Author Topic: how good do you think you are at optimising? (Read 7483 times)

Sunic_Flames · « **Reply #20 on:** February 06, 2009, 03:29:30 PM »

Quote from: RobbyPants on February 06, 2009, 03:24:46 PM

Like Kahn and Pun Pun?

Past Khan maybe. Present Khan is a 2, and that's being generous. He's a full on Sundertard and Anti Fighter now, among other things.

skydragonknight · « **Reply #21 on:** February 06, 2009, 05:36:52 PM »

8 +/- 1 depending on the day. Though days when I'm at 9 are fairly infrequent.

Shadowhunter · « **Reply #22 on:** February 06, 2009, 07:04:22 PM »

Here probably a 4. In my gaming group 9, if nothing else since beeing a 10 won't allow me to play the character since it's too optimized.

bhu · « **Reply #23 on:** February 07, 2009, 02:26:45 AM »

I'm...uncertain. At a guess I'd say I'm average. The group I play with deliberately does the opposite of optimization to avoid being "powergamers" due to some horribly mentally scarring episode in their past. I can throw together anything no matter how unlikely, and the odds favor I will still be the most powerful member of the party by default. They find Monks overpowered for Gods sake.

j0lt · « **Reply #24 on:** February 07, 2009, 02:40:07 AM »

Quote from: bhu on February 07, 2009, 02:26:45 AM

They find Monks overpowered for Gods sake.

When 3.x first came out, I was really excited about the Monk class. I probably played like 3 or 4 different Monk characters over the years. Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure they all died...

Straw_Man · « **Reply #25 on:** February 07, 2009, 05:28:59 AM »

Ooh rating other posters. Myself 3 to 4 as long as I insist on my own builds

bhu · « **Reply #26 on:** February 07, 2009, 07:21:39 AM »

Quote from: j0lt on February 07, 2009, 02:40:07 AM

Quote from: bhu on February 07, 2009, 02:26:45 AM
They find Monks overpowered for Gods sake.

When 3.x first came out, I was really excited about the Monk class. I probably played like 3 or 4 different Monk characters over the years. Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure they all died...

To give you an idea of how much fun listening to their conversations is here's a quote: "ALL Good Saves? Omg all I have to do is max out my Con, Dex, and Wis and I'll be unkillable cause I'll never fail a roll."

Which is why I'm uncertain how good I am at optimization. Playing with my group, I've never been allowed to...

bogsnes · « **Reply #27 on:** February 07, 2009, 07:45:57 AM »

If it were among my RL play-group, I'd be a 11, but that is mostly because the others don't even know what DMG means...
nor do they know what optimising means...

Dictum Mortuum · « **Reply #28 on:** February 07, 2009, 07:48:22 AM »

I'm probably somewhere around 8. Maybe less, as i tend to sacrifice power for flavor and prefer aesthetic builds

EjoThims · « **Reply #29 on:** February 07, 2009, 10:23:47 AM »

I'd say probably 5-6. Possibly a little higher than the norm, especially in my areas of personal focus, but I haven't spawned any real unique tricks or specialty builds (1million attacks was mostly me compiling other tricks in creative ways, though I am quiet proud of the combination of PMWF, Multi-headed/mouthpick, and Ability Rip to generate more attacks with head based progressions).

Talen Lee · « **Reply #30 on:** February 07, 2009, 10:29:20 AM »

3. I'm too interested in elegance and progression. It's more important to me that every level goes smoothly than it is that my character WILL be awesome, or WAS awesome.

Back in 3.0, when the tools to optimise were blunter and the highs higher, though, I think I rated very highly. I remember getting Psychofeedback nerfed through the Wizards boards and I remember very clearly the creation of the Geomancer Gish builds which showed how crap gish were back in 3.0

AlterFrom · « **Reply #31 on:** February 07, 2009, 07:06:26 PM »

3-5. I don't put a whole lot of time into making a build its absolute best, and I barely (if ever...I might even say never) post to CharOp boards (here or otherwise).

Tshern · « **Reply #32 on:** February 10, 2009, 10:42:36 AM »

I am a 1d4+1.

skydragonknight · « **Reply #33 on:** February 10, 2009, 12:52:30 PM »

Quote from: Tshern on February 10, 2009, 10:42:36 AM

I am a 1d4+1.

You're a Magic Missle?

Tshern · « **Reply #34 on:** February 10, 2009, 12:56:53 PM »

That too.

Sinfire Titan · « **Reply #35 on:** February 10, 2009, 06:11:13 PM »

7. When I'm in my environment (Incarnum, etc) is when I can get major work in.

Although I prefer fixing the system than breaking it (I have a flash drive with 17 home brew classes on it, and only 5 of those are completed works).

Talen Lee · « **Reply #36 on:** February 10, 2009, 06:14:18 PM »

Quote from: Tshern on February 10, 2009, 12:56:53 PM

That too.

Just so we're clear, that's a sexual metaphor, right?

Bozwevial · « **Reply #37 on:** February 10, 2009, 06:18:09 PM »

In comparison to most, if not all of the gamers I know? The numbers don't go that high.

In comparison to the 339 and/or BG boards? Probably a low 6, and that's being generous.

InnaBinder · « **Reply #38 on:** February 10, 2009, 07:58:58 PM »

Quote

I'd say people like Janus Jones and Tielexu Ghola would be 10s

*coughLoPcoughDisposableHero_cough*

The_Mad_Linguist · « **Reply #39 on:** February 10, 2009, 08:08:21 PM »

Obviously I'm a 4d3-2d4.

Yes, that can go negative.

News:

Author Topic: how good do you think you are at optimising? (Read 7483 times)