Powergaming (was RE: [MUD-Dev] How much is enough?)

[shren]

On Sat, 4 May 2002, Zach Collins (Siege) wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Kwon Ekstrom wrote:
>> From: "Jeff Cole" <jeff.cole at mindspring.com>
 
>> I agree, powergaming isn't a problem, it's simply a playing style
>> which is most effective at reaching an optimum level.  As a power
>> gamer myself, I don't have any problem with it.  My solution to
>> power gaming is complexity.  By increasing the number of stats
>> and attributes required to make the system work, you make things
>> more difficult to "power game" as such.

> I've discovered the opposite in P&P games.  The biggest problem I
> had with 2nd Edition AD&D, for example, was when the various class
> and race handbooks came out; Skills and Powers was the worst of
> the crowd, because you could build all the other munchkin
> characters (and more) using its rules.  The more complex a game
> system becomes, the easier it gets to point a character in an
> extreme direction.

There's a difference between "designed into the system at the
beginning" complexity and "add more power in this supplement so the
players will buy it" complexity.  I remember my initital frustration
with this concept was with Rifts, where every supplement seemed to
have a bigger and better gun.  Complexity is good in a well formed,
coherent design, but it should never be added merely for the sake of
itself.

Luckily, it seems MUDs and mudlikes can sell plenty with geography
expansions and don't have to tinker with the rules too much.  "What
am I trying to accomplish with this change" and "What will this
change *really* accomplish" are the two big questions.

--
http://www.shren.net

 x
 xxx
  x

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev