So, you’ve read all about how to how to make a character with a compelling story and how to play D&D tactically. You love your character, and you don’t want them to die. It’s only natural to start thinking about making your character as powerful as possible so they aren’t casually slain by a lucky kobold. Whether you’re a roleplaying maven who wants to give your character a beautiful arc or a combat fanatic who wants to slay everything that stands against you, it only makes sense for your thoughts to turn to powergaming.
In this installment of the New Player’s Guide, we take a look at a controversial topic that has driven many D&D groups apart: will optimizing your character improve your D&D game, or tear your group apart? The answer is more nuanced than you might think.
What is Powergaming?
Powergaming is a term that describes the act of optimizing your D&D character and acting in a way that maximizes reward while minimizing risk. “Powergamer” is roughly synonymous with terms like “min-maxer,” and “munchkin,” and all of these terms carry a degree of derision. That might be because this efficient way of playing largely ignores the “roleplaying” aspect of roleplaying games, and focuses almost exclusively on winning the “game” aspect.
Some powergamers think deeply about the systems of D&D to find broken combos and exploits in the rules, whereas others simply look at character optimization (“char-op”) boards to find powerful combos that other players have theorized about online.
Why Some Folks Optimize, and Why Others Don’t
Everyone who optimizes does it for different reasons, but one common through line is that being strong is fun. If you make a character and envision them as a mighty demon slayer, you want the game to support your story with the mechanics. You want your character to be cool, right? D&D rewards a clever understanding of its mechanics with greater power—essentially, the ability for your character to do cool things more consistently.
In a more extreme case, you might want to create an all-powerful character because the relationship between you and your Dungeon Master is antagonistic. If your DM tries to screw your character over at every opportunity, like you’re playing the Tomb of Horrors in every session, it makes sense to create a character that can’t be defeated.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with optimizing your character; it just means that you’ve put in work to allow your character to do the cool things that you want them to be able to do. On the other hand, there is a dark side to powergaming. If your DM just wants to play a collaborative game where the DM sets interesting challenges in front of the players, but isn’t going out of their way to annihilate your characters, optimizing your character into an all-powerful death machine could leave other players in the dust.
If everyone in your group is optimizing their characters to the best of their ability, this isn’t a problem; everyone’s playing Gandalf or Galadriel or Elrond, the campaign becomes a super-powered thrillfest where powerful wizards and warriors battle evil liches and their undead servants.
On the other hand, there are lots of players who don’t like to optimize. Some do so because they don’t have the time to dedicate to fussing over every minute detail of their character sheet because of their job, home life, or because of any number of real-world concerns. Life is hard, and the people who are working hard to make their real life work deserve to have fun just like the folks who are able to dedicate hours to learning how to optimizing their D&D character. If everyone in your game is “optimization neutral” in this way, you might have a party made up of Aragorn, Legolas, Boromir, and Gimli. All powerful warriors in their own rights, but with a few flaws that force them to rely on one another to survive.
There’s another type of players, too: the kind that actively choose not to optimize their character because they like their characters to have character flaws that are represented in their game stats. These players might optimize their characters in some ways, and lean hard into their weaknesses. Or, they might be happy to be defined by their flaws more than they are by their strengths. A group of players that would rather play Frodo, Sam, and Gollum desperately surviving in a world too powerful for them might play characters like this.
It’s easy to have fun in any group filled with players that all have the same philosophy towards character optimization—even if they don’t have the words to articulate what that philosophy is. However, things become messy when characters of wildly different levels of optimization are in a party together. Gandalf fights the Balrog alone at the Bridge of Khazad-Dum in The Fellowship of the Ring because, as he tells the Fellowship, “This foe is beyond any of you.” This is an awesome moment in the Lord of the Rings films and novels, because we’re an audience that gets to watch one character have the spotlight in a scene that is at once both tragic and epic.
But in a game, the wild power disparity between the hyper-competent Gandalf, the strong-but-flawed warriors like Aragorn and Boromir, and the kind-hearted but physically weak hobbits would be incredibly frustrating. Unless you know that your group is actively excited for that kind of power disparity, you need to figure out a solution.
Side Note: The Stormwind Fallacy
Worth noting is that these broad categories aren’t the be all and end all of powergaming. A classic RPG fallacy is the “Stormwind Fallacy,” which states that character optimization is antithetical to roleplaying. This statement is fallacious because it’s absolutely possible to have a flawed, three-dimensional character and still optimize their build so that they can reliably do cool things, too. Aragorn and Boromir are great examples from the Lord of the Rings characters mentioned above; they’re powerful combatants, but have intense roleplaying flaws. In the films, Aragorn is reluctant and fearful to lead, so he chooses not to claim his birthright and lead the mighty armies of Gondor. Boromir is a talented warrior with many advantages, but he is vulnerable to the corrupting influence of power and the will of the One Ring—a temptation that leads to his downfall.
Some of the best story-focused roleplayers are willing to put their powerful, optimized characters into compromised, suboptimal situations because it creates a dramatic and exciting story. You can see this in Critical Role, Tales from the Mists, and any number of other beloved D&D streams. It can take a lot of trust in the DM to present you with situations that let you kick ass and situations that prey upon your characters’ weaknesses. Nevertheless, playing this way is incredibly rewarding.
What Kind of Gamer are You?
There are too many positions on powergaming and character optimization to count; the spectrum of opinion between “it’s the only true way to play” and “it ruins D&D” contains infinities. Likewise, there’s a continuum of how intensely players will optimize their characters. Some players have an innate knack for finding powerful combos and gravitate to optimizing automatically. Some read char-op threads on D&D forums to learn the best strategies. Some are just happy to play. Some still actively give their characters debilitating flaws because it helps them create a more dramatic and nuanced character.
All of these playstyles are valid. Even so, just because they’re all fine ways to play D&D doesn’t mean that people with different playstyles won’t come into conflict. Some of these playstyles are so disparate that it’s almost inevitable that someone will get annoyed with someone else for playing the game “wrong.” But don’t despair. This doesn’t mean that your group is doomed if some people want to optimize and others don’t.
Communicate Early and Often
If you’re playing with veteran D&D players, they probably know whether or not they like to optimize their characters. In that case, just ask them straight away as part of your Session Zero. As usual, clear and open communication with your fellow players is the solution to 90% of all problems at the game table. Try to align everyone’s goals by finding out if some people don’t like the power imbalance that powergaming can create between player characters, or if they don’t mind.
If your players are new to D&D, they probably don’t know for sure if they’re going to min-max or not, so asking directly won’t be as useful as it would with a veteran player. You might be able to guess how they’ll approach the game based on their personalities or taste in other media. D&D players who play collectible card games or MMORPGs may be more inclined to optimize their characters in D&D because the types of games they play heavily encourage optimization, whereas players who were more into fantasy novels or films may be less inclined to min-max. This is just a rule of thumb; it’s not true for all people. The only way to know how new players will approach the game is to play with them for a few sessions.
Once you know roughly where on the powergaming continuum your players fall, you can host a Session Zero and lay out some expectations for your campaign. Remember, you can have a Session Zero at any time during your campaign, not just before the first session. This works even better if everyone can talk about their own expectations too; this will make your Session Zero less of a lecture from the DM and more of a conversation between friends.
Here are some questions to ask new players that haven’t thought about powergaming before:
- If one of the characters is stronger than all the others, would that make the game less fun for you?
- On the other hand, would you have less fun if your character is weaker than all the others?
- If one character hogs the spotlight and consistently spends more time doing cool things than you, would you be annoyed?
- Do you want this game to be the sort of game where we all work together to tell a story, or do you see it as a competition between the players and the DM?
These questions will help identify your players’ feelings towards intra-party balance (how powerful the characters are in relation to one another), without once mentioning the jargony words of “powergaming” or “optimization.” If the players tell you that these things don’t bother them, great! Just let them know that they can always tell you if something feels bad about your campaign, then go play some D&D!
If a player answers “I don’t know,” then take their answer at face value. Don’t assume they’re hiding something from you. Optimization is probably just a topic they haven’t thought about before, or one that doesn’t impact their enjoyment of the game. Don’t interrogate them, just move on. Trust that if someone’s optimization (or lack thereof) bothers them during the campaign, they’ll let you know.
If the players tell you that yes, some of these things would bother them, you can facilitate a conversation in which the players can agree to not do things that will upset the other players. You’re all here to have fun together, after all. If someone feels like their fun is being trampled on because they feel forced to consider what’s fun for other people, that’s not the kind of person you want in your weekly gaming group. You can ask questions like these to work out a compromise:
- It sounds like most people want the group to not be too overpowered. Would you feel okay not reading any character optimization guides or choosing overpowered combos?
- It sounds like most people want the group to be relatively powerful. Would you feel okay reading a bit about your character’s class before playing? (The Class 101 series is a great place to start to get an overview of your character.)
Balance between player characters can be one of the most important topics a D&D group can discuss. Or, it could be completely unimportant! Figuring out what works for your group must be your number one priority as a Dungeon Master. If you and your players can communicate clearly and effectively with one another, you’ll all come back to the game week after week, excited to play again.
Are you a powergamer, or does someone in your gaming group love to optimize their characters? Have you ever talked with your group to work out how to deal with power imbalances in the party? Let us know in the comments?
Create A Brand-New Adventurer Acquire New Powers and Adventures Browse All Your D&D Content
James Haeck is the lead writer for D&D Beyond, the co-author of Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus, and the Critical Role Explorer's Guide to Wildemount, a member of the Guild Adepts, and a freelance writer for Wizards of the Coast, the D&D Adventurers League, and other RPG companies. He lives in Seattle, Washington with his fiancée Hannah and their animal companions Mei and Marzipan. You can find him wasting time on Twitter at @jamesjhaeck.
I don't understand the correlation between powergaming and ruining fun. I think learning the game involves learning the rules, otherwise why bother with dice and numbers at all? As for comparing powergaming to smoking, that's absurd. I mean no disrespect, but it is. Again, I stand by the fact that powergaming is not inherently bad for players either new or veteran. I also stand by the fact that those who optimize their characters for the sole purpose of outshining the rest of the group and crapping on the DMs game are jerks and should be avoided. But that doesn't make all powergamers like that at all. You're drawing dangerously close to the Stormwind Fallacy here (If you're not familiar, here's a link that describes it: https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Stormwind_fallacy). Basically it says that if you are a true roleplayer, you cannot be a powergamer, and that if you're a powergamer you cannot be a roleplayer. Its gatekeeping at its finest. That's what my 30 years have taught me. At the end of the day as long as no one's a jerk it doesn't really matter how you play the game.
I agree that the Storm Wind Fallacy is partly correct, just because you are a power gamer does not mean you are not a good roll player, but from when I read the article last and after some discussions on other RPG boards I have generally seen people say every power gamer is a good RPer. Which I think most people would not agree with. I have also seen/read/heard people seem to quote the "Fallacy" as doctrine and the end all be all of their actions are valid at a table. Again I can say I have not been at every table but I have been to quite a few conventions, game store games and home games where disruptive players (and some GM's) cause serious issues, and in two cases caused stores to close and in one the demise of Friday Night Magic with about 20-40 players.
MDC
Don't encourage this. It sucks and makes the game miserable for everyone. It's a ROLE PLAYING GAME. Your DM puts all this effort into creating this wonderful world for you, don't ruin it by treating it like a video game. Power gaming sucks. Don't encourage it.
Powergaming is a 'red flag', a sign that things may go wrong. It might not be a problem every time, but its potentially an issue to be aware of. Same as that player who wants to play an evil character - are they really interested in exploring an anti-hero, or do they just want to screw over the other players?
A player who powergames is telling you they don't just want to compete, they want to dominate, to win at all costs. They are saying they put the mechanics before the narrative and story. They are saying that the character primarily exists through its stats rather than its personality. That may or not be a problem at your table, which is why its a potential problem.
As I said before, it's a correlation - all playstyles have potential problems, but optimisers are more likely to cause disruption at the table and to spoil the enjoyment of other players. It's something to be aware of, and plan and communicate accordingly.
I've said it before, but the Stormwind Fallacy is a fallacy in itself, it was dreamed up purely to try and excuse that person's anti-social behaviour.
It's basically saying that 'not everyone who drives over the speed limit has an accident, therefore driving over the speed limit is completely safe'.
But the truth is that driving over the speed limit makes it more likely you will have an accident. Powergamers are more likely to be 'That Guy' of d4chan fame.
Thanks for your reply obeytheFist0369. I think it's always good to discuss these things and to hear all of the different viewpoints.
"I don't understand the correlation between powergaming and ruining fun."
It's surprising to me that your lengthy experience with the game doesn't have at least a smidgen of agreement here. You've never had a game where one person made a crazy build plan, hid their intent from the DM and the other PCs, and come some certain level (maybe 4 or 5), they hit a huge power spike and then just started to dominate everything, destabilizing the party balance and the DM's plans?
"I think learning the game involves learning the rules, otherwise why bother with dice and numbers at all?"
I think this is a super valid point, but I also think that it presents a barrier for many people to enter the game. Less mathematically inclined minds do not enjoy the number crunching. I believe in 5e though, the emphasis for new players (the intended audience of the article) is to have fun making active contributions during campaign encounters (whether they are combat or just RP), and it is less focused on the granularity of the rules and technical details. I feel like 3.5 is more well-suited for people who enjoy learning rules.
"As for comparing powergaming to smoking, that's absurd."
Maybe my smoking analogy was over-the-top, but the point there was to say that there is a strong correlation (in my experience at least) between people who enjoy powergaming and fun-ruiners, so as a new player, I'd recommend focusing on other aspects to avoid that risk. It's not a blanket statement, and I'm not saying that powergaming is always bad, but what I am saying is that if someone is a powergamer, they are way more likely to be a rules lawyer, fun-ruiner, munchkin, jerk, etc. To powergame without ruining the fun of others and stealing the show -- that takes finesse. Maybe even 30 years of experience ;).
Here's my attempt at a better analogy than the smoking one. I'm curious to know how you feel about it:
Encouraging a new player to powergame is like having someone new to driving, and you let them have a Ferrari. Sure, technically, that's not really that bad, and it can be fun, but if the point is to go on drives with your friends, most of whom are in Toyota Corollas, then there's a high probability that you will just outshine them and steal the show. They will most likely feel a bit jealous and unsettled knowing that your car is just flat out better, and it might end up ruining the fun of the drive. It would take some social acuity as the Ferrari driver to know when to back off of the gas to let another driver shine, and that takes experience, so maybe for a first car being a new driver, try a regular model so you can be one with the pack.
So, again I'll state that everyone should play the game their way, and as long as everyone agree that fun is being had there is no worry. There really isn't a need to define "powergaming", as its simply a better mastery of the rules. This is a debate that has been going on since there were message boards dedicated to gaming, and it is a pointless argument. You play the game your way, and I'll play mine. Though, I suspect, you'd probably have a lot of fun at my table. Most new players I play along side certainly do, as do most veterans.
I made it a point to really learn the rules so that I could use them to realize the vision I had for the character I was building. I help others do this because I want them to be able to realize their vision for their character too. If I see someone use the rules as a club rather than a sculpter's chisel, I tell them that they're not welcome at my table. The correlation between "powergamers" and "jerks" is meaningless, because the first is simply someone who knows and uses the rules, and the other is someone who knows and uses the rules to be a bully. In no way does it hurt for a new player to learn the rules to better realize the vision they have for their character. If they then use their new found powers of rules knowledge to be a jerk? Well they were probably already jerks to begin with. Rules knowledge simply made it easier.
As for your analogy? It makes sense. But, I would state that some tracks work best with Ferraris, and that if you can't or won't make the switch to the appropriate vehicle you should maybe find a different track rather than try to make the track better suited to your car. There are TONS of RPGs out there, and there is nothing wrong with finding one that is more your speed. That may sound a bit elitist, but I firmly believe that anyone can play D&D and all people are welcome to it, but don't expect the game or people to change just because they don't play the way you think they should. I stopped playing Pathfinder because I didn't like the ruleset and wasn't a fan of the games playstyle. I didn't expect people to change how they played their game, I chose to find a different one. I am always welcome to come back and play (I still have my 1e books), but I probably won't because the game is not the kind of game I like to play. That track was better suited for Mustang drivers, and I prefer the Ferrari. My car could work on their track, but its much better suited for a Ferrari track. And if someone came up driving a Corrola, I'd either direct them to the Corrola track, or help them tune their car up to run on the Ferrari track. If they didn't want to change their car? Well, I don't know what to say to that...
As for the new player who drives a ferrari? Good for them. Have fun with that. Drive what you want, but don't be a jerk. The car doesn't make one a jerk, the driver was probably a jerk already. Now they're a jerk in a fast car.
Really this entire thing, what I've been trying to say, is don't be a jerk. Play how you play, but don't be a jerk. Know the rules, abuse the rules, play with the rules, but don't be a jerk about it. This is a cooperative game. Use rules knowledge to be a better team player. Don't use the rules to be a bully. That's what I would tell new players. And older players, who are often the ones who need to hear that message more :).
Edit: I mistyped a word and I'm a perfectionist :)
I couldn't have said it any better. Players can optimize there characters and still do great roleplaying. They can do both or neither. A player could have a horrible character and be a bad RP or they could have a great character and do great RP. They are in no way linked together like how the Stormwind Fallacy describes.
This.
I have no issue with powerful characters. I have issues with players trying to shove everyone else out of the limelight. In my experience, the anti-collaborative players are running a) the chaotic stupid rando-moron or b) the optimized combat machine. I have played with folks that have optimized combat machine characters and are not anti-collaborative players, but historically I am more likely to need to spend effort on *player management* when a new player shows up with the optimized combat machine of a character.
I love seeing innovative or powerful character designs. I hate having to keep anti-collaborative players from trying to make it all about them.
Powergaming isn't the same as character optimization, imo.
Character optimization is about finding ways to do what you want to do well within the confines of your character.
Power gaming, on the other hand, is a pure power fantasy. It's about being better than anyone else--whether that's the DM's controlled monsters or NPCs, other players at the table, or even the DM themselves.
The issue isn't with the type of character, but rather with the type of player. If you can't "sit back" and let other players shine and also accept that you might fail in your adventure, then collaborative game play might not be for you.
I think part of the issue in the comments is terminology use. We all are talking about powergaming, but some people see it as parallel to being a munchkin, optimizing a character to some goal, being the best at everything and/or being a jerk.
When I hear "munchkin," I think of a player that makes their character as powerful as possible, often through combat prowess. Such a player will resort to metagaming, studying modules to find their desired assortment of magic items and then play through them to make that level 20 vengeance paladin with a holy avenger and a belt of storm giant strength. This irritates me, but getting to that point is time-consuming and difficult without proper teamwork.
Optimized characters often follow guidelines to achieve some goal. Many such guides don't bring up magic item use, as it's dependant on the DM. A level 6 human fighter with 20 STR and Polearm Master is a strong melee combatant, but often falls short on NPC interactions due to a lower CHA score. I have no issues here, as this sort of player doesn't overshadow others in a broader spectrum.
Master of All setups are good at almost everything. Such a player will play a character that is good at melee combat, ranged combat, spellcasting, exploration, healing; you name it, this character can do it (valor bards and paladins are easy to do this with). This can be annoying, but doesn't need to be if handled right. A backup character that primary roles can fall back on is often appreciated.
Don't be a jerk. Just don't.
Honestly, I have more issues with players being resistive to cooperating with other party members than I do with powergaming. I don't think powergaming is purely a bad thing, but the last campaign I played in had some HUGE issues with optimization. Half of the party was so over-optimized that the rest of us kept dying to the encounters designed for those characters, and for a time I was playing a character that was almost half the level of the party because our GM wouldn't let us play full-level backups, causing even more frustration on my part. This campaign ended with our GM outright dictating the events of the final battle because A. he was super fed up with the party not wanting to play online and B. the characters were so stupid broken that there was no way the campaign would end without the high-power players just taking over and enslaving the rest of the party. (they played some very morally-grey characters who thought themselves better than everyone else) Overall I really did like that campaign, mostly because I was the ONE member of the party who was trying to advance the story in any way, (my character also had some important ties to the plotline but that's unimportant) but even I had to fall into the trap of optimization after being given just the right combination of magic items to get my character's AC up to a maximum of 45, and my character wasn't even tanky in the slightest, I was playing a wizard. There was a player who was playing a wizard/warlock combo who just straight-up left the party for the second half of the campaign only to show up at the end having used the time to craft like 4 stat boost books and was now tied for highest INT stat, they then proceeded to give each party member a legendary-tier magic item that they had crafted in addition to the 4 stat books. I'm just glad I haven't had to deal with these types of shenanigans as a GM yet.
Exactly this.
That is some next level optimization. Also doesn't sound like a fun group to play with. Reminds me of some Pathfinder groups I used to play with, which is one of the reasons I play 5e :-)
As a DM, I'm happy with either type of player!
Generally, however, I think flawed characters make for a more interesting story as they need to account for their own weaknesses as well as any dangers encountered their path
Optimization should be less of an issue with 5E.
So as an example, in 2E and 3E, you got bonus spells based on your Wisdom (Priest) or Intelligence (Wizard). If your Wisdom was low, spells could fizzle when you cast them - and the stat had to be over a certain number (3E is 10+spell level) to even attempt to cast it. And you didn't get stat bonuses every 4 levels in 2E.
And so, your choice was to optimize and literally case three times the number of spells when you unlocked a 1st through 4th level spell slot. And I think nearly everyone chose to optimize for those extra slots. The same was true for other classes, you optimized because generally you were hamstringed otherwise on your basic class abilities.
Also, not only would a Bard not get spells at level 1, but they had to have a 12 DEX, 13 INT and 15 CHA (source: page 41 2E PHB). And Paladin, for example, took 12 STR, 9 CON, 13 WIS and 17 CHA. Also, they had to be lawful good, and had more restrictions past that.
And so I mean some of the optimization is because historically - the game forced it on you.
(edited to remove extra line breaks)
"Powergaming" is a term invented by players who aren't good at the game, and DM's who would rather shame players into playing something else because they can't rise to the challenge. Why would you want your character to be weak for flavor, or because others have self-esteem issues when your character does better in combat than them? Why don't we put all that pettiness aside and just be fantasy characters?
Sorcerers and Bards still tend to drop INT.
I feel like im powergaming and i dont want to. I am a 4 level druid goliath who is needed all the time. any tips
you already aren't. druid goliath have no synergy whatsoever. druids are innately powerful so don't cry when you do your job