[UA] Powergamer != Munchkin

[Matthew]

On 7/22/05, Rayburn, Russell E. <RERayburn at columbus.gov> wrote:
> Well said!
> 
> The idea that improving one's character to be competent is somehow wrong seems... off.

There's a difference between the natural improvement that comes of a
player spending experience to keep up with a power curve and poring
over the system in order to extract every possible advantage. One of
them is something that all players can and should do, whereas the the
other is characteristic of someone who is rather fixated on gaming the
system.

By the way, the term "munchkin" and "powergamer" might have had
distinct meanings at some point in time, but at this point, I think
it's sort of academic. In a story-focused game, both of them are
unnecessary and distracting.

> Struck me as particularly off.  That sentiment is in 'The Art of War'... but there's no negative connotation.  Getting others to surrender without a fight is seen as a good thing, and while reason and intellect can change hearts and minds they can only go so far.  Sometimes you need a solution to the gordian knot.
> 
> Yes, the story the GM is trying to tell is important... but I hope the players are more than NPC's, acting only at the GM's whim.  For the players to be, well, players they have to be able to take their own actions.
> 
> That's not possible if the players skills are maxed out on 'write angsty poetry'.

I think his point was that the characters are so badass that there's
no way for a reasonably designed encounter could best them, which is
not cool. It's all fun and games when the players have earned their
power through experience points, but if all they've done is munge some
numbers and take advantage of loopholes and inconsistencies, that
sucks.

- Matthew