Pimped Beginning characters, And the players addicted to them.... Options

[Sphynx]

Actually, ignore that last post or this thread is going to go off on another wild tangent. One I don't feel like discussing. :P

Sphynx

[TinkerGnome]

You'll find 800 different definitions of munchkin out there and let's not discuss them here. The closest to an official definition you're going to get is from Steve Jackson (warning, PDF). The company has a card game, RPG, and a Munchkin's guide. I found a PDF of it on the website, and to quote the intro:

[Herald of Verjig...]

And you can check here for a more complex explination.

[Dax]

[tjn]

[Connor]

I'd probably have to agree with TinkerGnome that you seem to be more of a power gamer.

A bad roleplayer that just doesn't to anything well is a bad roleplayer. A bad roleplayer that min/maxes and crunches the numbers and only plays the number game to go in and kill everything/conjure force 20 spirits/hack into the orbital bank with ease/etc is a munchkin.

A good roleplayer that does everything good is a good roleplayer. A good roleplayer that has a tendency to play the number game really well and min/maxes every character as much as possible is a power gamer.

In brief I think that sums up how I see things. Maybe we should start a thread to come up with some common definitions to all these terms for all of us to use around here to avoid some confusion!

Also in my last post, I didn't nessecarily mean handing the two example players pre-made characters. Just that for all intents and purposes their character sheets were the same as far as the numbers and such went.

[Anymage]

Dax (and a vague nod to Sphynx, too);

You may not jump into the shadows with everyone knowing what a badass you are, but beginning characters are by no stretch of the imagination "first level"; look at the archetypes and what can easily be made out of character creation, you'll find that these are overwhelmingly characters who have survived and thrived in the shadows already, not "gutter trash" trying to claw their way up. They may not be legendary prime runners (which is a good thing), but they're a far sight better than most "undocumented assets", and probably worth your average J at least considering for the job.

Now, part of this is a cycle from SR's shitastic job of balancing starting characters and a spiraling cycle from there. ("Munchkins" can make super-characters by ignoring social and other background skills; NPC's need battle skills to challenge munchkins, "real roleplayers" need battle skills to handle the NPC's while still having social and background skills, which gives munchkins even more points, etc.) Part of it is probably a conscious decision to encourage more capable starting characters (since let's face it, first level fragility sucks).

And since the issue of power curve has come up here, may as well throw in on that...

One of the major differences between RPG's and movies is that movies can fall back on special effects to show how cool the character is. You or I can't do triple arial spin kicks, so watching a character in a movie do them is super-spiffy. RPG's often don't have such detailed descriptions, and even when they do, what real people can do is far less of a benchmark than what other characters can do; in a supers game, if everyone can fly and has at least one other shtick, *just* being able to fly isn't that great even though joe player can't. If a starting player can do it, it's standard. If most everyone in the game can do it, it's pretty bog-standard. So being able to advance past starting level, and have a clear grasp that you're going from starting to legendary, is pretty important to the game part of the RPG, as well as the long-running campaign part of it.

BTW, not that anyone asked me, but my ideal starting level would be "experienced in the shadows, has stood out from the teeming street hordes, and is finally getting a shot at real pro work". But that's just me.

[Glyph]

Min-maxing != munchkinism. Min-maxing is a useful approach to building a character, and consists of minimizing a character's weaknesses as well as maximizing his ability to do his job. A true min-maxer won't make a sammie with 5 combat skills and no etiquette or stealth skills. They will realize that being unable to sneak around or function in social situations will handicap their character, so they will be sure to make him well-rounded enough in non-combat areas.

I don't see anything wrong with tweaking the numbers. Some people have the mistaken notion that min-maxing and making a decent character background are mutually incompatible. Actually, someone who meticulously allocates their points is probably more likely to craft an intelligent and well-thought-out background. Yes, there are people who tweak the numbers and turn in a cardboard-cutout character background, and drama queen "roleplayers" who turn in a frickin' novel about their character but barely understand the rules. But there are also lots of inept munchkins whose attempts at min-maxing have glaring weaknesses to them, as well as roleplayers who create tough, powerful characters.

For people who have a problem with certain players, min-maxing is not the problem, nor is power level. Get them to care about the game and care about the characters they are playing. Trying to limit Availability or starting power level is only treating the symptoms.

[Connor]

I realize min-maxing is not munchkinism, but it is a part of any munchkins toolbox.

In general I have nothing against min-maxing, although I feel there's a level to where min-maxing becomes cartoonish aside from any munchkinesque tendancies.

[Crusher Bob]

The problem I have with most systems is that they are too easy to min/max. In standard SR getting a skill at 6 in char gen is 'worth' much more later in the game than two skills at three, but the chargen cost is the same. This means that min/maxing is a math based thing rather than a concept based thing.

This is why I am a big fan of BECKS, and why I dislike most artifical limits on begining characters.

[A Clockwork Lime]

[Digital Heroin]

Oooh... ooh... I want Human B/R...

[Aidley]

[Connor]

[Sphynx]

*sigh* It did turn into a thread on the definition of Munchkinism... sorry Joker, I tried to stop it. :P

I'll not reply to those posts, but since Dax quotes me, I'll respond to him. ;)

[L.D]

I think we scared away the Joker. :D

[TinkerGnome]

[Crusher Bob]

CP2020 handeled lots of cyberware about as well as SR handles encryption (i.e. not well at all). :cyber:

[Shockwave_IIc]

[Sphynx]

Shock: Don't confuse "planning" with "spending". Planning 100 karma makes sense, just like it makes sense to plan your life and what you want to study/learn ahead of time.

As for the number crunching, at least when a player turns in a character like that, you know they love the game and their character. Those other characters that get turned in are from players who next week, are perfectly ok playing something else instead, and don't care if their characters die off as quickly. Char-Gen min-maxxing is, IMHO, a GREAT sign.

Sphynx

[Shockwave_IIc]

Ok, so (and i may have this wrong) because i don't number crunch to the 3rd decimal, i dont like my characters as much? I spend far more time on making a background make sense then number crunching, but that doesn't count?

[TinkerGnome]

[L.D]

I have to agree with Shockwave here. Lack of numbercrunching does not mean that you don't love your character. I know that all my players love their characters (if they have created a good one), but some just don't care that much about the numbers. They just want a character with decent stats. What's important to them is the background and personality of the character and what interesting (difficult) situations that the character can get into because of that personality and background.

[Sphynx]

Ok, I may have worded my post poorly, but in my experience, it's very true that if a player doesn't do some amount of number crunching, that player usually tends to be unattached to their character.

However, since we're so far off topic and into discussion areas I don't enjoy discussing due to my bizarre playing methods, I'll cut out of this discussion. Hope I was able to influence you a bit Joker, there's always a side that alot of the dumpshockers don't feel is right, and I feel it's the only right way. I just wanted to express why certain things aren't wrong.

Sphynx

[Firewall]

My personal definition of 'munchkin' would be a player with one solution/style. I used to play Vampire and so I saw the two extremes of munchkin; at one end are the brujah with massive strength and melee who take physical damage disciplines, at the other end are Toreador with max charisma and mind-control who just take over your character for half an hour while they play sex-games. Somehow, I am a bigger fan of the fighters than the freaks playing solo cybersex...

Min-max is different. I like characters with definite strengths and weaknesses. Just have to teach them, minimum does not always mean zero.