Whats a Munchkin?

[Casey]

Originally Posted by Bill Cameron

Snow here, been shoveling out there between bouts of 'shoveling' in here at the Forum. I've got my kettle on, loose leaf Earl Grey in the strainer too. Gonna make a brew up strong enough to float a horseshoe in it.

Been there since mid 2002 with the same handle as here and close to 2000 posts so yes. Still a Knight though the Moot closed down due to non-payment of dues last June and I still have the Moot Jester title and the miniphants. ^.^

While I had some good conversations over there, I'm burntout on QLI and currently running a gritty gonzo game of Tekumel (aka one of Grandfather's pet Pocket 'Verses). I also find these forums easier to use.

Cheers,
Kevin

On Topic: I recall some good if spirited threads there that touched upon Munchkinism. While we don't agree fully on differences between Traveller editions IIRC we do agree that key parts of the Traveller feel are lethality (including but not limited to combat), some amount of randomness in chargen, and an emphasis on player characters being heroes, not Heroes. All help prevent Munchkinism.

P.S. switched to looseleaf after your last post. Excellent with warmed up Holiday raisin banana nut bread. mmmm

[Tom Kalbfus]

Originally Posted by Casey

Been there since mid 2002 with the same handle as here and close to 2000 posts so yes. Still a Knight though the Moot closed down due to non-payment of dues last June and I still have the Moot Jester title and the miniphants. ^.^

While I had some good conversations over there, I'm burntout on QLI and currently running a gritty gonzo game of Tekumel (aka one of Grandfather's pet Pocket 'Verses). I also find these forums easier to use.

Cheers,
Kevin

On Topic: I recall some good if spirited threads there that touched upon Munchkinism. While we don't agree fully on differences between Traveller editions IIRC we do agree that key parts of the Traveller feel are lethality (including but not limited to combat), some amount of randomness in chargen, and an emphasis on player characters being heroes, not Heroes. All help prevent Munchkinism.

P.S. switched to looseleaf after your last post. Excellent with warmed up Holiday raisin banana nut bread. mmmm

Preventing Munchkinism isn't everything. Munchkins buy games, and if I recall correctly Game Designer's Workshop went out of business. Perhaps the people playing their games got tired of having their characters killed all the time, and all those smug expert gamers who always look down on Munchkins couldn't keep the game in business. You see games like D&D play to all comers, they make adventures for characters who just want to clean out dungeons and become all powerful rulers of their own fiefdoms, and they play to those more thoughtful roleplayers whose characters only occasionally raise a sword. The broader your customer base the more money you make. Wizards of the Coast realize that, they don't care if Munchkins play their games, after all their money is just as good as anyone elses. A smart busness doesn't look down on any of its customers. The 'U' in GURPS stands for Universal, its time you remember that, the game wasn't made just for pros who know ins and outs of the game, if it just catered to that clientel, the company couldn't grow.

If they want to expand their business, they need to make it easy for new players to learn, and new players need a simple situation where they can learn the ins and outs, without those complicated stories, and so many of the pros advocate, sometime people just want a simple hack and slash and their is nothing wrong with that. There is also nothing wrong with rewarding character points for killing monsters, that is the perogative of the GM after all. The biggest problem of most established game companies is the snobbery of the old pros who make it their habit of putting down new players and discouraging them. I read that speech from Wizards of the Coast in an issue of Dragon some time ago, and I'm basically repeating that point here. Wizards is bigger than GURPS, and the way GURPS can compete is to find out what Wizards is doing right and emulate it. If GURPS can get people who are new to RPGs instead of just those who graduate from D&D and want to try something new, then I say they are doing quite well.

[cccwebs]

Munchkin has nothing to do with genre or game system. It has nothing to do with point values or the characters built. Munchkin is a play style. It is the win at all cost style. Munchkins aren't in the game for fun. They're in it for the "glory", and usually they take delight in making everyone else at the table miserable in the process.

[Casey]

Ah my turn I see. Well the tea hit the spot and the bread was good. So here goes.

Originally Posted by Tom Kalbfus

Preventing Munchkinism isn't everything. Munchkins buy games, and if I recall correctly Game Designer's Workshop went out of business. Perhaps

Oh any version of Traveller can still have Munchkins and by Traveller I mean all Traveller editions, not just Classic Traveller. The example in a previous post of mine had several behavior patterns drawn from Traveller games I've been in. The Battledress/PGMP-15 combo is the classic example dating back from the start of the Classic Traveller in 1977. GDW went out of business due to overprinting of a Desert Storm sourcebook (i.e. a mainstream book) and the CCG boom, which was explained on CotI some months ago now by Dave Nilsen.

The rest, well you’re responding to somebody else as I’ve not been talking about those issues. I’ve nothing against say dungeoncrawl, though I don’t like to play it online for various reasons, including online play not really suited to endless combat encounters. Face to face I don’t mind it as I game face to face mainly for the social aspect and fun, not a particular style of play.

Grognards can be munchkins too. :)

Oh and don’t try to beat D&D at its own game. That way is doomed to failure. Having said that, you do realize SJG has RPG supplements for D20 catering specifically to Munchkinism?

Hmmm methinks it's time for some more tea. Maybe the Orange Pekoe this time? I confess to finishing the banana bread. It was very good.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by zorg

Munchkinny is also to try to design a character with enormous/problematic/adventure-wrecking powers and hoping the GM doesn't notice. Or to get permission from the GM for a minor aberration and turn it into a huge one, again hoping no-one notices.

The player who takes exotic/supernatural advantages without telling the GM he plans on this. Who picks a prestige class so he can control other player characters. Who tells the GM that the GM told him he could have an ability for one point per when the GM told him three. Who tries to gain entrance to a gaming group by telling members of how his characters took on all comers by sitting in a tree in a cart moved by magic and shooting them. Who designs his own prestige class and grants it the Tracking feat free at first level due to "special training," along with spellcasting ability. Who insists that his eighth level paladin/monk have an awakened dire wolf as a cohort, and if the GM says no, he tells the GM that the GM is stifiling his attempt at "being different." Who makes his character the center of attention in every game, every session.

Munchkins I have known and loved. Or loathed, as the case may be. I think I put up with some of it because I kept thinking the player could be redeemed. Well, not the guy whose epic character shot from the uprooted tree in the magic cart. He was both munchkin and stupid.

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

This is a thread about What is a Munchkin?, you're bringing up munchkin character point rewards for killing things, I'm pointing out that one of the primary reasons D20 is often Munchkin bait and breeding grounds is due directly to that reward system.

You and I are on the same page for once. It's not like you can't run a D&D game and have it revolve around more than mindless killing -- I've done it, and I've played in it. But it grants XP for defeating monsters (you can rout them or charm them and still gain the XP), and other areas of XP grants are fuzzy. The Description chapter in the PHB is 8 pages long, of which: three pages go to alignment, a very vague descriptor of behavior; three pages go to religion, which is mostly a listing of gods and their cleric domains and favored weapons; and a page of generating your character's height, weight and age. That leaves a page to actual personality, of which half is dedicated to different names for skills and trying to get your GM to let you tinker with a class or race. The game is openly balanced around combat skills, and the guidelines for Dungeon Magazine adventures encourage combat encounters. Is one supposed to think this game is Bunnies and Burrows or Blue Planet?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by cccwebs

Munchkin has nothing to do with genre or game system. It has nothing to do with point values or the characters built. Munchkin is a play style. It is the win at all cost style. Munchkins aren't in the game for fun.

That's not actually true. Munchkins are in the game for fun. They just define 'fun' as 'winning'.

[Luther]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That's not actually true. Munchkins are in the game for fun. They just define 'fun' as 'winning'.

Actually Gamists define 'fun' as 'winning'.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by Tom Kalbfus

Preventing Munchkinism isn't everything. Munchkins buy games

Sure, they also buy Hackmaster or even better Munchkin D20 by SJGames, but when they buy GURPS, that could mean there's hope for them yet.

Originally Posted by Tom Kalbfus

There is also nothing wrong with rewarding character points for killing monsters, that is the perogative of the GM after all.

No actually, there is something very, very wrong with it, that's the realm and to the taste of a Munchkin GM and Munchkin players, and part of the theme of this thread is about how to identify Munchkins, and hopefully reform or failing that, how to get rid of the Munchkins.
We're pretty helpful on these boards, and we tend to believe even Munchkins can be reformed by playing GURPS.

Making sure to drive out the Munchkin habit of rewards for killing things, is only one of the many services we provide. *bseg*

Now where did I put my Holy Anvil of Munchkin Smiting?

[roguebfl]

even D20 has moved the emphisus from XP for killing monster to "Defeating a Challenge" admit one of the easiest way to defeat the challenge normally is to kill the monster but...

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Awarding points for killing things is not Wrong or even Hurting Wrong Fun. But goodness, man, give out a lot less! If my players survive a massive, winner-take-all fight with powerful NPCs or critters or both, run in an aboveboard but ruthless "the GM is actually trying to kill your PCs" manner, I'll give them like 2-3 bonus points for the session that included the fight - if the fight goes more than one session, I'll add maybe 1 point per session to this total. Maybe I'll go as high as 4 if the challenge was ludicrously over the top but defeated. The MOST xp I'd give in one session is fraction of the amounts you'd get based on 2 xp per 25 points worth of bad guy.

It just seems like a massive tidal wave of points far in excess of the challenge. Give them 10 points a session if you want rapid advancement, but giving them points based on individual kills isn't such a great idea. Back in my Man-to-Man days, we gave out 1/2 xp per kill in melees, but the game was purely fighting. I wouldn't do that these days, not when my PCs are 300-400 points or more and routinely fight people much less powerful than them. Once PC can demonstrably kill off 2 75pt battle-optimized characters per turn, and once knocked off more than 2 dozen in a fight. How many XP is that worth? :D