Question on min/maxing and related

[Asherion]

I have a real question here - it is not intended to be derogatory in any way, I'm sincerely confused about this.

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?

Exaggerations, but you get the gist - don't most DMs just up the ante of the game when players powergame, and thus, isn't it just more work and annoyance for everyone?

I think I'm missing something... but i haven't played enough DnD outside of my own group, or the first one I played in IRL, to really get this play style, since we only have one powergamer and he just isn't good at it at all :D

[pilvento]

I have a real question here - it is not intended to be derogatory in any way, I'm sincerely confused about this.

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?

Exaggerations, but you get the gist - don't most DMs just up the ante of the game when players powergame, and thus, isn't it just more work and annoyance for everyone?

I think I'm missing something... but i haven't played enough DnD outside of my own group, or the first one I played in IRL, to really get this play style, since we only have one powergamer and he just isn't good at it at all :D


HERESY! :smallfurious:

[Hanuman]

I have a real question here - it is not intended to be derogatory in any way, I'm sincerely confused about this.

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?

Exaggerations, but you get the gist - don't most DMs just up the ante of the game when players powergame, and thus, isn't it just more work and annoyance for everyone?

I think I'm missing something... but i haven't played enough DnD outside of my own group, or the first one I played in IRL, to really get this play style, since we only have one powergamer and he just isn't good at it at all :D
Because some people play DnD as if it were a videogame.

It's a huge habit and these boards are highly charged with the optimization theme.

I should know, I played Guild Wars for almost 3k hours and that game was nicknamed "Build Wars" because the entire challenge of the game was minmaxing, of course I like opt. and not being a weak character as most people do, but most people like not being underpowered IRL as well, thats the same reason we have powerful bodies, brains and good looks (not speaking for everyone).

[Curmudgeon]

I guess a lot of people are more interested in a sense of power in a fantasy role-playing game than they are in a sense of accomplishment. Perhaps because making a character who can only succeed if played intelligently is hard work, whereas playing a character who can just shrug off most anything is relaxing and easy.

[Demons_eye]

The only difference is instead of playing John K. who saves the princes and kills a dragon you are Johny Kickass who saves the world and kills an Elder Evil is level, its just the scale of things. Both can be fun to play, some just like one over the other. Neither inherently take away from power or accomplishment IMHO. If the big bad is just as optimized as you then it is just as hard to take him down now matter how well you optimize, your level, stats, weapons, or gear.

In short: Opinion.

[Prime32]

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?Gestalt = More options in a smaller party, lets you try out more new things at once
5d6 drop 2/Super high point buys = Low point-buy encourages min-maxing more than high point-buy. Having higher values in scores not central to your class does little to increase your power, and if you rely on multiple scores (MAD) you'll be crippled without it.
Accelerated XP gains = PbP games progress much slower, they need it
Multiclassing = Very few character concepts fit one class exactly, and the most powerful classes are harmed by multiclassing anyway

[Eloel]

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates

Gestalt = More options/more different styles of characters
High PB = Ability to do things 'properly'
Larger gold => Never seen anyone going for higher gold, we tend to assume WBL
Accelerated XP => Again, never seen it, most people just use the DMG values, or make up values themselves.
Freely Multiclass => Because even Conan, the stereotypical fantasy guy, can not be built with a single class. When you want to play a "bookworm that studies magical writings and casts off them" (basic enough concept, imo), you're most likely going to play a Wizard/Archivist/Mystic Theurge/Some other double PrC. (MT is underpowered. Not the point)
Oops, too many classes for a simple concept? Who cares?

Also, a counter question:
Why not?

[Salanmander]

I have a real question here - it is not intended to be derogatory in any way, I'm sincerely confused about this.

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?

Exaggerations, but you get the gist - don't most DMs just up the ante of the game when players powergame, and thus, isn't it just more work and annoyance for everyone?

I think I'm missing something... but i haven't played enough DnD outside of my own group, or the first one I played in IRL, to really get this play style, since we only have one powergamer and he just isn't good at it at all :D

I know the past few posters have done this, but I have slightly different takes, so I'll still provide my reasons.

Gestalt: I really enjoy gestalt, but here's the main reason: gestalt makes characters who feel more awesome at a lower power level. In order to get characters who feel as uniquely powerful in their chosen expertise as a 5th or 6th level gestalt character, I feel like you need a 9th or 10th level regular character, which ends up being more powerful overall, and getting closer to the point that the game breaks down.

Accelerated XP: I've mostly played games at college. They last 1 or 2 semesters, playing once a week. That's at most around 25 sessions in a campaign. I also like seeing my characters progress. Using DMG advancement rules and reasonable length sessions, they would probably advance between 2 and 5 levels. It's nice being able to play a 5-15 campaign in a school year.

In general: I think the main thing is that I enjoy building characters. I enjoy the process of figuring out how they can perform better than expected in their target area. I'm currently playing a core-only Barbarian, and I realized that the last time I leveled up I made one single choice, and that was to continue with Barbarian. It was /boring/. Playing the game is still fun, but it sucks the excitement out of advancing.

I think that's the main thing. Create a 5th level gestalt with multiclassing freely allowed, from core + completes. Now create a 5th level non-gestalt with no multiclassing, from core. The former is just...way more fun.

[Escheton]

Because it's a complicated game and you want to cover your bases.
It sucks losing a character you come to care about because he/she has a flaw or the enemy has a lucky crit.

[woodenbandman]

I detect an amount of "equating multiclassing with munchkinism" which is not the case.

If i want to break my DM's game, I'll just play a wizard, or a druid, or whatever.

If I want an interesting character that can do stuff like walk on walls, move through shadows, etc, I might have to multiclass, a lot. And you know what? That doesn't mean that I'm trying to break your game. That means that I think this particular combination of abilities is cool.

A level 20 wizard, a level 20 fighter, and a level 8 Totemist/3 Rogue/2 Monk/7 Umbral Disciple can all have similarly interesting backstories.

The DIFFERENCE is that the third character's creator spent a lot of time coming up with his character concept in terms of what special powers he had. That doesn't mean he didn't put just as much thought into the character's backstory.

Now, when a player is POWERGAMING, that means that he is usually playing some sort of class derived from wizard, or a hulking hurler, or some other crap. He'll probably have spells prepared to always win initiative, then drop 20 nukes on the baddies before they have a turn. THAT is powergaming.

In short: just because my guy has more classes than you doesn't mean I'm going to ruin your game. I've played in games with people like you and I don't offer you unsolicited advice about how your character sheet should look. I'd really appreciate if you'd reciprocate that courtesy.

EDIT:

PERSONALLY SPEAKING this is why i prefer games with point-buy based character generation systems with no classes. If you play burning wheel, people will look at your stats and say "oh look you have good sword skills and sorcery skills, you're good at swords and sorcery." But if you play DnD and you have wizard/fighter/abjurant champion/eldritch knight, people look at your character and say OMG WHY U HAVE 4 CLASSES U MUNKCHIN.

[Necroticplague]

Plus, it seems that here a lot of dm's have an "I will munchkin if you do" attitude to them, where an increase in player power through optimization results in further optimizing on the monsters (they even have guides for it already).

[KillianHawkeye]

I just want to add that excessively restricted multiclassing (a la the favored class system in D&D 3E) is pointless and not very much fun. If I want to play a Half-Orc Wizard/Rogue with a couple levels of Fighter for bonus feats and weapon proficiencies, why should I take an experience penalty?

tl;dr Pointless restrictions only succeed at restricting your fun.

[Asherion]

In short: just because my guy has more classes than you doesn't mean I'm going to ruin your game. I've played in games with people like you and I don't offer you unsolicited advice about how your character sheet should look. I'd really appreciate if you'd reciprocate that courtesy.

So... if this is directed at me, then you have no idea what advice I would give you - since I've given none - and you ahve no idea what I'm like, and thus cannot make the observation that you've played with people like me. I stated in my preface that I genuinely do not understand the idea, and that it's not meant as any sort of accusation or flame.
How about you repay that courtesy. Thanks.


Those points seem valid. I admit that I like the gestalt idea, perhaps more so than some of the others. And I have no inherent problem with multiclassing or the rest, I guess I have just watched people make characters that APPEAR to be geared to break their DM's game, and I wonder why they would do that, since, as someone stated above, this is not a video game.

On the other hand, if you want to beef your character up, use a variety of classes to make the character fit your mental image, etc etc - I think that's spectacular.

Maybe the fine line between making an awesome character and making an OP game breaker lies within the mind/intent of the player themselves, and it's a question of which players and DMs should work together, more than which 'things' a game allows.

Edit:
"Munchkin" is a funny term for this that apparently is a prevalent one. I usually refer to my two year old as a munchkin. Hmm. lol

[Gnaeus]

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?

1. It is an interesting minigame, which doesn't require actually getting a group together. As a married professional with 2 children, I can only actually game about once every couple of weeks, but I can go through the intellectual exercise of building a level 10 gestalt or plotting my next 5 levels of spell selection or item crafting when I am sitting at a red light or taking a five minute break at the office.

2. It opens up more options in play. MAD classes, which tend to be low tier, benefit disproportionally from high stat rolls or PB (I can make a playable druid with something like a 6 point buy.) If your group plays on a level where Monk or Fighter doesn't make the grade, good optimization can help them be more functional.

3. It is the easiest thing to discuss on a gaming forum. I mean, your character may have had an awesome RP moment last week, but I wasn't there and unless you are also an awesome writer/storyteller I probably don't want to hear about it. I don't know the setting, the DM, the other PC's, you, or all the background that made that moment awesome. Without knowing you, it is hard to help you or your group RP better. When someone asks about a rule or a build, on the other hand, everyone is immediately on the same page. People discuss making stronger characters because it is the easiest thing for the boards to discuss.


Exaggerations, but you get the gist - don't most DMs just up the ante of the game when players powergame, and thus, isn't it just more work and annoyance for everyone?

This has been covered before, but personally, I would rather fight giants than orcs, or dragons than stirges. I want to fight monsters out of legend, not rescue the neighbors cat who got lost in goblin woods.

And of course, for many of us, it isn't work at all.

[Asherion]

This has been covered before, but personally, I would rather fight giants than orcs, or dragons than stirges. I want to fight monsters out of legend, not rescue the neighbors cat who got lost in goblin woods.

This is also a very valid point. I agree. And as far as work goes, I guess I take a lot away from the group I used to play in, in which controlling the characters (one in particular) so that he did not constantly ruin the game for everyone else tended to seem a lot like work for the DM.

I think that not only would you rather fight those monsters but, if the DM has the time (which some of us do, some don't) they'd rather design those fights. I love the challenge of microdesigning an epic fight. Although I just as often DM with little to no plan... it's fun to design. Same way if I'm creating a PC. I get that.

[Starbuck_II]

I have a real question here - it is not intended to be derogatory in any way, I'm sincerely confused about this.

Why is it that a large portion of the community here, and really in tabletop/PbP RPGs in general, are so intent upon things like Gestalt, 5d6b3, super high point buys, larger gold allotments, accelerated XP gains, and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times with 234234 prestige classes and 234255 templates?

Exaggerations, but you get the gist - don't most DMs just up the ante of the game when players powergame, and thus, isn't it just more work and annoyance for everyone?

I think I'm missing something... but i haven't played enough DnD outside of my own group, or the first one I played in IRL, to really get this play style, since we only have one powergamer and he just isn't good at it at all :D
Basically
Gestalt = More options in a smaller party, try out more new things at same time
5d6 drop 2/Super high point buys =Remember Point buy limits highest stat to 18. Thus you must increase other wscorew and minmax less.
Low point-buy encourages min-maxing more than high point-buy. Many classes are stronger with one stat (caster)
Accelerated XP gains = Never heard of it.
Multiclassing = what do you think classes are? Careers, Life paths, destiny?
Because multiclassing can help one utilize an idea.
Unless there are billions of classes: favored class rules require you to get Prestige classes to ignore XP penalty.
Without that rule and/or no Prcs, you'd have to multiclass to get a good concept sometimes.

Templates are usually for fun or cool gadgets.

[Salanmander]

Edit:
"Munchkin" is a funny term for this that apparently is a prevalent one. I usually refer to my two year old as a munchkin. Hmm. lol

Different people define "munchkin" differently, but all of them involve trying to get an edge in the game. The most prevalent definition around here is someone who actively and willfully breaks or misinterprets rules (often inconsistently, i.e. beneficial interpretation for my character, detrimental for the enemies) for their character's mechanical gain.


I think that not only would you rather fight those monsters but, if the DM has the time (which some of us do, some don't) they'd rather design those fights. I love the challenge of microdesigning an epic fight. Although I just as often DM with little to no plan... it's fun to design. Same way if I'm creating a PC. I get that.

As a DM I would definitely agree with this, and add a bit more. At low power levels, number of sources, levels, etc., the PCs more rarely surprise me. It's /fun/ to give my players a giant fortress that they need to get to the heart of that's guarded by high level druids riding wyverns, and has an alarm spell over it, and all that jazz, and have them go "okay, let's start by controlling weather to make it a blizzard, and then sending summons towards the fortress to see what happens" instead of "um....hide and move silently towards it i guess".

[Kalaska'Agathas]

I am an optimizer. I optimize because I have a character concept in my head, and I want the mechanics of my character to reflect that. I don't take levels in Fighter if I want to play an academic Wizard on his first foray out of his master's care, I play a Wizard. Similarly, if I want to play a mundane brawler who grew up on the streets, I play a Barbarian or Rogue, not the mechanically stronger Cleric. If I want to play someone who is week but skilled, I can do that (Probably Swash 3/Rogue 17 daring Daring Outlaw, or some variation on that theme) and do reasonably well with it. If I want to play a character who believes, from a philosophical standpoint, that he and others can make the truth, I can do that (Wizard/Shadowcraft Mage/etc.) and again, do reasonably well with that character. These two examples are wildly different in power, yes, but neither is 'better' for roleplay - they both fit the respective concept I'm trying to create with the character, so it then becomes up to me to hold my end up, roleplaying wise, rather than a function of what classes I've taken.

As far as having a higher point buy goes, I prefer a higher point buy as it lets me play classes or concepts that wouldn't work otherwise. And I like gestalt for similar reasons - it lets me make concepts work at either lower levels than normal or at all. And for gold, I tend to assume the Wealth By Level as given in the DMG.

[T.G. Oskar]

Gestalt: on that sense, I tried Gestalt only once. It was fun, mostly because it allowed players to cover up some bases and me as DM to try out some different monsters to challenge them. Gestalt is nice, and it breaks down only when you add powerful classes to the mix, or play those class combinations real well: a Hexblade||Dread Necromancer, for example, makes for an awesome dark warrior-priest type (Hexblade||Favored Soul works well too), but the combination of both classes isn't as potent as, say, Wizard||Archivist whom can get pretty much all spells and still have action economy to use them on one turn. It's great for small groups when you have people that know the rules very well; it's actually a curve ball for them, since the sheer amount of options it opens gets balanced to the fact they have to deal with a lot of stuff in their character sheets. Generally, you don't want to use gestalt that much, unless it's a one-shot or you want to up the ante of the campaign.

5d6b3: Most people here look for point-buy, since it's a much more effective way to deal with ability scores. Besides, someone else mentioned the worth of it better than I would.

Point-buy (and over 25 points): Point-buy is a very effective way to create interesting characters while still providing some restrictions. Old editions' "roll 3d6 six times in order" is more detrimental than anything, and reserved only to experienced roleplayers (or roll-players, whatever floats your boat) who can do miracles with that (or usually play SAD characters). Point-buy makes you choose your class and race first, instead of choosing a race and class to complement your rolls.

Now, 25-point buy is the equivalent to having the elite array (IIRC), meaning you wouldn't be stronger or better than a creature with elite array. 28-point buy is a nice choice to get, since the three points make you have at least one good score (if you wish to get it), and three above-average scores, or a much more favorable distribution, but it still ends up a bit fair (18, 12, 12, 12, 8, 8). 32-point buy is the highest recommended, and it still remains fair; you can get around 2 good scores and everything else bad, or about four fair scores (14 and upwards), making reasonably powerful characters. Anything else is just kinda pointless, except for MAD classes which can benefit a bit more.

Now, the idea behind this is simple: your most important score should be between 14 or 16, because otherwise you'll be in trouble. Other important scores should be between 12 to 14, and dump scores usually will get the lowest scores, so you'll be ensuring at least a 8. You may ask why not make it five or something, but the thing is that reaching 0 on an ability score can be potentially deadly on any level (think a Wiz with Strength 5 suffering from a Ray of Enfeeblement; that's basically a one-hit kill). Anything else is not recommendable, since it will make your survival harder (because you'll have a very vulnerable score in terms of ability damage), and you'll still place any low scores on your dump stat so it doesn't matter whether it's 3 or 9, so as long as your lowest score isn't 12 and you still get one or two great scores (such as 18, 18, 14, 14, 12, 12, which is just one of the many opportunities you get by rolling your stats). So, while it's beneficial to the player, its beneficial in a good way; considering that you'll probably also have a penalty to your scores by means of race, you can figure out that point-buy is at most fair.

Also: unless the campaign calls for that, you're a hero; you're already above the average individual by means of being a PC, so you'll probably start with better ability scores than the norm.

More gold than WBL: That's usually uncalled for in here. You can get lucky and get loads of gold, but usually the forums agree on WBL as a guideline. It may seem a lot, but that's what the developers thought was a fair distribution, and at least that's something we (at least I, feel free to add in if you feel the same, hence the royal "we") accept as a good way to go. It's a proper way to restrain the "Christmas tree" effect, since while you still theoretically get what you desire, you need to be pretty careful on what you spend that money. Heck, even having full starting gold isn't any surprising; WBL of a 1st level character doesn't compare to WBL for NPCs...

Faster XP gain: That deals, as others have said, with speeding up play. Technically, you and your remaining members of a 4-person party need 13 battles with CR equal to your actual level to level up; now try to do that once per week in order to level up, and you'll get people bored or downtrodden. Generally, you'll get two or three battles on average, with a total of 5 battles or one BIG battle that can count for 2 or 3 maximum. No one can face 13 battles in one session, nor the players nor the DM. Thus, you'll get a level up increasingly slower, nearly grinding to a halt at level...10 or something, where you'll probably level up every two or three sessions. Not leveling up leads to people getting bored with the game (unless you're a magnificent storyteller, but most of us suck at storytelling and need a hook to keep the players reeled in), so you either increase the difficulty of monsters (making battles longer and harder) or give up some XP for stuff you are impressed with. In that sense, and considering most people play usually once a week (at least on tabletops), having a sense of progression helps immensely.

PbP, as mentioned before, is harder in terms of keeping people hooked because, while they can read everything that's said and done, the environment doesn't help with the little things that make table playing such an experience (sharing with friends, swifter reactions from people), instead relying on everyone having its "turn" before proceeding. It's not entirely slow, but it's a different kind of slow: basically, you should do by PbP in a week what you do on one day per week sessions in order to make PbP interesting enough; otherwise, the delay would be such that people start getting bored and leave (no matter how masterful the DM may be).

Multiclassing: This is less a concept of powergaming and more a thing of "base classes MCing is retarded", at least on terms of base class multiclassing. Case in point: you already are getting punished by attempting to multiclass because your progression in both classes gets delayed (it isn't like AD&D 2e where, while getting a higher XP total, you still leveled up all classes at the same time and thus didn't loss much, other than being one or two levels behind the party). Getting a further XP penalty is just shooting you in the foot.

As for excessive PrCs, there's a good reason for it. Most of the time, you want something that will make your build all the more interesting because of it: perhaps it's the options, the bonus feats, or even a way to make entering the PrC that you like easier (and still fit your conception of the build you intend to play with). Thus, dipping is natural. If the classes (and PrCs) were built in such a way that they could count for all the possible build options, there wouldn't be much need for a plethora of PrCs. As well, some PrCs lend to the build more than others, and sometimes you find a combination of abilities from three different PrCs that fulfill what you intend on a build. In that case, forcing people to finish one 10-level PrC in order to get another seems a bit like restricting over restrictions (considering that to enter the PrC you already need to fulfill some prerequisites, which means that if you intend to PrC twice or thrice you need to prepare for ALL entries, not just one).

It's also the lure and appeal of new PrCs. The developers tried to find new ideas for existing concepts: Eldritch Knight already fulfills the idea of "magic swordsman", but it lacked the ability to literally blend magic and swordplay (as done by, say, Final Fantasy's Magic Knight). Spellsword tried to tackle the concept, but it was made with a more militaristic mentality (where full BAB justifies half casting progression), so most people take what they want from Spellsword and use the strictly better option to complete what they intend to do with their build. Then comes Abjurant Champion (better for a tank-gish, but it's so good that it has become standard issue) and spins the builds once again. Now, is that powergaming? Considering that you get delayed access to spellcasting, whereas the game expects you to have 5th level spells at level 9th and with both classes PLUS the need to multiclass you get 5th level spells about four levels later doesn't seem a lot like powergaming; sounds a bit like gimping yourself a bit. It's the same thing behind Mystic Theurge: sound on theory, not sound on paper, proven in gameplay (when the Wizard has spells of two levels higher than yours, and you still lack the action economy to use both which should have been the intention).

But tacking PrCs here and there isn't something anyone can do: it's an art. It requires some thought to justify, since you'll be diversifying a bit in the name of power (or so you may think), but the combination of different areas of expertise makes for a more colorful character. Then there's the idea of two PrCs that would have worked better as one (Invisible Blade and Master Thrower, I'm looking at you two), and you can figure why it's evident people tend to do what seems like excessive multiclassing.

[Prime32]

And for gold, I tend to assume the Wealth By Level as given in the DMG.I think I understand the "higher gold" thing. If PCs gain XP 20% faster, they must also gain treasure 20% faster or end up below WBL.

[ericgrau]

I think I'm missing something... but i haven't played enough DnD outside of my own group, or the first one I played in IRL, to really get this play style, since we only have one powergamer and he just isn't good at it at all :D

Most groups are similar to yours. I have yet to see one that isn't. I think a lot of posters have a hard time realizing when to suggest and not suggest theoretical optimization techniques. What blurs the line further is that some high power options are okay in some groups for reasons including what other posters have said. So while most agree that some things are way over the top, many disagree on where exactly to draw the line.

[WarKitty]

Personally, I find it useful to get the highest power build I possibly can put together. Then I can pick from what options are there to get the power level desired.

Point buy is just easier to work with when you're putting together a build. You can't really do a build without knowing your stats.

Multiclassing, well, multiclassing only really increases power on the melee builds. They need it. Plus, some concepts just don't work without multiclassing.

Accelerated WBL/XP: I actually do this as a DM. The players love it. I love it because I can throw nasty stuff at them.

Gestalt: It's nice in small parties, mostly. I've also been known to give out pseudo-gestalt if no one wants to play a particular party role. (Bard? You now have healer gestalt.)

As a side note: if you can't make your players cry with stirges, you're doing it wrong.

[PersonMan]

stuff I agree with

Basically this. Optimization comes naturally to me-it allows me to play the characters as I envision them(rather powerful and/or awesome, usually) rather than going "well, this guy is supposed to be able to do x, y and z but if I put points into y then I'll have to reduce x...and z isn't all that great either."

Besides, some concepts use quasi-abusive uses of rules for fun to play results-in one system, for example, with the right abilities you can become immune to damage from slamming into things and fly so fast that you deal horrendous damage to anything in your way. From that base I created a fun(albeit unused) British knight who defends the realm by slamming into its enemies.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

If you already have a normal table game going, you might as well play out your uber-powerful character on the interwubs. To that end, I generally see the more powerful setups for forum games rather than table games.

[Salanmander]

If you already have a normal table game going, you might as well play out your uber-powerful character on the interwubs.

I...honestly don't understand what you mean by this. Would you mind elaborating?

[Eldariel]

Point-by-point:

Gestalt: It allows for theurge-types and monster characters without huge overhaul of the rules. In other words, there's tons more stuff you can play in Gestalt, than in normal 3.X.
Point Buy: I'm personally of the school that believes that point buy shouldn't be an obstacle. That is, if you want X out of your character, the rules should allow for that. As such, high point buy is kinda necessary to accomodate the wide variety of different kinds of character focuses and styles people want. It's not like high point buy makes for characters without weaknesses or some such. It also helps some of the weaker classes quite a bit, and multi-focus characters like warrior/mages, skill monkey/warriors and such are more doable under high point buy again increasing the options people have available.
Multiclassing: I want the players to have the freedom to generate the most accurate representation for their character possible. Many concepts can be done with single-class characters but many concepts really, really want lots of classes to work. Same with PrCs; I want as large a freedom for the players to represent their character as accurately as possible in mechanics. Free access to PrCs helps a lot there, especially since much of the material for 3.X is poorly written and thus forcing people to go all the way in PrCs and such would just make the classes mechanically needlessly weak; something that kinda sucks when character level is supposed to be the measure of character power in the system, not their class. The option is either to allow free multiclassing or to rewrite all the mediocre classes to be more worthwhile (both of course involving bans/rewrites on overpowered stuff); I've chosen the former.
Lots of Gold/Accelerated XP Gain: Lots of gold is something I don't do. I hate magic item dependency with passion and try to work around that as much as possible. Accelerated XP I like in online formats though; characters' abilities grow organically and feel very different on different levels so if chances are you are only gonna have so many sessions, I prefer to have the chance to go through the phases of your character growth in the game, rather than have the game end before you get anywhere.


So, that's about it.

TL;DR: For best possible mechanical representation of the character each player wants to play. I want to give players as free hands in that as possible. Though of course, I don't play Gestalt all that often (unless asked) and don't use high wealth but I can see where people using them are coming from.

[Godskook]

Gestalt

Gestalt is *FUN*, but I'm not "intent" on it. The diversity avaiable in a gestalt game is the largest benefit, since you can have a party with 5 wizards in it, but one's a soulmelding naturalist(totemist), another is literally all brains(psion), while a third is a gish(warblade). And you can do this from *level 1*.


5d6b3, super high point buys

Cause of the way the game works, stats above 10 are "enabling" while stats below it are "disabling". Personally, I go with a "start low and buy your way up" method.


larger gold allotments

Don't really hear much about that. Most fellas I talk to assume WBL.


accelerated XP gains

Don't really hear about this one too much.


and being able to freely multiclass 234324234 times

Because no matter what you do, you'll never be as strong as Druid 20, Wizard 20, or Cleric 20.


with 234234 prestige classes

Dead levels suck, variation rocks, and being better at your own tactics than a similar base class who's tactics are different is *APPROPRIATE*. I generally only get about 2-3 prestige classes anyway, which typically means I've completed 1-2 prestige classes by level 20.


and 234255 templates?

Don't really touch them, and I rarely hear people wanting to use more than 1 or 2 of them anyway. I mean, why have an option if you're never allowed to use it?