Well when you actually think about it and put it into context min maxing makes sense.
First the game is designed for you to min maxing, any game any system that sets a requirement, forces you to min/max, to build a better player. 1st edition, wanted to be a magic user, better be a elf, how about paladin well then you better roll good. 2nd edition fighter, yeah 18/00 hmm con 20, yes... 3rd edition (don't get me started) 4th edition, yes there is min maxing.Second lets think of real life for a second, and not golf. People who train day in and day out on something get really good at it, but by doing so they are not good in other areas. I'm a computer tech, i could not build a house, though i could help if someone told me what to do.
It makes sense
Same with it is a fighter to dish out damage, why would a party accept a fighter that wasn't good at what he does, it just doesn't add up. your a crack team of heroes fighting monsters, each player is one in a thousand. Regular people don't train like you and regular people don't fight monsters
Well min/maxing ruin the game
Anything can ruin the game, its how people chose to role play the game. The beauty of 4e in my opinion is you have so many options, you can easily min/max but in my experience I've found people take the choice they liked or felt was cooler than just min/maxing.
Posts
Thanks for the shout out, Mike. Mix/maxing certainly has its place in RPGs, but I find it even more satisfying to find a niche that you can specialize in (thereby gaining the max) without sacrificing too many other necessary skills or attributes (thereby avoiding the min). The Battlerager Fighter build I reference in my article has very balanced ability scores and did remarkably well in the skill challenge. I'm all for "power gaming" but I don't like to play lopsided characters if I can avoid it.
ReplyDeleteI prefer to go with my gut and choose things that sound cool. When the game becomes a glorified math problem, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
ReplyDeleteIt can be a problem for DMs when somebody goes over the top; it forces the DM to metagame to challenge the munchkin(s), while not killing the rest of the party.
I'm not saying don't min/max, but make sure you are considerate of your DM and fellow players! :D
Hehe. I wonder where you got the idea for this post? :)
ReplyDeleteIt boils down to this - if you like min-maxing, and everyone in your group is having fun min-maxing, then it's awesome. No reason not to do it.
If you're the *only* one min-maxing and the GM has the challenge level set lower (at the non min-max level) then it's not such an awesome thing to do. You're being "that guy".
Personally, I don't see the appeal in doing it. I'd be more impressed seeing a player with a "regular" fighter make his way through a tough encounter than another player with a "most powerful" Battlerager Fighter do the same thing. Especially since a lot of min-maxing is simply Googling for the best build on one of the forums. :) I guess if you had an adversarial DM, then it would make sense. If the DM is already trying to *not* kill the party, then it's even more pointless. Why not play something based on it being interesting rather than the most optimal build.
But again, if everyone in your group is having a good time with it, then keep on crunching.
Excellent posts guys, i was afraid this would turn into a battle but everyone has excellent points.
ReplyDeleteStuart, your view is perfect and i hope most groups operate on the rule, if you like it do it if not then don't