Powergaming vs. Creating Underdogs

When it comes to TTRPGs, what kind of character do you want - a specialist who has been expertly minmaxed, or a more rounded character who isn't all that great at any one thing and is therefore in for more of a hero's journey? Guest Sam de Leve takes Brennan through the ringer in this Contested Roll segment!
Watch the full episode here: www.dropout.tv...
Welcome to Dimension 20, Dropout.tv's anthology actualplay show! Enjoy watching every campaign, every behind-the-scenes, every one-shot, and every talkback, only on Dropout: dimension20.dr...
Sign up for the Dropout newsletter here: newsletter.dro...

[@dragonstryk7280]

Um, Brennan, don't know how to break this to you, but Frodo and Bilbo were both halfling rogues, which is an optimized build for them.

[@VivaLaDnDLogs]

What kind of DPS were they dealing?

[@mactireliath2356]

Yeah, and while Frodo and company were bumbling & fumbling through Middle Earth Strider was picking off Orcs from the shadows like a fucking ninja

[@Samhobbit]

@@mactireliath2356 Aragorn is Royal so it makes perfect sense to be maxed.

[@Mijal15]

Halfling Rogues that dumped all of their stats into Charisma.

[@Samhobbit]

@@Mijal15 Love a charismatic rogue.

[@Xacris]

I love hearing Brennan make this argument, mostly because I've seen what he builds when he gets to be a PC hahaha

[@Prince_Luci]

Deadeye was so busted they couldn’t even have him show up later to help cuz of how gamebreaking he was lmao

[@Prince_Luci]

@@brawlyaura5799 probably. But it was fun while it lasted lol

[@FilthyNobeard]

@@brawlyaura5799 Not really. Once you recognize you're at that point you just have exercise restraint. You're still helpful in a fight, but if things go sour you get to be all fuckin' smug and go "Suppose I'll get serious now" and save the day when it really counts.

[@matthewmilam6578]

@@brawlyaura5799 It really depends on the table. If you have a power gamer and a less experienced DM than yeah. If you have an experienced DM and players then you can powergame all day. The DM will be able to compensate for it. Its really only a problem if one of the players knows the game much better than the DM, or the DM can't provide challenging combat encounters. It isn't even that hard to optimize a build while maintaining roleplay. So the power gaming problem never made a ton of sense to me. Emily Axford loves to optimize, but she has great DMs who can handle it. Look at her builds, Bard/Paladin, Storm Sorcerer/Tempest Cleric, Druid/Barbarian. She's super creative and always looking for advantages, but it doesn't affect her roleplay. The people no one likes are the Tiberius(Critical Role) types. Guys who take up everyone's time trying to buy up all the glass in a city to build a death laser, trying to hog the spotlight, looking up monsters online during a session. Those people are obnoxious because they aren't invested in the game as a story or an immersive experience, instead they treat it as a math problem that they can impress everyone by solving. They want to be seen as the smartest boy and they think of themselves as the protagonist of the campaign. I would argue that some of the biggest fun of DnD is building a character that is meant to be good at something and then getting to be good at it during a session. Murph built Rizz to be good at being a detective, and when he gets great investigation roles and finds clues that isn't power gaming, its just gaming.

[@Nerdnumberone]

Luke was highly force-sensitive and a skilled pilot. He would regularly bullseye 2m womp rats in his T-16. The T-16 was often used by the Rebellion to train X-Wing pilots since it had a similar control scheme. Plus, Luke definitely grew into a very powerful character. It looks like he may have made some choices that paid off later, like force sensitivity and piloting, that would only pay off in the mid-levels. Lots of optimization builds start off a bit rocky until their combo gets going.

[@davigibson3356]

plus midichlorians

[@Nerdnumberone]

@davigibson3356 I was going to stick with "force-sensitive," since it's functionally the same thing, but this way I can ignore the controversial lore introduced in the prequels.

[@albertonishiyama1980]

"Yeah, because being the only Paladin on the whole scenario because they can do fun magic is SUCH A ROLEPLAY CHOICE. No mechanics involved here, I'm sure."

[@ronanh.9261]

Also this.

[@Tuffsmoygles]

yeah, but if he had been real min max that first fight with Vader on Cloud City would have had him taking Vader's head and banging his sister to celebrate.

[@kuraukumo]

I love the frodo angle, as tho Gandalf Legolas and Aragorn aren't absolutely mixmaxed to hell and back, in gandalf's case, literally

[@meduimrareberries5888]

I’d argue Aragorn was less of a min/max-er and more of a Jack-of-all-trades. Rarely was he THE best at any one thing, but was fully capable of standing alongside his teammates and contributing in just about any situation. Play Your Role has a great video on this, where he talks about being able to support your team during nearly any situation is part of what makes the ranger (conceptually, at least) work.

[@OhMeGaGS]

I like how Brennan went for Frodo, a guy who's job for the whole series was to just roll wisdom saving throws while his minmaxed companions did all the actual work xd

[@schwann145]

Right? I was really hoping the rebuttal would be, "Lord of the Rings? Did you really want to start there? Let's talk about literally all the elves..." lol

[@Stricken314]

And Frodo was specifically Min-Maxed for making Wisdom Saving Throws

[@OhMeGaGS]

@Steven Rickey in my head cannon he kept rolling 1s but rerolling with halfling luck

[@happyninja42]

Not only did they do the work, but Frodo also had a "split the party" moment with the actual combat monkeys, and instead wandered off on a social/RP campaign of his own, with the other mostly social character, and a DM npc, while the rest of the table of combat classes were actually fighting the encounters the GM mapped out.

[@voicetest6019]

Yes, but also the Halflings show their ability to take out goddamn orcs *with thrown stones* and pass a stealth check *beside an entire army.* Hell, Sam stands up to Shelob, that's one hell of a wisdom saving throw. The halflings don't look like powergamers, but they are absolutely minmaxed.

[@wolfkniteX]

Hold up, Luke absolutely did not have 10s across the board on his stats okay. He's was established to be a talented pilot in the film, that's at least a 14-16 on DEX, the fact that he's had to endure the heat on a desert planet, at least 12 on CON, him being able to fix C-3PO in Ben's hut after the Tusken Raider attack, maybe a 12 on INT and if not either proficiency in Engineering or he simply got a high enough roll on the check.

[@BBBness]

There's two types of power gamers: 1) "I'm going to build this to be exactly what I want'" 2) "If my party is not 100% optimised I will either pressure/bully my team into doing better, showoff how much better I am, or leave." Be option 1 as much as you like, just don't be a 2. For the love of your fellow players and the hobby in general, don't be option 2.

[@stephenwithaph1566]

I have only only only played with 2s. I no longer play dnd online.

[@BBBness]

@@stephenwithaph1566 Yeah. I wouldn't trust online games. Hope you've found a good 'in person' group.

[@stephenwithaph1566]

@@BBBness Unfortunately not, but there are plenty of game stores in my city, so I need only look.

[@8Sigurd]

The type 1 you describe is an actual power gamer in DnD. The type 2 you describe is an actual asshole gamer in DnD. This type can be pro or against: minmaxing, following plot, sharing treausres, doing sidequests, murderhobo, deep backstories, sex fluency and basically any aspect of the game that you can and can't think of. They will pressure/bully fellow gamers or DM to do what they like regardless. Fuck them.

[@dhwright98]

Powergaming in 3.5 was honestly insane. 5th edition, the worst thing you could probably do is become a Sorlock, which ultimately isn't even THAT bad if you're a good dm.

[@VilageIdiot]

or the infinite wizard combo / genie warlock simulacrum, but yea, i agree it was a lot crazier in early editions

[@LeRodz]

I don't know about that. I've seen people do some crazy builds in 5e. All of which could be instantly shut down by the DM of course, but still.

[@tahaanwar5366]

Or you could create a character in 5e that can do 1,000 damage in a round

[@JMSginoclave]

5E goes infinite in a couple of ways other than Coffeelock, such as Minor Conjuration + Glyph of Warding. Most optimization happens at lvl 1, with Custom Origin or VHuman, playing a caster, min maxing stats, getting Shield + Silvery Barbs and a starting AC 18 or above. Individual DMs and post-script blog RAI may rule out straight readings, but it doesn't change the content written there and there were little to no erratas on them rules, so.

[@RDR911]

My 26 AC warforged paladin (hit 30AC during a dragon fight cuz of buffs) would like a word

[@brandongalvan6603]

Brennan: "Let the little guys have a win." My 20th level Fairy Zealot Barbarian with insane abilities and equipment that basically grant her a recharging breath weapon, free spellcasting, long-ranged attacks, and legendary actions while being nearly unkillable: "Yeah!"

[@inplfw]

I know you meant that to be an excited "Yeah!", but my mind read it as a John Wick "Yeah..."

[@liamross340]

to be fair literally any build of a character no matter what at 20th level is a godlike being

[@Dalenthas]

Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas just sitting there min maxed to hell doing everything they can to keep the Hobbits alive 😬

[@rogerbaxter8207]

The next one of these segments should absolutely be on why this segment is not named 'Contention 20'

[@MajikkaniHand]

Holy SHIT that's a good idea.

[@Gafizal1]

I'm with Sam, 100% ... Roleplay a luxury explored by characters who have not died in battle!

[@bengonzalez5215]

Luke skywalker didnt have tens across the board, he was an amazing pilot and mechanic. He was shootin wamp rats from his speeder!

[@Auriel_Direnni]

Yeah but the aiming was from the overpowered "force user" feat, and mechanic and pilot are class abilities, he was higher level, didn't start at lvl 1, he was like lvl 5 before he multiclassed into jedi. He himself had maybe higher than average charisma since people seemed to like him instantly, but otherwise a bunch of 10s.

[@dragonix8881]

While i do power game, i love an underdog character. My luck is just so bad that i have to build around it. A good example for me is that in the last combat session i rolled 8 to 10 nat 1's and was the only one who rolled any.

[@tehrickles1447]

One of my favorite characters was a 13 wisdom Kobold druid who barely spoke common and had wild magic surges every time he tried to cast a spell. Utterly useless in combat and in skill events for the most part, but tons of memorable moments in downtime.

[@emilywilson967]

I love making strong characters, but my luck is also awful. Rolling for stats usually helps you, but nope, I managed to roll 2 6s, and nothing above a 14. I have to optimize just to fight against my rolls.

[@JacopoSkydweller]

Loaded dice, but shitty?

[@leopoldhollow]

damn, who let wil wheaton near your dice?

[@dragonix8881]

​@julianyoon4948 idk. I think him and my ancestors angered a god of luck and cursed both our blood lines. Also, update i just recently dm a one shot and didn't roll higher then a 5.

[@r.downgrade5836]

That ending really did it for me. Delightful.

[@elaniarkady7351]

Brennen arguing against Sam is just perfect. He gets to ramble and they just take the argument and blow it up with two sentences.

[@Comicsluvr]

I LOVE her! Her debate style is both sarcastic AND entertaining! A wonderful video! Btw, Frodo had the Luck Feat and Halflings are lucky anyway. Luke had the Force Initiate Feat.

[@KitKatWiffleBallBat]

Brennan is a madman.

[@DrakeWurrum]

I like how Brennan brought up Luke as a guy with "10s across the board" when he was a total Gary Stu character. Not to mention the whole.... shooting womp rats with his T-16 back home...

[@shallendor]

Always happy to see Sam, they are so much fun!

[@BrenGamerYT]

My friends are always making the unkillable demigod optimized characters, and from a DM perspective it’s just not fun to play against those all the time. From a player perspective, building cracked out min maxed character who’s goated with the sauce for every one shot just to keep up with them is exhausting.

[@charliebarlet551]

"frodo the little guy triumphing from evil" Also being with the perfect archer, the perfect fighter and the perfect wizard help a little xD

[@tristunalekzander5608]

Ouch, that last one got personal haha I love playing as the underdog, look at an RPG like Kenshi, you pretty much always start as the underdog, but you work your way up to superhuman power, it's that process of improving that makes that particular game fun.

[@mwadams1]

Sam is amazing and I love them.

[@dancingowlbear]

I hope Sam gets to be on a Dimension20 at some point. They're a delight.

[@joshmargolis1424]

Han Solo was a sharpshooter rogue. Luke Skywalker started at level 1 but then his build came into focus late into the game and he became a powerful paladin by the endgame of RotJ

[@MalakianM2S]

Min maxers are only a menace if the campaign is not about that, just build your characters around the mood the DM is trying to set for your group. These social media popular groups are enjoyable to see because they all have an improv background, they agree with the setup they are presented and go from there, nobody is trying to stand out and having it their way.

[@Josh-99]

God these two are so great! I had to stop eating my dinner because I was laughing too hard and way afraid I'd spit my stir-fry on my laptop. Also, the best characters are "competent but flawed". It's the Wizard who does have a 16 in Intelligence but an 11 in Constitution and a 12 in Dexterity. It's the DEX-based Paladin, who can still do the job really well but can't wear heavy armor. It's the Rogue with 14's in almost every stat that focuses more on skills than combat prowess. Remember: D&D is a team sport. It's a good idea to give your character weaknesses and strengths both so you can excel in certain areas AND so your party members can fill in at the times when you are out of your depth.

[@rayplays7498]

love how he's having to hold back from agreeing so hard. xD

[@MikeMcHargue]

They both come up with such good points, so fast.

[@ilexdiapason]

brennan was so mad at this that he created the rat grinders

[@boeufkak]

ah, dimension 20- where fincher's ripley can debate potter's squirrel nutkin about whether it's better to play old mr. brown as a xenomorph

[@gbprime2353]

My campaign has what I call the "Jewel Rule," after a player's former character. Its pretty simple... take a barbarian with max strength, a two handed weapon, all the feats they rack up, and add in appropriate magic items per level. If you equal this damage output, you're an optimal character, exceed it you're power gaming. And for those who fall short of that level, the DM adds items and custom feats and things that will bring their combat usefulness up to that of the optimized barbarian. It's a little harder to measure skill builds like that, but the idea holds. Because a lot of players like to be Superman, but you gotta make sure that Jimmy and Lois have something to do that is equally as important.

[@lastnamefirstname8655]

i'm a fan of the super overpowered character that doesn't have to even think to accomplish absolutely everything.

[@NicolasClark7732]

While I love to min max and powergame... I can pull it back. Along those lines, during a DnD game I played one of my friends joked about how I would probably play a bard so I could try to sleep with everybody, and another one of my friends mentioned how I wouldn't be the sort that would build a character like that.

[@xarvous]

"Play an underdog," says the guy who played a 5-class sneak attack nuclear explosion last year.

[@corymerritt9100]

the best argument I've heard for pro-min maxer was; Failing at tasks you're supposed to be good at is immersion breaking.

[@Darkninja282]

Isn’t making sure that your character is the most un optimized statblock for comedic effect for masterful improvisation in fact optimized?

[@kagesong]

Brennan deserves this.

[@vinsal7629]

Sam!! What a joy to see them around the D20 space! Fun convo for both of them

[@pallenda]

Well played Sam. 😂

[@bruteforceknights]

Although, the best times can be from things going wrong, which can be harder if there are a bunch of character who keep succeeding all the time

[@colbybastian17]

Omg I love and miss Sam!

[@CRandyGamble]

Sam put that very well. Adventurers aren't normal people, they're all specialists. They're focused, often on one or two powers only. It's more realistic. Like how well do you think Eddie Van Halen could break dance? Probably not so well because he focused on shredding faces with guitar. And that makes simple sense both in life and at the table.

[@Theeoldmann]

WoTC did make Luke Skywalker's character sheet in Star Wars D20 Saga & Revised editions... They weren't all 10s across the board. Also ... Counter to the opposed argument.... If everyone is optimized, that's the new bland normal. Thus making the average Janes & Joes abnormal/exotic. Futurama did a fun Amazonian depiction of this idea as an absurdity.

[@MasterRoyalTea]

I power game walk so the underdogs can run

[@obiesenpai3869]

So what I consider making an underdog isn't "10s across the board." You can make an underdog Rogue for example who has maxed out Dexterity for example. Creating an underdog has more to do with backstory, but also something that I find is very important on a character level: weaknesses. One of the reasons why people tend to like underdogs is that those underdogs struggle, and we root for these underdogs and remember them because they succeed despite struggling. There are reasons why people call Superman boring, one of those reasons is because he can accomplish anything and everything, and the only thing that can stop him is a glowing green rock. Power-gamers not only try to make their characters good at mostly everything, but they try to make sure their characters have no weaknesses. Which isn't as good of a character as someone who needs to ask another player for help with something that they are not good at.

[@Tom-j1v]

I love being the dude at the table who has a powerful enough character to make sure his casual friends can do whatever shenanigans they want LOL we're not all douchey spotlight hogs, some of us just love power and the things it lets us do (for ourselves, and our friends).

[@farfromsilenced]

I didn't know I felt this strongly about this point. Team underdogs!

[@shinybugg9156]

Lol Brennan always having to say things he doesn't believe.

[@koonitube]

both right in a way. They both emphasize the story... Doesnt matter if you optimize or not, as long as you focus on making a character you like, that fits in the story.

[@EliotHochberg]

While there is fun, in both MinnMax characters and underdogs, they are downsides to both as well. For the MinnMax character, there’s a danger of being too focused on battle, or that one thing that you can do that you’re not useful in any other situation. In other words, unless your campaign is all battle simulation, you might struggle to be a contributor in situations like diplomacy, investigation, exploration, etc. On the other hand, for an underdog character, the tens, across-the-board character, it can indeed be frustrating to find that when the chips are down, you aren’t able to help. Fortunately, both of these situations are solvable, and I’d argue. They’re both actually the same. That is to say, if you start out with either of these characters, at first level, you can do things to compensate for those areas where you have trouble. For instance, if you have a MinnMax character that you intend to MinnMax, the entire time, you can make the character interesting by using role-play to allow your character to add flavor to situations where they aren’t particularly effective. For the underdog character, as the campaign progresses, they can make choices that will more directly align themselves with the general tone and needs that the environment presents. They also have a greater opportunity for pathos, Since they are more likely to find themselves making difficult choices that will come to haunt them further down the line in the campaign. But to stay true to the spirit question, I would say that a MinnMax character is most appropriate for one shots and campaigns that start at a high-level. on the other hand, I typically prefer for a longer campaign to start with a character that has an obvious flaw. But let’s be very clear, if you were a MinnMax character, you also have an obvious flaw. A good GM will be keeping track of all the strengths and weaknesses in the party, and endeavor to present situations were each of the characters is able to take advantage of their strengths. At the same time, they will be bringing forth situations and opponents Who will target the weaknesses of those characters who are MinnMax in someway. Vettel said, it is fun to try to figure out a character that has the most of some thing. For instance, I have a character who can, at level 12, summon so many animals That the entire table would groan with disappointment

[@Thedragon5881]

I mean, regarding the lotr example. How many people's favorite character is Legolas? An elven archer who never misses a shot. Or Aragorn? A kingly figure with a maxed charisma and incredible fighting skill.

[@pyrarius1598]

I'd say that Powergamers and Unlikely Heroes are oil and water, both very useful and interesting but usually unable to mix. If you're an unlikely hero in a group of powergamers, you just sit there while your friends delete whatever looks at them funny. If you're the only power gamer in a group of unlikely heroes, you steal the spotlight and rob those heroes of their special underdog moment that they gimped themselves for

[@Tom-ze7pn]

Nothing brings me more joy in this moment than Brennan trying desperately to go against all his programming…

[@Blind_Smithy]

Issue with this is DnD doesn't have a way to increase the characters potential stat wise bar ASI which wouldn't let you increase your stats to match your party members GURPS however, GURPS does this amazingly. 150pt character put your points into advantages and powers but leave yourself weak stat wise as you grow to a 900pt monstrosity

[@chrisperez6800]

she fired shots at him lol

[@Elheru42]

The problem that powergamers create is actually for their non powergamer allies. If everyone on a team is maxed out like crazy and battle focused, then the dm can really up the encounter intensity. But if a few seriously flawed role play heavy characters are in the midst of a deadly encounter they really might get smashed. Fortunately in my group the player who deliberately plays out every flaw and bad decision is our barbarian / paladin. He has decided to not rage most of the time because it might offend his deity. He only uses his smite on a creature when it is already dead as he thinks that blast of power is meant to honour his god. BUT he has an insane number of hitpoints so he can take a beating whilst being stupid.

[@nigeladams8321]

It doesn't even have to be "seriously flawed characters" if you have someone playing in a way where they are exceedingly powerful, but the rest of the party doesn't want to spend time theory crafting in order to build a character then you're going to run into this problem. A character not being an unstoppable killing machine doesn't make them seriously flawed

[@pauldamm3345]

Brennan is real life optimized to play dnd

[@Kokosnuss]

Have both sorts at your table. There will be situations for everyone to shine. From my experience the more into-roleplaying folks enrich the overall fun outside of combat and typical min maxers know the rules and such and keep the combat fluid. DnD literally is for everyone. :)

[@Jellybeansatdusk]

There’s already so much you can’t plan for in D&D - dice, other players, free will. Why not prepare what you can to do the best for the things you can control.

[@DavidSmith-jj7ll]

Luke was literally the scion of the Chosen One, and at the end of the second campaign he was literally going up against said Chosen One and at the end of the third campaign he takes on the Chosen One and and then without even a short rest takes on the Chosen One's Archlich master, although he does need the assistance of the low-HP and resource-depleted Chosen One towards the end of the encounter. The Force was Strong with That One. You're confusing starting at Level 0 or Level 1 in Star Wars (that's what it said on the marquee when I went to see it; that's what it's named. A New Hope is a retcon even if he did intend to go back and do prequels. I have spoken.) with an all-flavor no-optimization underdog character build. Luke was special af Sure Frodo and Sam were mostly 10s, although probably like 18-ish in Wisdom* and Con, and probably 12-14 in Dex. Hell Sam may've had a 16 Str to literally carry Frodo up a mountain even after at least two levels of exhaustion. And the party had like a minimum Level 18 Gloomstalker and a Level 16 Arcane Archer or really min/maxed Ranger5/Rogue13 Wood Elf and a 15 Battlemaster Dwarf, and spent a lot of time with a straight up Level 20 probably Abjuration Wizard. GoT? Jon, Ned, and Rob are all optimized. Arya and Daneyaraesys started at level 0 but you better believe their builds were optimized at the end. You better believe that Bran had some pumped stats. Only Podrick, Sam Tarley, and maybe Ser Davos are underdogs. But Podrick has a minimum 18 Cha. Ged? Optimized. Kirk? Spock? Optimized. I swear in the entire main-cast Trek series, only Nog, Chekov, and perpetual-Ensign Harry Kim are everypersons. River Tam? Yup. Buffy? Yup. Willow? Yup. Angel? Yup. OK Xander is all-10s, but I think that's just Whedon with a sub fantasy as a beard for whatever his toxic bullshit was. Captain America is literally a super soldier who in Session 0 went from Level 0 Vuman with nothing but the Inspiring Leader feat to a Tier 3 or 4 Kensei Monk (with the sheild as his Kensai weapon). Tony Stark is the most min-maxed Artificer you've ever seen. Same with Batman. Superman, literally Superman. Wonder Woman? Demi-goddess. T'Challa? Supersoldier via the Heart-Shaped Herb. I think Scott Pilgrim, Shaun (of the Dead), and maybe Harry Potter and Ron are pretty un-optimized, although Harry's a Vuman with probably the Lucky feat. Hell, actual literal Underdog is super optimized. *Ferreal tho, the number of consecutive saving throws those two made against the legendary cursed macguffin

[@tdpod6109]

"Limits are more interesting than super powers." Brandon Sanderson.

[@CiaphasKirby]

Flaws don't have to be displayed in your stats to be present. You can always play your character with flaws without shooting yourself in the foot with bad feat or level selections.

[@WumboGuy]

It really depends on the game for me. But in most situations I would say optimized characters are less interesting storywise. I like weird characters so I usually will extend that into their stat block. Like playing a one armed swordsmen who wields a large two handed sword in his offhand. You can't have that kind of character with an optimized build.

[@D3vious113]

"If you looked at Luke Skywalker's character sheet you'd see tens across the board!" BULLSHIT! If that man doesn't have at least a 16 in Dex and SOME charisma you're lying to my damn face AND I WILL FIGHT YOU ABOUT IT! *Disclaimer, all in good fun* Really though this was a good one :D

[@thelonggame9166]

The only thing missing from these debates is rolling for initiative in order to see who starts the debate first.

[@dodhethompson4841]

This is a difficult debate, because this isn't a debate, both of these things are fine, in fact both of these things work really well in a party because like the other person said, having a few folksy hero types in the party is cool until you die because nobody in the party is competent, general rule of thumb is it's best to have one optimizer for every person that wants to play that more incompetent role, because they balance each other out

[@DaveBerendhuysen]

What was the thing with the pie and the cake? Wasn't that just the same discussion in another form?

[@steffenhesslarsen]

As a dungeon master, I can tell you that the problem with a group with min-max'ed and non min-max'ed characters is that the player who is min-max'ed tends to love combat, while those who are not comes to loathe it due to feeling insignificant. Combat often ends up with the min-max'ers doing the fighting and the other players being bored and not participating. This is because when the min-maxer does 150 damage in a round, the non min-maxer feel that a possible contribution of 10-20 damage from their side doesn't really matter. And so they will tend to half-heartedly roleplay during the fight, while hoping it's over as soon as possible. The Min-maxers tend to feel that the other players should just min-max as well, and can't understand why they don't do it. After all - min-maxing a character is fun. The rules are made so that it'll lead players to see interesting possibilities to play that they might not have noticed otherwise. Besides - isn't it the duty of anyone playing a game to at least know the rules of the game they are playing? Min-max'ers do see that the other players get bored in combat, and tend to try to help the non min-maxers get a better build so they don't have to be bored in the fights. Min-maxers tend to like when others have min-maxed their character, and like the synergies stemming from a powerful party. They like challenges and overcoming them. Min-maxers want to impress their friends at the table, and tend to be somewhat crestfallen when they realize that their friends are not having that much fun in fights because they have min-maxed their character. Those who do not min-max find it incredibly boring to read through books and books of rules to make a good build, or even worse to have to limit their character creating creativity to fit an unnatural class-build. To them it's even worse picking someone elses build - or have their well-meaning friend make their character for them. Basically they just want to get into the roleplaying, and want to impress their friends with the drama and depth of their roleplaying. The non min-maxers don't understand why the min-maxer doesn't just relax, pick a race based on the race they want to roleplay, pick stats that reflect the roleplay story of the character they want to play, and pick skills that simply reflect what the character would have learned during their past. They tend to find the multi-class monk, rogue, oath-breaker paladin-bard-barbarian with alignment-swapping at different levels offensive because there is no heart in the background story and roleplaying of such a character. To them it's just a bunch of numbers put onto a character sheet which spoils the roleplaying experience. So - how do we get it to work in a group where we have both min-maxers and non-min-maxers? First - recognize the difficulty. Second, don't be shy as a dungeon master to let your non-min-maxer get magical equipment way more powerful than what you give to your min-maxer. Ask your players to have faith that you are addressing the issue. Second, recognize that when you have a min-maxer in the group you are forced to power up the non min-maxers - and that means you have to power up the foes the party face to provide a challenge. Third - be aware that your non-min-maxers tend to have a limited patience with simply calculating combat tactics and rolling dice. Make sure to include roleplay in fights. For your min-maxers, make the enemies the party faces diverse stat-wise and requiring different approaches. Use spellcasters often - they tend to add strategy to battles with area effects, surfaces, broken lines of visibility and so on. Use interesting terrain features that your min-maxers can play with or need to overcome. Min-maxers tend to like having to think to come up with a strategy to overcome challenges. Finally, pay attention to what characters "shine" in combat. The system lends itself to it being different from time to time, but sometimes it may help to prepare an encounter so your non-min-maxer also get to "shine" with their abilities.

[@joshkerber5738]

Brennan did destroy that paladin in calamity

[@Ace_Greymoore]

I love how they're both right. An underdog raises the stakes, and you can get into how they're backstory makes them ill-suited for what they're doing, and the optimized characters can carry their weight no matter what.

[@boRegah]

Brennan radiates agressive Energy. Sometimes more sometimes less subtle. But he always does it.

[@davelogeman]

Frodo and Sam do great in the protected environs of fantasy fiction but they would both wind up as crimson stains on the dungeon floor in a world ruled by TTRPG game mechanics.

[@ZorroVulpes]

Everyone says to play how you want and be inclusive, but when you're powergaming they tell you to leave the table.

[@mortalitydoesstuff8965]

Luke Skywalker is absolutely min maxed, he's the son of the chosen one

[@Kaejyn]

I love how Brennan has to "lose" this "argument" twice on the same segment because he's actually a minmaxer/powergamer himself.

[@Adclif]

Lets leave out the fact that Frodo hung out with multiple Min Maxers Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas, Arwen etc

[@Karanagi]

How unlikely is the unlikely hero if every hero is the unlikely hero?

[@Darkthoughts-z7r]

Optimizers and Min-Maxers are not the same people. Optimizers are seeking make a character concept the best it can be without forgoing roleplay. The power fantasy comes from being the mighty barbarian or intellectual wizard in the story. Min-Maxers are seeking to make a build to beat story and at worst the second page of the character sheet is part of what they “minimized” to do so.

[@CoffeeTheFreshmaker]

Bein an adventurer in a dangerous world and only having so many opportunities to learn new spells or abilities... ofc you'd focus on something that helps keep you alive and kicking through the hell that you're crawling. Is that powergaming or RP'ing someone who just wants to survive?

[@boRegah]

Bilbo and Frodo had above average intelligence, were well educated and rich. Frodo had superior power in withstanding the influence of the ring and he (like the other Hobbits in the fellowship) also learned how to hero properly in less then a year. When they returned to the Shire they had become badass generals who freed the Shire without any help by the big people. They're not _too_ underdog.

[@jonsimpson6240]

Optimize t make a functional character. Its a mechanica system so build a character that works for the task that you want to do. And then play the character like a character.

[@DavidJWGibson]

I adore Sam. They're amazing.

[@tom2678]

Mossbrow, cough. Rabbit assassin cough cough

[@averagejoey2000]

frodo baggins unlikely hero but he's from the same story as Gandalf

[@lexiette8343]

If someone gets mad that someone customizes their character and happens to make it stronger than the rest then idk what to tell you, you need to start making pre-made characters or something

[@Nezxmi]

I think Brennan forgot about Luke’s racial ability, “Child of the Chosen One”. His stats may be 10’s across the board but he’s got like +15 to every roll he makes.

[@kciref6016]

Honestly, D&D just ain’t fun if you can’t fail. And if you do your best to eliminate fails, then failing also stops being fun… allow yourself to see a story progress in a way you don’t want and see what happens. If it’s more fun for you to be constantly adjusting for optimal mechanic exploration, no one can say no to you, but I honestly just don’t see how a story would be any fun if everything you do is engineered to go your way

[@Ramschat]

Ah yes, how far would Frodo and Luke Skywalker have gotten without Gandalf, Aragorn, Obi-Wan, Han Solo, etc. Underdogs van thrive only because their party contains powerhouses that pick up the slack

[@EzraColdsGarage]

Gandalf was a power gamer.

[@mediocreboi]

It certainly depends on who you're playing with, like if each person optimized in a stat so you can always have someone good at something but no one good at everything. It can lead to interesting problems when you need the intelligence guy in 2 places a once, who is going to step up out of their comfort zone and become the int guy for a challenge. But min-maxing seems like a mindset of earlier additions, and not that ptimized characters can't be compelling but weaknesses and the growth are where non-professional DMs can more easily create something compelling at the table. Also from personal experience optimizers can tend to think in a single player mindset and if that's what you want to do go play most any rpg videogame.

[@gyongyverjellinek3992]

This was mighty and menacing

[@Coffee-Lock]

Why not both? I like both.

[@brianvw2724]

Frodo's quest would've been easier for someone like Aragorn, but Aragorn's challenges weren't easy for him either. Everything is scalable. There's obviously no wrong way to play. My two cents: Try a different play style from time to time, not just a different character. Don't sabotage yourself just to avoid failure. Some people like a wimpy character they can blame failures on. Ask yourself if you're trying and if the answer is yes, then cool. If all you have are Bilbos they'll never go on an adventure.

[@RJ_Ehlert]

Nice.

[@esWhistler]

I feel Brennan missed the point here, he's talking about why is cool too okay an underpowered character, which doesn't contradict that it could be good or not to play an op one

[@necronsplayer]

the throw???? he went hunting for that L

[@kid14346]

The actual anti-power gamer argument that I would have gone with would have been leaving the other players in the dust. Power gaming is only a problem when they literally take everything away from the other players. If someone wants to fill a role, but they are not as mechanically minded as an other player it can feel bad when they are constantly out shined at the role they are trying to do. The best thing to do though is to have a session zero and see what everyone wants to do so that nobody steps on each other's toes. I will say though it does kill me to watch people use a class I love to play "wrong". I have watched someone play a fighter and they just sat there doing super non-optimal actions and then got upset when they didn't do enough damage. I am a min-maxxer at heart but I do generally try to keep it in check. This is harder in drop-in games at game stores, but then again you could just do a min-maxed support to help the noobs at the game store. Make a Bard/Sorcerer/Wizard/Cleric that specializes in throwing buffs to as many players as you can. Make a Barbarian/Fighter/Monk that specializes into Tanking and distracting enemies in a way that makes them not target the others. Most people don't hat min-maxers when they take a supporting role.

[@Dan-si8eu]

Luke Skywalker's Dex is at least 16

[@brynntannehill8912]

I love optimizing characters, but... At a table where you mix minmaxers and people who are more about the flavor and RPG aspect, combat can be a lot less fun for the folks who aren't powergaming because their characters don't feel like they're contributing nearly as much to the fight. Or, they're just like: Oh, we'll buff the variant human paladin and they can nova any BBEG we meet into the ground in a turn or two.