Question for DM's

[Mgrancey]

Have to agree, such specialized or in worst case one dimensional characters tend to be a bigger aggravation than not. Too many end up with the "One Tool" attitude, make other players at least feel unnecessary, or over power regular encounters to the point that you need to rework way too much to provide a challenge. From my experience they also tend to either be fighter types or spellcasters, both of which tend to become a lot of trouble. One from usually being completely disruptive on social stuff or the other needing heal/protection in combat constantly.

As a player I, have more than once, just had my character stand back and do jack because a power gamer just blitzes through all the enemies, it was so much fun.

[Dershem]

I agree with the one tool comment and in rpgs that tends to be combat. I would rather see the group come up with a smart way to avoid or minimize situations than hitting everyone with a big stick.

[LordEntrails]

I agree with the one tool comment and in rpgs that tends to be combat. I would rather see the group come up with a smart way to avoid or minimize situations than hitting everyone with a big stick.

Me Grog! Me strong! Me carry Big Stick!

[Varsuuk]

I like to collect ears and rush through doors if it is suggested in passing to me.

I also have like 16 Str (eventually got Hill giant gloves though) and 15 Con (5e, think Con now 16 and took a feat for more. Int/Wis about 12/11 and Char of 8 (raised by orcs... full human though)

Sure, the rogue outdamages me in combat and casters for the longest time had at or slightly over my hp... I have fun in my party being a bit odd (rolling for omens and aforementioned ear fetish) and being easily manipulated.


When I co DMed, we used the 4d6 drop lowest x 6 and rearrange. Did this x2 picked best set of 6 rolls. If neither had 15 or better, allowed one stat reroll to replace ONLY that stat if got better roll. Was AD&D and never had many 18s (one pally was 18/37 & 17 Con. He was not the norm.

[dulux-oz]

Me Grog! Me strong! Me carry Big Stick!

You not named "Jazz"!?

[Targas]

I might add we currently play Pathfinder which is heavily combatboriented. However I award the same amount of experience, or even grant incentives like ‚inspiration cards‘ if they outwit the battle. It‘s a win-win. Combats are faster, it‘s more fun being creative, story progresses faster, and leveling up is better when they are more clever. I know it‘s not about the topic we discuss, but I wanted to share anyway. :-)

[ArcebU]

Ability score really doesn't matter except to players.

A player who is really bad at RPing will always be bad at RPing if their stats are all 20's or all 6's.

In reality having dumb stats in some and being genius level at others is probably more accurate than being average with everything.

I've had cases where you have the players that would genuinely strike up conversations with other players or npcs never asking for a specific check leaving that up to me.

I've had players that just run up to an npc and say I want to make a persuasion check.

D&D on the internet gives you all types but I digress.

The ability score has more value for players. I think some feats actually have more of an impact than ability score, like observant. If you are playing with passives observant basically can create narratives without the player doing anything more than being present.

Cantrips scaling is another one with more impact than ability score.

So no a +2 (20) doesn't imbalance the game in most cases it fills into the meta because you have that character who is good at this one thing and you know you should be able to rely on them for it.

Then you as a DM can colorfully describe how to they succeeded at doing what it is they are good at.

[Full Bleed]

Ability score really doesn't matter except to players.

A player who is really bad at RPing will always be bad at RPing if their stats are all 20's or all 6's.

In reality having dumb stats in some and being genius level at others is probably more accurate than being average with everything.

I've had cases where you have the players that would genuinely strike up conversations with other players or npcs never asking for a specific check leaving that up to me.

I've had players that just run up to an npc and say I want to make a persuasion check.

D&D on the internet gives you all types but I digress.

The ability score has more value for players. I think some feats actually have more of an impact than ability score, like observant. If you are playing with passives observant basically can create narratives without the player doing anything more than being present.

Cantrips scaling is another one with more impact than ability score.

So no a +2 (20) doesn't imbalance the game in most cases it fills into the meta because you have that character who is good at this one thing and you know you should be able to rely on them for it.

Then you as a DM can colorfully describe how to they succeeded at doing what it is they are good at.

Sounds like you and Foamhead should game together. Not so much with most of the other respondents in the thread. Which is the point I was making. A player can't force their ideology on the GM. If they don't like the GM's gaming philosophy, go find a GM (and other players) with a more like-mind. No reason to keep trying to bang your square peg into someone elses' round hole. That's just as painful as it sounds.