shesheyan wrote:Some players want to be as powerful as possible. They derive pleasure from that. It doesn't matter what class the character is as long as its the most powerful combo in the edition. I have no problem with it, as long as the optimiser doesn't start trying to force the other players into selecting upgrades in a similar fashion instead of choosing things because they fit with their character concept and evolution. Or event worst critiquing other player actions because they are not «tactically optimal».
I've had to tell several min/maxer over the years to back down from trying to control other player's choices. In fact each campaign a ran since 1981 had at least one min/maxer. One of the most annoying had bought the 1e DMG and kept asking me to put specific magical items in treasure hordes so his character could be more powerful. In the end I got tired of being asked to put a girdle of giant strength. So I put a girdle, but it was the cursed girdle of sex change. The player was so happy he put it on his character without any an identification spell. Needless to say he was not very happy... he never asked for specific items after that.
I hear you about the trying to control other player's choices. I had a min/maxer trying to back-seat-game on me every time I levelled up my PC, telling me what I should do. I don't mind someone asking me what I am trying to do with my PC, and then suggesting a possible path (to get to a Prestige Class I've said I want to take or whatever) but when someone offers me advice on "what I should do" in or out of the D&D game, and they actually have not found out what I'm trying to do, it's generally just them telling me what
they would do, rather than helping.
I think my PC, Braxon, in
AuldDragon's live-streamed Spelljammer game, is probably the PC in Auld's game who is most likely to pick up and use a cursed item. One of us is going to get caught out at some point.
shesheyan wrote:More recently a 5e player tried to convince me that his Paladin could multi-class as a Hexblade entering a pact with a demon of the Shadowfell in order to wield a special magical evil blade. He wrote this extremely improbable one page background to justify how the character was possible. I told him wasn't possible to play such a character because it made no sens. No deity would continue supporting a Paladin that entered in an evil pact. He proceeded to rules lawyer me for a week via emails. I said no every time. He left our group of players saying he was playing that character in the D&D Adventure League in a store. No one cried over his departure.
That is a bit nuts.
If someone plays a paladin and thinks they can get a demon into supporting them (without turning evil) they are clearly trying to trick that demon into supporting good. Maybe they should be able to
attempt to trick a demon, but there is no way that they can argue that their attempt would work on a sheet of paper. Demons are tricky things themselves and I think that any demon that does allow a paladin to become a Hexblade is probably going to be wise enough to have some sort of plan to get one over on that Paladin and corrupt them into a Blackguard.
I'd probably be inclined to say "no" and back that up by telling the player that their PC would know that it was almost impossible to trick a demon into doing that. But if they came up with a non-min/maxy argument, I'd warn them that they would be risking having their Paladin get duped into becoming an
evil NPC that was no longer their character and see if they still wanted to go through with it. I'd also tell them that they were at risk of offending their deity and loosing their Paladin powers until they attone (and that attoning would almost certainly involve refusing to use Hexblade abilities). And if they still wanted to do it, I'd sit down with them and explain the system of making rolls to see if their alignment has changed and make one of those alignment changing charts for their PC.
(But, I'd rather not have someone do something that doesn't fit in with the ethical values of their PC.)