vacuum, and as such its usefulness will seldom be realistically static. I think we can all agree that a fireball is more damaging then a magic missile, but sometimes the magic missile is a better option.
More then that though, the aggressive nature of your post compelled me to type this out, please, let's keep the discussion civil.
When they opened the door the lizard man was holding a flower and smiling. He looked up and in a hopeful gravely voice said "Friend!?" They killed him for the 25 exp.Who got the sweet flower loot drop? :P
Screw the flower, he'd make a hell of a handbag.
*missing the point*
This kind of work, can be helpful, when used to pan out character concepts to determine synergy in abilities and such.
I already addressed that, but thanks...
Until the internet told me otherwise I would have thought a 'tank' was a fighter who was well-armoured and did good damage... like a tank.This is a good example of how MMO's are changing our words and how we communicate.And people's perceptions. For I know I've seen proper tanks. Characters with awesome AC AND awesome damage output. And those tanks made sure they got noticed, too.
That's today's wimpy "tanks": Can't focus on more than one thing (even though fighting's always about both taking and giving) and can't make others notice them.
I think the current "tanks" are more like Armored Personel Carriers (APCs) then Tanks. Their job is to ward the people "inside" his/her/its protection while letting them fire out.
Pathfinder does not have many options for good APCs, but fairly robust ones for good Tanks. :-p
|
|
It's just striking me as lashing out at being told that your favorite character isn't as wonderful as you think.
For good reason, when you tell someone they're playing or building their character 'wrong' you may as well tell them to go pleasure themselves in the corner while the 'big boys' play the game. It's the kind of prick that tells people how to play and what to play that irritates me most.
If someone wants to play an archer fighter or melee sorcerer who are you to tell them they're not allowed to play, or to chastise them about their 'build'.
|
|
You know, telling telling someone how/what to play irritates me too. But so does jumping on someone for proving a point with math. There is a difference between telling someone they are "doing it wrong" and showing them that there are other options that are mechanically better. It's the same difference between telling someone they need to switch from a spear to a greatsword, and showing mathematically that a greatsword does more damage than a spear.
Sometimes the question becomes: "What point are you trying to prove with mathematics?"
If someone is having fun playing with a spear-wielding character then they are actually mathematically correct. Because the purpose of the game for many is to extract maximum fun from a character, not maximum damage output.
I sometimes enjoy a bit of number-crunching, I think most gamers do, the problem that occurs is the one you have highlighted: When a troll comes along and insults you because you don't play the game based upon their mathematical models then that will probably put you off the parts of the internet where those models have been created.
In any case, I think the OP was clear that this thread was about recognising/documenting changes. So perhaps we should concentrate upon that, rather than deciding if those changes are valuable/useful/to our taste.
MMOs mean tabletop games need to step up.
Perhaps players are doing these things because they're more fun? Nerd hobbies now have higher competition amongst each themselves. Some of the complaints are laughable. New games are more "combat based?" D&D has always been about combat, it evolved from a wargame for crying out loud. Art is too "modern?" No, it's not - you're just old. Yeah, it sucks - god knows I get irate when things I like are old and unpopular - but it's how the world works. The art you liked in D&D was modern then, too.
As for complaining about language, one word: "Gish." You are never allowed to whine about "MMO language" again as long as you live.
All I'm seeing is "This is something I don't like, let's blame something new and popular! Kids these days!"
As for math, god forbid people talk about math in my nerdy tabletop game filled with math and science nerds which is built around rolling dice and using math to add and subtract numbers from each other.
Your way of pretending to be an elf isn't superior to anyone else's. We're all nerds.
MMOs mean tabletop games need to step up.
Perhaps players are doing these things because they're more fun? Nerd hobbies now have higher competition amongst each themselves. Some of the complaints are laughable. New games are more "combat based?" D&D has always been about combat, it evolved from a wargame for crying out loud. Art is too "modern?" No, it's not - you're just old. Yeah, it sucks - god knows I get irate when things I like are old and unpopular - but it's how the world works. The art you liked in D&D was modern then, too.
As for complaining about language, one word: "Gish." You are never allowed to whine about "MMO language" again as long as you live.
All I'm seeing is "This is something I don't like, let's blame something new and popular! Kids these days!"
Far be it for me to criticize the game for not being what it "should be." I do not have a problem with the game becoming more MMOesque if that is what the particular situation calls for. I am planning on designing an upcoming encounter involving a cyclical progression of traps and roles that, in essence, resembles many of the fights in WoW and reproduces them with Pathfinder rules. It makes perfect sense for the setting (XCrawl) so it works.
The thread has indeed gone off the beaten path, but that's ok. I think we have established that some younger players like a bit more action and some older players long for "the good old days," when a parley with the goblin king didn't amount to a diplomacy check.
So...ok then. Lets get back to the point of the thread which is to list how new players coming from MMO culture are commiting logical errors because they mistake the game for an MMO. Like looting corpses in the midst of combat and assuming that they can take a nap outside of the Shadow Dragon's lair. How do you educate players who are used to playing in a static environment, or...how do you modify the game to suit the tastes of these new players while preserving the classic feel of D&D.
After (more than) a few horrid experiences I will not get into here, my hatred for MMOs is rivaled only by my hatred for Joss Whedon, which is another long story. MMOs just seem to bring out the worst in some people, which could be a mixture of the anonymity of the internet mixed with a system that revolves entirely around combat. I know that there's been more than a little bit of chocolate getting mixed in peanut butter with respect to tabletop gaming and MMOs, and, perhaps surprisingly, I have no problem with that if it helps both systems grow and evolve. And I have seen this happen, at least on paper. In practice, however, the adherents of either system tend to bring bad habits and prejudices along with them when playing in the other person's territory, which leads to increasing social schism. With respect to MMOs, the anonymity of the internet(and, at least twice in my experience, the lack of any need for personal hygiene), and the overwhelming desire to either buy anything from anybody(magic items, maps, souls, etc.) or kill everything that isn't a party member(some of this COULD be attributed to old school Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale as well), leads to a person who, at the table, is less than fun to be around. This isn't to say tabletop gamers are perfect, however- the strong desire to NEVER separate the party(in one case, the party members moved their gear and bedrolls so that everyone was within 5 feet of each other, going so far as to map it out on a grid- using a design they came up with over the course of many years that lead to much griping and complaining if they had a random encounter at night), and the overwhelming desire to kill someone for their stuff if they won't sell it to you leads to an unfun experience for the DM at least. As both of these genres develop and share ideas, they will get some bad along with the good, and must work hard on an individual level to maximize one while minimizing the other.
|
|
I myself am a bit frustrated by players getting used to the immersion mindset of a PnP RPG, and I agree with a lot that has been said here. But for me, it seems like it is a positive thing that MMORPGs are as popular as they are, because it makes PnP games seem less like a niche hobby. When convincing someone who loves WOW to give Pathfinder a try, I can refer to WOW as a reference point, as something they already enjoy, and then extol why I think PnP gaming provides a unique experience that he or she can't get in MMORPGs, or anywhere else for that matter. The fact that they would now give Pathfinder a shot gives me the vicarious thrill of experiencing this new hobby through their eyes.
On a similar note, I think it's great that the new 4e Red Box is out, because this will expose the PnP gaming to a whole new generation of gamers who might otherwise not give gaming a chance.
The reason why some PnP concepts are unfamiliar to those who were weaned on MMORPGs, is simply because PnP gaming is new to them. I don't think it creates a paradigm that they cannot break their minds out of. It's just a different entry point than what brought in gamers in years past, which perhaps was exposure to fantasy literature. As opposed to coming initially from an immersive, imagined experience, now some folks are coming from exposure to a structured game simulation. In the meantime, PnP gaming represents a wonderful middle ground between the two poles, with rules providing the "game" (as well as proposals for immersive worlds) and the actual people providing the spontaneous and imaginative human element.
Although one might argue that it's more of a leap for this new group of tabletop gamers than before, well we'll just have to deal with it lol. In the meantime, MMORPGs have engaged a huge number of people for whom the idea of being a hero and conquering baddies THEMSELVES is a thrilling idea that they never would have given a chance before...
|
|
I also have noticed that some groups simply consider every...single...npc to be a threat and a source of experience. Maybe it has always been this way. Once I ran a random dungeon for some quick laughs. Each room was about 10x10 feet with a single monster in it. The party got into the habit of opening each door and just flat-out killing whatever was on the other side. No questions asked. I finally got a little frustrated and put a lizard man in one room. When they opened the door the lizard man was holding a flower and smiling. He looked up and in a hopeful gravely voice said "Friend!?" They killed him for the 25 exp.
That's a hilarious example!
I would like us to somehow return to the spirit of the OP and think of ways in which people seem to "not get" the idea of being in an immersive world. And more than that: how we can fix that.
Phazzle, to take off from your example, perhaps it's a good idea to "punish" your players for acting so rashly. I know your dungeon was meant to be a joke, but perhaps in the future have them "raid" a goblin lair, during which a goblin allies with the party somehow or does something particularly heroic. And then have the goblin die in front of their eyes, perhaps as a result of their own stupidity. Emotionally involve them somehow. Sounds to me like a lot of us are GMs. Perhaps we can talk some about how we can break some players out of the MMO mindset. ;)
After (more than) a few horrid experiences I will not get into here, my hatred for MMOs is rivaled only by my hatred for Joss Whedon, which is another long story.
And I'm keen to hear this "long story" about why you hate Joss Whedon.
With respect to MMOs, the anonymity of the internet(and, at least twice in my experience, the lack of any need for personal hygiene)
I'm curious which game stores you've been going to over the past 20-30 years, cause I regularly meet PnP/war gamers with bad social skills/poor hygiene.
That's the thing that gets me, other than having some different slang, everything that anyone has said about an MMO player I've seen in players BEFORE MMO's were even invented and RPG's weren't even being modeled in 3D. Not just what you're saying, but every person so far.
Powergamers existed before MMO's. Players who always ended up playing murderous bastards, and who didn't seem to grasp that there should be consequences to their actions, existed before MMO's.
WoW has drawn a lot of players into nerd-dom that never played that kind of game before. Some of these players are branching out into similar genres and so we are seeing new players who perhaps have some bad habits they've formed prior to coming to gaming, but they aren't new bad habits.
When they opened the door the lizard man was holding a flower and smiling. He looked up and in a hopeful gravely voice said "Friend!?" They killed him for the 25 exp.Who got the sweet flower loot drop? :P
You win an Internets, sir
I don't see anyone that's caught onto this yet, so I'll throw it in. The concept of optimizing came out well before MMOs got popular, or even existed at all. You'll see some MMO terms being thrown around like trash mob and DPS, but most of those words have other sources. Like tank, and mook. Those are not MMO terms, at least not originally. Some of them are even used intentionally (I intentionally say DPS to refer to damage output here for example).
The real reason why people are seeing the behaviors they describe is because of optimizing, not because of MMOs. Since combat is quick, and if you don't finish it quick it finishes you quick as a non caster you have to build as if you can solo the enemy for the simple reason that if you do, then you win as long as you (or another party member built right) goes first. If you don't you need to bank on 2 or more people all going first, which is less likely than just one person winning initiative. You also have less allowances for harder than normal encounters... and since there are infinite enemies and your character has substantially less than infinite lives you must optimize to even the odds unless you're already just that powerful (casters). But either way optimization is about eliminating as many undesirable variables as possible. So when someone does make a level 10 beatstick that can one round at level stuff by themselves, they're not trying to actually solo the game, they're just maximizing the chances they can keep playing it. The party even probably works together great if they're all optimized. But when it comes time to roll initiative, knowing that as long as any of you four go first you're fine means you're a lot safer on having to bet on more things all going how you want (more people going first). If the party is really bad then either no one will go first, or they'll be too weak to make their going first matter. This tends to result in them failing at whatever they were trying to accomplish. Violently.
I think that we are getting closer to the core of "optimization," argument. Yes, yes, yes optimization has always been around. Yes, certain people have always been a little too overzealous about making sure that everyone was optimized. However, I do think that MMO culture has exacerbated the "problem." Examples:
1) While playing WoW we had a mage in our guild who did not understand the concept of spell hit. So much so that he would try to roll on every pretty item and stack hit. He could not understand why his DPS was steadily decreasing and we all got kind of pissed at him since he was simulteniously hurting himself and the guild. So we got rid of him.
2) I play with an awesome group of friends that has been playing for years and are not too concerned with optimization. We have one player who spent hours upon hours designing a special bladed armored suit that essentially gave him armor spikes and one short sword-like blade on each gauntlet. Awesome idea, awesome character, I made him take an exotic weapon proficiency for the suit since it gave him the benefit of locked gauntlets and an increased critical range.
I invited a player that I met at a hobby shop that just didn't get it. He kept asking the player things like.
"Do you grapple often?"
"Why dont you just use two shortswords with locked gauntlets?"
"You would get the feat back."
"Why do you have so many ranks in Craft(item)."
"You could do this instead...blah...blah...blah."
We got tired of this quickly and I had to take him aside and set him straight because he was encroaching on the player's right to play what he thought was an interesting character. He was a bit younger and he was an avid MMO player.
If you transported the player from example 2 to example 1 we would all be patting him on the back for speaking up and doing what is right for the guild. In example 2, however, he is a pain in the ass.
I think I would name this the "Optmimization trumps roleplaying effect."
I am also curious as to what 'problem' there is with optimizing. When you have a game where whole archetypes must optimize to be playable, your options are to optimize heavily or stick to a narrow subset of characters. Most MMOs, surprisingly do not do this. You certainly have to optimize for raids, but it's not as if every single battle in the field will slaughter you if your build sucks. The same is not true of D&D.And yes, I do play MMOs. I got started on them several years after getting into tabletop. I was an optimizer long before I logged onto an MMO server. And for what it's worth, what drove me to optimize was that my first character was a fail build and I had no desire to repeat my mistakes, preferring instead to learn from them and grow better from them.
I would say the problem with optimizing is that it puts other players(not characters) grubby fingers on your character sheet. It really cuts down on both creative and sometimes even personal space as everyone else pours over a character sheet looking for flaws that, if found, mean that you as a player and perhaps even as a person are not allowed to play with/be in 500 feet of this group. Kicking someone out of a group online is one thing(and even that requires a certain amount of grace/courtesy IMO), doing it in real life is something quite different, especially if you are in someone's home and not a game store.
|
|
Optimization has been around since year dot in RPG's for sure. What has changed in my observations is the rules have developed such that the gap between optimized and non-optimized in terms of "pluses" has grown with time. For example even in the stats. 18 strength in 3.5e+ = +4 to hit, 18/00 in 1e/2e = +3 to hit. In the first case you are very likely to have this str or greater, in the first well unless the dice gods really like you. The newer d20 type system promote and in some ways require a lot more effort to optimize to avoid quite ridiculous differences in, and to be honest, combat. I think D&D was always about combat to some extent, but the d20 system has created a far more micro-manage combat system which increases the time combat takes and hence gives the impression that d20 is ALL about combat.
S.
I think that we are getting closer to the core of "optimization," argument. Yes, yes, yes optimization has always been around. Yes, certain people have always been a little too overzealous about making sure that everyone was optimized. However, I do think that MMO culture has exacerbated the "problem." Examples:
1) While playing WoW we had a mage in our guild who did not understand the concept of spell hit. So much so that he would try to roll on every pretty item and stack hit. He could not understand why his DPS was steadily decreasing and we all got kind of pissed at him since he was simulteniously hurting himself and the guild. So we got rid of him.
Yes, MMOs are all about optimization. Compare to tabletop which is equal parts mechanics and fluff. However those things are not necessarily in conflict with each other. You can be effective, and cool. It doesn't require setting feats on fire, etc. That actually isn't what Mr. Blade Armor was doing since EWP: Blade Armor is a feat and so is IC: Shortsword. So he wasn't actually wasting any resources, and the MMO guy was the one doing it wrong by optimizing poorly.
I am also curious as to what 'problem' there is with optimizing. When you have a game where whole archetypes must optimize to be playable, your options are to optimize heavily or stick to a narrow subset of characters. Most MMOs, surprisingly do not do this. You certainly have to optimize for raids, but it's not as if every single battle in the field will slaughter you if your build sucks. The same is not true of D&D.
And yes, I do play MMOs. I got started on them several years after getting into tabletop. I was an optimizer long before I logged onto an MMO server. And for what it's worth, what drove me to optimize was that my first character was a fail build and I had no desire to repeat my mistakes, preferring instead to learn from them and grow better from them.
There is no problem with Optimization. I am a precise optimizer. Most of my players optimize to at least some degree. It is not necessarily about optimization it is more about the right to be critical of another player's choices. Much more sense to be critical in an MMO setting, much less sense to be critical in with someone at a game table.
Are all MMO players critical, heavens no.
Are all P&P players polite, also no.
I am simply saying that it is much more likely that an MMO player will be critical.
Additionally there are way more choices in Pathfinder than in say WoW. So there is no real "right," way to make a character in Pathfinder, just better options.
The point that I was trying to make is that the bladed suit gives the following benefits/drawbacks.
+10 to disarm attempts
increased critical range from 20x2 to 19-20x2
Can use hands freely
Took a lot of ranks in craft (armor) to concieve of and make
Two locked Gauntlets do not require an EWP so the character would have
+10 to disarm attempts
a critical range of 19-20x2
can not use hands freely
I suppose he could take IC: Armor spikes
+10 to disarm attempts
a critical range of 19-20x2
can use hands freely
But this would make his top critical range 19-20x2 and he is planning on taking IC for the suit once he gets his next feat increasing the critical range to 17-20.
The idea of a "dump stat" and having fighters with low mental stats is a phenomenon of pure optimization - it's also one that has existed since the dawn of D&D.
Seeing MMOs blamed doens't surprise me. 3.5 was accused of being anime, 3e was accused of being Diablo, 2e was accused of being dumbed down for casual mainstream gamers, even AD&D got flak.
"Things are different, kids who like it are dumb and inattentive and the things they like are dumb."
|
|
Disingenuous.
Pre 3rd: 18/00 Str = +3 to hit, +6 damage. When a total damage of 15 is considered good, adding 6 is a huge boost.
3.x: 18 Str = +4 to hit, +6 damage*. Yes, it seems higher. Then you remember it's 6 damage added onto about oh... a hundred or more... Of course you take the 18 Str anyways, but it's making far less of a difference than perfect starting Str in earlier editions. You also have more sources of to hit.* - Because you'd be stupid not to use a two handed weapon in 3.x.
Perhaps not the best example I could come up with but disingenuous, I think not.
Almost without fail the 3.x melee based fighter will have 18 str (or greater), it is far less likely 1e/2e fighter will. Combine that with the %str roll in 1e/2e and the chances of the 1e/2e getting close to the natural stat based addition to hit/damage of a 3.x character is slim. In my time the best I have seen was 18/76 - he was a Paladin*. As you rightly point out there are far more places to get "pluses" from in 3.x, meaning of course you need "system mastery" (as Monte termed it) to make the 'correct' choices. The differences between the 'correct' choices and 'incorrect' choices have a significant impact on characters combat abilities. Optimization had far less effect in 1e/2e and also in the later 4e than in 3.x by a country mile.
S.
*: I remember this from 26 years ago, now no one bats an eyelid at stats in excess of 18 at level 1.
I would say the problem with optimizing is that it puts other players(not characters) grubby fingers on your character sheet. It really cuts down on both creative and sometimes even personal space as everyone else pours over a character sheet looking for flaws that, if found, mean that you as a player and perhaps even as a person are not allowed to play with/be in 500 feet of this group. Kicking someone out of a group online is one thing(and even that requires a certain amount of grace/courtesy IMO), doing it in real life is something quite different, especially if you are in someone's home and not a game store.
I am also curious as to what 'problem' there is with optimizing. When you have a game where whole archetypes must optimize to be playable, your options are to optimize heavily or stick to a narrow subset of characters. Most MMOs, surprisingly do not do this. You certainly have to optimize for raids, but it's not as if every single battle in the field will slaughter you if your build sucks. The same is not true of D&D.And yes, I do play MMOs. I got started on them several years after getting into tabletop. I was an optimizer long before I logged onto an MMO server. And for what it's worth, what drove me to optimize was that my first character was a fail build and I had no desire to repeat my mistakes, preferring instead to learn from them and grow better from them.
So you have a player. Let's call him Steve.
Robert: Hey Steve, what are you playing?
Steve: Oh, a Wizard geared towards save or loses with some buffs.
Robert: Yeah? Have you looked at *insert suggested spells*?And the conversation proceeds from there. No obsessive scrutinizing every little detail, just helping to make them make the character they want to make and have it work. Granted, it's not the best example for demonstration as they picked a good archetype, and if they didn't it would require far more in the way of specifics to be playable. Even so it's...
This is a slanted conversation because Steve already has a concept that is easily geared towards optimization. He says as much as he uses terms that optimizers use on a regular basis, which opens the door. In my experience, the conversation tends to go this way....
Robert: Hey Steve, what are you playing?
Steve: A wizard.
Robert: What kinda wizard?
Steve: I dunno. Maybe a summoner or something. I'm thinking of making him the decendent of another summoner I played a few years ago...
Robert: A SUMMONER?!? Why, when [insert long, drawn out rant here] is BETTER?! I can prove it on PAPER! Your build is the SUXXORS!?!?
Steve: Say wha?
This is the same conversation as above, just drawn out to make the optimizer in question look like a raving loon. Both are a little unfair with respect to the topic of the "problem" of optimization because one makes the optimizer look like a saint, the other, like a lunatic.