Author Topic: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]  (Read 27742 times)

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #60 on: December 14, 2011, 10:17:43 AM »
Or you can grab a homebrew monk for him. Some at least achieve basic functionality(or if you apply Psywar manifesting to one otherwise stock monk, you get something that works pretty nicely).
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline RobbyPants

  • Female rat ninja
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8172
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #61 on: December 14, 2011, 10:29:04 AM »
To be honest, I've had problems with certain players even when I explain these things, though. They refuse to see the class for how shitty it really is (and yes, the player always plays monks).

Just start actually letting him be as useless as he should be for playing a monk. Given a few sessions, he'll probably see things right.
I tried. Luckily for him, the game didn't last long enough for him to figure it out, and the three players of the casters were doing a good job keeping him alive. Also, he'd blame his fragility on things like "not having Bracers of Armor" rather than on "being a monk".
My creations

Please direct moderation-related PMs to Forum Staff.

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #62 on: December 14, 2011, 10:45:26 AM »
Well, my idea was to give him a good, actually functional one first. Then when he goes to other games and picks the raw class, he'd see the gaps all the clearer for not having the abilities he used to.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline RobbyPants

  • Female rat ninja
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8172
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #63 on: December 14, 2011, 12:06:59 PM »
Well, my idea was to give him a good, actually functional one first. Then when he goes to other games and picks the raw class, he'd see the gaps all the clearer for not having the abilities he used to.
Yeah, I made that post without seeing yours on the next page. That approach might work really well.
My creations

Please direct moderation-related PMs to Forum Staff.

Offline Tiltowait

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Werdna advances!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #64 on: December 15, 2011, 04:48:36 PM »
I like taking characters and making them make the biggest explosions possible. Normally Evocation is gimped, but if you optimize it enough you get some big booms.

I'm not sure where that makes me fit into this.

I wouldn't find it fun to have my Tiltowaits barely do anything though.

Offline archangel.arcanis

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #65 on: December 15, 2011, 04:51:44 PM »
I like taking characters and making them make the biggest explosions possible. Normally Evocation is gimped, but if you optimize it enough you get some big booms.

I'm not sure where that makes me fit into this.

I wouldn't find it fun to have my Tiltowaits barely do anything though.
That is fine in most games. Since you are taking a weak theme and working it to a competent or even good for the game level. In a game where everyone is playing wizards, druids, and clerics to their full potential playing a blaster would be stupid.

Offline zugschef

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 699
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #66 on: December 15, 2011, 04:56:43 PM »
mailman is a blaster and fits in nicely.

Offline Tiltowait

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Werdna advances!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #67 on: December 15, 2011, 04:59:33 PM »
I like taking characters and making them make the biggest explosions possible. Normally Evocation is gimped, but if you optimize it enough you get some big booms.

I'm not sure where that makes me fit into this.

I wouldn't find it fun to have my Tiltowaits barely do anything though.
That is fine in most games. Since you are taking a weak theme and working it to a competent or even good for the game level. In a game where everyone is playing wizards, druids, and clerics to their full potential playing a blaster would be stupid.

Playing a normal blaster would be stupid. Playing a blaster that does on average 320 damage at level 10 and that bypasses immunities is playing a character that makes things without Evasion just die, and that still has non boomy spells for when setting things on fire is not a solution to the current problem. The things that do have Evasion aren't hard to kill via other means, and they have to save first.

My party is Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, and me. I keep up with them. If I couldn't I'd play something that did.

Offline archangel.arcanis

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #68 on: December 15, 2011, 05:04:07 PM »
I like taking characters and making them make the biggest explosions possible. Normally Evocation is gimped, but if you optimize it enough you get some big booms.

I'm not sure where that makes me fit into this.

I wouldn't find it fun to have my Tiltowaits barely do anything though.
That is fine in most games. Since you are taking a weak theme and working it to a competent or even good for the game level. In a game where everyone is playing wizards, druids, and clerics to their full potential playing a blaster would be stupid.

Playing a normal blaster would be stupid. Playing a blaster that does on average 320 damage at level 10 and that bypasses immunities is playing a character that makes things without Evasion just die, and that still has non boomy spells for when setting things on fire is not a solution to the current problem. The things that do have Evasion aren't hard to kill via other means, and they have to save first.

My party is Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard, and me. I keep up with them. If I couldn't I'd play something that did.
320 at level 10 is pretty good, I know I've made some with higher numbers but I think they had a few levels on that. The point is you built your character to the power level of the game rather than making it weak because it is more fun to roleplay.

Offline Tiltowait

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Werdna advances!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #69 on: December 15, 2011, 05:14:26 PM »
Like I said. I wouldn't find it fun to not have my Tiltowaits do much. I would have made that character do that degree of damage regardless, as I need to do about 160 to kill things and 320 with a save for half does that. If I made a blaster at all that is. In a game where the DM overreacted to the damage, I'd end up playing something else that I enjoyed less and that was more powerful but looked less impressive.

Offline Bloody Initiate

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2011, 03:16:51 PM »
It really comes down to the group. Not everyone shares your priorities ("your" being used in this case to speak to any reader). My group at home would give me a "WTF?!" if I gimped a character. My group at college would have probably loved it, and in fact they might have preferred I actually did it with the characters I played.

The group at home is about winning. The group at college preferred shenanigans.

Also I distinguish between "leaving weaknesses" in a character and "gimping" a character. Leaving weaknesses is something you'll end up having to do most the time no matter what because the nature of most systems, invincibility isn't really allowed so you just try to control where your soft spots are. "Gimping" is where you do as the original quote suggests and you deliberately add a clump of shit to your character so that everyone will smell them coming.

I don't gimp on purpose, but I have done it on accident without realizing it until later. I have also been gimped by bad luck or other things beyond my control, like rolling so terribly on my stats that the GM gave me the elite array as a mercy. Most the time I don't think it's a good idea, but some groups really dig it and there's not really anything wrong with that as long as they're having fun (Even if it's for reasons we struggle to fathom). I insist on using plural forms though, because if you want to have a group of clowns I require that it be the GROUP's preference and not just a minority. Clown groups can be fun even for optimizers, because often they just trundle by on ridiculous luck and it can be something amazing to watch. Basically optimizers prefer consistency and can manufacture success, but that makes it kinda generic at times, while clowns just fuck up and traipse through nightmare scenarios only to somehow occasionally emerge victorious. That looks different every time.

Overall I agree that gimping is bad, but there are tons of factors and whether you gimped your character may not always matter, while at other times it might actually have been someone's preference. That preference may be idiotic for every logical reason, but it doesn't exist in territory where logical reasons carry much weight.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2011, 03:18:29 PM by Bloody Initiate »
(click to show/hide)

Offline Jackinthegreen

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 6176
  • I like green.
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #71 on: December 24, 2011, 03:33:44 AM »
Based upon what I've seen with film and literature, I'd say the "interesting" characters are definitely not gimped.  Each of them has a potentially bad quality, but their good qualities make up for that and actually make the character successful.  Hell, sometimes the former bad qualities turn out to be quite useful later on.  To use a movie example of this, Seamus Finnigan from the Harry Potter series had a knack for blowing things up when trying to do his schoolwork or even having fun.  When he intentionally tried blowing things up, it was a booming (pun intended) success.

The key to making an interesting character is that they're successful even with some flaws here and there.  They don't have to be successful at everything, but enough that they can grow and develop.  In the "growing up" stages they might need some help, but once the character (or group of characters) has matured the audience expects them to hold their own because of their own abilities and experience.

I gave a nod to the group part because the interactions between characters is a key way to make the story interesting.  That and D&D is traditionally a group game, so helping make sure the group is interesting and effective is tantamount to all the players having a good time.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2011, 03:35:22 AM by Jackinthegreen »

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #72 on: December 24, 2011, 04:16:26 AM »
Gimped is a bit of a loaded term here yeah, more correctly it's 'Characters with significant weaknesses' and 'Flawed characters'. To an extent, neither extreme is desirable, flawless all powerful spellcasters with spells for every possible situation can be just as bad(because nothing is an obstacle) as the blind quadriplegic monk(because everything is an obstacle).

In a cooperative game, limited flaws are perfectly fine, provided your strengths help cover for other allies flaws. Strengths overshadowing allies strengths(not complementing as with buff spells, but making them irrelevant by outperforming them at their primary strength) is terrible idea. Flaws that react fatally with the group likewise(most simple case is the Frenzied Berserker in a group with no means of stalling him, disabling him, or even outrunning him). Everything else falls on a sliding scale.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Tiltowait

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Werdna advances!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #73 on: December 25, 2011, 06:38:38 PM »
Sometimes though, you just have to realize that riding a bike well isn't something that is that meaningful.

Offline SolEiji

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3041
  • I am 120% Eiji.
    • View Profile
    • D&D Wiki.org, not .com
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #74 on: December 25, 2011, 06:43:29 PM »
Sometimes though, you just have to realize that riding a bike well isn't something that is that meaningful.

Noooonsense.  It's simple really, see?  You just need to ride hard down into a portal to Baator, where you'll bounce on the front tire and spin, knocking out all of the endless hoards of devilkind.  Drift across the burning fields of screaming souls and down into the canyon of endless murder where you'll pop a wheelie, smashing Asmodeus in the face, killing him.

Simple really.   :D
Mudada.

Offline Tiltowait

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Werdna advances!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #75 on: December 25, 2011, 06:46:59 PM »
Sometimes though, you just have to realize that riding a bike well isn't something that is that meaningful.

Noooonsense.  It's simple really, see?  You just need to ride hard down into a portal to Baator, where you'll bounce on the front tire and spin, knocking out all of the endless hoards of devilkind.  Drift across the burning fields of screaming souls and down into the canyon of endless murder where you'll pop a wheelie, smashing Asmodeus in the face, killing him.

Simple really.   :D

Or I could just summon a horde of Solars.

Offline ImperatorK

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2313
  • Chara did nothing wrong.
    • View Profile
    • Kristof Imperator YouTube Channel
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #76 on: December 25, 2011, 07:59:20 PM »
Or I could just summon a horde of Solars.
Where's the fun in that?
Magic is for weaklings.

Alucard: "*snif snif* Huh? Suddenly it reeks of hypocrisy in here. Oh, if it isn't the Catholic Church. And what's this? No little Timmy glued to your crotch. Progress!"
My YT channel - LoL gameplay

Offline Tiltowait

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Werdna advances!
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #77 on: December 26, 2011, 02:59:31 PM »
Or I could just summon a horde of Solars.
Where's the fun in that?

To crush your enemies, to drive their statblocks before you, and to hear the lamentations of their DMs.

Offline zugschef

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 699
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #78 on: December 26, 2011, 05:45:23 PM »
i bet you can't say that with a styrian accent.

Offline wotmaniac

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1586
  • Procrastinator in Chief
    • View Profile
Re: Gimped characters are more fun [Fallacy discussion]
« Reply #79 on: January 22, 2012, 11:04:27 PM »
I'm probably not breaking any new ground here, but here goes my 2cp:

all the players pretty much need to be on the same wave-length as far as characters go.  If everybody is running intentionally gimped characters, then yes, a gimped character is in order.  (and of course, the same is true for the opposite end of the scale, and at all points in between)  And once the group has settled on an effectiveness level, then the DM probably needs to scale things accordingly.

The problem with having a huge discrepancy between the PCs, in terms of effectiveness, is that it's basically a break-down in the social contract.  If everybody else wants high optimization, then that one guy who wants to play the gimp is indeed depriving the rest of the group of the common courtesy of a reach-around.  By the same token, the guy who wants to be SUPER-AWESOME-GOD in a party of gimps probably needs to find either a new concept or a new group.
It's about group-appropriateness.  Anything else is probably going to lead to some seriously dysfunctional gaming.