|
Why is it so hard for people to admit they're power gamers? It's not a dirty word.
Some people are into gaming for the role-playing and some people are in it for the battles, tinkering with the rules to optimize their chances of success. That's perfectly fine.
So why is it that some people will bend over backwards to convince you that their crazy alternate race, 3rd party class, four archetype, min-maxed character with three 18s and three 7s for attributes was built that way for role-playing purposes?
Guys, it's okay. Power gaming is part of the game. We accept you for who you are; there's no reason to lie to us.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why can't a character be built efficiently, with interesting mechanics and also be fun and dynamic to role-play? And why can't someone who enjoys fighting also enjoy out-combat and rp scenarios just as much?
I definitely do not see them as mutually exclusive as you appear to.
It might be because terms like "power gamer" are so ill-defined and subjective.
I know people I play with that I think of as power gamers. I know people I play with that think of me as a power gamer.
I do not think of myself as a power gamer, relative to the people I play with who really are power gamers. From my perspective, of course.
I build something that will be fun to RP, make my mechanical choices fit the concept, and then fill the glaring meta-mechanical gaps as much as I can with the resources I have left over. In that narrow slot where I can allocate resources that didn't have to be expended to bring the original concept to life, I optimize the hell out of everything I can though.
Frankly, I'm with Meepo on this; Am I a power gamer? Buggered if I know.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it necessary to pigeonhole players, or anyone else, in the first place? Labels are restrictive. If you call someone a powergamer and treat them as if they are a powergamer, you discourage them from being anything but a powergamer.
And really, this is clearly a case of diminishing others in order to elevate yourself. That's not nice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it so hard for people to admit they're power gamers? It's not a dirty word.
Some people are into gaming for the role-playing and some people are in it for the battles, tinkering with the rules to optimize their chances of success. That's perfectly fine.
So why is it that some people will bend over backwards to convince you that their crazy alternate race, 3rd party class, four archetype, min-maxed character with three 18s and three 7s for attributes was built that way for role-playing purposes?
Guys, it's okay. Power gaming is part of the game. We accept you for who you are; there's no reason to lie to us.
Why do gamers still insist on this false division between role playing and "power" gaming. I "power" game all the time. My PCs are built to be very effective at their chosen role be that healer, fighter, skill master, diplomatic face or whatever. I'm also (I kid you not - this came a surprise to me as well) considered the best role player in my group of 6. I formed the group originally out of those people I felt were the top rpers of my friends with another friend as a DM.
So where do I fall on the whole power/roleplay gamer spectrum? Who knows and more importantly - who cares? Frankly keep your nose out of my character sheet and play your own damned character.
Why is it that people who play a straight-crb human wizard don't get called power gamers but when you play anything making use of available options people automatically think you are power gaming?
I PROMISE that no matter what insane stupid crazy options, broken classes, PrC's, archetypes, race and gear I have that my Fighter 14 will get his ass whooped by that basic Wizard 14.
Also, why do people think that being the little hermit wizard guy is good role-playing but the guy who actually has a compelling backstory and reasons for taking the various options is a bad role-player?
Also, role-play vs roll-play is a false dichotomy. Why do people feel like they need to rub your face in it if you like to take time to explore options and build neat characters?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why can't a character be built efficiently, with interesting mechanics and also be fun and dynamic to role-play? And why can't someone who enjoys fighting also enjoy out-combat and rp scenarios just as much?
I definitely do not see them as mutually exclusive as you appear to.
This.
Plus, one individual's definition of power gamer does not always relate to someone else's. Worry less about what the other guy is doing and have fun playing your character. Keeping up with the Jones in real life or gaming is seldom fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Denial much, guys? :)
It's okay. Power gaming is perfectly fine. Everyone enjoys the game in their own way.
If that's the case, why the thread?
|
|
Because I'm sick of closeted power gamers trying to convince me that their paladin is only a suli because it's fun to role-play. That their 20 dexterity, 5 charisma tiefling is only a rogue because "it's his personality."
Shh, shh, shh... it's okay. Power gaming is okay. As I just pointed out in another thread: the granddaddy of all RPGs is a tabletop war game.
Just don't tell me you didn't roll up a strix archer ranger because it gives you "plenty of opportunities to explore the rich culture of the strix." You rolled that character so you could fly at 1st level and rain down arrows from above. It's okay to admit it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah. So a power gamer gave you bad touch at some point and you are still harbouring a grudge about it.
The best cure for that is to find a group of people that believe like you do and embrace playing rather than hate.
|
|
Ah. So a power gamer gave you bad touch at some point and you are still harbouring a grudge about it.
The best cure for that is to find a group of people that believe like you do and embrace playing rather than hate.
I'm wracking my brain to find a way of telling you you're right in a way, but it's just not coming to me.
I suggest you start over and read the thread from the beginning if you're lost.
Oh no, I'm pretty sure I've got a good take on this. Good luck with your gaming.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I pretty much sum up my approach by a quote I saw on ENworld years ago.
"Build 'em like a power gamer, play 'em like a roleplayer"
When I am away from the table, I tend to construct the most efficient characters I can, within a specific concept. Now a lot of my concepts lend themselves to power gaming.
At the table, I play everything through the character's point of view. My primary purpose is to live in the moment as my character (I am a big fan of deep immersion).
The two are not mutually incompatible.
I was in a Rolemaster game decades ago, and I understood the system better than the GM. He had some house rules that I "abused" and effectively made 1st edition D&D style multi-class - A full healer that was also a full monk - he was a follower of a healing god, and while he could take anyone with his martial arts, he rarely fought. I also a Dwarven mage, that with his Battleaxe was as good as any fighter. One time something came up and the Dwarf had to fight a guy without magic. He beat a fighter a couple levels higher than him in 1 on 1 combat. The GM wanted to look at the character sheet. Then he looked at my Healer (who was worse).
He shook his head and said "Either of these characters could take over the party and no one could stop them" - and he didn't get my response of "why would I want to".
In response to the example in the OP...
When D&D 3.0 came out, it said you could play as a monster. So I did. I tried to break the system. I build a half gold dragon half celestial Paladin.
Powergamed - yeah. But while the original build idea was to break the system, the character was one of the funnest to play. She had blood of 2 different lawful good creatures running in her. I got the idea that she was never tempted - she ALWAYS chose right, and did the right thing. So she came off a little arrogant early on - but playing her over time - having her grow to someone who realized that not everyone had the same sure footing on ethical dilemmas that she does.. it shook her worldview, and the character growth that came from all of that is some of my best gaming memories.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because I'm sick of closeted power gamers trying to convince me that their paladin is only a suli because it's fun to role-play. That their 20 dexterity, 5 charisma tiefling is only a rogue because "it's his personality."
Shh, shh, shh... it's okay. Power gaming is okay. As I just pointed out in another thread: the granddaddy of all RPGs is a tabletop war game.
Just don't tell me you didn't roll up a strix archer ranger because it gives you "plenty of opportunities to explore the rich culture of the strix." You rolled that character so you could fly at 1st level and rain down arrows from above. It's okay to admit it.
Oh for frex's sake - you're just a troll! And I fell for it! That ain't happened 'round here since aught eight!
Because I'm sick of closeted power gamers trying to convince me that their paladin is only a suli because it's fun to role-play. That their 20 dexterity, 5 charisma tiefling is only a rogue because "it's his personality."
Shh, shh, shh... it's okay. Power gaming is okay. As I just pointed out in another thread: the granddaddy of all RPGs is a tabletop war game.
Just don't tell me you didn't roll up a strix archer ranger because it gives you "plenty of opportunities to explore the rich culture of the strix." You rolled that character so you could fly at 1st level and rain down arrows from above. It's okay to admit it.
Personally, I doubt you're better at understanding people's motivations than they are.
However, presuming for the sake of argument that you're correct about those people's motivations and they're lying or in denial...Why does it matter? Why are you sick of people you think are powergamers claiming to be roleplay focused?
Ah. So a power gamer gave you bad touch at some point and you are still harbouring a grudge about it.
The best cure for that is to find a group of people that believe like you do and embrace playing rather than hate.
Actually, he can't seem to accept that not everyone who plays a non-core race does it for the power, and actually chose it for the roleplay purposes and backstory. This seems to be in response to many of the replies from the "What ever happened to the core races?" thread.
|
I kind of see what the op is saying. Even for the most part I disagree with most of his first post. If your going to build a Fighter with a 20 str and con with a int and/or Cha of 7. Well your going to get a big penalty in role playing situations. I don't care how good a role player a player thinks he is or how Oscar worthy his Pergormance at the table is. He is not going to be as good or better than the bard with a Cha and Int of 12 or more. Want to play a character that hits hard and can take a decent amount if damage great. If a player designs a character to be dumber than a glass of water and a personality that has dogs barking at his heels all the time he suffers that as well.
I caution players ahead of time that if they want to take low ability scored to boost others it will affect th in game play. Good role playing or not. It's not fair to the characters who have high Cha or int scored if the guy with low stats gets a free pass because of "roleplaying". Another problem is that the system rewards you for optimizing . I once had two monks in one if my games. A optimized one and a multiclass bard/monk. The optimized version was good at what he did. The multiclass one wanted to be both a good monk a bard. Yet Slso be as effective. I tried my best as a DM yet a multiclass character is usually never as good IMO as a single classed character.
There is nothing wrong with power gaming. Being a DM means one has to detes field A lot if demands from players. If one is unable or unwilling to do so then one should not take the role if a DM .
I like to powergame the Heck out of a character. My gnome fighter is level 5, with ac 29, +12 to hit (with power attack) who does d6+14 damage, he's a combat monster, booya! And yet I've just gone on an extended break from my regular group due to a lack of roleplaying and immersion.
I like to powergame and I love to roleplay my characters, I am not a just a powergamer and not just a roleplayer, I am more than the sum of my parts. Who am I? I'm Jean Valjeaaan! And so Javert, you see it's true, that man bears no more guilt than youuuuu. Who am I? 24601!
Because that's what this silly notion of "them against us" deserves ;)
Many of us embrace our powergamer nature and someone trying to limit us to it is narrowminded and predjudist and I honestly pity such small minds. If threads such as this is born from envy then just ask, I'll be happy to help you powergame too.
I love to roleplay, but the only reason to play Pathfinder or really even D&D (3E+) over other roleplaying games is because optimization is fun. If you don't want powergaming then play a Fate system or maybe Spellbound Kingdoms.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like to powergame the Heck out of a character. My gnome fighter..
This line made me choke on my coffee. :)
Memorax seems to get the point of this post. Power gaming is fine, do it all you want. Just don't think you're going to get away with a 5 charisma by calling your strix ranger "the stoic, silent type." Just like the low strength wizard has to deal with his tiny carrying capacity, you're going to occasionally have to deal with the fact that your character rubs people the wrong way.
Also, don't bring a character whose attributes consist of three 18s and three 7s to the table and try to tell me you only did it that way because it makes for a good personality. Yeah, your orc barbarian is all kinds of awesome in battle, but you're going to have to learn to laugh along with the rest of us when he sticks his foot in his mouth when the party is trying to talk to the queen, then accidentally walks into a closet when they're trying to leave the palace. If you're a power gamer, just own it and let's have some fun with the character's deficiencies.
I'm not a powergamer. I'm not skilled enough at it yet to have earned the title.
I will claim the title of Roleplayer though. Every one of my characters has a unique and memorable personality. Every one of my characters has a backstory that sensibily explains whatever trait or feat the character has taken. Some of those traits exist because they enhance the existing background. Others exist because they enhance the character and the background grew to cover them. Regardless of why the traits are there, the character's background (and thus their personality) is deepened and enhanced by their presence.
I'm not a powergamer, but one day I will be. And on the day I earn that title, it won't magically erase my title as a roleplayer. I will bear both titles with pride.
I like to powergame the Heck out of a character. My gnome fighter..This line made me choke on my coffee. :)
Memorax seems to get the point of this post. Power gaming is fine, do it all you want. Just don't think you're going to get away with a 5 charisma by calling your strix ranger "the stoic, silent type." Just like the low strength wizard has to deal with his tiny carrying capacity, you're going to occasionally have to deal with the fact that your character rubs people the wrong way.
Also, don't bring a character whose attributes consist of three 18s and three 7s to the table and try to tell me you only did it that way because it makes for a good personality. Yeah, your orc barbarian is all kinds of awesome in battle, but you're going to have to learn to laugh along with the rest of us when he sticks his foot in his mouth when the party is trying to talk to the queen, then accidentally walks into a closet when they're trying to leave the palace. If you're a power gamer, just own it and let's have some fun with the character's deficiencies.
It's the attempt to force a label onto people, which often carries negative connotations that I find grating.
Berating a person until they accept a label from you isn't conducive to a productive discussion.
|
|
I try to build my characters with a mix of attributes at most one maybe two liq scores. IMO taking low scores at least in D&D is really not worth it. Too many penalties and they need to be role played properly. In my games no way is the character with a Cha of 8 or less going to be a successful as the one with a Cha if 12 or higher. What keeps getting ignored by some in the community is that roleplaying can offset some effect of the low attribute scores. Not all.
It's a balancing act at the table. A DM has to make sure everyone has fun . That being said a player also is responsible for building a character with low ability scores. With all the bonuses and penalties such a character has.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's the attempt to force a label onto people, which often carries negative connotations that I find grating.
Especially when it's phrased as if the labeller understands your motivations better than you do. ("You may say you're into the story, but you're really just thinking about the numbers.")
It's best to just take people at face value, in my experience. Especially when all you really know about them is gleaned from a few internet posts.
|
|
I don't like the label of power gamer either myself. Yet sometimes I have been in games where players try to cheat the system. Have high stats in the main attributes and low stats with the ones they don't need. Then try to get around it by roleplaying. Not wrong with roleplaying I encourage it. It's when the players try to do bypass the low attributes on a character where it bothers me. Want to make a fugly character go for it. Expect to be penalized in social encounters. Just like the Bard with high cha and usually lower strength is not going to be as effective in combat.
The problem is as MattR1986 pointed out is that the character with high str and con with low int and cha are always tried to roleplay the same way. If it's part of a curse I'm willing to give a free pass as it makes sense that a pc is going to at first come across as lacking social skills and dumb. When a players wants to have his cake and eat it to is where I firmly draw the line. It's not like the system rewards you that much for taking a int and/or a cha of 7. Espcially with a fighter with low skill points a int of 7 is asking to have no skills imo. And for what 1-3 points of more damage. I rather have more skills points and be more successful at social encounters instead imo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing I powergame is where I put my stats. But I NEVER have a score below 10. If that means my highest score pre-racials is a 16... *shrug* If a character of mine would get a negative to one of the class's prime abilities (such as a dwarf paladin or gnome fighter), then I will make that score higher than usual to offset that penalty.
I am very able to powergame/optimize/min-max/whatever you wanna call it, but I choose not to, as that crap excessively drains any fun I have in the game. Whether I do it or the other players do. Dealing 150 damage to a frost drake in a single hit with a shocking grasp attack as a black-blade magus is just obscene and made me /facepalm when I saw it.
If that's your idea of fun, good on you and I hope the others in your group find it fun as well. I personally find it boring and it makes me lose interest fast.
Denial much, guys? :)
It's okay. Power gaming is perfectly fine. Everyone enjoys the game in their own way.
Childishly condescending much, Headfirst?
Oh for frex's sake - you're just a troll! And I fell for it! That ain't happened 'round here since aught eight!Because I'm sick of closeted power gamers trying to convince me that their paladin is only a suli because it's fun to role-play. That their 20 dexterity, 5 charisma tiefling is only a rogue because "it's his personality."
Shh, shh, shh... it's okay. Power gaming is okay. As I just pointed out in another thread: the granddaddy of all RPGs is a tabletop war game.
Just don't tell me you didn't roll up a strix archer ranger because it gives you "plenty of opportunities to explore the rich culture of the strix." You rolled that character so you could fly at 1st level and rain down arrows from above. It's okay to admit it.
OI WENT AND GOT JIBBERED BY A MUNTER TWO TIMES TODAY AND IT AIN'T EVEN TWELVE BONG
I don't like the label of power gamer either myself. Yet sometimes I have been in games where players try to cheat the system. Have high stats in the main attributes and low stats with the ones they don't need. Then try to get around it by roleplaying. Not wrong with roleplaying I encourage it. It's when the players try to do bypass the low attributes on a character where it bothers me. Want to make a fugly character go for it. Expect to be penalized in social encounters. Just like the Bard with high cha and usually lower strength is not going to be as effective in combat.
The problem is as MattR1986 pointed out is that the character with high str and con with low int and cha are always tried to roleplay the same way. If it's part of a curse I'm willing to give a free pass as it makes sense that a pc is going to at first come across as lacking social skills and dumb. When a players wants to have his cake and eat it to is where I firmly draw the line. It's not like the system rewards you that much for taking a int and/or a cha of 7. Espcially with a fighter with low skill points a int of 7 is asking to have no skills imo. And for what 1-3 points of more damage. I rather have more skills points and be more successful at social encounters instead imo.
No offense, but what you are describing isn't a player problem, it's a DM problem.
As the DM it is your responsibility to call for rolls and set the DC. If you aren't asking for social skill rolls, than you can't blame people for dumping Charisma and investing zero skill points in them.
The Barbarian who dumps Charisma and doesn't invest in Bluff/Diplomacy isn't going to beat a DC 20 and very rarely a DC 15. There are a lot of things that are DC 15 or higher.
Childishly condescending much, Headfirst?Denial much, guys? :)
It's okay. Power gaming is perfectly fine. Everyone enjoys the game in their own way.
Whoops, almost forgot.
":)"
As a changeling Bard, I'm sure I don't have a clue what this discussion is about.
|
|
No offense, but what you are describing isn't a player problem, it's a DM problem.As the DM it is your responsibility to call for rolls and set the DC. If you aren't asking for social skill rolls, than you can't blame people for dumping Charisma and investing zero skill points in them.
The Barbarian who dumps Charisma and doesn't invest in Bluff/Diplomacy isn't going to beat a DC 20 and very rarely a DC 15. There are a lot of things that are DC 15 or higher.
I disagree. If a player wants to be good at combat and social aspects of the game he needas to build the character properly imo. I run the game I cannot and will not be responsible for players who build characters poorly imo. I can suggest a player not max out con and str. I can`t force them too. So a player to a certain extent is responsible for the way he builds his character.
I can as a dm only do so much. If the party needs to engage in diplomacy I can`t very well lower the DC because the melee types dumped stats. Don`t get me wrong I do ask for rolls and set the DC fairly. I do get the rare player who wants to be both good at combat and social encounters without having attributes igh enough. More often than not they fail at aocial encounters.
I can as a dm only do so much. If the party needs to engage in diplomacy I can`t very well lower the DC because the melee types dumped stats. Don`t get me wrong I do ask for rolls and set the DC fairly. I do get the rare player who wants to be both good at combat and social encounters without having attributes igh enough. More often than not they fail at aocial encounters.
I didn't say lower the DC. In fact, my suggestion would be the opposite. If you want players to invest in Charisma and Diplomacy more, raise the DC's.
For me, roleplay is not something to reward with a bonus, it's the minimum requirement to engage at the table. I'm not a tyrant about it, but rather something I work with the player on and suit to their style of play.
The major premise for a game system to work: to effect change, you must use the mechanics of the rules to do so.
By "effect change" I mean something that matters. Sure, tying your shoes 'changes' them from untied to tied, but unless the success or failure is consequential, it doesn't matter. I'm talking about more important changes. Getting an NPC to do a favor. Making an orc dead. Finding a secret door. All these things require a roll.
|
|
I didn't say lower the DC. In fact, my suggestion would be the opposite. If you want players to invest in Charisma and Diplomacy more, raise the DC's.
Which I do at the table. I don't disallow a player from roleplaying just make the chances of auccess harder.
For me, roleplay is not something to reward with a bonus, it's the minimum requirement to engage at the table. I'm not a tyrant about it, but rather something I work with the player on and suit to their style of play.
I reward them with a bonus as well. Nor am I tyrant about it either yet at the same time their should be consequences for building a character with low cha and int. As a DM one should not bend the rules for low attributes since it penalizes those who invest the point in those attributes.
The major premise for a game system to work: to effect change, you must use the mechanics of the rules to do so.
Low attributes are still low attrbutes. They are tied into the system for skill rolls. Low con and str mean you hit less for less damage and can take getting hit less. Their is a reason why the system gives negatives to low attributes. If this was a rpg like Fate or one where attributes were not so tied into the system then you can have a character that is not as smart or charismatic while still bein effective. Imo this is not the system for it. Not without houserules or giving free passes to those with low attributes while screwing over those who invest the proper points in those attributes/
By "effect change" I mean something that matters. Sure, tying your shoes 'changes' them from untied to tied, but unless the success or failure is consequential, it doesn't matter. I'm talking about more important changes. Getting an NPC to do a favor. Making an orc dead. Finding a secret door. All these things require a roll.
Again what is being forgotten is that those who take low attributes should not be given a free pass on social situations of any kind. It matters not if it is a important situation or not. Want to take a cha or 7 or less go for it. I expect you to roleplay it. If not I have to start allowing a player using the Bard to hit and do as much damage as someone with a low cha.
Responsability for a player having fun is on both the player and the DM. More on the player because I run and design the game they are playing in. Not the character. Player want to hit and interact well in social situations then build the right character. I refuse to take any responsability for poor player character design. I don't force players to build characters a certain way. Yet neither am I forced to cater to a person who wants to have high con and str at the expense of three attributes of 7 or lower.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where did I say bend the rules? Where did I say free pass?
Your post seems like you're trying to argue a position opposite mine, but I'm not advocating the things you seem to imply that I'm advocating, so I'm confused.