Of course there is no generally accepted definition of "munchkin", but in my case: I don't have a problem with powerful characters or players that seek such ("power gaming"), so I define munchkins as those who cheat. YMMV. I would certain concede that there is a large crossover between powergamers and munchkins (but some munchkins don't powergame - they cheat, but end up with ineffective results - and some powergamers aren't munchkins, they'd just rather play Conan than Homeless Guy).
> People who have: how do you think they might react to
> a GM who says "yes, but" to *everything*, but does
> insist on narrative and dramatic consistency?
I've run a few games where I removed all the limits (not of HQ, though - Champions, Amber, and Shadowrun), and my group (like me) are definitely powergamers. It reduces the urge even for that, though; part of the appeal of powergaming is trying to get the best bang for your buck within specific constraints, and if you HAVE no constraints, that aspect of it disappears. In some cases I suppose that could lead to more well rounded characters; my experiments were not really overwhelmingly positive, though, and I generally use the standard rules or some variation thereof. Given my admitted preference for the powergaming style myself, however, feel free to conclude that it didn't suit ME and might well suit others.
-- GAZZA
Powered by hypermail