There are many old arguments among RPG players that can quickly escalate into 50-page monstrosities, and the subject of min-maxing and munchkinism, especially when it comes to single-player computer RPGs, is certainly among them.
This particular thread is aimed toward establishing an informal argument against using cheese techniques and simply playing to "beat" a SP CRPG as opposed to experiencing it in what I believe to be its generally intended purpose: to simulate the original tabletop RPG experience (which means many things), or, at the very least, to enmesh the player into a gameworld designed to stimulate his intellect and imagination through reasonably challenging tactical situations and opportunities to immerse himself into a fantastic world without depriving it of necessary purpose.
It must be conceded off the bat that many, certainly a considerable percentage, of players of RPGs could not give any less of a shit about "balance" or "fairness" or even a significant challenge in their choice of single-player titles. Their goal is invariably to defeat the game, to overcome any challenges it does pose through sheer force, exploiting any weakness or deficiency in its design as ruthlessly as possible, for that is their purpose and the means by which they derive their pleasure; there is no sense in attempting to dissuade them from these practices and I will not begin to (specifically) attempt to do so, despite the intent of this thread in the first place. That percentage of players is an irresistible force.
However, there is nothing wrong with fortifying the position of the purist which, due to his faith on a fundamental level in the whole point of SP RPGs, can be an immovable object. But it is a position that often needs reinforcements in the face of the munchkin hordes.
So putting the methods and motivations of the min-maxer far aside, let's talk about what this side of the battlefield sees as the whole point of playing SP RPGs. In my opinion, it always goes back to being an imitation of what many of us never had the opportunity to experience enough of, or at all: the tabletop experience. That is to say, not necessarily the specifics of it such as the physical booklets and the dice and the figurines and so forth -- although those all bring back many fond memories -- but rather the spirit behind these things. A fair, moderated, cohesive and internally consistent escape to a fantasy world driven by some form of conflict and inherent motivations.
I put it to you: what is the point of wading into such a world if one is stacking the deck in favor of easy "victory"? Of course, one could argue that any effort put in to better one's character or his equipment or even the gaining of any metaknowledge of the gameworld and its milieu is tilting the favor towards conquest. But I counter by stating that the process of doing so, the sometimes rigorous and painstaking steps taken through exploration, combat, victory, even defeat, are the ingredients that go into what is supposed to be a delicious recipe. Take away the joy of "cooking", if you will, and you're left with what? Does the chef enjoy his prepared meals? He often may, but others' enjoyment of his efforts are what drive him and I postulate that each and every one of us, while playing a single-player RPG, are indeed our own chefs. Actually, we are the stewards of these recipes. Whomever designs the game is really its master, and I am of the firm belief that the intent of playing them in the first place is to preserve as best we can the flavors and textures intended. Spoiling the meal is all too easy.
It's an odd thing to juxtapose the position of the purist against that of his opposite. The two sides just don't understand one another. I suppose it comes down to how they originally were exposed to the roleplaying hobby and thus how their tastes were shaped. But I also think that it derives from within: there's got to be a certain personality trait that governs whether one decides to exercise what seems to be, from their perspective, justified and even righteous restraint for "taste's" sake when playing through a SP RPG, versus those who throw delicate palate balance to the wind for dominance' sake.
Is one right while the other is wrong? Again, this thread is not meant to debate that. But I still pose, at whatever chance I get, to the other side of the fence: if you are essentially playing against yourself, what's the whole point? Aren't you spoiling your own meal?
I conclude with another concession in that that this has been merely a reductionist argument and, in fact, has not been bolstered by enough specifics of the advantages of remaining a purist to be entirely convincing. Nevertheless, my motivation in attempting to in any case remains (TL;DR): it is a philosophical belief, if anything, into the very nature of the pleasure derived from booting up a classic CRPG. I do so because I seek nourishment of my fantasy appetite. I want to set the table, I want to sit down with my napkin and my fork and knife, and I want to enjoy a pleasant meal, properly. And I take my time in doing so; those who indulge in oversalting, overspicing, and gorging using their fingers are, in my estimation, missing the entire point.
Thank you, gentlemen, and bon appétit.
This particular thread is aimed toward establishing an informal argument against using cheese techniques and simply playing to "beat" a SP CRPG as opposed to experiencing it in what I believe to be its generally intended purpose: to simulate the original tabletop RPG experience (which means many things), or, at the very least, to enmesh the player into a gameworld designed to stimulate his intellect and imagination through reasonably challenging tactical situations and opportunities to immerse himself into a fantastic world without depriving it of necessary purpose.
It must be conceded off the bat that many, certainly a considerable percentage, of players of RPGs could not give any less of a shit about "balance" or "fairness" or even a significant challenge in their choice of single-player titles. Their goal is invariably to defeat the game, to overcome any challenges it does pose through sheer force, exploiting any weakness or deficiency in its design as ruthlessly as possible, for that is their purpose and the means by which they derive their pleasure; there is no sense in attempting to dissuade them from these practices and I will not begin to (specifically) attempt to do so, despite the intent of this thread in the first place. That percentage of players is an irresistible force.
However, there is nothing wrong with fortifying the position of the purist which, due to his faith on a fundamental level in the whole point of SP RPGs, can be an immovable object. But it is a position that often needs reinforcements in the face of the munchkin hordes.
So putting the methods and motivations of the min-maxer far aside, let's talk about what this side of the battlefield sees as the whole point of playing SP RPGs. In my opinion, it always goes back to being an imitation of what many of us never had the opportunity to experience enough of, or at all: the tabletop experience. That is to say, not necessarily the specifics of it such as the physical booklets and the dice and the figurines and so forth -- although those all bring back many fond memories -- but rather the spirit behind these things. A fair, moderated, cohesive and internally consistent escape to a fantasy world driven by some form of conflict and inherent motivations.
I put it to you: what is the point of wading into such a world if one is stacking the deck in favor of easy "victory"? Of course, one could argue that any effort put in to better one's character or his equipment or even the gaining of any metaknowledge of the gameworld and its milieu is tilting the favor towards conquest. But I counter by stating that the process of doing so, the sometimes rigorous and painstaking steps taken through exploration, combat, victory, even defeat, are the ingredients that go into what is supposed to be a delicious recipe. Take away the joy of "cooking", if you will, and you're left with what? Does the chef enjoy his prepared meals? He often may, but others' enjoyment of his efforts are what drive him and I postulate that each and every one of us, while playing a single-player RPG, are indeed our own chefs. Actually, we are the stewards of these recipes. Whomever designs the game is really its master, and I am of the firm belief that the intent of playing them in the first place is to preserve as best we can the flavors and textures intended. Spoiling the meal is all too easy.
It's an odd thing to juxtapose the position of the purist against that of his opposite. The two sides just don't understand one another. I suppose it comes down to how they originally were exposed to the roleplaying hobby and thus how their tastes were shaped. But I also think that it derives from within: there's got to be a certain personality trait that governs whether one decides to exercise what seems to be, from their perspective, justified and even righteous restraint for "taste's" sake when playing through a SP RPG, versus those who throw delicate palate balance to the wind for dominance' sake.
Is one right while the other is wrong? Again, this thread is not meant to debate that. But I still pose, at whatever chance I get, to the other side of the fence: if you are essentially playing against yourself, what's the whole point? Aren't you spoiling your own meal?
I conclude with another concession in that that this has been merely a reductionist argument and, in fact, has not been bolstered by enough specifics of the advantages of remaining a purist to be entirely convincing. Nevertheless, my motivation in attempting to in any case remains (TL;DR): it is a philosophical belief, if anything, into the very nature of the pleasure derived from booting up a classic CRPG. I do so because I seek nourishment of my fantasy appetite. I want to set the table, I want to sit down with my napkin and my fork and knife, and I want to enjoy a pleasant meal, properly. And I take my time in doing so; those who indulge in oversalting, overspicing, and gorging using their fingers are, in my estimation, missing the entire point.
Thank you, gentlemen, and bon appétit.
