I just watched a Dawnforged Podcast and so to everyone defending the idea of min/max would you be okay with this. (note: this does require a wizard ability from unearthed arcana to make actually work, but it is a good example of how min/maxing to the extreme can seriously harm the game for everyone).
Basically you take 2 levels of fighter / 6 levels of warlock wizard 2 Sorcerer 10 Use action surge to cast magic missle twice, switching its damage type to fire and using the GOblin race. By doing so it is possible to dear 21d4+651 damage to a creature, meaning anything in the Monster manual is toast. Granted I'm not sure how much it can be reworked to do massive damage at lower levels.
Using Unearthed Arcana to make this point is cheating. The whole point of Unearthed Arcana is to test things before they become official so we don't end up with broken content. Min/maxers are doing us a favor here, because they find the exploits before they can break the game. Plus, multiclassing isn't even on their radar at the point where UA content gets published.
But there's a bigger problem: this doesn't work. The only way you can get that kind of damage is if you assume Fury of the Small (+character level to damage) applies to each dart; it doesn't.
Note that Volo's Guide To Monsters warns the DM about Monstrous Adventurers:
Some of these races are unusual in that they have a reduction to an ability score, and some are more or less powerful than the typical D&D races - additional reasons for the monstrous races to be used in a campaign with care. -VGTM p118
Anyways, I'll bet money the Lore Master Wizard was scrapped and won't become official in its current form. Only 1 out of the 3 Wizard subclasses in UA made the cut to the upcoming book (Xanathar's Guide to Everything). The Lore Master wasn't well-received and had problems (e.g. being able to change the saving throw of Hold Person to Strength so you auto-fail the following saves.)
Finally, that build is really subpar whenever it's not doing its Magic Missile shenanigans once per long rest and has to wait until close to level 20 to do its one trick. The player will have to put up with being underpowered for like half of their career and will never get access to level 6+ spells.
But even if this was a thing, a DM could prevent it with any combination of:
Not designing encounters with only one strong monster (this is always a recipe for disaster)
Being immune to fire
Being smaller than the Goblin (Enlarge/Reduce does double duty here, because it can enlarge the Goblin while shrinking the caster)
Shield spell
Counterspell
Blinding the caster
Greater Invisibility (or any other form of semi-permanent invisibility)
Hit-and-hide tactics (if the monster has something similar to Cunning Action)
Fog Cloud, Darkness, or any other form of heavy obscurement
Globe of Invulnerability or Antimagic Field
Silence and grappling (though Subtle Spell gets around this)
The previous Undying Light UA gave CHA to Radiant and Fire damage iirc. However, why go through all that trouble when you can Nuclear Druid instead. Its more rules legal than the above example. Abusing MM can be fun and all, but what happens when you have to do it a second time? You've just hemorrhaged a lot of spell slots to pull off a neat trick only once. There are so many parts of the game that don't involve dealing hitpoint damage, and you've sacrificed your utility in all of them.
The previous Undying Light UA gave CHA to Radiant and Fire damage iirc. However, why go through all that trouble when you can Nuclear Druid instead. Its more rules legal than the above example. Abusing MM can be fun and all, but what happens when you have to do it a second time? You've just hemorrhaged a lot of spell slots to pull off a neat trick only once. There are so many parts of the game that don't involve dealing hitpoint damage, and you've sacrificed your utility in all of them.
Not sure where the other 7 darts in the original claim came from since you can't twin Magic Missile and you can't Quicken it in this case either.
A CR 20 monster has 365-400 HP (see DMG p274) so this won't be one-shotting anything even if you use Elemental Adept and Empowered Spell to help get max damage.
It costs two 5th level slots but can be stopped with one 1st level slot for Shield. It also doesn't work on anything immune to fire which covers most demons/devils, or anything with Limited Magic Immunity.
Honestly Radiant Soul doesn't add much here; we could do better by dropping Warlock and going Sorcerer 16. That lets us use one 8th and one 7th level slot and pick a different damage type, but this still only brings up the damage to 210 at most.
That's pretty good, but you could just drop Wizard and go Sorcerer 18. Now you have 9th level spells and can cast Meteor Swarm and an 8th level Disintegrate. That does 256 on average with no saves or 173 with 1 save, causes way more collateral damage, can't be stopped with a 1st level slot, and Meteor Swarm doesn't require sight.
You could also trade single target damage for more collateral damage with Incendiary Cloud instead of Disintegrate. As an added bonus, Incendiary Cloud doesn't require sight either.
But again, I'm sure Lore Master will be scrapped anyways.
Why do ppl play rpg's? Fun, right? Which is more fun: failing all the time or succeeding all the time? (Pseudo-trick question. Should be MOST of the time, in either case.)
Most ppl can experience disappointment and failure in their day to day lives. D&D allows ppl to experience playing a character who can succeed at things and effect change upon their circumstances and/or the world. This is probably why ppl want to min/max. I totally get that. Real life can suck. Fantasy life should be nuthin but success and perfection...
BUT! I would warn those ppl that even in fantasy, successes lose their meaning and sweetness if there is no failure. And as far as playing the game with a group of ppl (even if they are ppl u just met and not necessarily your friends...yet) THE EPIC FAILS are enjoyed and remembered as a much as the EPIC WINS. Maybe even more so.
If your character is really bad (mechanically) at combat, try to find ways to help your party without directly engaging enemies. Or play it for laughs. A fighter with low strength and con can die very easily, so then play it recklessly, forcing your party to try to hold you back or protect you (let's call this the 'chickenhawk' scenario.) Even bad characters can still roll well, and 5% of the time will hit no matter what. The unlikely crit/kill from the weak melee character is AWESOME!
More likely than not, however, characters with really bad stats won't last long. If it was a character you, nonetheless, put a lot of time and backstory into, well, mourn them. Roll another character. Ask the DM to introduce your new character into the adventure, and play on.
Remember that combat is a player vs DM arms race, in that if you build a stronger character, the DM will build stronger enemies. And if you are playing an Earth-bound Kryptonian, while your teammates are playing Elongated Man and Nightwing, they will soon grow tired of watching you do everything. Even Jordan learned that he had a better chance to win when he shared the load. He could still lead the team in scoring, but maybe Paxton had to hit that clutch 3 (apologies to ppl not conversant in 90's NBA metaphors!)
Anyway, that's just the opinion of this lonely retired halfling ranger/rogue. Now leave me alone to finish my ale! If you want to know about the abandoned mine, ask the barmaid!
I'm glad this thread took off but I love the insult of people actually min/maxing in a thread that is defiantly against it! (To give a real life analogy - in the UK we hate it when Amazon / Uber / Starbucks etc min/max the tax system and pay no tax in the UK - all perfectly legal but leaves a bad taste in the mouth. People are happy to do it in the game, bad people, pay your game tax....hmmn...that sentence got away from me a bit....wibbly wobbly timey whimey...)
Anyway, not paying taxes hurts other people. That's gaming the system. Min/maxing doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't constitute gaming the system, unless it's done to a ridiculous degree. Meaning there's a huge gap between certain players. Furthermore, everyone deducts things from their taxes if they can. That doesn't make them bad people. Only when you game the system becomes it bad. And min/maxing doesn't have to be like that.
And if you don't like a certain combination for the fluff, like Paladin/Warlock, just refluff it. Make your patron and your god the same source. As long as the new fluff fits the gameworld, where's the harm? If min/maxing helps a player to invest in a character and get attached to it, there's nothing wrong with it. Wanting to be badass is not wrong. Wanting to be efficient is not wrong. Wanting to master a system is not wrong. Only one-upping the other players is. But that can be done in a lot of ways and is largely independent from min/maxing.
A min/maxed cleric of life, who keeps their team alive isn't one-upping their teammates. They're helping them be better at their stuff. Being great at what you do can be an altruistic thing.
Hello, I started the thread which means I read the first post...have you? It's your game play how you and your party want too...have fun....(Didn't mention people and taxes mentioned the big bad companies....)
The thread was started tongue in cheek I really don't mind how others play their game, I won't be joining them and they may not enjoy my games but I have to say min/maxing hurts me...
(I don't love to insult people - read the thread properly. Damn it passive aggressive insult?!?)
The insult is too me in a thread where I come out against min/maxing people started min/maxing in the replies!!! Damn them and their irony...
I think the discussion starts to get away when people make their arguments with different understandings or definitions of important terms. Same term but different definition is a recipe for misunderstandings and confusion.
New year, new me. I've decided after re-reading this thread in the new year to remove all combat mechanics from my games. It will inevitably lead to a power disparity between characters and you can't roleplay during combat. Honestly, how would you expect to get off full sentences in 6 seconds? As such, in all of my upcoming campaigns, the only way to affect change upon my worlds are through the overly elaborate debate rules. Should that fail, I have an equally elaborate set of Dragonchess rules which is known to solve all problems.
Using Unearthed Arcana to make this point is cheating. The whole point of Unearthed Arcana is to test things before they become official so we don't end up with broken content. Min/maxers are doing us a favor here, because they find the exploits before they can break the game. Plus, multiclassing isn't even on their radar at the point where UA content gets published.
But there's a bigger problem: this doesn't work. The only way you can get that kind of damage is if you assume Fury of the Small (+character level to damage) applies to each dart; it doesn't.
Note that Volo's Guide To Monsters warns the DM about Monstrous Adventurers:
And Mike Mearls is on record saying that "It was more important to match the race to its existing stats/lore than to produce new abilities."
Anyways, I'll bet money the Lore Master Wizard was scrapped and won't become official in its current form. Only 1 out of the 3 Wizard subclasses in UA made the cut to the upcoming book (Xanathar's Guide to Everything). The Lore Master wasn't well-received and had problems (e.g. being able to change the saving throw of Hold Person to Strength so you auto-fail the following saves.)
Finally, that build is really subpar whenever it's not doing its Magic Missile shenanigans once per long rest and has to wait until close to level 20 to do its one trick. The player will have to put up with being underpowered for like half of their career and will never get access to level 6+ spells.
But even if this was a thing, a DM could prevent it with any combination of:
You are actually right. Though losing warlock would only lower the final damage by 5 per missle. So losing about a 100 damage isn't all that horrible.
Limited use sure... But it really only needs to work once.
The previous Undying Light UA gave CHA to Radiant and Fire damage iirc.
However, why go through all that trouble when you can Nuclear Druid instead. Its more rules legal than the above example.
Abusing MM can be fun and all, but what happens when you have to do it a second time? You've just hemorrhaged a lot of spell slots to pull off a neat trick only once. There are so many parts of the game that don't involve dealing hitpoint damage, and you've sacrificed your utility in all of them.
Action surge lets you fire the missle twice. However, the original post was in error by adding your Warlock levels to your spellcasting.
Why do ppl play rpg's? Fun, right? Which is more fun: failing all the time or succeeding all the time? (Pseudo-trick question. Should be MOST of the time, in either case.)
Most ppl can experience disappointment and failure in their day to day lives. D&D allows ppl to experience playing a character who can succeed at things and effect change upon their circumstances and/or the world. This is probably why ppl want to min/max. I totally get that. Real life can suck. Fantasy life should be nuthin but success and perfection...
BUT! I would warn those ppl that even in fantasy, successes lose their meaning and sweetness if there is no failure. And as far as playing the game with a group of ppl (even if they are ppl u just met and not necessarily your friends...yet) THE EPIC FAILS are enjoyed and remembered as a much as the EPIC WINS. Maybe even more so.
If your character is really bad (mechanically) at combat, try to find ways to help your party without directly engaging enemies. Or play it for laughs. A fighter with low strength and con can die very easily, so then play it recklessly, forcing your party to try to hold you back or protect you (let's call this the 'chickenhawk' scenario.) Even bad characters can still roll well, and 5% of the time will hit no matter what. The unlikely crit/kill from the weak melee character is AWESOME!
More likely than not, however, characters with really bad stats won't last long. If it was a character you, nonetheless, put a lot of time and backstory into, well, mourn them. Roll another character. Ask the DM to introduce your new character into the adventure, and play on.
Remember that combat is a player vs DM arms race, in that if you build a stronger character, the DM will build stronger enemies. And if you are playing an Earth-bound Kryptonian, while your teammates are playing Elongated Man and Nightwing, they will soon grow tired of watching you do everything. Even Jordan learned that he had a better chance to win when he shared the load. He could still lead the team in scoring, but maybe Paxton had to hit that clutch 3 (apologies to ppl not conversant in 90's NBA metaphors!)
Anyway, that's just the opinion of this lonely retired halfling ranger/rogue. Now leave me alone to finish my ale! If you want to know about the abandoned mine, ask the barmaid!
This thread really didn't need to be necroed...
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
I'm glad this thread took off but I love the insult of people actually min/maxing in a thread that is defiantly against it! (To give a real life analogy - in the UK we hate it when Amazon / Uber / Starbucks etc min/max the tax system and pay no tax in the UK - all perfectly legal but leaves a bad taste in the mouth. People are happy to do it in the game, bad people, pay your game tax....hmmn...that sentence got away from me a bit....wibbly wobbly timey whimey...)
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe....
You love to insult people?
Anyway, not paying taxes hurts other people. That's gaming the system. Min/maxing doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't constitute gaming the system, unless it's done to a ridiculous degree. Meaning there's a huge gap between certain players. Furthermore, everyone deducts things from their taxes if they can. That doesn't make them bad people. Only when you game the system becomes it bad. And min/maxing doesn't have to be like that.
And if you don't like a certain combination for the fluff, like Paladin/Warlock, just refluff it. Make your patron and your god the same source. As long as the new fluff fits the gameworld, where's the harm? If min/maxing helps a player to invest in a character and get attached to it, there's nothing wrong with it. Wanting to be badass is not wrong. Wanting to be efficient is not wrong. Wanting to master a system is not wrong. Only one-upping the other players is. But that can be done in a lot of ways and is largely independent from min/maxing.
A min/maxed cleric of life, who keeps their team alive isn't one-upping their teammates. They're helping them be better at their stuff. Being great at what you do can be an altruistic thing.
Hello, I started the thread which means I read the first post...have you? It's your game play how you and your party want too...have fun....(Didn't mention people and taxes mentioned the big bad companies....)
The thread was started tongue in cheek I really don't mind how others play their game, I won't be joining them and they may not enjoy my games but I have to say min/maxing hurts me...
(I don't love to insult people - read the thread properly. Damn it passive aggressive insult?!?)
The insult is too me in a thread where I come out against min/maxing people started min/maxing in the replies!!! Damn them and their irony...
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe....
I think the discussion starts to get away when people make their arguments with different understandings or definitions of important terms. Same term but different definition is a recipe for misunderstandings and confusion.
New year, new me. I've decided after re-reading this thread in the new year to remove all combat mechanics from my games. It will inevitably lead to a power disparity between characters and you can't roleplay during combat. Honestly, how would you expect to get off full sentences in 6 seconds? As such, in all of my upcoming campaigns, the only way to affect change upon my worlds are through the overly elaborate debate rules. Should that fail, I have an equally elaborate set of Dragonchess rules which is known to solve all problems.
/aged thread
[ Site Rules & Guidelines ] --- [ Homebrew Rules & Guidelines ]
Send me a message with any questions or concerns