An interesting realization I've recently had

[Breaw]

A bit of necessary background about the group(s) I play have played with over the past 10 years:

1) We pretty much exclusively play with only the core 3 books, 3.5ed. Sometimes our DM (which varies) pulls out a scroll from spell compendium as a juicy treasure for the party wizard, or pulls out a monster from some setting book, but in general it's just core 3.

2) Very few (only 1 really) of the friends I've ever played with is much of a power-gamer. That's not to say that people don't strive to kick some serious ass, it's just that the character concept is almost invariably sub optimal.

3) Until I recently rolled a Cleric of Kord (1 level of Barbarian), I had never played a character with more than 12 Str.

Now, a little about this Cleric of Kord. We often play with a houserule that players start with a '0th level' in a class (NPC or PC depending on the DM). One of the restrictions is that your character can't have higher BaB than level (in other words no warrior 0th level and full BaB class). As a result this character is warrior 1/barbarian 1/cleric 2 at the moment, and is at full BaB for his level. He also has the most ridiculous stats I ever seen rolled naturally:

18 Str, 15 Dex, 15 Con, 14 Wis, 13 Int, 12 Cha

Simply goofy. After playing this character through 5 sessions now, I have come to a surprising realization. There really isn't a substitute for 18 Str, full BaB and a Greatsword I mean, before I enlarge person, bless the party, magic my weapon or rage (which I never do anyway, the buffs get spread out to the rest of the party before I wade in), I'm already doing 2d6 + 6 damage.

Now I'm sure there will be plenty of optimizers out there that will tell me that I'm wrong, and that blank is better in every way to a high Str fighter at low levels. I'm not saying that this is the best build ever, just sharing that it really surprised me just how big a difference that strength makes. More than a rogue with 18 dex or a sorc with 18 cha to be sure.

Anyway, thought I'd share. (P.S. I do fully appreciate just how silly this sounds to anyone who have played high Str melee for decades, I just never had)

[Matthew]

It is certainly most noticable in D20 than it has ever been before. High strength AD&D characters could really dish out the damage as well, but even an 18/90 strength meant only +2 to hit and +4 to damage. The 1e two handed sword was a bit of a 'king of weapons' on account of its weapon versus armour adjustments to hit, but the 2e two handed sword lacked that advantage (and thus was lacking).

As far as D20 goes, though, and especially since 2003 when they changed the rules of power attack, the high strength great sword using fighter is a very good combination (yeah, yeah, "Wizards!").

[Ned the undead]

He also has the most ridiculous stats I ever seen rolled naturally:

18 Str, 15 Dex, 15 Con, 14 Wis, 13 Int, 12 Cha



I roll stats like that all the time.

[marjan]

I roll stats like that all the time.

"You lucky, bastard." (no offense meant)



There really isn't a substitute for 18 Str, full BaB and a Greatsword

Yes, there is... 24 str, more BaB and greatsword. :smallbiggrin:

As Matthew said most of 2H dmg comes from PA at later levels. But when you are low level most of your damage comes from weapon and strength bonus. There are certain situations where this is not the case (being a rogue for example), but those are rare in core.

[Pironious]

18 Str, 15 Dex, 15 Con, 14 Wis, 13 Int, 12 Cha

My best roll is:

18, 18, 14, 13, 12, 12.

Which came out as this:

18 str, 12 dex, 16 con, 12 int, 18 wis, 11 cha.

Say hello to my dwarven cleric of buttkicking. Strength and War domains, I miss that guy...

[Saph]

Now I'm sure there will be plenty of optimizers out there that will tell me that I'm wrong, and that blank is better in every way to a high Str fighter at low levels.

Really, not as much as you think. There are ways to equal it, but unless you're totally abusing the rules, it's hard to beat the simple and easy synergy of a high Strength score and a big honkin' weapon.

- Saph

[Breaw]

I roll stats like that all the time.

Consider that I haven't played in a campaigned that has lasted less than a year and a half. Might not be *that* unlikely to roll that high, but with only 8 characters made the odds dwindle.

[Citizen Joe]

He also has the most ridiculous stats I ever seen rolled naturally:

18 Str, 15 Dex, 15 Con, 14 Wis, 13 Int, 12 Cha


Congratulations, you are a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is spout off stats, you're a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all the neat toys and magic items he has, you're a munchkin
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all his mythic exploits and feelings, then you're a roleplayer.

[Matthew]

I should say one other thing. At Level 1, 2 or 3, your character is probably better off with a long sword and large shield, as his enemies aren't going to have enough hit points for him to need more than 1d8+4 damage, whilst a nice +2 to armour class rarely goes astray.



If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all the neat toys and magic items he has, you're a munchkin

Nah, that's still power-gaming. The mark of the munchkin is insuffcient understanding of the rules to powergame. They are usually telling you about their character with powerful build and monkey grip.

Most munchkins are also power-gamers (or wannabes). Power-gamers who are also role-players are usually fine.

[marjan]

Power-gamers who are also role-players are usually fine.

Going by Joe's definition that's impossible. You can't say two things first, you have to say them one by one. :smallwink:

[greenknight]

Now I'm sure there will be plenty of optimizers out there that will tell me that I'm wrong, and that blank is better in every way to a high Str fighter at low levels.

At low levels, that's a pretty good build, although the spiked chain is usually recommended over a Greatsword, if you can spare the feat. At higher levels, the full spellcasters rule because each one of them has something which can equal or exceed your damage output and do a lot of other useful stuff too.


I'm not saying that this is the best build ever, just sharing that it really surprised me just how big a difference that strength makes. More than a rogue with 18 dex or a sorc with 18 cha to be sure.

If you're just playing Core, the Rogue continues to be useful as a scout and for disabling traps. The Sorcerer is a full spellcaster, and while generally considered to be inferior to a Wizard, they still dominate over non-spellcasters at higher levels.

But if you're mainly playing low level games, the non-spellcasters can really kick butt the way they are supposed to.

[Citizen Joe]

Sure, your mileage may vary, but the 'How do you describe your character?" is a pretty good acid test for the powergamer/munchkin/roleplayer gamer types. Clearly, you could be a combination of all of those, in fact most people are. But the point is, on a subconscious level one of those aspects will stand out and that will be how you see your character.

The OP could have used different terms, and almost went roleplayer with the mention of being a cleric of Kord. For example, he could have said he's never played a character with more than average strength, but he recently made a Cleric of Kord with maximum strength, a greatsword and fighter level skill in it. Glory be to Kord for such a destructive combination... Ya, totally roleplayer while basically stating the same thing.

If the OP had done something like, I got this greatsword and these gauntlets that let me wield it to totally take down that dragon... that would be munchkin, and again something of the same statement.

[Breaw]

Congratulations, you are a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is spout off stats, you're a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all the neat toys and magic items he has, you're a munchkin
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all his mythic exploits and feelings, then you're a roleplayer.

Bah? So when I describing how surprised I was by the power level exibited by a character (due to high strength) and therefor mention his extremely high stats, this somehow makes me a powergamer? I mean, if I was to talk about how I was surprised by my cleric and mentioned only his undying devotion to Kord, even though he finds Kords lack of patience for the weak a bit troublesome... this would have facilitated the conversation how?

First of all, I'm not sure I like your tone. Had a bad day? Secondly, I actually mentioned that he was a cleric of Kord first, with a background in Barbarism, not mentioning his stats. And thirdly, why on earth would I focus on the motivations of my character when the specific topic I wanted to bring up was his power level (due to the stats I rolled for him).

Your distain for optimization is quite apparent, although I'm not entirely sure what your beef is (not that I'm particularly interested), and your presumptions about why I enjoy tabletopping are unfounded and a little insulting.

That was weird.

[SadisticFishing]

Citizen Joe, originally when I read your post I was slightly offended at what I thought was the assumption that I was a powergamer (even though I hadn't said anything this thread), before I realized how accurate that might be. Generally when I describe characters, I start with the ridiculous exploits, then the reason I could pull them off, if it involved min/max'ing (which I am good at). Sweet, I'm a roleplayer.

My best stats rolled so far were 18/18/17/16/14/11. Rawr. (Note, I'm not talking about a character so the above still stands!)

Yes, though, at lower levels, there's little substitute for strength. As you start levelling though, the wizard with his thousands of save or lose and debuffs/buffs will start to outshine you, though whenever I play a wizard, I tended to use Haste most often because it really helped the fight, and didn't steal the spotlight.

[Breaw]

Sure, your mileage may vary, but the 'How do you describe your character?" is a pretty good acid test for the powergamer/munchkin/roleplayer gamer types. Clearly, you could be a combination of all of those, in fact most people are. But the point is, on a subconscious level one of those aspects will stand out and that will be how you see your character.

The OP could have used different terms, and almost went roleplayer with the mention of being a cleric of Kord. For example, he could have said he's never played a character with more than average strength, but he recently made a Cleric of Kord with maximum strength, a greatsword and fighter level skill in it. Glory be to Kord for such a destructive combination... Ya, totally roleplayer while basically stating the same thing.

If the OP had done something like, I got this greatsword and these gauntlets that let me wield it to totally take down that dragon... that would be munchkin, and again something of the same statement.

There we go. A little more explanation as to the reasoning of your opinions went a long way. Not that I agree with you, but at least I understand your perspective a bit better.

A small insight into me, and how I speak. I am a PhD Physicist. Physics and mathematics have been the primary focus of my life for the past 8 years. When I wield a Greatsword I fully appreciate that 2d6 + 6 means I'll do on average 13 damage per round and that has nothing to do with powergaming.

Being aware of the mathematics is unavoidable for me, it's a third language for me. That said, I don't pour over books to find the optimal decisions. Why am I using a greatsword? Favored weapon of my deity. Why is Str my primary stat? Kord is the god of strength.

If I was interested in discussing party dynamics I would have introduced my character as a person with thoughts and feelings and motivations. If I wanted to discussed stat based game mechanics I would (and did) introduce him in terms of those stats.

To be perfectly honest I'm not sure if I care if I'm considered a powergamer, a munchkin, a smurf or a half-dragon beguiler, it was mostly your presumptiousness that caught me off guard.

[Citizen Joe]

I never said there was anything WRONG with powergaming, just explained an easy way to recognize it.

[Breaw]

Yes, there is... 24 str, more BaB and greatsword. :smallbiggrin:

Amusingly enough, 24 str is exactly where I am at when I hit enlarge person and rage, although I'm at 3d6 + stuff at that point. :P

[marjan]

The OP could have used different terms, and almost went roleplayer with the mention of being a cleric of Kord. For example, he could have said he's never played a character with more than average strength, but he recently made a Cleric of Kord with maximum strength, a greatsword and fighter level skill in it. Glory be to Kord for such a destructive combination... Ya, totally roleplayer while basically stating the same thing.

If the OP had done something like, I got this greatsword and these gauntlets that let me wield it to totally take down that dragon... that would be munchkin, and again something of the same statement.

Not, really. If you just say that greatsword and 18 str results in high damage, that is just getting straight to the point. Usually this isn't possible if you want to talk about roleplaying.

On the, other hand if you want to say the same thing, but you recite your whole character background from his birth, that's called being bulls***er phylosopher. :smallwink: (cookie for anyone who gets the reference)

Now, what the OP did, was more close to first option, since him being a cleric of Kord has mechanical influence on this character. And Cleric of [God] is usually how people call clerics as a class, when it has important impact on the mechanic discussed.

Just to be clear: fundamentally there is nothing wrong with any approach to game.

[Breaw]

I never said there was anything WRONG with powergaming, just explained an easy way to recognize it.

Fair enough. I just have a knee jerk reaction when someone considers me something that does not reflect my own image of myself. It means either I'm giving off the wrong vibe or I am not particularly self actualized.

Oh, and for the record. The feats for the character in question? Improved unarmed strike, improved grapple and combat expertise. (CE to pick up improved trip when I can).

Why? Because Kord also the god of wrestlers and athletes.

Iunno, maybe I'm still a powergamer in your books, I don't feel a full unarmed 'feated', greatsword wielding cleric is a particularly optimized character.

[Signmaker]

Simply goofy. After playing this character through 5 sessions now, I have come to a surprising realization. There really isn't a substitute for 18 Str, full BaB and a Greatsword I mean, before I enlarge person, bless the party, magic my weapon or rage (which I never do anyway, the buffs get spread out to the rest of the party before I wade in), I'm already doing 2d6 + 6 damage.

A raging barbarian with the same stats?

[marjan]

A raging barbarian with the same stats?

Yup. need more characters


I recently rolled a Cleric of Kord (1 level of Barbarian)

[JaxGaret]

Playing E6 (or E8 or E10) really fixes a lot of problems with higher-level class imbalance.

Pretty much by completely removing it from the equation :smallbiggrin:

If you haven't heard of E6, look it up. It's a nice 3e variant.

[Citizen Joe]

Here's another acid test...

You're in the library with your gaming books on the table with your character sheet on top with a little doodle picture of your character in the corner...
Cute girl walks up, sees your character sheet and asks who xxxKillStealer69xxx is (bonus points if you get the reference)...

You start describing your character...
At the end of your explanation is the girl:
a) Smiling and interested in hearing more.
b) Dazed and confused by a long stream of meaningless stats.
c) 20 feet away talking on her cell phone, giggling and then taking a cellphone picture of you.

[UserClone]

To be perfectly honest I'm not sure if I care if I'm considered a powergamer, a munchkin, a smurf or a half-dragon beguiler, it was mostly your presumptiousness that caught me off guard.

That made me giggle. I've played a Half-Dragon Beguiler!!

[marjan]

At the end of your explanation is the girl:
a) Smiling and interested in hearing more.


So, after saying that it's a character for RPG, she doesn't run away. I envy you.

[Breaw]

Here's another acid test...

You're in the library with your gaming books on the table with your character sheet on top with a little doodle picture of your character in the corner...
Cute girl walks up, sees your character sheet and asks who xxxKillStealer69xxx is (bonus points if you get the reference)...

You start describing your character...
At the end of your explanation is the girl:
a) Smiling and interested in hearing more.
b) Dazed and confused by a long stream of meaningless stats.
c) 20 feet away talking on her cell phone, giggling and then taking a cellphone picture of you.

Which planet do you live on in which such women exist? The only way I got my wife into the game was by introducing her to OoTS first.

[JaxGaret]

Here's another acid test...

You're in the library with your gaming books on the table with your character sheet on top with a little doodle picture of your character in the corner...
Cute girl walks up, sees your character sheet and asks who xxxKillStealer69xxx is (bonus points if you get the reference)...

You start describing your character...
At the end of your explanation is the girl:
a) Smiling and interested in hearing more.
b) Dazed and confused by a long stream of meaningless stats.
c) 20 feet away talking on her cell phone, giggling and then taking a cellphone picture of you.

That sounds like a Charisma test more than a gamer-type test.

[Matthew]

Going by Joe's definition that's impossible. You can't say two things first, you have to say them one by one. :smallwink:

Aye, but if you say one thing first to one person and another thing first to another, then there's room for it...



Just to be clear: fundamentally there is nothing wrong with any approach to game.

Well, maybe not absolutely, but subjectively there can be...

Interesting article, here: I Hate Fun (http://lotfp.blogspot.com/2008/06/i-hate-fun.html).

[marjan]

Aye, but if you say one thing first to one person and another thing first to another, then there's room for it...

Though you would need to know two persons willing to talk to you to pull that off. And god knows that not all geeks are blessed with such a fortune. :smallfrown:
But, seriously if you are asked what equipment you use and you start talking, are you muchkin?

[Reinboom]

Here's another acid test...

You're in the library with your gaming books on the table with your character sheet on top with a little doodle picture of your character in the corner...
Cute girl walks up, sees your character sheet and asks who xxxKillStealer69xxx is (bonus points if you get the reference)...

You start describing your character...
At the end of your explanation is the girl:
a) Smiling and interested in hearing more.
b) Dazed and confused by a long stream of meaningless stats.
c) 20 feet away talking on her cell phone, giggling and then taking a cellphone picture of you.

Alternatives:
a) Yawning, waiting for you to get to the stats.
b) Discussing where you could get more out of it.
c) Rolling her eyes, and then walking away... eh, sort of. I need an exact definition of "munchkin" here to describe my response rather than just "item-focused monty hauler".

[Matthew]

Though you would need to know two persons willing to talk to you to pull that off. And god knows that not all geeks are blessed with such a fortune. :smallfrown:

Ha, ha.


But, seriously if you are asked what equipment you use and you start talking, are you muchkin?

It's kind of hard to tell these days. It used to be that if some guy started telling you about his twentieth level halfling paladin, +5 two handed sword of ass kicking, and his mind slaved ancient gold dragon mount, that you could pretty much identify him as a munchkin straight off. These days, that all kind of sounds par for the course to me... (well, not in my games)

[Solo]

There really isn't a substitute for 18 Str, full BaB and a Greatsword[/b] I mean, before I enlarge person, bless the party, magic my weapon or rage (which I never do anyway, the buffs get spread out to the rest of the party before I wade in), I'm already doing 2d6 + 6 damage.

Yes there is






A monk with wands of Enlarge Person and Divine Power.

[Breaw]

Yes there is






A monk with wands of Enlarge Person and Divine Power.

Man, you even out bolded me.
*shakes fist*

[Solo]

Man, you even out bolded me.
*shakes fist*

And the monk has max ranks in UMD and a masterwork tool of UMD to pull this off.

And spends most of his wealth at lower levels on consumables.

And has to spend several rounds buffing w/ spell faliure chance from UMD to get his buffs up.

[Reinboom]

And the monk has max ranks in UMD and a masterwork tool of UMD to pull this off.

And spends most of his wealth at lower levels on consumables.

And has to spend several rounds buffing w/ spell faliure chance from UMD to get his buffs up.

Thank goodness for his high saves during this. Or I might be calling you a joke.



Oh, and you need more skullclamp Power Attack, Reckless Charge, and Leap Attack, Breaw.
Or be something bigger and throw things (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=142565).

[Siosilvar]

xxxKillStealer69xxx is (bonus points if you get the reference)...
Fear the boot! Or, more precisely, Chainmail Bikini. When do I get my bonus points?

Also, someone mentioned E6... There's a G6 variant somewhere on the 1st or 2nd page of the homebrew forum, and I'm working on a S8 version.

[Solo]

Thank goodness for his high saves during this. Or I might be calling you a joke.



Oh, and you need more skullclamp Power Attack, Reckless Charge, and Leap Attack, Breaw.
Or be something bigger and throw things (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=142565).

Moar cards damage ftw!

[DUSUCK]

Congratulations, you are a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is spout off stats, you're a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all the neat toys and magic items he has, you're a munchkin
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all his mythic exploits and feelings, then you're a roleplayer.

What about when you are hopefull to show people your half dragon minituar and you are proud of your +6 LA cus you have a good BaB

[Talyn]

Aye, but if you say one thing first to one person and another thing first to another, then there's room for it...


Well, maybe not absolutely, but subjectively there can be...

Interesting article, here: I Hate Fun (http://lotfp.blogspot.com/2008/06/i-hate-fun.html).

That "I hate fun" guy... I feel seriously sorry for him. He is EXACTLY the kind of person that I would never, ever want to play with. Why? Because he hates fun! Because he wants the game to be as much like work as freaking possible.

He's the kind of guy who will ensure that you will never, ever be able to bring your non-RPG-playing friends to the table... and is proud of that fact. Who forgets that D&D is a social game, a way to connect with people.

That blog post was the absolute worst kind of freaking reactionary grognardism I've ever read. I hope that I'll never have a player like him at my table - and pray to God that he's never running any game I ever play.

[Matthew]

That "I hate fun" guy... I feel seriously sorry for him. He is EXACTLY the kind of person that I would never, ever want to play with. Why? Because he hates fun! Because he wants the game to be as much like work as freaking possible.

He's the kind of guy who will ensure that you will never, ever be able to bring your non-RPG-playing friends to the table... and is proud of that fact. Who forgets that D&D is a social game, a way to connect with people.

That blog post was the absolute worst kind of freaking reactionary grognardism I've ever read. I hope that I'll never have a player like him at my table - and pray to God that he's never running any game I ever play.

The funny thing is, he feels exactly the same way about you. :smallbiggrin: Seriously, though, you are mischaracterising what he's saying a little. He doesn't really hate fun at all, he hates being disengaged by his hobby. Indeed, he has a different definition of "fun". I can totally understand that.

[Yahzi]

Interesting article, here: I Hate Fun (http://lotfp.blogspot.com/2008/06/i-hate-fun.html).
A rant after my own heart. :smallbiggrin:

[Levyathyn]

We often play with a houserule that players start with a '0th level' in a class (NPC or PC depending on the DM). One of the restrictions is that your character can't have higher BaB than level (in other words no warrior 0th level and full BaB class)

That house rule seems simple, at first glance, but I love it. I plan to use it next time I run a 3.5 campaign. It's like giving fluff skills out, but it amounts to something.

[Indon]

Congratulations, you are a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is spout off stats, you're a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all the neat toys and magic items he has, you're a munchkin
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all his mythic exploits and feelings, then you're a roleplayer.

You got this off of a list off the internet, didn't you?

I haven't seen anything off of the list I'm thinking of in years, though, and it had a fourth category (you know, for the guy who always played CN back when CN meant bat-**** stupid-insane).

[SilverSheriff]

Congratulations, you are a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is spout off stats, you're a powergamer.
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all the neat toys and magic items he has, you're a munchkin
If, when asked about your character, the first thing you do is talk about all his mythic exploits and feelings, then you're a roleplayer.

But when explaining a character nobody really cares about what your saying if you talk about hos exploits and feelings unless:

1) they have never played D'n'D.
2) they are a Roleplayer themselves.

[nagora]

Here's another acid test...

You're in the library with your gaming books on the table with your character sheet on top with a little doodle picture of your character in the corner...
Cute girl walks up, sees your character sheet and asks who xxxKillStealer69xxx is (bonus points if you get the reference)...

You start describing your character...
At the end of your explanation is the girl:
a) Smiling and interested in hearing more.
b) Dazed and confused by a long stream of meaningless stats.
c) 20 feet away talking on her cell phone, giggling and then taking a cellphone picture of you.
d) Rolling a character.

[Stupendous_Man]

d) Rolling a character.

e) asking you out on a gaming date :smallbiggrin:

[bosssmiley]

<trim>

As a result this character is warrior 1/barbarian 1/cleric 2 at the moment, and is at full BaB for his level. He also has the most ridiculous stats I ever seen rolled naturally:

18 Str, 15 Dex, 15 Con, 14 Wis, 13 Int, 12 Cha

Point buy. For the love of Pelor, point buy. :smallsigh:


Simply goofy. After playing this character through 5 sessions now, I have come to a surprising realization. There really isn't a substitute for 18 Str, full BaB and a Greatsword I mean, before I enlarge person, bless the party, magic my weapon or rage (which I never do anyway, the buffs get spread out to the rest of the party before I wade in), I'm already doing 2d6 + 6 damage.

and...grease. Low Ref save Tank of Kord fall down, go boom. :smallwink:

Yeah, melee-focused characters in Core do dominate the game up until 3rd level spells come into play (which is also about the time the meaningful metamagics do, surprisingly enough... :smallconfused: ).

After 5-6th level the wizard, druid and rogue will start to redress the balance of power thanks to good ole linear fighters quadratic wizards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards) formula of D&D. By 10th level they'll probably be pointing and chuckling.


Warning!
textwall ahead


those who demand everything easy and quickly will always outnumber those that don’t, and pretty soon a hobby that was custom-made for the studious and imaginative and thorough now belongs to an entirely different caste, while those of us that the hobby was created for are left on the fringes, told that we’re just not compatible with today’s gaming, and sometimes, even today’s life in general.

F*** that. F*** that. This hobby is ours. These other types can come and play and we’ll welcome them with open arms and show them the way if they ask, but to dictate fast-food mentality in my imaginative tools… that means war.

“Tyranny of fun” nails it – role-playing companies, in their doomed efforts in ignoring the anomalous nature of role-playing’s mainstream popularity of the 80s, target the type of people that aren’t well-suited for role-playing to buy their products. Because lets face it… it takes a certain something odd to be a real role-player. “Nerd” and “geek” and such are not terms of endearment, they are insults, but they do prove the point that we’re not normal everyday types.

<trim>

– the best role-players are the ones that take it seriously, make it important in their lives, and give it their all. People who do this are the most important part of any hobby. You want to be a casual gamer? Fine. But don’t expect the same level of deference and respect that a lifer is going to get. Those who take their activities seriously are the only ones who matter.

But in reality, people who take things seriously and who actually become knowledgeable and who actually expect newcomers to respect tradition and who expect newcomers to actually learn something and who discourage equal treatment for every dumb s*** that falls off the turnip truck… they are insulted by the turnip truckers. Peer pressure is important and there are a whole lot more dumb s*** fun-seekers who balk at the idea of “fun” being related to “effort” and “investment of time” than there are people who want to learn and be immersed in their hobby as a whole, not just while they’re goofing off with some pals on a Saturday night.

Hah! That's actually quite good, up until the point he goes off on one about Hasbro having no 'moral' right to the D&D name. I can see a lot of my own "To hell with mockers, casuals and WoW timewasters!" grognardism in that article.

I especially love the closing quote:


"4E is like hair metal! It's a gateway for some people to something of value." - Matt Johnsen

It resonates with my own initial knee-jerk "4E = Mordheim/WHQ" reaction. :smallredface:

In some respects though the entire article subverts its own intent. The sheer ferocity with which the writer goes for his selected bete noire is a clever way of throwing a bucket of wake-up water in the faces of the "D&D. Serious business!" crowd. The idea that someone could get so defensive about what's essentially a sophisticated game of magic tea party with extra toy soldiers garnish* unintentionally gives a great sense of MST3K perspective (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MST3KMantra) about the whole thing.

TL;DR? Casuals can be annoying, but the road of 'game as serious business' leads ultimately to the circlejerk of online Tekumel fandom. :smalltongue:


* Yes, as a long-time gamer, I have the right to mock my own game. :smalltongue:

[nagora]

Hah! That's actually quite good, up until the point he goes off on one about Hasbro having no 'moral' right to the D&D name.
They don't. Only Gygax and Arneson have any moral right to the name, or people they willingly appointed as successors. Legal and moral in this case are diametrically opposed.

As to the rest of his rant, I generally agree. The game has been spoilt by making things far too easy. In the name of "fun" all the fun of achieving things has been taken out. You have a +6 sword that summons the Mayor of the City of Brass? Who cares when the DM handed it to you on a plate because the DMG said that was a level-appropriate reward for basically turning up every week for a few months? That's borrrring.

It's as meaningless as levels given out on a set schedule because the game's designers assume that their players are sugar-powered attention-deficit retards who will wander off to WoW if they don't have 70th level characters like all the cool kids on that do.

The "fun" he's against is the sort of fun that having only ever eating desert is. Everybody likes desert, but there's something seriously wrong with the person who complains about a meal because it wasn't all sugar and cream.

[Stupendous_Man]

wow, you're bitter...

[Matthew]

wow, you're bitter...

There are people a lot more bitter out there.

The morality question is one of perspective. If money, good business sense, and purchasing power are the same as moral rectitude, then it would be silly to say Gygax and Arneson have a moral right to the game. If you understand that they were literally forced out (against their will and the latter by the former) and unwillingly lost their legal rights to ownership of the intellectual property (which they created), then there is some substance in what is said. Dungeons & Dragons, after all, wasn't given to us as consumers, it was sold to us as customers.

Mind you might be bitter too if you saw your hobby being transformed into something you didn't recognise, or even you had previously considered the diametric opposite of what the game was about (or the normalisation of the absurd; it's kind of like your favourite hard core metal band being destroyed and then their name used for a new pop band who claim to be continuing their legacy). No good dwelling on that, of course, but hard feelings are not necessarily something you choose to have.

[RebelRogue]

The "fun" he's against is the sort of fun that having only ever eating desert is. Everybody likes desert, but there's something seriously wrong with the person who complains about a meal because it wasn't all sugar and cream.
Personally, I find my mouth to dry very rapidly when eating desert! :smalltongue:

[bosssmiley]

...it's kind of like your favourite hard core metal band being destroyed and then their name used for a new pop band who claim to be continuing their legacy).

This actually happened. Poor Bewitched (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bewitched_(Swedish_band)), I hope they managed to live down the whole B*witched (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B*witched) mix-up in the late 1990s. Heck! Even wikipedia warns you not to mix the two up. :smallbiggrin:

So 4E : 1E :: B*witched (wholesome Oirish teenypop) : Bewitched (Swedish metal)

Yeah, I can see it: one's an unthreatening, accessible corporate product designed for the broadest market appeal possible; the other is created by an obscure and vaguely threatening subculture purely for their own enjoyment. :smallwink:

[nagora]

Personally, I find my mouth to dry very rapidly when eating desert! :smalltongue:

:smallbiggrin: I am mildly dyslexic, and desert/dessert trips me up all the time! Rogue and rouge is another pair, and of course the spell-checker is no help.

[Gerrtt]

Mind you might be bitter too if you saw your hobby being transformed into something you didn't recognise, or even you had previously considered the diametric opposite of what the game was about (or the normalisation of the absurd; it's kind of like your favourite hard core metal band being destroyed and then their name used for a new pop band who claim to be continuing their legacy).

That's essentially where I stand right now; I can appreciate where he's coming from. The problem is not that he hate's fun, it's that he hates the definition of fun that is being doled out to him in 28 dollar, 200+ page books and outlined for him.

My big issue with what he's saying stems from the fact that I am a mix between being casual and having an appreciation from where this all comes from. I got started on 3rd ed and moved on to 3.5. When I was in my prime I was playing less than 5 hours a week. But I still have an appreciation for what is and what was, for a play style that is not always easy and rewarding, and for a game with serious or even dark overtones.

However, I don't think that getting up in arms is the answer. The answer to the problem of a corporation telling you what fun is to not buy their product and enjoy it the way you want. Call me weak-willed or wishy-washy if you want. Hell, call me a sissy, nancy, or worse. If there's an incarnation of the game out there that you already like then use it, don't get bent out of shape because someone makes a product you don't want. Just don't buy it.


Back on task...

Yeah, at lower levels having a high strength and a two-hander can be fun. I hope you continue to enjoy it at higher levels (and I don't see why you wouldn't since power attack just gets better the higher BAB you have).

[Riffington]

The OP was just describing something he noticed; there's no reason to suspect he's a powergamer or munchkin based simply on that.

A powergamer is someone who specifically tries to make his character more powerful than others out there in the campaign.
This can be done in a fun, reasonable way if
*you stay within the intent of the rules
*you make sure you aren't hurting the fun of the DM/other players.

A munchkin is a type of powergamer who takes it a bit too far in their game. This includes any of the following problems in their powergaming:
*abusing rules loopholes
*bullying others
*spotlight-hogging
*Insisting on mixing thematically-inconsistent elements.

Note that the above only apply within a game. Abusing rules loopholes in a contest doesn't make one a munchkin, for example.

[Project_Mayhem]

The "fun" he's against is the sort of fun that having only ever eating desert is. Everybody likes desert, but there's something seriously wrong with the person who complains about a meal because it wasn't all sugar and cream

I'll have you know I've just eaten half a tub of peanut butter*. And I enjoyed it. That was fun. I'm living on my own now, so, whatever, I'll do what I want :smallwink:

Seriously, the I hate fun guy needs to get of his high horse. Yes, he has a point. Yes, earlier edititions of D&D were probably more intellectually rewarding, and less instant gratification. Yes WotC are focusing on a newer demographic. So? Are men with guns stopping him from playing the way he likes? Are ninjas sneaking into his house and ripping his old rulebooks up? No, to the best of my knowledge. If he wants to play the old way, great, the rules still exist, and are still easily accessable. There are people still making content and adventures for those editions. If he wants to be an elitist and sneer at people, then theres nothing stopping him.


*Thats a normal, jam jar size, English tub, not a humongous American one. Cause' that would go past greedy into life threatening.