> I think Jeff had a nickname for the behavior when
> I'd described what I did.
> Something like "min-max two step."
Nice name!
> Instead of being tempted to
> say, "I want my character
> to have an ability 'Destined To Rule 10W5,' when
> making my Argrath." And
> then wondering if I've overstepped some boundary.
hmmm... I wonder if the difference I'm seeing here is perhaps because I expect a LOT of interaction between player and GM in character design. If you put that concept to me, as a GM, I'd tell you what sort of level would be appropriate, there'd be no need to wonder. Just ask - asking the GM a question shouldn't be a big deal, surely? Yes, that would be a bit on the high side by our standards, but we'd just say so, not treat it as a deadly insult or evidence of idiocy or anything.
How would I set it, and suggest you think about it? By comparison with NPCs with similar abilities. I've never heard of any such ability before, but it's obvious that, say, Kallyr, Broyan, and Garrath Sharpsword all have it (and they're all semi-statted NPCs in Swords). I'd set it for them, then use that as a standard of comparison for you. And if you said you wanted it at a similar level, I'd start work on long-term plots and character background hooks to make sure you were in with a chance at a throne, and start discussions with you about what interesting internal conflicts that could generate: "fears responsibility" would be a nice partner to it, for instance :)
> On the subject of Munchkinism, the term derives from
> an early Dragon
> Magazine article that spoke to the problems of
> convention play in that you
> often ended up playing with young players. And these
> players,
> unsurprisingly, tended to be into playing out power
> fantasies. The quote
> about it is something to do with them explaining
> their 42nd level
> Anti-paladin character to you, and how he slew Thor
> or somesuch.
Ah, thanks. I'd traced it back to the Wizard of OZ, but this didn't help :(
> Now, I can see if Jane's players were actually D&D
> powergamers how one might
> want to take the point limit off in order to be
> informative that the limit
> wasn't saying that the system is meant to be played
> like D&D. But from what
> I know of those players, I'm doubting this is the
> case in her game.
Definitely not. I think it's more that this game is not about earning the right to have powerful and/or interesting characters. The idea of choosing whether to have more power or a new interesting relationship just isn't the challenge we're dealing with. Using either, or both, to say something interesting about the PC or the universe that's dramatically consistent with the various interwoven stories is the challenge, and the numbers used to help us describe this and to maintain consistency are not the limiting factor.
> Not seeing how this pertains to any use of
> the term munchkin.
Only perhaps that a "munchkin", under almost any of the definitions so far, would probably not appreciate this type of game.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Powered by hypermail