Munchkinism vs. RP

[luj1]

On a scale where 0 is pure role-playing and 100 is pure munchkinism, my personal playstyle typically falls anywhere within the 60-80 range.

Both extreme role-playing and extreme munchkinism can ruin the fun, imo.

 

[Shadenuat]

79

 

[AwesomeButton]

Munchkinism in actual RPGs, RP in story-driven interactive movies.

 

[Chippy]

Everyonebody gonna roleplay faggottism for BG3...

Spoiler

You were expecting a serious answer to this age-old question?

 

[Prehistorik]

79

7 is the most picked number by humans when they attempt to randomly choose between 1 and 10.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Whenever i pick up a new RPG, i spend a lot of time studying the system, looking up strategies, planning the "best" characters, and all that jazz, but once i set down to play i disregard all that and go for full RP.

I think its fun to discover and plan power gaming builds but not so much to play them. The only exception is games that almost require powerful builds not to be frustrating, like Icewind Dale in HoF mode, or stuff like Diablows.

 

[nikolokolus]

In a CRPG I'm about 99, in a PnP game I'm about 30.

 

[luj1]

I think its fun to discover and plan power gaming builds

For sure but to a degree imo. It happened to me many times that extensive metagaming sapped all the fun. Sometimes we plan too much instead of being spontaneous and playing, just like in life.

 

[frajaq]

Roleplay/~~my immersion~~ with the protagonist, and always get powergame-y with companions to carry the protagonist if necessary (it's rarely necessary because RPGs are easy as fuck these days)

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[mondblut]

On a scale where 0 is pure role-playing and 100 is pure munchkinism, I am 101.

 

[HeroMarine]

Only 3 other people voted like me

 

[undecaf]

If the game actually supports it in a meaningful way (and there are not a lot of those games, most games tend to be built around munchkinism one way or another), I roleplay. But I munchking that character/party by what ways it can based on the theme and intent.

So, I suppose 40-60 where that's applicable. Otherwise I just play the way the game feels fun, and usually munchkining 100% isn't very fun for me.

 

[SniperHF]

Here's how I approach things:
My character is a rogue or thief (or other class) so it will do rogueish or theify things generally but I'm never going so far as to create some non-existant backstory or personality for this character and try to do everything possible to live out that crap in the game itself. Within the confines of my character AS it's written out on the page and the dialog/gameplay options presented in game, I'll do what is most obvious or optimal in terms of being able to complete the task but I'm also not pouring over the character stats to make sure I have the best possible min-max.

I don't think trying to pick the best or most effective thing is munchkinism as such. To me actual munchkinism involves some level of theory-crafting at a minimum.

AoD is an easy example because the results are super extreme. If you're munchkining AoD there's 3 ways to go. The "hybrid" see all content path which requires massive amounts of trial and error. The kill everything approach which requires serious thought into your combat build choices. And the optimal diplo approach which while easier does require specific choices in creation and level up and it must be optimal to get the most out of it.

Where as if you're role playing AoD, there are times where you would outright have to choose suboptimal dialogs and potentially ( or probably ) even lose the game just cause you're "role playing". It's like playing to intentionally lose the game, it's dumb. Most games just don't punish you to this extent.

 

[HeroMarine]

AoD is possibly the best game to roleplay. Losing (i.e. having one char dying) is part of the game.

 

[Tavernking]

Roleplay on the first run until I hit a road block. Then it's powergaming all the way baby

 

[Funposter]

About an 80. I would always like to have a build and pick choices that are relatively optimal, but I'm willing to spec into some things that aren't the best for the sake of ~fun!~. Like picking Seduction or Intimidation over the normal Persuade in Bloodlines, if it fits the build - it's not the best, but it's kind of neat if it fits the idea of the character in your head. In the same vein, I am happy to build characters or use classes that are recognised as being subpar (think playing a pure Mage in Morrowind, or something) but I will then powergame with them as best as I can, to make them less shit.

 

[Yosharian]

It's very misleading to propose that powergaming and role-playing are in direct opposition to each other.

They aren't. Picking choices that are sub-optimal isn't role-playing. Do it if you wish, but don't jerk yourself off in my face and tell me "Look pa, I'm role-playing!"

 

[what am i doing]

How is building an effective character somehow mutually exclusive with roleplaying? Seems like some retarded tabletop mentality where they get mad at people who think about their build and put a bit of effort in.

 

[Cael]

On a scale where 0 is pure role-playing and 100 is pure munchkinism, my personal playstyle typically falls anywhere within the 60-80 range.

Both extreme role-playing and extreme munchkinism can ruin the fun, imo.

Actually, you are a fucking idiot.

1. Powergamers are not munchkins, the main difference being that powergamers work within the rules to come up with nasty combinations. Munchkins will violate the rules or have "creative" interpretation of the rules in order to "win".
2. Making a powerful character is not mutually exclusive to roleplaying. If that is the case, we won't have Olympic champions in real life but have a bunch of robots instead.
3. You are nothing but a butthurt dramafag who loves attention but can find none because your blind, crippled Int 6 wizard character with a 40 page backstory keeps getting outshined by others at the table.

 

[PapaPetro]

Depends on if it's a dungeon crawl or a fully fleshed out narrative campaign.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Saerain]

These "umm por que no los dos retard" replies are perplexing in response to a question that didn't propose incompatibility and in fact advocated for enjoying the compatibility...

 

[what am i doing]

These "umm por que no los dos retard" replies are perplexing in response to a question that didn't propose incompatibility and in fact advocated for enjoying the compatibility...

The poll itself and the first post both imply it's a scale, which means that, for example, if you want to be more storyfag, then that means you're less concerned about optimizing your build and vice versa. Which is a retarded premise. How does roleplaying detract from your ability to build your character properly? How does building your character properly detract from your ability to roleplay? It's not a scale from one to the other. Build optimization and roleplaying are not mutually exclusive, you don't have to decrease one to increase the other.

 

[PapaPetro]

These "umm por que no los dos retard" replies are perplexing in response to a question that didn't propose incompatibility and in fact advocated for enjoying the compatibility...

Build optimization and roleplaying are not mutually exclusive, you don't have to decrease one to increase the other.

There are implicit limits before it becomes insincere. The idea that some Int dump stat half-orc is gonna find ways to break the in-game universe rules to do infinite damage is absurd. A good DM would call out meta-gaming and just flat out say that your character is too retarded to do something clever like that.
You also run into another metagaming problem where everyone just runs the same hyper-optimized cheese build, with every character mechanically being the same Gary Stu of RPG mechanics.

It's easy to pick the optimal moves; any idiot these days knows that stacking +1s to things is better. It's takes skill to pick the flawed ones and give them meaning to the story you're crafting.