PDA

View Full Version : Defining: Optimizer, Powergamer, Munchkin



ShadowsGrnEyes
2009-10-25, 01:39 PM
OK, these words get thrown around alot and I'm curious how different people define them. I've seen people say optimizer for things I would call powergaming and I've seen people say munchkin for things I'd just call optimizing and I've seen rather bad arguments over it. So in the interests of broadening MY understanding I'd like all of your input.

These are the definitions I was going by. Am I wrong? Or are these truely all relative terms and there are various definitions depending on the people involved?

Optimizer: Someone who plans their character so as to best use abilities and the rules of the game to their advantage. (perfectly fine in any game)

Powergamer: An optimizer who disregards the intended power level of the game and abuses flaws in RAWR(while not breaking rules) to make themselves significantly more powerful than the game intended for their level. (do-able if everyone in the game is a powergamer and the dm can compensate.)

Munchkin: A powergamer who abuses flaws in RAWR and breaks rules(intentional or accidental) to drasitcally increase the power level of their character beyond the intended or even reasonablly adjustable power level of the game. (pretty hard to deal with in any game)

Flickerdart
2009-10-25, 01:49 PM
Optimizer: "Toughness is a weak option for my Fighter. I'll take Steadfast Determination instead."

Powergamer: "Fighter is a weak option for my character. I'll take Wizard instead."

Munchkin: "Wizard is a weak option for my character. I'll take Pun-Pun instead."

AstralFire
2009-10-25, 01:55 PM
Optimizer: Someone who decides upon a set role or concept and uses the rules to maximize her potential towards that direction. An optimizer may be optimizing a non-optimal class or concept for the sheer enjoyment of making that concept work.

Powergamer: Someone who decides upon a high level of potency and makes character selection and customization primarily based upon being effective. A powergamer begins character creation with a mechanical effect or level of dominance they seek to achieve.

Munchkin: Someone who decides upon a high level of potency and makes character selection and customization solely upon being effective. May or may not actually use flawed rules interpretations or cheat; the important thing differentiating the Munchkin from the Powergamer is a near-total apathy for assisting or refraining from injuring the play experience for others, in pursuit of her goal of power.

There is a rough correspondence on the other side of RPG, the 'RP' - those would be Method Actor, Limelighter and Prima Donna.

Moriato
2009-10-25, 01:58 PM
In my experience it goes something like this:

Optimizer = A word that munchkins use to describe themselves.

Powergamer = A word that munchkins use to describe themselves.

Munchkin = The word that everyone else uses to describe the people who don't think they're munchkins but "Optimizers" or "Powergamers" instead.

ShadowsGrnEyes
2009-10-25, 01:58 PM
There is a rough correspondence on the other side of RPG, the 'RP' - those would be Method Actor, Limelighter and Prima Donna.

hah, i like that.

Sir_Elderberry
2009-10-25, 02:12 PM
Optimizers, well, optimize. They work within a character concept to maximize a character's effectiveness.

Powergamers are not out to work with a character. A powergamer wants to have power, and so his first consideration in the game is not "what character would be fun?" but "what character would be the most powerful?". They're not as bad as the next category but can cause issues, mostly if mixed in with nonpowergamers, because the aims of the players are different.

Munchkins are also out to have power, but in a different way and with a different aim than the powergamer. The powergamer views D&D as a series of challenges that the DM is putting forth and wants to defeat them. The munchkin views D&D as a contest among everyone at the table to dominate gameplay. This means that they must be more powerful not only than the DM's challenges, but more powerful than the other players as well. Because of this, they're not interested in playing a game, the way the powergamer is. They're interested in playing a metagame, and in their view, everything that advances them helps that. Rules don't apply to their metagame and so they may ignore or overlook them.

AstralFire
2009-10-25, 02:14 PM
Method Actor: Someone who decides upon a set role or concept and thinks through every aspect of the character's personality to maximize her immersion within the role. Some will occasionally make choices that are simply bad for the character or campaign's health to remain true to the character's personality, but only when such things are called for.

Limelighter: Someone who wants to be the primary focus of story development. In many ways, much the same as the method actor, except that they're more likely to take a 'crowd-pleaser' concept, and controversial in-character choices are more likely to arise because they make the game 'interesting'.

Prima Donna: Someone who wants to be the primary focus of story development and expects all important action and roleplay to revolve around them. May or may not be making illogical and inconsistent in-character actions; the important thing differentiating the Prima Donna from the Limelighter is a near-total apathy for assisting or refraining from injuring the play experience for others, in pursuit of her goal of attention.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-10-25, 02:19 PM
In my experience it goes something like this:

Optimizer = A word that munchkins use to describe themselves.

Powergamer = A word that munchkins use to describe themselves.

Munchkin = The word that everyone else uses to describe the people who don't think they're munchkins but "Optimizers" or "Powergamers" instead.

You've never met individuals from the first two categories then. I, myself, sit somewhere between the first two. DnD is a painfully flawed and inflexible system that requires work to make it... -well, work. The problem comes from those self-centered tools who care not a whit for the enjoyment of others in their quest to 'win' the game.

KitsuneKionchi
2009-10-25, 02:31 PM
To use magic the gathering terms (Note: most people fall into portions of these categories):

Spike: Someone who wants to win at all costs, including originality, logic, and even bending the rules so far they snap. They can completely break games (see: Punpun) or just be that thing that saves the party when it desperately needs it because they are an efficient character (see: any extremely efficient and powerful gish; probably an artificer XD).

Favorite Books: All of them. But usually only about ~5 pages from each.

Johnny: Johnny wants to play on his own terms. That is, he see's DnD as the perfect chance for creative expression and will stick to his own guns even at the risk of sub-par power. He'll commonly be the one to try to optimize the underused classes and create odd character types you'll never see anywhere else. Why play a Cleric to heal and buff when you can be a Truenamer Incarnum-user with Stigmata and Strongheart Vest to offset the con damage?

Favorite Books: Tome of Magic, The Quinessential Soul Knife, A WotC article you never even heard of posted by Monte Cook on a forum back during 3.0 beta days

Timmy: He wants to be a good character using the biggest and most impressive things he can find. He doesn't necessarily want to win at all costs like the Spike or combine weaker elements into stronger ones like the Johnny. He's the guy who uses all his spells in a single Time Stop + Delayed Blast Fireball blast on the first encounter and, thanks to Ultimate Magus' ability to reduce 1st level spells into metamagic buffs, leaves nothing left over for the final boss. They pick the Great Axe over the Scythe since it uses bigger dice, without realizing the Scythe does more technical damage when you account for its critical hit multiplier.

Preferred Books: Player's Handbook, Monster Manual 1, The Complete Series

Vorthos: Cares nothing for power or mechanics so long as its flavorful. Theme trumps everything. He'd prefer playing a level 1 commoner to a level 10 druid if he could narrate his 14 page back story to everyone about why he chose to be a chicken farmer and why he'll avenge the loss of his village ransacked by bandits a week before he joined the rest of the party, using his father's sword he found hidden in the rafters of his house while he tried to escape the marauders.

Preferred Books: Weapons of Legacy, Draconomicon, his own book he's been writing about his character who le-...I'll tell ya later.

Melvin: Melvin prefers mechanics over gameplay. That is, he's content to sit by and read some fascinating new way to apply spell components in an intuitive fashion that blows all previous spell-component mechanics out of the water. He loves exploring new mechanics and constantly rating them. He's most likely to change his character (or beg to DM) to try out something new. Probably homebrews a lot and dreams of working for R&D.

Preferred Books: Changes every week based on 3rd party updates and forum revisions that make the systems *so* much better. Also: Pathfinder.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-10-25, 02:46 PM
If Johnny, Melvin, and Vorthos combined their powers... I'd be their Captain Planet.

Temet Nosce
2009-10-25, 02:47 PM
Optimizer: Someone who decides upon a set role or concept and uses the rules to maximize her potential towards that direction. An optimizer may be optimizing a non-optimal class or concept for the sheer enjoyment of making that concept work.

Powergamer: Someone who decides upon a high level of potency and makes character selection and customization primarily based upon being effective. A powergamer begins character creation with a mechanical effect or level of dominance they seek to achieve.

Munchkin: Someone who decides upon a high level of potency and makes character selection and customization solely upon being effective. May or may not actually use flawed rules interpretations or cheat; the important thing differentiating the Munchkin from the Powergamer is a near-total apathy for assisting or refraining from injuring the play experience for others, in pursuit of her goal of power.

There is a rough correspondence on the other side of RPG, the 'RP' - those would be Method Actor, Limelighter and Prima Donna.

I essentially agree with you. However, I'll type it out as well, slightly more succinctly.

Optimizer: One who optimizes, attempting to fulfill a specific concept with maximum efficiency.

Powergamer: One who wants to have a powerful character.

Munchkin: One who wants to be "best" to the detriment of the rest of the table. May cheat to get it. Also applied to people who simply play in a style to the detriment of the rest of the table.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-25, 02:55 PM
...We just had one of these threads last week, right?



(Note: most people fall into portions of these categories):

Spike: Someone who wants to win at all costs, including originality, logic, and even bending the rules so far they snap. They can completely break games (see: Punpun) or just be that thing that saves the party when it desperately needs it because they are an efficient character (see: any extremely efficient and powerful gish; probably an artificer XD).

I'm inclined to say this is a Munchkin, not an Optimizer. In fact, I don't see anything in your post that would meet the definition of Optimizer. Spikes, in MTG terms, are all over the tourny scene, and are proper optimizers. The Stop Having Fun Guys is an extreme Spike. The cheater is a cheater.

Efficient character design doesn't (or shouldn't) disrupt the campaign (I say shouldn't because there are DMs out there who believe the party should fail at some things).

Optimizers do not actively seek out the most powerful classes and builds and expect to "win". They know that victory only matters in combat scenarios, and that you can't "win" DnD (the party can, but only at the end of an adventure). They don't strive for "winning", they aim to make their characters as powerful as they need to be in the role they choose. And they know how to hold back. Most importantly, an optimizer will play by the rules.

Power Gamers seek out the most powerful build options, but not necessarily the best classes. They try to be the most powerful at what they do. If they are proven wrong they may argue their side, but are more likely to accept that they are wrong and seek to make a correction. They are capable of getting along with the rest of the table quite well.

Munchkins don't care about the party, and actively seek to be the best at everything. They may be rude about it, and may misinterpret the rules, and may very well disrupt the game often. When proven wrong, they may be immature about it, or they just find something else to bend or break. These people are the bane of gamers, as they often go to lengths to cheat, simply for the sake of power over the other party members. Rarely will they show respect for the DM's authority or for people trying to keep the game on track.



Sometimes the three may overlap, but an optimizer is the most likely to recognize his own syndromes of the other two styles and most likely to correct himself. A Power Gamer is likely to realize he is a Munchkin, but whether or not he corrects himself depends on which side of the spectrum he's on. Munchkins are the hardest to correct. They tend to be stubborn, and often require regular chair beatings. Still, some have been redeemed.





With regards to the Flaws variant in UA/SRD, it's a psuedo-broken mechanic that shouldn't have been printed. Its a nice boost, and any optimizer will take advantage of it, but they respect the DM in that area and only utilize flaws if they are allowed. To be honest, flaws and bonus feats are not that powerful except on certain builds; it just makes character optimization easier. A Munchkin may read the flaws section, and then apply them immediately at next to no limit. A Power Gamer may or may not use them at all, but if they do they make sure it is ok with the DM first.

Gametime
2009-10-25, 02:55 PM
In my experience it goes something like this:

Optimizer = A word that munchkins use to describe themselves.

Powergamer = A word that munchkins use to describe themselves.

Munchkin = The word that everyone else uses to describe the people who don't think they're munchkins but "Optimizers" or "Powergamers" instead.

That's a mildly insulting way to categorize a wide group of people, in my experience.

I think Flickerdart's example is a pretty good way of summing up the differences.

lsfreak
2009-10-25, 02:58 PM
Optimizers take a concept, like "arhcer" or "illusionist" or "Jack Sparrow," and from there work out how to make that concept work within the game. They discard choices that are subpar for filling out the concept - like perhaps refusing fighter when warblade is a better combatant - without choosing options based solely on their mechanical power. A good optimizer is also willing to refluff things, which many non-optimizers aren't, which can lead to tensions even outside of any mechanical power.

Powergamers start with the character, and may never get to the concept. They start building up "a swift hunter" or "a FS conjurer" or "tripmonkey." Here mechanically-subpar options are thrown out for the reason of being mechanically subpar, rather than the option not fitting the character.

So, take the concept of an agile, fast 2HW-user. The optimizer might take an elven courtblade, classing as a warblade with a dip in cleric (travel devotion) and barbarian (pounce + variant rage), focusing on Diamond Mind and White Raven and Tiger's Claw and grabbing Shadow Blade as well.

A powergamer, on the other hand, probably wouldn't even play this concept. Dumping a huge investment of points into Dex instead of Str hurts your damage output and requires several extra feats to remain on the same level.

So, no sane powergamer is going to go for a 2-hander with a starting Str of 10 and Dex18. But an optimizer can work with that concept and make it into something worth playing. A non-optimizer simply won't be able to get the concept to work well, because a non-optimizer probably won't notice things like Shadow Blade or Elven Courtblade.

[The thing to keep in mind is that on forums such as these, advice often leads towards powergaming rather than optimizing. Mechanics is what we work with because the character itself is generally unavailable. It's up to the OP to figure out whether ideas would fit a character or not; we simply give out the advice, including things that may or may not go against the spirit of the character, and leave others to decide what's okay.]

Munchkin is a different matter entirely. A munchkin is someone who has fun at the expense of others. This often means powergaming, or at least attempting to, and ignoring that they're dominating the table. It tends to also be assossiated with powergaming poorly, screwing up the rules because the person simply read a few posts on a forum and doesn't actually know what they're doing. But it can just as easily be someone who is optimizing - a good thing - but not noticing how much their power level is affecting the other players. And it can be people who try and fasttalk their DM into allowing things they shouldn't. And it can be people who purposely misinterpret the rules because it's advantageous.

streakster
2009-10-25, 03:15 PM
In their own words:

Optimizer:
"Well, that's the backstory finished. Now I just need to build the character."

Powergamer:
"Well, that's my build finished. Now I just need to come up with some backstory."

Munchkin:
"LOOKIT MAH NUMBERZ!"

You also forgot the other end of this scale - the Actor.

Actor:
"LOOKIT MAH BACKSTORY!"



Thus, the scale runs:

Actor [RP above all]
Optimizer [RP/Power]
Powergamer [Power/RP]
Munchkin [Power above all]

Either end of the scale is annoying and impossible to play with. The munchkin is only out to get higher numbers, and won't play fair or play nice. The actor, on the other hand, put no effort into his build, because he's more interested in his novel length backstory, which he'll cram in at any occasion. The munchkin dominates of all the fights himself, while the actor has to be carried through by the members of the party who didn't spend all their feats on spell thematics and toughness.

Moriato
2009-10-25, 03:16 PM
That's a mildly insulting way to categorize a wide group of people, in my experience.

I think Flickerdart's example is a pretty good way of summing up the differences.

I do my best to mildly insult as wide a group of people as I can at every opportunity.

Seriously though, when I began playing D&D, "Munchkin" meant pretty much what people use the word "optimizer" or "powergamer" for nowadays. A munchkin was someone who only cared about making the best character they could, and amassing as much wealth as possible. This seems to be the default goal most people have in D&D anymore.

Now people seem to think that powergamer and optimizer mean something different and munchkin = cheater.

We just used the word cheater for people who cheated.

KitsuneKionchi
2009-10-25, 03:17 PM
Well we also forgot the "developer" archtype: he's happy so long as he can play either some odd system he foudn online or can test one he make himself XD

Nero24200
2009-10-25, 03:18 PM
Optimizer - A player seeking to take abilities appropraite for his/her character, but not nessicerily weak abilities. Will usally take enough power to remain useful in a party, but doesn't stretch to steal the spotlight.

Munchkin - Someone who takes power for powers sake. Likes to steal the show, instant-kill bosses, and doesn't mind the addition of new abilities or hownbrewn material, as long as he/she realises how powerful the new abilities are but the other players don't.

Powergamer - Somewhere in between, is more willing to take options purely for power, but won't try to outshine too much and make their broken build too obvious.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-25, 03:20 PM
I do my best to mildly insult as wide a group of people as I can at every opportunity.

Seriously though, when I began playing D&D, "Munchkin" meant pretty much what people use the word "optimizer" or "powergamer" for nowadays. A munchkin was someone who only cared about making the best character they could, and amassing as much wealth as possible. This seems to be the default goal most people have in D&D anymore.

Now people seem to think that powergamer and optimizer mean something different and munchkin = cheater.

We just used the word cheater for people who cheated.

Because no one understood that Blaster Wizards sucked, or that Fighters weren't worth taking to 20th level. Back then, being an optimizer was a niche much smaller than it is now (we are now very wide-spread). Back then, the odds of having an optimizer who knew what he was doing in your party were fairly slim. Back then, we were considered the bane of the RPG community because no one understood what we were doing and why.


We've tried hard to shake that karma too. And people with your attitude just make it hard on us. Though I believe we all agree with you on the Cheater part.

AstralFire
2009-10-25, 03:29 PM
In their own words:

Optimizer:
"Well, that's the backstory finished. Now I just need to build the character."

Powergamer:
"Well, that's my build finished. Now I just need to come up with some backstory."

Munchkin:
"LOOKIT MAH NUMBERZ!"

You also forgot the other end of this scale - the Actor.

Actor:
"LOOKIT MAH BACKSTORY!"



Thus, the scale runs:

Actor [RP above all]
Optimizer [RP/Power]
Powergamer [Power/RP]
Munchkin [Power above all]

Either end of the scale is annoying and impossible to play with. The munchkin is only out to get higher numbers, and won't play fair or play nice. The actor, on the other hand, put no effort into his build, because he's more interested in his novel length backstory, which he'll cram in at any occasion. The munchkin dominates of all the fights himself, while the actor has to be carried through by the members of the party who didn't spend all their feats on spell thematics and toughness.

Much love, Streaks, but I disagree with this version because it puts tabletop in a sliding scale of Game versus Roleplay when I think that these definitions are more helpfully described as a triangle between Game, Roleplay, and Social Views.

Starbuck_II
2009-10-25, 03:31 PM
One clue, if the call is called himself a power gamer or optimizer and dies alot: then they are neither.
A good power gamer/optimize doesn't die alot.

Moriato
2009-10-25, 03:31 PM
Because no one understood that Blaster Wizards sucked, or that Fighters weren't worth taking to 20th level. Back then, being an optimizer was a niche much smaller than it is now (we are now very wide-spread). Back then, the odds of having an optimizer who knew what he was doing in your party were fairly slim. Back then, we were considered the bane of the RPG community because no one understood what we were doing and why.


We've tried hard to shake that karma too. And people with your attitude just make it hard on us. Though I believe we all agree with you on the Cheater part.

Not... really. We weren't stupid.

Believe me, there were as many people then who knew the rules just as well as you do.

Also, when I started it was 2nd ed, and everything had far fewer hit points than they do now, and saving throws were a lot easier to make, so blasters were actually very powerful.

Regardless, no one invented power gaming, it's always been there, it was just never the goal of the game for most people.

Shpadoinkle
2009-10-25, 03:35 PM
An Optimizer is someone who takes a role and tries to make themselves as mechanically effective at it as they can without disrupting the game. An optimizer archer will buy a more powerful bow if it's available, they have time, and the party doesn't have to go out of thier way to get it. Seems like a pretty meaningless label to me, since most players do this, unless they either don't understand the mechanics of the game or they're much more interested in the roleplaying aspects of the game than the mechanical side of it.

A Powergamer wants power, whether that consists of combat ability or political influence or just plain money or something else, and generally they seem (to me) to be the kind of people who don't understand or don't care that you can't "win" D&D, and the primary point of the game is to have fun with your friends, not be better than the DM and other players. Many players have a few drops of this in thier bucket- not that I blame them, of course, and I'm not saying that's bad. Being able to become superhumanly powerful is part of the appeal of D&D in the first place.

A Munchkin is like everything bad about the Powergamer dialed up to 11. They want to be the best at everything (and often think they are), tend to either make very poor decisions when building thier character or abuse some loophole in the rules to become stronger than they should, whether the loophole actually works like they think it does or not. A munchkin could very well decide that a sorcerer can stay at home and send his familiar out on adventures to do stuff for him because the sorcerer and familiar know evertything the other knows, and the sorcerer can cast spells with his familiar as a proxy, so the sorcerer could send his moue familiar to infiltrate the castle, sneak into the king's room, then Magic Missile him to death (this isn't drawn from an actual experience, if you're wondering, it's just an example that came to mind, and most munckhin interperatations of the rules tend to be much, much more stupid and insane.)

Actual roleplaying is almost universally an alien concept to munchkins, and the only thing they do resembling it tends to be saying, in character "Do what I say or I'll kill/torture you," or "Look how much better I am than you!" Many munchkins think D&D is just a video game on paper.

Riffington
2009-10-25, 03:39 PM
Because no one understood that Blaster Wizards sucked, or that Fighters weren't worth taking to 20th level. Back then, being an optimizer was a niche much smaller than it is now (we are now very wide-spread). Back then, the odds of having an optimizer who knew what he was doing in your party were fairly slim. Back then, we were considered the bane of the RPG community because no one understood what we were doing and why.


We've tried hard to shake that karma too. And people with your attitude just make it hard on us. Though I believe we all agree with you on the Cheater part.

I don't think the game really changed that much. You could always play a powerful character without being a munchkin. Optimizing a "build" or "a die rolling technique" or whatever has the potential to be disruptive but need not necessarily be disruptive. You became (and still become) a munchkin when your quest for power comes at the cost of other players' fun, realism, roleplay, or game continuity.

Dienekes
2009-10-25, 03:58 PM
Most of these are pretty good definitions for online discussion and so forth, but in my experience around the table the terms mean something like this.

Optimizer=never really used around the table. Would probably be someone who simply did something cool with what they had. They didn't shine every session but when he shines he shines brightly.

Powergamer= the guy who put time into being the most efficient member of the group. While not technically overpowered, yet, you do however get a little annoyed playing with him. No matter what the situation he seems to do just as good if not better than the other players.

Munchkin= That Guy. You've only really heard of That Guy from others, or maybe met one once. Everyone hated him. He figured out a way to blow up the planet at level 2 and then proceeded to do it and reorder the world in his image. He told the GM how things worked and pouted when it didn't work his way. At one time he decided to destroy the entire city in which they were getting their quests from because he didn't like one of the NPC's attitudes.

This should be noted, however, to be a sliding scale. One teams powergamer is another teams munchkin, and so forth. All depending on how optimized the rest of the party is.

Zaydos
2009-10-25, 04:14 PM
Personally I'd say an optimizer takes a concept and tries to make it work. A power gamer says "how can I be strong" and looks into it, and a munchkin just tries to get power.

An optimizer is good they take an interest in the RP and mechanics. They know the rules well enough I don't get asked to design their character for them.

A power gamer can take an interest in the RP but it is always backseat to mechanics. They change their alignment and concept so they can take Vow of Nonviolence and get +4 to Save DCs.

A munchkin will kill games. They claim +8 synergy bonus to diplomacy at Lv 1 in 3.0 where by the rules you could only get +4 (and yes I did encounter that).

DaedalusMkV
2009-10-25, 04:21 PM
Well, I've actually managed to play with people from all three groups in very little time, so here's some anecdotes:

Optimizer: "You know, I've always wanted to play an Ogre. Now I've just got to find a way to make it work..."

Powergamer: "If I play a Psychic Warrior/Monk I can get a lot of attacks at a decent BAB that deal way too much damage. Or, I could be an Ubercharger and do about the same, but simpler and more reliably. What do you guys think?"

Munchkin: "Hey, check out my new character, everyone! I've got this ability that lets me reroll ones for damage and another that lets me roll another die if I roll max! So I use a Small dagger and BAM! Infinite damage! Who's the king now?"

The last one doesn't play with us anymore. He quit in a hissy fit after the first session, where the DM vetoed his infinite combo. When we told the middle one none of the other characters would be able to match his, he changed to a batman psion instead (lets make them better, then). That's the main difference between a powergamer and a munchkin.

Samb
2009-10-25, 04:31 PM
There is no difference mechanically, but a world of difference fluff-wise.

All: push the boundaries of the rules/DM BS tolerance to make there concept of a PC as streamline and potent as possible given the rules.

munchkins: play to win, no one likes them, have bad social skills.

powergamer: plays well with others, but has no qualms about overshadowing other party members in displays of their awesome skills. Generally viewed with reluctant respect.

Optimizer: a more catch-all and neutral phrase. These guys let the dice do the talking, maybe smug know-it-all's or indifferent gunners.

taltamir
2009-10-25, 04:44 PM
the problem is that the base mindset starts you with power gaming right when you are told "now CHOSE how much attribute points to put in each attribute".

As for optimizing... so is a wizard with vast intellect choosing to use effective spells, or spell combos, instead of blasting away with fireballs an optimizer? IN CHARACTER they should know better... just like you know that getting a degree gives you more money than working at starbucks. Or that shooting someone is more effective than running at them and demonstrating your kung fu.

It doesn't matter how you define each of those words, you don't need to pigeon hole every person into some definition. You can simply look at individual actions and determine if they are bad or good.

Generally people agree that:
1. Cheating is bad. Lying about your stats, lying about whats on your sheet, and lying about rolls is a bad thing.
2. Playing a tier 1 class with lower tier people and stealing the show is bad.
3. Fighting with other players and DM is bad
4. Role playing is good.
5. Being a team player is good.
6. Withholding info the DM should know is a bad thing. (ex: you cast a spell that requires a ranged touch attack, he just tells you to roll for damage because he forgot it requires a touch attack. If you remembered and kept silent it is not a good thing)

Is a highly optimized wizard who ONLY ever prepares support spells (haste, slow, etc) a bad thing?
is a sorcerer with low stats and bad saves who gets lucky rolls and insta gibs BBEGs with save or die spells a bad thing?
is a rogue with a terrible build who is ineffective in combat as "roleplay" and who just hides when the fight starts abandoning his friends a bad thing?

Some are, some aren't... playing a strong character is not a bad thing, being a jerk to the other players is a bad thing (and you can do that if you are playing a well built or poorly built character).

Telasi
2009-10-25, 04:48 PM
Optimizer: Takes an idea and makes it as effective as possible without making choices purely for the sake of effectiveness in game mechanics.

Powergamer: An optimizer who is willing to step outside what makes sense for his character concept in order to be effective.

Munchkin: Simply takes the most powerful combination of abilities possible in order to maximize his mechanical effectiveness, ignoring character concept entirely.


-Telasi

Samb
2009-10-25, 05:00 PM
Honestly, there is no difference between the three. Trying to say there is one is just mental masturbation.

Powergamers just have the sense and decency to not overdo it, whihle munchkins do not.

AstralFire
2009-10-25, 05:02 PM
Honestly there is no difference except for the difference I just outlined.

The New Bruceski
2009-10-25, 05:03 PM
It's all a matter of perspective. I am an optimizer, you are a powergamer, he is a munchkin.

taltamir
2009-10-25, 05:06 PM
Honestly, there is no difference between the three. Trying to say there is one is just mental masturbation.

Powergamers just have the sense and decency to not overdo it, whihle munchkins do not.

that is a pretty significant difference.

KitsuneKionchi
2009-10-25, 05:10 PM
Long thought process spelled out below.

Long story short: whether or not a player is a munchkin is about what they do in game. That's it. Its not about builds or what they do on forums or even what there character is capable of. To some extent, table-talk comes into it ("My character could beat yours! he has the potential to get unlimited AC I just don't do it!").

If a player allows all other players the ability to do what they came into the party to do without overshadowing or otherwise making them feel worthless or in every way inferior to you, it doesn't matter how many builds you know or that you happened to choose the best feats for your character that you could find.

But remember: Munchkin derived from a slang term used to bash younger players who didn't see the joy that can be derived from roleplaying without being concerned primarily with power.

No player is truly one of these though. I made a character with as many attacks as posssible in a single round with a naginata. In the end I fell in love with the flavor behind the heaven's wing kata and void points. My character was optimized to have as many void points as possible. But when confronted by the DM with "you know, that ability is really weak compared to X and Y and Z" I just shrugged. "Its ok. This is enough. I prefer this flavor".

Isn't it defined rather clearly though?

Power Gamer: From the words "power" and "gamer". A gamer who is mostly concerned with power.

Optimizer: From "optimize". A player whose character is the best possible at whatever it is he or she does.

Munchkin: A derogatory term probably first given to players who groups felt were too young to properly play.

A Munchkin is someone who thinks power is the most important part of a game.

A Munchkin doesn't necessarily mean you worship Punpun and have a +30 to bluff at level 8. It means you *try*. It means you wish you *could*. And it means you try to get as close to that goal as possible without being kicked out of your group. It means your #1 concern is the numbers.

On the other hand, having +30 to bluff doesn't mean your a munchkin. Often times players will start with a character idea and, barely straying from the original path, come out with a character stronger than any other in the party.

A player can spend hours scouring his books, countless web articles and multiple forums to create the best possible character they have and still not be ANY of these three. To be perfectly honest, I have no idea what I am (I've been called a powergamer, but everyone else who knows me laughs at that description of me). I usually create a vague idea of a character in my mind. Like "it'd be cool to use something humble but evocative like ropes...I could even float around and be carried by them and use them to choke people...". From there I begin looking around for ways to animate rope permanently without asking the DM for permission to use Permenancy with Animate Ropes. I later re-discover "Animate Objects". Long story short: within 2 hours I was recreating the dreaded "Nanobot Build" and getting more AC than a warforged incarnate with vow of poverty and combat expertise. But in the end I just wanted to do cool things with rope. It didn't start as "max out my AC"; it started as "fly around on ropes".

Of course, I just dumbed it down by limiting the number of animated objects to 3-4 to only get around +6-+8 AC, using ropes instead of a stronger material and not using permenacy or persist. It doesn't mean I didn't think about Divine Metamagic + Persist or using the Passion Domain + Cult of the Dragon Below feats to get unlimited metamagic on all my spells without any increases to spell level or (thanks to the domain) Charisma drain to get more ropes than I knew what to do with. I just didn't do it.

And that's the considerable difference between these often hated archtypes and a considerate player. A considerate player is one who worries about his friends having fun at the table. He wants to make sure everyone is having a good time. And its hard to do that when you feel unwanted.

The best kind of player is the munchkin who controls his or her urges and simply plays nerfed characters. They commonly fall into trying to do odd things like optimize counter-spelling or own considerable face with basketweaving.

streakster
2009-10-25, 05:57 PM
Hmm. Astral, you're probably right. I guess I just assumed there - munchkin bad social skills, optimizer good, etc. So lets see If I can't revise, here...


Non-Dnd Player: -Rp -Game - Society
Roll a character? What?

Doesn't like the game.


Prima Donna (Formerly Actor): +RP -Game -Society
I'm not done yet! We haven't even gotten to chapter two of my backstory!

This is their epic story, not yours, so sit down and listen to their backstory. Did you know they want to be an author someday?



Actor: +RP -Game +Society
At least I'm getting better at the death scenes...

Here to roleplay, and couldn't care less about the the whole dice thing. Still, a nice fellow, and does the best he can to help out during the boring non-RP bits.



Jerk: +RP +Game -Society
Whatever, dork.

Yeah, we all know this guy. He's just a jerk. (Seriously, what is his deal?)



Optimizer: +RP +Game +Society
Can't we all get along?

Your bog standard DnD player.



Munchkin: -RP +Game -Society
Waddaya mean, I can't play Pun-Pun?

Here for big numbers, and nothing else. Wants to overshadow the group as well as the enemies. If he ever actually RP's, expect it to be boasting or intimidation as others tremble at his might. Breaks rules, cheats, uses old, weird splats - whatever it takes.



Powergamer: -RP +Game +Society
40d6, baby! Umm, I mean, "Take that, villain?

Here for the more mechanical side of things - but nice enough to limit himself for the group. Plays smart but fair. His backstory, nine times out of ten, is revenge on the barbarians/orcs/necromancer that killed his parents.

KitsuneKionchi
2009-10-25, 06:07 PM
The Distraction: -Rp -Game +Society
How many...oh...uuh...what's a skill?

Doesn't know the rules very well and doesn't care to learn. Doesn't care about story but doesn't break character. Usually playing a character made for him by a friend or a prebuilt. But he still plays because, god-bless him, he loves being with his friends.

Usually is the one who remembers to order the pizza...but can often times be "that guy" who breaks the mood of the game to show off a 4chan meme or have everyone listen to a 'bitchin' song he just got'.

mostlyharmful
2009-10-25, 06:23 PM
Much love, Streaks, but I disagree with this version because it puts tabletop in a sliding scale of Game versus Roleplay when I think that these definitions are more helpfully described as a triangle between Game, Roleplay, and Social Views.

Perhaps what we need is a two way sliding scale with three catagories in each, some way of pigeon holing on the basis of two random and arbitrarily defined characteristics that nobody even agrees on in the first place.... perhaps that is the way out of this mess????!!>???!11!:smallamused:

AstralFire
2009-10-25, 06:25 PM
Actually, we have pretty good agreement in the topic for the definitions - most posts are retyping the same general idea or concept, with various refinements. Almost no one falls nearly into a single category, but they are useful as guides.

mostlyharmful
2009-10-25, 06:38 PM
Actually, we have pretty good agreement in the topic for the definitions - most posts are retyping the same general idea or concept, with various refinements. Almost no one falls nearly into a single category, but they are useful as guides.

Yes. I admit it. I was going for the cheap point about trying to shoehorn a topic this complex into a grid system simply because Ethics is my passion and the alignment system makes me want to hit something with a big stick but it does seem to be a thing. Obereoni and all that, that power to punk ratio of your character is emphatically not the same thing as immersion to idiot rating, some people try to tie them together and it seems most of us (me very much included) just can't get behind that.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-25, 07:15 PM
Optimizer: Someone who tries to optimize torwards a particular goal. This may or may not coincide with being a powergamer.

Powergamer: He's out to be powerful. He might not actually be good at it, but he's trying. If he is good at it, he's likely also an optimizer.

Munchkin: Willing to do anything to be successful, including bending or breaking rules, and isn't generally a team player. Not all optimizers or power gamers are munchkin, but all munchkin at least attempt to power game.

Tiki Snakes
2009-10-25, 07:30 PM
Personally, the way I understand it and view it from experience and board-skimming;

Optimiser; A Powergamer, largely. The term often used by a Powergamer to describe themselves in a Politically-correct way, as the term Power-Gamer has (rightly or wrongly) certain negative connotations attatched to it.
Someone who likes to build powerful and competant characters wherever possible.

Powergamer; Someone who likes to build powerful characters. Is often unhappy with the idea of playing a 'sub-optimal' character in some way. Cross-over with Optimiser. Often mistaken for a Munchkin.

Munchkin; Someone who wants to play a powerful character, but is not limited by concience or morality to stay inside the actual rules of the game. Will take any advantage they can over the world, the dm, and even the players, whether it is supposed to work that way or not.
Ie; A Powergamer who cheats. Often, they aren't actually very good at building competant or powerful characters.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-10-25, 10:09 PM
Optimizer: A person who can take a concept, and make it mechanically viable, or even powerful. An example of this would be my character Takahashi no Onisan. I took a CW Samurai, and made him powerful enough to be able to hold his own in Test of Spite.

Powergamer: A person who creates a mechanically powerful character, using mechanics as the sole point of reference for building the character, then comes up with a back story to fit this unusual build.

The difference between these two:

An Optimizer will consider a set of restrictions or limitations on character creation to be a challenge, a Powergamer will find them restrictive.

Then, there's the Munchkin. He acts like a Powergamer, but without regard to the rules. So he'll make a Hellfire Warlock, uses Legacy Champion to increase the damage his Hellfire does, and forget to tell the GM that it does Con damage every shot. Failing that, he'll use Gestalt character creation rules in a non-gestalt game, becase 'it wasn't on the ban list'. In a gestalt game, he will use dual-progression classes because 'it isn't explicitly banned, merely suggested to avoid using'.

For example:

A GM has banned the Cleric class.

The Optimizer will create a Druid with the feat Spontaneous Healer so he can still be an effective healer while contributing to the party in a meaningful way. Alternately, he may play a Favored Soul to get spontaneous Heal spells. Either way, you can be sure that this character will be effective at keeping the party going, at the very least.

The Powergamer will shrug, and make a Wizard/Incantatrix/Iot7V, using early entry method for Incantatrix to squeeze all 10 levels of Incantatrix in and all 7 of Iot7V.

The Munchkin will make an Omnicaster with full spellcasting in Divine, Arcane, Psionic, and a few others, using Cloistered Cleric because only 'straight cleric' was banned...

Tyndmyr
2009-10-25, 10:10 PM
There's an early entry mechanism for Incanatrix?

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-10-25, 10:23 PM
There's an early entry mechanism for Incanatrix?

I'm fairly certain there is, since I'm fairly certain it doesn't have skill requirements...

taltamir
2009-10-25, 10:51 PM
Perhaps what we need is a two way sliding scale with three catagories in each, some way of pigeon holing on the basis of two random and arbitrarily defined characteristics that nobody even agrees on in the first place.... perhaps that is the way out of this mess????!!>???!11!:smallamused:

do not mock the pigeon holing cabal, they do not like it when people mock them. You would not like it if they did not like you...

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-10-26, 12:32 AM
Perhaps what we need is a two way sliding scale with three catagories in each, some way of pigeon holing on the basis of two random and arbitrarily defined characteristics that nobody even agrees on in the first place.... perhaps that is the way out of this mess????!!>???!11!:smallamused:

Well, if you want a two-way grid, I came up with the following "player alignment" grid in a thread on alignment where we were debating these terms as well:


Lawful Good: Optimizer. He does what he can within constraints to build a great character. He finds that limits enhance his creativity, and he builds to the power level of the group to ensure that everyone's even.

Neutral Good: Casual Gamer. She's here mostly to have fun. As long as she's having fun, and everyone else is having fun, she's happy.

Chaotic Good: Actor. He likes to explore the world and get in character, and his motto is "What would [character] do?" He does what he can to ensure other PCs get their "screen time" as well.

Lawful Neutral: Rules Lawyer. This guy cares about RAW more than anything else. Whether rulings favor PCs or the DM, whether rulings are a bit off or far off, it doesn't matter; he just wants to make sure the rules are followed.

True Neutral: Girlfriend. She's here mostly because the DM (or occasionally another player) asked her to show up and try it. She doesn't really know what she wants and participates erratically.

Chaotic Neutral: Escapist. This guy is there to play a half-fiend three-tentacled wacky creature, insult the king to see what happens, and otherwise let off some steam from his daily life and/or be as unrealistic as possible.

Lawful Evil: Munchkin. He stays within the rules, if only by the barest possible adherence to a vague rule, and does his absolute utmost to build the best possible character--personality? What personality?

Neutral Evil: Powergamer. He makes a powerful build and bends his character's personality in favor of getting what's best for the player. He wants to win D&D, and that's all he cares about.

Chaotic Evil: Party-Killer. He just loves causing havoc, and will backstab, steal, and do whatever else to screw up the game that he can.

There you go, a metagame alignment system. Good means you help the party, evil means you hurt the party, and morally neutral means you do a bit of both (intentionally or not). Law means you favor mechanics, chaos means you favor roleplaying, and ethically neutral means you favor both or neither depending on the situation.

PhoenixRivers
2009-10-26, 12:41 AM
Optimizer: I want to be effective.

Powergamer: I want to Win every encounter, and shine.

Munchkin: I want to win at any cost, regardless of balance, or fun. I want to be the biggest baddest guy in town in every town, and every party.

Ravens_cry
2009-10-26, 12:44 AM
The way I define it, the optimizer is pretty much everyone. Almost all of us like our character to be effective, with different levels of how much effort we are willing to put in it. A powergamer is player who finds great satisfaction with the process of optimization. The munchkin takes it to a greater extreme then other players in the group and does not care if it ruins the game for others. A munchkin may or may not cheat, though they often do interpret the rules as best helps them, and act offended when others don't see things their way.
That is how I see it anyway.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-10-26, 01:57 AM
Jerk: +RP +Game -Society
Whatever, dork.

Yeah, we all know this guy. He's just a jerk. (Seriously, what is his deal?)I like most of these descriptions. They correctly place a high value on social skills at the table; the most highly-regarded of the -Society character types is the one not at the table. But I'd go further with the one I quoted, because this player-type can be the very worst of the bunch.

The Munchkin might destroy encounters or entire story-lines with questionable rules interpretation-maneuvers and then pout when the DM vetoes it. The Prima Donna might attempt to steal the spotlight for his own epic backstory and pout whenever his tragic story is ignored.

But your Jerk (or, as I would call him, the Marty Stu player) will take over encounters and entire storylines. He will maximize his face skills to ensure that he and his tragic/epic backstory dominates every social encounter. And the worst part is that, while the players can interrupt a Prima Donna's soliloquy, and the DM will veto a Munchkin, the Marty Stu player can be skillful enough to maintain his terrible grasp on the game.

I've only heard horror stories of such players, but I'm sure they're out there, waiting for me to stumble into the wrong game...

Uin
2009-10-26, 04:25 AM
The Distraction: -Rp -Game +Society
How many...oh...uuh...what's a skill?

Doesn't know the rules very well and doesn't care to learn. Doesn't care about story but doesn't break character. Usually playing a character made for him by a friend or a prebuilt. But he still plays because, god-bless him, he loves being with his friends.

Basically the group I DM in a nutshell. It would be nice if they tried to learn the rules. The better your players get the more shenanigans you can through at them. They walk around like mundane commoners when they really need to be casting See Invisible to spot the Rogue/Wizard stealing their loot and cast Dispel magic to drop them out of the sky. It is unlikely I'll suffer the problem of having my main recurring "bad" guy killed before her time.

Saying that, we do have a lot of fun. :smallsmile:

Kurald Galain
2009-10-26, 07:02 AM
OK, these words get thrown around alot and I'm curious how different people define them.

In my opinion -

Optimizer. Somebody who compares the various options for his build, and picks the best. Note that what is "best" can vary; for instance, you can optimize a character for versatility, or for speed, or for doing flashy things (where being flashy is not necessarily the same as being effective). This applies primarily to character building. It has no negative connotations. It also implies a certain amount of learning: while a beginning optimizer may think that Weapon Focus is a good feat in 3E, an optimizer should eventually learn from mistakes and realize better options.

Powergamer: Similar to an optimizer, but where an optimizer acts that way because he likes the challenge, a powergamer does it because he wants to be powerful. This is a subtle but important difference, and it means the term "powergaming" has some negative connotations that "optimizer" doesn't. A powergamer tends to optimize for power only (not for versatility, or fun, or whatever else) and tends to use dubious interpretations of rules whenever this leads to a more powerful character.

Munchkin: A munchkin just wants to win the game, and hasn't realized the paradox therein. It is overall a negative term, and applies primarily during the game. A munchkin doesn't necessarily have any skill at building or optimizing, and is liable to throw a tantrum over his mistakes rather than learn from them. The munchkin is liable to get upset if his favorite option is not allowed, or doesn't work in a particular encounter for whatever reason, or if upstaged or defeated by something. Comes near the bottom on the list of kinds of people you may want to play with.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-26, 07:21 AM
I'm fairly certain there is, since I'm fairly certain it doesn't have skill requirements...

Two feats, third level casting, and Im pretty sure it requires Knowledge(Arcana). May be more. Feats can be lined up for quick entry, sure, and there are ways to get second level casting quickly, but third level arcane casting faster than normal? I'd love to know that trick.

Indon
2009-10-26, 07:23 AM
Everyone who improves their character's power, within any parameters, solely to increase the character's power is an optimiser.

Powergamers are individuals whose maximum optimisation level still fits in with the game's social contract (and in fact they may want to renegotiate that contract so that they can introduce a wider range of optimisation opportunities). They, are a subset of optimisers.

Individuals who violate the social contract of the game (often, but not always, by outright breaking the rules) in the course of optimising are munchkins, and are also a subset of optimiser.

My definition is distinct from the others only insofar as the last two categories can apply to the same player in different games, which would explain some of the conceptual overlap between the two.

Matthew
2009-10-26, 07:51 AM
Pre 2000 powergamers and munchkins were pretty much the same thing; the main difference being that the former were good at creating "twinked out" characters, whilst the latter were bad at it.

The "powergamer" might tell you about the difference between the bladesinging kit and the bladesinging proficiency, and why it pays to combine the latter with fighting with two weapons; he may complain if the game master recognises this abuse and house rules it away.

The "munchkin" will probably tell you about his twentieth level halfling fighter/magician/thief who rides his celestial dragon through the cosmos when not otherwise engaged with the harem of 100,000 young ladies (most of whom are high level ninja-assassins) at his imperial palace situated on his own personal demi-plane.

The "optimiser" is a new term that has come into existence with the increasing presence of an on-line D&D community, and seems to be linked to the proliferation of D20/3e character creation options. Many powergamers and munchkins have labelled themselves optimisers to avoid the stigma of the other two terms. In fact, though, powergamers and optimisers are pretty much the same; both seek to create the most powerful or effective character that they can within defined limits, and the individuals within the groups will vary with regard to their other qualities and aims. Defining one as "bad" and the other as "good" is a false dichotomy.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-26, 07:54 AM
Optimizer is definitely not a new term.

Matthew
2009-10-26, 08:02 AM
Optimizer is definitely not a new term.

In the parlance of D&D it is, as far as I am aware. Never encountered it in that context prior to 2000; I could be wrong though.

Tiki Snakes
2009-10-26, 08:09 AM
Is Optimizer a new term? Well, I only started encountering it VERY recently.

Here's a massively unscientific litmus test for you;

Powergamer@ Urban Dictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Powergamer) 4 Definitions.

Optimizer@ Urban Dictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Optimizer) No Definitions.

If nothing else, it doesn't seem to have entered the Zeitgeist yet.

AstralFire
2009-10-26, 08:48 AM
That owes something to the fact that in online gaming, everyone optimizes - and online gaming is bigger than tabletop. Powergamer, however, still has a definite (if marginal) usage there, although hardcore is the preferred term.

jiriku
2009-10-26, 10:09 AM
Most all that could be said, has been said. But to offer my two coppers, most of the gamers I've played with aren't optimizers. I'd just call them casual gamers.

Casual gamers know the rules well enough to build and play their own characters, but they often can't tell which options are weak or strong, and they don't scour rulebooks looking for ways to improve. They mostly just take what treasure they're given, and never plan their character build more than a level ahead.

Casual gamers are pretty lukewarm on the roleplaying front too. They don't write backstories, and generally RP their character as a fantasy version of themselves.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-26, 10:17 AM
In the parlance of D&D it is, as far as I am aware. Never encountered it in that context prior to 2000; I could be wrong though.

I've heard it used prior to then, albeit not nearly so much. Granted, the roleplaying community was far less cohesive and connected then, so no doubt terminology was less standardized.

I would assume that everquest and co popularized the term, but they are not responsible for inventing the term or the concept.

I'd also say that 3.x holds more options for the optimizer than past editions...but optimization existed even then in some forms.

Moriato
2009-10-26, 10:27 AM
I would assume that everquest and co popularized the term, but they are not responsible for inventing the term or the concept.


I think they popularized not just the term, but the whole concept. Yeah, it was there before them, but it wasn't the goal of the game.

It was around the same time that EQ and WoW that the goal of D&D seemed to shift from "Fight some monsters, get some treasure, finish your quest" to "Build the best character or else u r a n00b"

D&D has never been balanced, but no one used to care. If the wizard finished the battle early that meant there was less chance of your fighter dying, so... good all around. You never even heard anyone talk about "balance" back then, now it's all you hear about.

I blame WoW pvp for that. All of a sudden people are more concerned with whether or not their wizard could beat the party cleric in a fight than the storyline of the campaign.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-26, 10:30 AM
I'll agree that it's more common, and WoW certainly doesn't help w regards to this attitude. In my experience, advice used to consist more of tips like "play an elf" than complete net-builds. The was true of other games, like MTG. Balance in the early years was sketchy at best, but few people cared about it nearly as much as they do now.

Guess that's part of being popular.

AstralFire
2009-10-26, 10:40 AM
WoW wasn't the cause (and definitely not WoW PvP, which was a complete joke in small group fighting until 2006). I saw L20 v L20 hypothetical fights on the Wizards boards long before anyone not in the PC gaming market even knew what the hell a Warcraft was.

Optimization is an outgrowth of the very nature of D&D from 2nd edition and onwards; options became a bigger and bigger part of the game with every edition, and this was a natural outgrowth of that. 3.x, which is the edition with the most variety of options available to a single person, happened to coincide with the mainstream appearance of the internet - which itself would have had a similar effect.

Jayabalard
2009-10-26, 11:40 AM
That's a mildly insulting way to categorize a wide group of people, in my experience.The group he's insulting is really "people he's played with" rather than everyone who uses the terms (that's what the "in my experience" part means).

Zaydos
2009-10-26, 12:08 PM
Have to say while I never heard "optimizer" before starting to read forums, okay lurk on this one, nor did me and my old group ever play WoW we did begin to optimize characters. It is a natural outgrowth of having an interest in the rules, and the very fact that I was the one most interested in the rules and character building made me the perennial DM... that and I could plan 2 adventures a week whereas the others could make one every two months. We had a munchkin for a while, who had DM'd for us but as a player tried his hardest to destroy the game while being "CN" and randomly attempting to gain political power to, well all his plans ended with destroying the city or just causing general misery. They went:
1) use +20~ at Lv 1 diplomacy (without magic items) to take over town.
2) some stupid stunt that destroys the economy of said town (or causes a mob to burn the building he is in down)
3) ???
4) Profit!
He actually wrecked 3 or 4 campaigns my friends tried to run that way before I DM'd. I double checked his numbers. He had a +8 not a +20~, and I made him role-play diplomacy which he kind of failed at miserably. Also I kept his wizard to his actual spells per day as opposed to at will magic.

I like optimizers; I can handle a power gamer; and a munchkin just needs to leave (although foiling them can be fun :smalltongue:)

Emperor Tippy
2009-10-26, 12:40 PM
Optimizer: Some one who picks a character concept and then makes the most mechanically viable character that fulfills said concept.

Powergamer: Someone who chooses a specific power level that they want their character to be and then builds a character that fulfills this criteria. After that is done they come up with the concept and background of the character based on it's mechanics.

Munchkin: Someone who makes the most powerful character they can get away with, not necessarily with any regard for the actual rules.

Both optimizers and powergamers are relatively good things and have their uses.

Munchkins are ***** and should be booted from the group immediately because they will just cause problems.

t_catt11
2009-10-26, 12:51 PM
Ah, but the wisdom is in determining which are which. I have yet to meet the munchkin who claims to be anything but an optimizer. I have yet to meet the powergamer who claims to be anything but an optimizer (at least, not during the game in question).

I can intellectually discern the difference, but it seems a very fine line to walk...

AstralFire
2009-10-26, 12:57 PM
The important part is not being a munchkin. I've met few optimizers who haven't decided at least once "no, I can't play that concept - there's no way to make it work at the level of power I want to be", and likewise few powergamers who haven't occasionally thought, "well, why don't I play this class instead? It's a little weak, but it's so cool."

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-10-26, 01:03 PM
Tippy: It has just dawned on me that I do not know you from Adam, yet I find that (more and more) I like the cut of your jib. Rock on.

BRC
2009-10-26, 01:06 PM
The Optimizer starts with a character concept (I want to play a fighter who specializes in mounted combat), and tries to make it as statistically strong as he can.
A Powergamer considers it his goal to make the most powerful character possible. They tend to start with a much more general concept, usually just a class. The difference between a Powergamer and an Optimizer is the amount of effort the Powergamer puts into finding strong combinations. Powergaming is not neccessarily a bad thing, but if the rest of the group isn't putting in as much effort, it can cause a serious power imbalance.
A Munchkin is a different beast entierly. While the powergamer's goal is to create the strongest character possible, the Munchkin actually wants to break the game.The Powergamer may merely be determined, and usually has no intent to break party balance, but the Munchkin is fully aware of what is going on.
Think about it this way
Told to make a Mounted Combat Fighter

An Optomizer will take Mounted Combat, wield a lance, and pick up Spirited Charge.
A Powergamer will throw Shock trooper on there as well.
A Munchkin will show up at the table having found a collection of magic items and feats from obscure splatbooks and Dragon magazine editions to create a guy who deals and average 10000 damage on a charge, can charge 6 times a round.
A homebrewer shows up with Giga Knight (http://pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF155-Gigaknight.jpg)

Kyeudo
2009-10-26, 01:16 PM
Ah, but the wisdom is in determining which are which. I have yet to meet the munchkin who claims to be anything but an optimizer. I have yet to meet the powergamer who claims to be anything but an optimizer (at least, not during the game in question).


I'm a powergamer and proud of it.

Jayabalard
2009-10-26, 01:22 PM
I'm a powergamer and proud of it.I'd say you're in the minority (on the "and proud of it" part). Most people seem to be afraid of labeling themselves as powergamers.

Emperor Tippy
2009-10-26, 01:22 PM
Ah, but the wisdom is in determining which are which. I have yet to meet the munchkin who claims to be anything but an optimizer. I have yet to meet the powergamer who claims to be anything but an optimizer (at least, not during the game in question).

I can intellectually discern the difference, but it seems a very fine line to walk...

I'm both a powergamer and an optimizer.

Depending upon the specific game I choose a power level, either one sufficient to ensure that I can save the parties bacon if needed (if you have a bunch of new players, characters with limited roles, etc.) or one that will match the power level of the rest of the party. I then see what concepts I like that can meet that criteria, choose the one I like best, and optimize it.

If I don't have to worry about the party (know the DM and other players well enough that I don't have to worry about such things as power level) then I am pretty much just an optimizer (I play whatever character concept has caught my fancy at the time and maximize it's mechanical potential). Granted, Cindy and Poke'Balls is a perfectly valid concept :smallwink:

AstralFire
2009-10-26, 01:23 PM
I'd say you're in the minority (on the "and proud of it" part). Most people seem to be afraid of labeling themselves as powergamers.

Here, perhaps, but GitP has one of the stronger tilts towards casual players and roleplayers (not the same thing!). My short time on Brilliant Gameologists, I heard the term more often - BG itself has plenty of great roleplayers, but the tilt there is definitely stronger towards mechanics.

The Glyphstone
2009-10-26, 01:39 PM
An Optomizer will take Mounted Combat, wield a lance, and pick up Spirited Charge.
A Powergamer will throw Shock trooper on there as well.
A Munchkin will show up at the table having found a collection of magic items and feats from obscure splatbooks and Dragon magazine editions to create a guy who deals and average 10000 damage on a charge, can charge 6 times a round.
A homebrewer shows up with Giga Knight (http://pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF155-Gigaknight.jpg)

Your classifications are good, but I think the examples are a bit flawed. For the sort of thing you're describing, it'd be more like:

Optimizer - wants to make a mounted fighter, so he gets Mounted Combat, a Valorous Lance, Spirited Charge, and Shock Trooper. May dip into obscure splatbooks and Dragon magazines, but will remain focused on mechanical improvements to the concept they started with. Mechanics should support the fluff, with no upper limit on said mechanics.

Powergamer - wants to do triple-digit plus damage on a charge, so he makes a mounted fighter with a Valorous Lance+Spirited Charge+Shock Trooper. Will definitely hunt out obscure magic items/feats from books and magazine, and then create a backstory intended solely to justify his mechanical build. Fluff should fit the mechanics, with no upper limit on how far said fluff needs to be stretched.

Munchkin - Wants to win. As Powergamer, but likely to not even bother inventing a backstory. He'll have Obscure Feat G from Magazine Issue #2135 that doubles his damage when charging, but 'forget' the clause that says his damage next turn is reduced to half, or try to convince the DM that Spirited Charge and a Lance should give x4 damage (x2x2), not the x3 that it is supposed to. Both fluff and mechanics become subservient to being Ub3r!!1.

BRC
2009-10-26, 01:45 PM
Your classifications are good, but I think the examples are a bit flawed. For the sort of thing you're describing, it'd be more like:

Optimizer - wants to make a mounted fighter, so he gets Mounted Combat, a Valorous Lance, Spirited Charge, and Shock Trooper. May dip into obscure splatbooks and Dragon magazines, but will remain focused on mechanical improvements to the concept they started with. Mechanics should support the fluff, with no upper limit on said mechanics.

Powergamer - wants to do triple-digit plus damage on a charge, so he makes a mounted fighter with a Valorous Lance+Spirited Charge+Shock Trooper. Will definitely hunt out obscure magic items/feats from books and magazine, and then create a backstory intended solely to justify his mechanical build. Fluff should fit the mechanics, with no upper limit on how far said fluff needs to be stretched.

Munchkin - Wants to win. As Powergamer, but likely to not even bother inventing a backstory. He'll have Obscure Feat G from Magazine Issue #2135 that doubles his damage when charging, but 'forget' the clause that says his damage next turn is reduced to half, or try to convince the DM that Spirited Charge and a Lance should give x4 damage (x2x2), not the x3 that it is supposed to. Both fluff and mechanics become subservient to being Ub3r!!1.
Yeah, those work better. Thanks.

Homebrewer still shows up with Giga Knight though.

Saph
2009-10-26, 02:18 PM
My definitions would be:

Optimiser: Too vague, no useful definition.

Powergamer: Wants to be as powerful as possible.

Munchkin: Wants only to be as powerful as possible.

'Optimiser' as usually defined is a pretty useless term because it's so wide as to cover just about every gamer in existence. Just about everyone has a 'character concept' and just about everyone makes at least some effort to make their character moderately effective. In practice 'optimiser' is mostly a self-applied label meaning something like "I'm a powergamer, but the good kind".

'Powergamer' is much more useful, because it describes a very definite class of player; the kind that want to be as powerful as possible and are willing to spend innumerable hours of CharOp research to achieve it. Can be good and can be bad.

'Munchkin' is a perjorative term that means pretty much the same as 'powergamer', but with a bunch of negative connotations; ie "he's a powergamer, and I don't like him." If you're trying to define it objectively, a munchkin is a powergamer who doesn't care about anything else.

. . . or if you're really cynical, you could say that 'optimiser', 'powergamer', and 'munchkin' all refer to the exact same thing. 'Optimiser' is positive, 'munchkin' is negative, 'powergamer' is neutral.

Matthew
2009-10-26, 03:39 PM
I've heard it used prior to then, albeit not nearly so much. Granted, the roleplaying community was far less cohesive and connected then, so no doubt terminology was less standardized.

I would assume that everquest and co popularized the term, but they are not responsible for inventing the term or the concept.

I'd also say that 3.x holds more options for the optimizer than past editions...but optimization existed even then in some forms.

Sounds like it has only recently (in the last ten years) gained wide currency in the community.



My definitions would be:

Optimiser: Too vague, no useful definition.

Powergamer: Wants to be as powerful as possible.

Munchkin: Wants only to be as powerful as possible.

'Optimiser' as usually defined is a pretty useless term because it's so wide as to cover just about every gamer in existence. Just about everyone has a 'character concept' and just about everyone makes at least some effort to make their character moderately effective. In practice 'optimiser' is mostly a self-applied label meaning something like "I'm a powergamer, but the good kind".

'Powergamer' is much more useful, because it describes a very definite class of player; the kind that want to be as powerful as possible and are willing to spend innumerable hours of CharOp research to achieve it. Can be good and can be bad.

'Munchkin' is a perjorative term that means pretty much the same as 'powergamer', but with a bunch of negative connotations; ie "he's a powergamer, and I don't like him." If you're trying to define it objectively, a munchkin is a powergamer who doesn't care about anything else.

. . . or if you're really cynical, you could say that 'optimiser', 'powergamer', and 'munchkin' all refer to the exact same thing. 'Optimiser' is positive, 'munchkin' is negative, 'powergamer' is neutral.

Agree.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-26, 03:58 PM
Tippy: It has just dawned on me that I do not know you from Adam, yet I find that (more and more) I like the cut of your jib. Rock on.

Clearly, this is because Tippy equals Win.


(I had to)

mostlyharmful
2009-10-26, 04:14 PM
Granted, Cindy and Poke'Balls is a perfectly valid concept :smallwink:

Incidentily Tippy my good sir... is there a Cindy sheet knocking around the wibbly wobbly web anywhere that you could link to? I'm curious and I've looked before but it's been discussed here so much I get bogged down in old threads.

Emperor Tippy
2009-10-26, 08:18 PM
Not any completed ones to the best of my knowledge. Most of my sheets bit the dust when the profiler went down. I have a few what I suppose you could call "Cindy light" sheets online at the moment but thats about it (Cindy light being the same basic idea but just not taken to the extreme or being lower level etc.).

Oh, and Tyndmyr get's to join my sig now. :smallbiggrin:

JadedDM
2009-10-26, 09:28 PM
I personally had never heard the term 'optimizer' in the context of D&D until after 3E was released. To me, all three terms hold the exact same meaning.

ShadowsGrnEyes
2009-10-26, 09:31 PM
I am an optimizer most of the time

I am a powergamer when the other players are also powergamers and its appropriate to the universe.

I am a munchkin only when goofing off for theoretical purposes. Like, "hey guys look what I made in my spare time isnt that ridiculous!. . . I think that'll be your next BBEG. . . no, I'm kidding. . . sort of. . ."

sambo.
2009-10-26, 09:40 PM
the difference is:

Optimisers and Powergamers can be good in a group while a Munchkin is almost universally a PITA, both for the DM and for the rest of the group.

both optimisers and powergamers might decide to build characters with an obviously massive flaw in them (the int6/wis6 barbarian for example), while a munchkin would never entertain the idea.

i'd class myself as a powergamer.

Samb
2009-10-26, 10:28 PM
the difference is:

Optimisers and Powergamers can be good in a group while a Munchkin is almost universally a PITA, both for the DM and for the rest of the group.

both optimisers and powergamers might decide to build characters with an obviously massive flaw in them (the int6/wis6 barbarian for example), while a munchkin would never entertain the idea.

i'd class myself as a powergamer.

Who are you!!!!???? I never thought I'd be annoying enough that someone would want to imitate me!