Powergaming Part 1

When it comes to pen & paper RPGs, I don't like powergaming.

In video games, victory and loss are usually binary. Winning is good, losing is bad. Winning lets you progress, losing makes you start over. In this environment, powergaming is fine, since you're only dealing with the computer, and it's feelings won't get hurt when you give every stat up and new sword to that same warrior. The game doesn't care if you skip content, use cheat-codes, neglect character story developement, etc.

Not true of pen & paper RPGs (for the purposes of this rant, we'll use D&D 3.5, but feel free to substitute whatever works for you). In D&D, you're playing with your friends, or at least, people who share a common interest. Age old lessons of sharing and taking turns come into play, as you work alongside these people to achieve party goals. Powergaming hurts players in this environment, because one player can quite literally overshadow the whole campaign, and ruin everyone elses fun. Powergamers can skew challenge level, party rewards, even negate the need for certain party members to exist. When the warrior has AC 27 at level 3, it makes it hard for the DM to present the party with a challenge that doesn't crush everyone else. Likewise, a party of varying levels can run into similar trouble.

However, in D&D, winning isn't always good, and losing isn't always bad. A player can be tricked into fighting or killing the wrong people, can take the wrong quest or not pay enough attention to the details, getting everyone into a heap of trouble. Having the ability to retreat from a battle, and quite literally live to fight another day, can create incredibly dramatic sequences within a campaign, and give players a chance to display great depth with their characters.

That being said, I'm one of the biggest offenders when it comes to powergaming in D&D.

To be continued...