Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

Chello!

Yep that's 3E. The fatigue rules from Hackmaster would mean that the 2 heroes would eventually be overwhelmed...they'd probably account for about 20 orcs (maybe--depends on level and armor) unless a crit or fumble took them down early.

My point about the firing at your ally is this: would the CHARACTER aim at the back of a friend's head hoping to hit a giant? No way. (well, maybe if he were evil.)

To me that's a defining characteristic...metagaming. Thinking of the game as the PLAYER not as a CHARACTER.

(Why am I talking about HM on a GURPS board? lol)

Tony

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

Though in that situation, the GM/DM might also be a munchkin.

Often the problem with D&D and why Munchkinism is so prevalent in the system, is due the prevalence of the type of poor GM who thinks that he's trying to win a game by beating or killing his players' characters, usually by moronically and literaly following the rules.

Munchkin GMs often create Munchkin players, all trying to beat each other at the game...

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

I don't know that anyone in your described scenario is a munchkin. The Errol Flynn type doesn't seem to be making an effort to craft a character that fits the setting, but that's a whole other issue.

I think it is a mistake to assume that people (like me) who dislike munchkinsim don't like players who are effective in meeting the conflicts that thier characters will face. There's nothing wrong with creating a character who is competent to meet the challenges that the campaign will bring -- in fact, not doing this, as in your example, is clearly wrong.

I'm satisfied with the definition that I gave. When point values and game-mechanical atributes are more important than the setting, the story, or the other characters I think that one has missed the point.

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

You Might be a Munchkin if...

You are trying to figure out how to make "Holy Napalm" ...,

...you might be a munchkin.

In a Star Trek Universe game you try your best to gain control of a "Doomsday Machine Weapon" (from the famous episode) ...

...you might be a mUnchkin.

If yo find youself in too many of those 400 Mr. Welch points that KROMM posted in General Role-playing... then..

...you might be a Munchkin.


- E.W. Charlton


I apolgize...but I just started hearing Jeff Foxworthy's voice doing "You might be a Munchkin jokes...

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

I thing best description of Munchkin was Luters one.

I have question,
is Munchkinism to use quarterstaff one haned (with ST14) and large shield in other hand?
To max out defense bonuses.

From one side is it "only" maxing out character. From other, is not so fine use quarterstaff by one hand (regardless of ST) and keep its superb bonus to parry.

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

Only if you claim to be getting the parry bonus from the staff , and use the staff skill when useing it one handed, instead of useing the boradsword skill 8)

becvuse then you are breaking the rules at get more than you should 8)

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

If you're using a staff with one hand, you don't get any defense bonus, period. *grin*

Makes it easy, doesn't it?

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

Metagaming and Munchkinism sitting in a tree . . .

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

Funny, I always thought this was a munchkin. ;)

...seriusly though, I agree that a munchkin is someone bending the rules too far.
However it seems to be a catch-all phrase that people use for players they don't think plays "by the rules" as they seem them. This includes not only the "rules of the game" but also "the rules of conduct".
It seems to be a word gaining in uses much like the "beloved" word: "noob", in computer gaming.

As a GW player I tend to use th word "beardy" when people stretch the rules to their advantage, and the word Munchkin for when people bend the "reality" of the setting to their advantage. Such as a Super-fast (but weak) superhero putting on armour so he has no "dissadvantages".

Re: Whats a Munchkin?
 

For years I had to deal with a player who would argue for hours over any little advantage he could get, and call the GM an idiot if he didn't agree.

His characters would browbeat the others in the group until they agreed to his plans, and then complain that he was the only person able to think of what to do.

He always chose disadvantages that he could ignore, or make a Will roll to overcome. His Will was always a 14>, and if he failed it and was forced to play his disad he would then spend the next hour sulking.

If he took Luck, he would use it and then delay the game as much as possible so he could use his Luck again as soon a possible. Lunch breaks counted as an hour of game time.

As a GM I had to take him aside a couple of times to tell him not to call another player (not in character,) a f***ing idiot.

For a while he insisted on rolling his dice in a wooden bowl so they wouldn't roll off the table, and so nobody else could see what he rolled. Before that he had the habit of passing his hand over the dice as he rolled them. It took me a couple of years to figure this out, but what he was doing was catching a quick glance at the dice and if he didn't like it he would tap one of the die with his pinky to change the result. I wasn't the only player to spot this either.

I always had to double-check the math on his character sheets. It always came out wrong, and always in the character's favor.

As a GM, he always ran senarios where the players would get their butts kicked, until some NPC's came in to save the day.

When playing board games he has, more than once, used the line "Well, it's my game, so we're going to play the rules my way!" Or he would put in a movie that nobody had seen before and point out all the really good bits, so everybody was watching the tube and not seeing him checking out the cards, moving the pieces, or rolling the dice creatively.

He considers all this to be perfectly acceptable gaming behavier, indeed, it's the way games are supposed to be played. Doing whatever it takes to WIN!

Would this guy be considered a Munchkin?