Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.

[Bruno]

While we had some very "wild and wooly" anything goes kitchen-sink 3.x D&D games around here, entire publishers were banned, along with some official supplements, as sort of an agreed "this is junk writing and produces junk results" armstice. There was also an assumption that you'd be using your pile of random supplements to make something interesting, not something powerful. The idea of deliberately designed cheese builds (the infamous Pun-Pun the kobold, as a classic example) horrified everyone once we heard about it.

Which is a long way of saying that we had campaign rules and guidelines, if loose ones based largely on mutually-assured good faith. That last part (good faith) is required for a really successful game, in my experience. Everyone on the table needs to be trying to make the game fun for everyone, including players making the game fun for the GM as well as vice-versa. Self-centered rules exploitation or abuse isn't fun for others.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Bruno

While we had some very "wild and wooly" anything goes kitchen-sink 3.x D&D games around here, entire publishers were banned, along with some official supplements, as sort of an agreed "this is junk writing and produces junk results" armstice. There was also an assumption that you'd be using your pile of random supplements to make something interesting, not something powerful. The idea of deliberately designed cheese builds (the infamous Pun-Pun the kobold, as a classic example) horrified everyone once we heard about it.

Which is a long way of saying that we had campaign rules and guidelines, if loose ones based largely on mutually-assured good faith. That last part (good faith) is required for a really successful game, in my experience. Everyone on the table needs to be trying to make the game fun for everyone, including players making the game fun for the GM as well as vice-versa. Self-centered rules exploitation or abuse isn't fun for others.

Interesting you mentioned third party publishers...they tended not to be automatically allowed in the games I played...because they weren't "official." And like your groups there were some official books every agreed were broken and weren't allowed without too much grumbling. But...I was in too many games with fundamentally incompatible character concepts that happened because it didn't seem to be proper for a GM to ban characters on the basis of campaign concept incompatibility. Actually, GMs rarely even saw the character ahead of time. What we mostly discussed was who had which class so we could make sure we had each of the four main class areas (Martial, Magic, Healing, Traps).

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by trooper6

GURPS, on the other hand, seems to sell more to GMs than it does to players. So the sense of entitlement that comes from being marketed directly to doesn't seem to permeate GURPS players.

The people who had trouble with the collaborative process with me were Champions players more than D&D players. I'm not sure if it's the same dynamic in Champions. But a lot of people who play that seem to work on the basis that you go off and huddle in a little room and do your own perfectly polished design and then drop it onto the playing field. It's almost like character design is a kind of contest. I'm not sure if Champions has anything like splatbooks; a lot of it seems to be more coming up with increasingly ingenious ways to tweak the rules.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by whswhs

It's almost like character design is a kind of contest.

This is, I think, a player style that's not confined to any particular system. (Or indeed, even RPGs as a category.) Some people enjoy manipulating the rules as a system in its own right, without regard for what is being represented or simulated.

I'll admit to occasionally enjoying playing with a system to see what the extrema look like, and how it stretches and breaks. However, I wouldn't find it fun to put the exploits into action in a regular game just so I could dominate it.

[Phantasm]

Oh yes, the dreaded "I paid for/pirated this book, so I have every right to use it and you can't say no to me!" argument... which I had to fight every so often when I laid down a rule for "If I (as GM) do not have a book, you cannot use anything from it!". That rule for my games really caused some resentment, especially after I revealed the "pitifully small" (their words) list of books I did have (the PHB, DMG, MM, MM2, MM3, all the Complete Warrior/Adventurer/Divine/etc books, but lacking the Quintessentials they loved).

Worst was a player who insisted that it was "the GM's responsibility to pirate the books he didn't have" if the GM didn't have the money to buy them. Suffice to say, he didn't last in the group long.

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

Worst was a player who insisted that it was "the GM's responsibility to pirate the books he didn't have" if the GM didn't have the money to buy them. Suffice to say, he didn't last in the group long.

If the GM doesn't have a book I want to use something from, I give them the book/pdf to read through ahead of time. Usually works out well.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by trooper6

GURPS, on the other hand, seems to sell more to GMs than it does to players. So the sense of entitlement that comes from being marketed directly to doesn't seem to permeate GURPS players.

Well, plus it doesn't make any sense. I mean, "I just bought this book on swashbucklers, so I feel entitled to play one!" "But this is a military sci-fi game, full of alien space-snipers that'll swiss-cheese a swashbuckler from a mile away!" "ENTITLED TO PLAY ONE!" "...okay..."

That said, I kinda wonder now is DF: Sages and DF: Ninja and DF: Power-Ups were actually designed with players in mind. A player could just buy DF: Ninja and then ask to have one dropped into a DF game.

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

If the GM doesn't have a book I want to use something from, I give them the book/pdf to read through ahead of time. Usually works out well.

Oh yeah, I got access to a few books I didn't have that way with less confrontational players. This guy, however, instead of sharing just said "go to this (well-known virus-laden pirate) site and pirate it".

And yes, he was quite blatant about the pirating.

[David Johnston2]

One thing you should do with powers that are just collections of game mechanics is ask them just what all that is intended to represent. Why can't the attack be dodged? How does it infallibly seek out the right targets?

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

Oh yeah, I got access to a few books I didn't have that way with less confrontational players. This guy, however, instead of sharing just said "go to this (well-known virus-laden pirate) site and pirate it".

And yes, he was quite blatant about the pirating.

Yeah...I wouldn't want to play with him, either.