I think some people are confusing these two things:

Caring only how uber your build is

Planning out a reasonable build that fits the characters roleplay concept




Both of the above could possibly result in the same build, but the intent is very different.

Quote from: Elfdart;577906Now the word "fallacy" is being abused. The only fallacy I saw in Libertad's lengthy post was this strawman:



It's a strawman because he cites no examples of anyone making this assertion.

People confuse munchkins and min-maxers a lot.

They conflate the two together.

A Munchkin is an aggressively competitive player who's selfish and doesn't care about other gamers.

Min-maxing is simply the method of creating powerful characters by minimizing their weaknesses and maximizing their strengths, usually by investing in the most useful traits.  There's different degrees of min-maxing, so it doesn't always result in a Pun-Pun monstrosity.

Min-maxing can be used for the benefit of the group in D&D.  Example: one PC be a build optimized around "buffing" fellow PCs and himself with enhancement spells, a far cry from the selfish "Munchkin."

Do a lot of Munchkins min-max?  Yes.

Are all min-maxers Munchkins?  No.

Quote from: Bill;578123I think some people are confusing these two things:

Caring only how uber your build is

Planning out a reasonable build that fits the characters roleplay concept




Both of the above could possibly result in the same build, but the intent is very different.

What I don't get is how people on this forum feel that they can look over other peoples shoulders while they're leveling up or play their character for them.  For the love of Byakuren if someone brings a character to your table and they're not breaking your game then don't start up somekind of spanish inqusition over every instance of multiclassing. This sort of thing is only an issue if people make it one, and it's those people who are jerks.

Want to see an optimized "build"

Druid 20.

Want another

Conjurer 15/Archmage 5

Want a character actually made to fit a concept.

Fighter 1/Evoker 6/ Spellsword 1/ Abjurant Champion 5/ Eldritch Knight 7

Quote from: Libertad;578125People confuse munchkins and min-maxers a lot.

They conflate the two together.

A Munchkin is an aggressively competitive player who's selfish and doesn't care about other gamers.

Min-maxing is simply the method of creating powerful characters by minimizing their weaknesses and maximizing their strengths, usually by investing in the most useful traits.

It seems like this is a repeat of the OP for this thread, with added terminology...

Quote from: LibertadThe Number Jerk Fallacy is the belief that guys who like to build powerful characters through excessive number-crunching are automatically inconsiderate selfish jerks out on an ego-trip, regardless of their relationships with the other gamers in the group.

Quote from: jhkim;578151It seems like this is a repeat of the OP for this thread, with added terminology...

Elfdart asked for examples of the "number jerk" mindset among gamers, so I gave an example: the term "Munchkin" is used on number-crunchers all the time.

I realize now that I just repeated myself.

Quote from: Libertad;578155Elfdart asked for examples of the "number jerk" mindset among gamers, so I gave an example: the term "Munchkin" is used on number-crunchers all the time.

I realize now that I just repeated myself.

That's OK.  I just think what's missing is an agreed picture of the non-munchkin min-maxer.

Quote from: jhkim;578163That's OK.  I just think what's missing is an agreed picture of the non-munchkin min-maxer.

That would be any non-munchkin gamer who knows what the fuck he's doing. Seriously, nobody sits down with a Players Handbook and thinks:

"Hey I'm gonna design a really sub-optimal character today! I don't want him to be of any use whatsoever. Yeah, that'll be all kinds of fun. I'll put his lowest scores in key attributes, pick up a weapon that sucks, some armor so heavy I can't move, then sink a few points into skills I don't need, and buy some magic items I can't even use. This is gonna be great!"

But you don't do that, because you know what the fuck you're doing. You're doing the exact opposite of that, which means you're min/maxing on some level.
And you're not a munchkin, so chill.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;578002Thanks for helping illustrate my point.  See, you don't care what happens in the campaign.  You're planning your build before the character even takes a first swing at an orc.  You're placing powers over actual game play.  Any time you've planned out 20 levels of character progression with the purpose of selecting a feat tree, you're completely pushing to the side how the actual game play in the game world happens.  It doesn't matter what actions your character takes, or what story he's following in the campaign, but you'll be damned if you aren't following your pre-planned build.  That's the part that doesn't make sense.

Sacro do you actually play any actual RPG at all? Yes I need to know what the fuck you want these random classes to actually DO before I can give them an in, or even out of, game context. Hell I'd at least need to know what the PLAYER wants this shit to do before I can give you what the character might of been thinking. If you were being anything other than stupid you would realize that.

QuoteAgain, context evades you.  We're talking about a character who is already level 20.  How often do you level up?  You made it sound like it's easy to keep gaining levels and switching back and forth.  That's why I made my comment.  Because for people who actually play the game, it's not like an MMO where you hit max level after a few months.  It took me almost 2 years to raise my fighter from level 15 to 16 in my original AD&D campaign (the highest level character I've ever had, btw, created in 1983). This is why I think you sit and make up level 20+ characters from scratch without actually playing them.

Obviously I need to break this shit down for you. If you CARED about having more cleric shit you would have put more CLERIC into your build. If you WANT more cleric shit for your character there's no fucking rule keeping you from doing that. Since you did not that means you don't give a shit about having more cleric shit. To have built a character specifically to level 20 without more cleric levels and than whine about not having more cleric stuff is fucking STUPID.

Your comment about being level 40 is DOUBLY stupid because even after I fucking point this kind of shit out to you you stand by it as if it makes any sense. Not only are you not reading the conversation you are a part of but you seem incapable of comprehending what you are actually typing and what it actually means. No wonder you didn't understand the difference between Entitlement and Empowerment.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;578190That would be any non-munchkin gamer who knows what the fuck he's doing. Seriously, nobody sits down with a Players Handbook and thinks:

"Hey I'm gonna design a really sub-optimal character today! I don't want him to be of any use whatsoever. Yeah, that'll be all kinds of fun. I'll put his lowest scores in key attributes, pick up a weapon that sucks, some armor so heavy I can't move, then sink a few points into skills I don't need, and buy some magic items I can't even use. This is gonna be great!"

But you don't do that, because you know what the fuck you're doing. You're doing the exact opposite of that, which means you're min/maxing on some level.
And you're not a munchkin, so chill.

This all day.

Quote from: Libertad;578155Elfdart asked for examples of the "number jerk" mindset among gamers, so I gave an example: the term "Munchkin" is used on number-crunchers all the time.

I asked for an example of someone accusing those who "build powerful characters through excessive number-crunching are automatically inconsiderate selfish jerks out on an ego-trip, regardless of their relationships with the other gamers in the group".

You posted links to sites where people give their definitions of what "munchkins", "min maxers" etc are.

I have yet to see anyone claim that "excessive number-crunching" makes players "automatically inconsiderate selfish jerks out on an ego-trip". You're arguing against a case no one has made -in other words, a strawman.

The OP (and several others in the thread I linked to) conflated munchkins and min-maxers in one breath, not making any distinction before going on to discuss problem stories.  He also describes some people he knows as folk who will "do anything to find a loophole in the system," and then says that "there's way worse munchkins and min-maxers out there."

You don't think that this qualifies as conflating guys who like number-crunching with selfish problem gamers, even if indirectly?

Quote from: Libertad;578125People confuse munchkins and min-maxers a lot.

They conflate the two together.

A Munchkin is an aggressively competitive player who's selfish and doesn't care about other gamers.

Min-maxing is simply the method of creating powerful characters by minimizing their weaknesses and maximizing their strengths, usually by investing in the most useful traits.  There's different degrees of min-maxing, so it doesn't always result in a Pun-Pun monstrosity.

Min-maxing can be used for the benefit of the group in D&D.  Example: one PC be a build optimized around "buffing" fellow PCs and himself with enhancement spells, a far cry from the selfish "Munchkin."

Do a lot of Munchkins min-max?  Yes.

Are all min-maxers Munchkins?  No.

Does OED have definitions for Munchkins and Minmaxers? No? Just wikipedia articles? Then fuck off.

I think if we say that anyone trying to get the best out of their character concept is a min/maxer - the term becomes so broad that it loses all meaning.
 
I would regard someone as a "min/maxer" if they prioritize high stats over building to try to maintain some sort of character concept - if they started by thinking "hey Feat X/Class Y has just great bonuses, so I'm going to play one of those".
 
Do you hate snow elves? Are you going to play one anyway and create some contrived backstory about how your character trekked from the Arctic to my current campaign just so you can avoid the standard -2 Con penalty for elves and have a -2 to Charisma instead? Then you're probably a min/maxer.
 
There doesn't have to be actual game-breaking imbalance (of the sort you see with munchkins) - the problem is not with the numbers but with the fluff.
A min/maxed character may have a background and roleplaying built into it, but its added after the fact. If the rules were different, they'd play something else.
 
In an unbalanced system (like 3.5) once one person maximizes, everyone else has to start doing it to keep up, and finally the GM has to spend extra effort trying to construct things that can keep up with the PCs.
Hence min/maxing is by its nature either antisocial or pointless. The only really meaningful increase in power is an unbalanced increase in power - a gain in ability as compared to other PCs - other improvements just lead to an escalation in NPCs to match.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;578303In an unbalanced system (like 3.5) once one person maximizes, everyone else has to start doing it to keep up, and finally the GM has to spend extra effort trying to construct things that can keep up with the PCs.
Hence min/maxing is by its nature either antisocial or pointless. The only really meaningful increase in power is an unbalanced increase in power - a gain in ability as compared to other PCs - other improvements just lead to an escalation in NPCs to match.

Precisely. Minmax is a stepping stone on the way to general numbers bloat. Instead of rolling a d20 and adding bonus of +1 or 2 to hit an AC of 15 (or thereabout) and rolling 1d6 for damage vs a creature with 20 hit points you end up with rolling a d20 +22 or 23 to hit an AC of 36 and rolling 2d8+15 damage vs a creature with 100 hit points.

Its all the same. If the world matches to keep pace with every gain then there is NO actual improvement taking place.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;578312Its all the same. If the world matches to keep pace with every gain then there is NO actual improvement taking place.

Bingo!  'Always fighting orcs'.

The Japanese yen (as of this post) is worth just over a penny.  So a Big Mac - with or without egg - costs 500￥or whatever.  Move the decimal over two places, and you don't have to pay 45,000￥ for your new PlayStation 3, you will be paying 450 quatloos, like everyone else in the world.  

Needless addition of zeros, in the case of currency, and needless numbers bloat in the case of gaming.  People complain about the handle time with subtraction or division, as though any sequence of numbers (regardless of length) added together is automatically easier than the shortest subtractions, but  "16+23+8+19" doesn't have an appreciably shorter handle time than "23-8".