Is it mean to optimize/break the game?

[randomhero00]

So I played with one particular DM who has a set of homebrew rules that lets you customize character creation at level one. A nice set of rules most of the time, especially since he runs very hard campaigns. Needless to say a short time later I had a lvl 1 cleric with a straight 30 AC (I could have gone higher...no point at level 1 tho :P ). It's not exactly breaking the game, since I'm not one shotting monsters, but when he asked my AC, and I'm like 30, "No, seriously..." he kind of looked disappointed/sad. Probably because he now had the headache of redesigning his homebrew system again, but I dunno.

Should I purposefully hold back? Part of the fun for me after all, is optimizing. I wouldn't *intentionally* break the game so its not fun for other people, but its not really my fault if his homebrew rules are out of whack, right? On the other hand, D&D in general isn't hard to optimize in the first place, especially AC. I'd only need a few more levels/gold without his homebrew to do the same thing.

What do you all do? What do you think?

[Tyndmyr]

If his homebrewed system is horribly flawed, finding the holes is just good testing. I welcome destructive tests to things I make, as it enables me to find and fix the flaws.

Optimizing and breaking the game are two seperate things. 30AC is not breaking the game. Time travel, on the other hand...

[randomhero00]

Agreed. This was the first time I felt bad doing it though. Just not sure why.

[Evard]

Well it depends on what others are doing. If everyone is over powered then its fine. Breaking/optimizing is only bad/wrong when the team is not on the same page.

A optimized wizard is only broken when he's in a party with a sub-optimized fighter. But put the wizard in a party consisting of an optimized Druid and Cleric then suddenly nothing is really broken.

It all depends on how the team plays since DnD is a team game.

[Saph]

Optimizing and breaking the game are two seperate things. 30AC is not breaking the game.

Uh, yes it is. It's a very weird way of doing it, but it's still going to mess up combats. Just because you can come up with something worse doesn't mean that what you're doing is good.

Should I purposefully hold back? Part of the fun for me after all, is optimizing. I wouldn't *intentionally* break the game so its not fun for other people, but its not really my fault if his homebrew rules are out of whack, right?

Mmm . . . no. I've got some sympathy for you, but this is self-serving reasoning. Just because there are holes doesn't mean you're justified in exploiting them.

Part of the skill of optimising is knowing how to make something that's a good level of power, which is generally not the same as trying to make something that's the maximum level of power. In this case your DM's obviously got some very exploitable house rules. The question becomes: do you want him to change them?

If you do, then this kind of character design is a good way to make sure they'll be changed quick, and it certainly exposes the problems with the system. If you don't, then yes, you're going to have to tone it down.

What you're doing is, as Tyndmyr pointed out, called destructive playtesting. If you're trying to balance a system as part of a systematic test, it's a valuable tool for the developers to use (so they can ban whatever you do). If you're playing in a casual environment, destructive playtesting can be real obnoxious. The reactions of your DM and other players will tell you which is which.

[illyrus]

My idea is that having PCs drop left and right is A Bad Idea (TM). So I tend to attempt to play at about the level needed to prevent that and adjust what I'm using to about that level. The issue comes in when the DM really does feel that every encounter should have PCs dropping left and right that it gets into an arms race of sorts.

In the current game I play in, a 4E game, I've limited myself to the PHB, the Adventurer's Vault 1, and the expertise feats from the PHB II. So I'm trying a different tactic of intentionally holding back what I have access to in hopes that the GM will step down their side of things. So far the answer has been no.

If your game is one where the party can get through most fights without having a character drop then personally I'd play within the spirit of the rules or perhaps take a step back. If your DM instead enjoys to decimate the characters for sheer personal joy, then by all means go all out. More than likely it falls somewhere in-between where you should show some restraint but not hobble yourself.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Uh, yes it is. It's a very weird way of doing it, but it's still going to mess up combats. Just because you can come up with something worse doesn't mean that what you're doing is good.

Not really. It's the classic problem with D&D tanks, what else can you do in combat. Yeah, you have great defenses, but any reasonably intelligent enemy can probably tell that, and since you have weaker offenses, they're going to ignore you if at all possible to focus on the more glass-cannon party members.

[Tyndmyr]

Well, it's normal to feel bad when you point out a flaw in someone's creation. They tend to invest themselves in it to some degree.

30 AC is high, yes...but does nothing against nat 20s, and against attacks that ignore AC. Likely your touch is also much more reasonable unless his system is truly messed up.

If someone hands me a custom char creation method, and warns that the upcoming campaign is really tough, I would likely also optimize for survivability.

[Sinfire Titan]

If his homebrewed system is horribly flawed, finding the holes is just good testing. I welcome destructive tests to things I make, as it enables me to find and fix the flaws.

Optimizing and breaking the game are two seperate things. 30AC is not breaking the game. Time travel, on the other hand...

Right.

If you want your character to be good at what he does, optimize as much as you need to. There's nothing wrong with this. It's when you optimize to specifically ruin the DM's campaign that it is bad (there's an easier way to do this).

[Riffington]

My idea is that having PCs drop left and right is A Bad Idea (TM). So I tend to attempt to play at about the level needed to prevent that and adjust what I'm using to about that level. The issue comes in when the DM really does feel that every encounter should have PCs dropping left and right that it gets into an arms race of sorts.

Work this out beforehand, instead. The player loses every arms race.

If your character sheet makes your DM uncomfortable, just change it. Seriously.

[valadil]

You should ask your GM. Some GMs want to fix their homebrew material, some don't. Whenever I've come up with well intentioned but clearly exploitable rules my players have been happy to oblige my request that they play nice. They understand that it's tedious to come up with air tight rulings. Most of the time it's not even worth the trouble. I'd rather test rules as intended to see if they're even worth the trouble. If a rule doesn't add to the game, then I won't bother proofing it against optimizers. OTOH if I come up with something fun, then it may be worth investing some time in making sure there aren't loopholes and then submitting it to powergamers.

Sorry, got off on a rant there. It should be common couresty to see if your GM is in the "testing for fun" or "testing for brokenness" phase of using his houserules. If he just wants to see if they're fun, you shouldn't make him feel bad by breaking them. And even if you do see a hole, it's probably better to tell your GM instead of making an exploitative character.

[Saph]

Not really. It's the classic problem with D&D tanks, what else can you do in combat. Yeah, you have great defenses, but any reasonably intelligent enemy can probably tell that, and since you have weaker offenses, they're going to ignore you if at all possible to focus on the more glass-cannon party members.

We've been told that the DM runs hard campaigns; that means he's going to want enemies that can threaten the PCs. So if you play a character with 30 AC, then you're going to start running into things that can hit you even with a 30 AC . . . say, a +15 attack bonus or so. For you, that's fine. For the players who have PCs with a normal first-level AC, say 16 or so, that's not so fine.

Once you start getting into optimisation, it's not enough to think about what you'll produce in-game. You also have to think about what the consequences of it are going to be.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

We've been told that the DM runs hard campaigns; that means he's going to want enemies that can threaten the PCs. So if you play a character with 30 AC, then you're going to start running into things that can hit you even with a 30 AC . . . say, a +15 attack bonus or so. For you, that's fine. For the players who have PCs with a normal first-level AC, say 16 or so, that's not so fine.

Or more casters, trippers, and similar who don't target AC.

[Eldariel]

Or more casters, trippers, and similar who don't target AC.

Aye. Just in the Endless Dungeon, I faced an Azer on level 2. Not terribly frightening offensively, but it has all high saves and AC 23. That means I'm pretty much 18-20ing it on attacks and under 50% SoDs. Grappling, though, works just fine. So I just grappled it and in three rounds, it was down. On low levels, there are means around whatever the opp is doing for almost all characters.

[Kaiyanwang]

In my opinion, Saph is right.

If for that DM the 30 AC is game breaking, you shoud keep the power level down letting him make his job without worrying about built the world around you.

I agree, an high AC is not game breaking FOR ME, as a DM.

Generally speaking, find the loophole of the system is a good idea only if is fun for everybody: does not seem to me that you are just "debugging" your system, but only trying to take a direct advantage.

Could be fun for a while, but could lead other people to think you are not behaving, we can say, in a well-mannered way. You could ruin your own game after a while.

[randomhero00]

I also got him something like +9 vs grapple checks (with another +5 or so in the works), he also has a base 17 touch, with a way to boost it to 21 ish. His saves are something like +6, +5, +6, and he can heal himself as a swift action :D

Yeah, I think I'll take the advice and simply ask him if he wants me to tone it down.

EDIT: I do still roleplay him as frail though. I may know he's tougher than the tank, but he doesn't.

[Superglucose]

Also would like to note that the GM I had who wanted us to "playtest" really meant "I want you guys to reassure me that my system is balanced." As such he got really upset when we broke his system into a million tiny pieces.

[randomhero00]

Also would like to note that the GM I had who wanted us to "playtest" really meant "I want you guys to reassure me that my system is balanced." As such he got really upset when we broke his system into a million tiny pieces.

That's kind of what I'm a bit worried about. And that, me asking if he wants me to tone it down might be insulting. Oh well.

[magic9mushroom]

Time travel, on the other hand...

Okay, I've been in the dark long enough. How do you make that work?

[lsfreak]

Instead of implementing these things into your character, approach him and say, "You know, you can get AC30 at level one by doing this, this, and this. Just making sure you meant to have that happen."

[randomhero00]

Instead of implementing these things into your character, approach him and say, "You know, you can get AC30 at level one by doing this, this, and this. Just making sure you meant to have that happen."

Its too late, I've already played a session. And changing it randomly without asking first would be worse.

[drengnikrafe]

Okay, I've been in the dark long enough. How do you make that work?

I did this once. I made a backup plan, too.
The main plan involved a very poorly worded homebrew class I called the "Pandamoniest". 3th level Warforged Pandamoniest with 0 dexterity can be treated as a time machine, if built correctly, and with ease at 5th level (as in, without planning that in advance).
The alternate version involves artifacts with epic time magic imbued on them.

Sadly, my PCs destructive nature ended the campaign when their shenanagins (sp?) in the past destroyed the possibility that they ever existed.

[Sinfire Titan]

Okay, I've been in the dark long enough. How do you make that work?

Forward only.

[magic9mushroom]

I did this once. I made a backup plan, too.
The main plan involved a very poorly worded homebrew class I called the "Pandamoniest". 3th level Warforged Pandamoniest with 0 dexterity can be treated as a time machine, if built correctly, and with ease at 5th level (as in, without planning that in advance).
The alternate version involves artifacts with epic time magic imbued on them.

Sadly, my PCs destructive nature ended the campaign when their shenanagins (sp?) in the past destroyed the possibility that they ever existed.

Then why is there a ban on time travel in the Test of Spite?

[lsfreak]

Its too late, I've already played a session. And changing it randomly without asking first would be worse.

Do it in the future then. You said you're working towards getting a rather large bonus to grappling, bring that up. If you find out there's a way you can get an extra +4 to hit, ask him before you actually start working towards it.

[ericgrau]

Optimize no, break yes. If you're screwing up a bad homebrew, I'm all in favor of blowing it out of the water, but only if you plan on remaking your character after the hole is found and patched.

[drengnikrafe]

Then why is there a ban on time travel in the Test of Spite?

There is? Huh...
I guess there is theoretically some way to travel around in time, and they wanted to stop it before somebody tried.
Maybe creating a plane in which time flows backwards. Or maybe they mean going to a plane where, in one round (or something) you can get 8 hours rest, refresh your spells, and shift back.

I really don't know. The above post is entirely speculation.

[Bayar]

Okay, I've been in the dark long enough. How do you make that work?

Genesis. Create your plane, choose the time trait, make it go backwards and fast.

[randomhero00]

Going forward in time is easy. Just use a race or a way to make a race that doesn't age. And either doesn't need to eat/drink or a way to ignore it, like Elans. Then find a safe place. Can do that at very low levels. But especially easy as a high level caster.

Going back in time, I'm not so sure about.

EDIT ninja'd a long time ago :P

[randomhero00]

Optimize no, break yes. If you're screwing up a bad homebrew, I'm all in favor of blowing it out of the water, but only if you plan on remaking your character after the hole is found and patched.

I'm fine in remaking him, not sure if he's fine in remaking his homebrew though. I'll find out.