>make intentionally sub-optimal character
>completely disregard tactics, waste resources, hoard items and don't use them
>fudge my dice to fail saves
>none of it matters at all, we are always completely successful
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Welcome to modern DnD, where it's impossible to fail, and player characters dying without consent is treated with the same level of seriousness as sex crimes without consent.
Have you tried not playing DnD?
>One group is so bad at the game that at least one person DIED every game and a TPK almost happened multiples times
>The group actually learned to take my advice and follow my commands to get out safely and even then people still do stupid shit to get themselves downed or die
>They got so tired of dying all the time they just stopped playing
>MFW I only got downed once and that was because the DM forced me in a bad position that was way out of my control
They still forget to bring a ten foot poll and medic bags.
I was playing GURPS.
>make a shit character
>GM makes the game easier to compensate
Well what the frick's the point in optimizing then?
There is no point. Modern DnD is basically improv theatre. It's not meant to be a tactical "game", like... at all.
I don't play DnD.
Good. Assuming you're being honest.
If it wasn't for le Role Critical and the mountains of freakshit to choose from, people would've abandoned the game long ago. Hell there are other games that are better for social improv.
Honestly this. I tried running and offering to run games that are more in line for these critical roll lovers and they always want to go back to D&D 5E with a lot of homebrew modifications. Then they either get bored and leave the game, the DM gets bored having to run so many encounters with nothing challenging them outside of combat or the player characters keep dying because nobody knows how to actually play the game, just meme all day.
There was never a point to optimizing. Minmaxing is just an open invitation for the GM to do the same, which turns the game into an arms race that the players can never win because the GM has Carte Blanche to give the enemies whatever abilities he wants, whenever he wants. It's like trying to fist fight a gorilla. In theory you can, but in reality it's going to tear you apart the second you piss it off.
Literally the oposite. A powerful character can be played badly for rp or flavour purposes without putting the other party member's fun at risk by underperforming. A weak character underperforms by definition AND has no saftey net if the dice go against you. You may have a right to play whatever character you want, but if you play a shit one you're forcing me to chose between playing my character as i intended and being forced to play optimally to save your b***h ass or worse myself depending on role
As a forever DM I 100% second this.
Recognizing of course, that there is a difference between optimization and playing optimally.
>forever DM
Doesn't mean anything. You choose not to play
>There was never a point to optimizing. Minmaxing is just an open invitation for the GM to do the same, which turns the game into an arms race that the players can never win because the GM has Carte Blanche to give the enemies whatever abilities he wants, whenever he wants. It's like trying to fist fight a gorilla. In theory you can, but in reality it's going to tear you apart the second you piss it off.
Even Gygax, despite his reputation, didn't do that. He was a little more inventive about it. Rob Kuntz had developed a sort of "dungeon meta" in his home game where his character and henchmen would bust down doors via the path of least resistance, steal all the shit they could, then vamoose.
So Gygax designed the Temple of Elemental Evil with the idea that if you broke down the doors all you were really doing was unleashing a malevolent demon fungus onto the world
If you have a strong character the DM might make more serious encounters that he’d be too much of a pussy to use against weak characters.
Was there ever a point in optimizing?
Like, as a GM, the only effect I've ever seen from optimizing, and what seems to be the drive for optimizers, is to make one character better than the rest mechanically.
The only good optimization I've ever seen has been of the "how do I take this absolutely garbage mechanic and make it as viable as the rest of the party", which has been used to make numerous great characters in our group.
Playing with a PF DM that doesn't pull any punches, have to optimize to keep up otherwise we'd all keep dying. Every other player who's been in the group except me has had 1 or more characters die (I've been making exclusively frontliners), and he hasn't made it any easier.
It depends really.
If the players are pulling a bag of rat, I laugh with them and let them get away with it then ask them to never do it again. Possibly offering a respec in the process.
If the players do a "regular" optimized character, then it allows me to get cooler monsters out of the shelves to make them feel prouder for triumphing of greater foes.
I have little to no experience with organisez play but from my understanding, in Adventurer's League everything is static. So optimisation do matter to show everyone how big your character's dick is.
There's never a point in optimizing a character besides the personal satisfaction you get out of the way the numbers interact.
>>make intentionally sub-optimal character
disregard tactics, waste resources, hoard items and don't use them
Kevin?
its not kevin, he at least plays to his strengths (if accidentally). you didnt see the other guy's character sheet like i did. you dont know just how bad it really was...
Are you having fun?
For a board that hates DnD, it's the only fricking game 99% of you homosexuals are capable of thinking of save for 40k.
Annoying, isn't it?
The funny thing is that the specific problem ITT isn't limited to D&D at all. The truth is that everyone plays almost every RPG the same way, like improv theater.
>Rather play DND than no games
>Rather play other RPGs than DND
>Most of friends prefer to play DND, so play DND
>Enjoy it because I'm laughing and joking around with friends, despite it not being the system I want
Imagine crying about what type of TTRPG to play and not spending 6+ hours with your friends and creating fond memories instead
>it's shit but it's shit with friends!
i can do literally anything else and do
digging a fricking hole is fun with friends, that doesnt make the turd sandwich suddenly gourmet
what a cope
do you have friends to dig a hole with, anon?
In OSR games dying is generally easier, but I noticed players get less invested in the RP side of things if their characters die every other session
Here's how I do it now
>when dropped to 0 hitpoints are out of the fight and can't be healed
>make 1 death save, before adjusting failing this meant death
>players can choose to roll on the maiming table instead of dying
>they can cure this decrease if they go on an adventure for it, similar to how some people run revives.
I would prefer a game were anyone can die at any moment, but in my experience players stop emotionally investing into a character after one or two deaths.
my dice to fail saves
>anon's collaborative storytelling (fake game) is the only one being ignored.
Maybe your 10 pages of backstory implying that your pc is destined to be a failure wasn't long enough.
Why are people taking this as a problem with the game and not just the DM being pillow handed?
Because everything is a system issue and bad DMs don’t exist