Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Munchkinism (was Physical Adepts)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 08:03:54 -0600
Q wrote:
|
| On Tue, 16 Sep 1997, David Buehrer wrote:
|
| > <idea> Priority C PAs receive 1 ability point per 1 magic point, priority B
| > PAs have a ratio of 1.5:1, priority A PAs a ratio of 2:1. </idea>
|
| You're kidding right? You actually _want_ a physad with 12 points worth
| of abilities running around? Can we say munchkin?

First, I don't mind if a PA in *my* game has 12 points of abilities.
Please note that my game is not combat oriented. I try to stress
story telling, plot, and character interaction. Combat is thrown in
as one of many spices to add to the game.

<friendly>

Second, munchkinism is as much the responsibility of the GM as the player.
If you, as a GM, allow munchkinism in your game it's your own fault. I
really get tired of people crying "Munchkin!" when they don't even know how
the game is being run. _Every_ game can be abused by a munchkin. _Every_
game can be run responsibly and played responsibly. _Every_ game can be
screwed up by a bad GM. A munchkin is not a rule, it is a player being
allowed to abuse the rules.

</friendly>

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 2
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Munchkinism (was Physical Adepts)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 15:14:04 -0400
David Buehrer once dared to write,

>Second, munchkinism is as much the responsibility of the GM as the player.
>If you, as a GM, allow munchkinism in your game it's your own fault. I
>really get tired of people crying "Munchkin!" when they don't even know how
>the game is being run. _Every_ game can be abused by a munchkin. _Every_
>game can be run responsibly and played responsibly. _Every_ game can be
>screwed up by a bad GM. A munchkin is not a rule, it is a player being
>allowed to abuse the rules.

Munchkins by our standard definition don't abuse as ignores the
rules of the games. Although it is the stereotype I don't think whether
or not the person can make a character more than 2 dimensional is a real
test either. just got finished with a similar thread on a Gothic
list about categorizing. The truth is we can't define how we group things
because we only have concepts of what they are. On a basic level we all
understand this grouping but we still might have different groupings.
Munchkins is the catch phrase on this list to describe most
everything that goes against what we believe is the grain. Let me offer
this as considerations before we keep using Munchkins off the cuff
(because no matter what we will still classify). The ability to create a
personality or storyline is a separate ability. While this ability is
often not found in Munchkins or Min/Maxers it is no means a test. The
same goes for the maturity of the person. A Munchkin is simply one who
changes the rules for his own good. Rule Lawyers (not necessarily
Min/Maxing) exploit the rules for their own good. There are other types
as well but they have little to do with this topic.
It may sound blasphemous (like that would stop me) but I think that
Power-Gamers, Rules Lawyers, and even Munchkins can have developed
characterizations and even play in challenging games if the campaign is
set up for it.
Again let me say that Munchkinism is separate from developing a
Characters personality. It's about changing/ignoring rules in an
unbalancing way for personal gain. A well thought out background and
characterization is no excuse for it. If the character is balanced with
the other players and versus the campaign so be it, but they might not be
in most games. It is this lack of acceptance that really defines
munchkinism.
Now I know some of you might now feel threatened that my definition
of Munchkinism could include you or that I might harbor some ill feelings
about how you run your games. The fact is I don't. I do consider you list
members my peers when dealing with Shadowrun and I'm proud to be a part
of this list. I doubt I could find such a diversified and knowledgeable
crowd. If I didn't respect your opinions I wouldn't waste my time arguing
so much.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

"One can't complain. I have my friends.
Somebody spoke to me only yesterday."
-Eeyore, Winnie-the-Pooh

I am MC23
Message no. 3
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Munchkinism (was Physical Adepts)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 13:47:14 -0600
MC23 wrote:
|
| David Buehrer once dared to write,
|
| >Second, munchkinism is as much the responsibility of the GM as the player.

I should have stopped at the end of this sentance :)

| Munchkins is the catch phrase on this list to describe most
| everything that goes against what we believe is the grain.

Bingo! The problem is that people use the phrase "munchkin" to refer
to several different classes of gamer. Some feel that powergaming is
munchkinous, others that number crunching is munchkinous.

If the response to my <idea> had been along the lines of, "12 points
for PA abilities! Your just asking for power gaming (which is
munchkinous in my opinion)." then I would have known he didn't like
the idea, and why.

My point is, that we should use the phrase "munchkin" to describe
distaste for a rule or character, not try to pigeon hole a style of
play.

| Again let me say that Munchkinism is separate from developing a
| Characters personality. It's about changing/ignoring rules in an
| unbalancing way for personal gain. A well thought out background and
| characterization is no excuse for it. If the character is balanced with
| the other players and versus the campaign so be it, but they might not be
| in most games. It is this lack of acceptance that really defines
| munchkinism.

So, what your saying is that you distaste players that ignore the
rules for personal gain. All that could have been said without using
the word "munchkin" and trying to apply a definition to the word :)
The very use of the word "munchkin" to describe a style of play
causes the problem, because everyone has a different (though similar)
definition for it. If used as a feeling towards a style of play
("ignoring the rules is munchkinous") then we won't have these
debates about what a munchkin is. And if used to describe someone
then we could understand that it's the worst possible insult towards
a gamer possible. Hmm.. I'm starting to ramble so I'm going to stop
here.

| If I didn't respect your opinions I wouldn't waste my time arguing
| so much.

Man, you must respect the hell out of Gurth ;)

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 4
From: David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Munchkinism (was Physical Adepts)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 18:08:04 -0400
At 08:03 AM 9/17/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Q wrote:
>|
>| On Tue, 16 Sep 1997, David Buehrer wrote:
>|
>| > <idea> Priority C PAs receive 1 ability point per 1 magic point,
priority B
>| > PAs have a ratio of 1.5:1, priority A PAs a ratio of 2:1. </idea>
>|
>| You're kidding right? You actually _want_ a physad with 12 points worth
>| of abilities running around? Can we say munchkin?
>
>First, I don't mind if a PA in *my* game has 12 points of abilities.
>Please note that my game is not combat oriented. I try to stress
>story telling, plot, and character interaction. Combat is thrown in
>as one of many spices to add to the game.
>
><friendly>
>
>Second, munchkinism is as much the responsibility of the GM as the player.
>If you, as a GM, allow munchkinism in your game it's your own fault. I
>really get tired of people crying "Munchkin!" when they don't even know how
>the game is being run. _Every_ game can be abused by a munchkin. _Every_
>game can be run responsibly and played responsibly. _Every_ game can be
>screwed up by a bad GM. A munchkin is not a rule, it is a player being
>allowed to abuse the rules.
>
></friendly>
>

That is what I would have said, if I had thought of it first.

--DT
Message no. 5
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Munchkinism (was Physical Adepts)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 00:18:52 -0400
David Buehrer once dared to write,

>Bingo! The problem is that people use the phrase "munchkin" to refer
>to several different classes of gamer. Some feel that powergaming is
>munchkinous, others that number crunching is munchkinous.

And that is a problem since all that is truely commonly shared of
our understanding of our use of the word is that it is derogatory.

>My point is, that we should use the phrase "munchkin" to describe
>distaste for a rule or character, not try to pigeon hole a style of
>play.

But it came from a style of play that does affect characters and
disregard for rules.

>So, what your saying is that you distaste players that ignore the
>rules for personal gain. All that could have been said without using
>the word "munchkin" and trying to apply a definition to the word :)
>The very use of the word "munchkin" to describe a style of play
>causes the problem, because everyone has a different (though similar)
>definition for it. If used as a feeling towards a style of play
>("ignoring the rules is munchkinous") then we won't have these
>debates about what a munchkin is. And if used to describe someone
>then we could understand that it's the worst possible insult towards
>a gamer possible. Hmm.. I'm starting to ramble so I'm going to stop
>here.

Language is the catagorizing and classification of things. I went
against the act of classifing things some time ago and found out it can't
be avoided.

>> If I didn't respect your opinions I wouldn't waste my time arguing
>> so much.
>
>Man, you must respect the hell out of Gurth ;)

In fact, I do. B>]#

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

"One can't complain. I have my friends.
Somebody spoke to me only yesterday."
-Eeyore, Winnie-the-Pooh

I am MC23

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Munchkinism (was Physical Adepts), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!