Forums of the Megaverse®

Meta-gaming isn't something I usually worry about with RPGs. That's more of a videogame phenominon.

I think the worst meta-gaming issue I've seen with RPGs is bribing the GM with pizza.

Edit: I take that back if you consider using out of character knowledge as meta-gaming.

--flatline

I wonder if a Psi-Leech and a Machine Person hooked up to a giant energy cannon as buddies would be considered munchkin.

I can certainly agree that if someones aggravating another player, that player should seek intervention by the GM. And it's not just body language, but verbal tone and volume that would clue the GM in on whether a player feels harassed. (Though the player should speak directly to the GM to absolutely clarify their position or ask the other player calmly to stop etc) I can see a problem with passive aggressive behavior if it triggers aggressive behavior as a response or it starts to dominate the game - something the GM should be the arbiter of. And other players can obviously decide if it's worth their while to attend further game sessions. So I guess it sorts itself out if it doesn't come to blows.

It's just really tricky judging stuff like 'tone' (volume at least we can measure in decibals, albeit I doubt that's being recorded during play). Plus whether or not you 'feel harassed' doesn't matter if harassment wasn't intended. Just as 'feeling aggravated' and 'being aggravating' are flip sides that don't always have the complimentary existence.

Some playing styles might be viewed as passive aggressive merely by taking actions with one's player that other players don't like... as opposed to how those actions were communicated.

Yup it can be tricky. So it's a bit of an art and the GM has to be careful not to demonise or isolate the 'offending' player.

Which is unavoidable when engaging in terms like these Much like 'killer GM'. I mean heck, that should be avoided too, unless you're roleplaying Friendship is Magic conversions there's no reason for people not to die.

Hmnn I always assumed it came from "Number Cruncher" which is usually shorthanded to 'muncher.

so a Munchkin, would be someone who over details their character or game to extreme levels(and may or may not encourage others to do the same), they try to make their character entirely and perfectly within the rules without bending them the notorious "creative use of game mechanics" player or game master.

Where as a power gamer, would be someone who entirely abuses the system to their own advantage, focusing on gaining absolute power(which of course corrupts absolutely).

Munchkins are fun to play with(they are cute and childish so have great reactions to weird and creative use of game mechanics thrown AGAINST them!)
Power Gamers are not.

As for where it originated see my 2nd sentence there, and the other poster's explanation(about 3rd post down i think)?
They were probably originally called munchers...then wizard of oz came out...and munchkin happened haha.
Its also one of the most fun cardgames around

Niji wrote:Hmnn I always assumed it came from "Number Cruncher" which is usually shorthanded to 'muncher.

Never, ever, in my life have I heard that one.

Wouldn't it be "Nuncher?"

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Niji wrote:Hmnn I always assumed it came from "Number Cruncher" which is usually shorthanded to 'muncher.

Never, ever, in my life have I heard that one.

Wouldn't it be "Nuncher?"

In my circles growing up we called number crunchers Munchers, as in munching on numbers....a bit to do with obsession with numbers, patterns, eating it up like...a food.

Just goes to show where a word can end up having similar meaning even though it was "invented" in another context and definition at a different time and place...though still in present day I'd say the definitions are pretty homogeneous now regardless. Cute little adorable stat munchers lol.

Niji wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Niji wrote:Hmnn I always assumed it came from "Number Cruncher" which is usually shorthanded to 'muncher.

Never, ever, in my life have I heard that one.

Wouldn't it be "Nuncher?"

In my circles growing up we called number crunchers Munchers, as in munching on numbers....a bit to do with obsession with numbers, patterns, eating it up like...a food.

Just goes to show where a word can end up having similar meaning even though it was "invented" in another context and definition at a different time and place...though still in present day I'd say the definitions are pretty homogeneous now regardless. Cute little adorable stat munchers lol.

We (my area) always called number crunchers Min/maxers.

You can compress that further and call them minxes instead

Eclipse wrote:You can compress that further and call them minxes instead

Now they want to be called "optimizers"

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Eclipse wrote:You can compress that further and call them minxes instead

Now they want to be called "optimizers"

Well, that only makes sense. They are, after all, optimizing their character design according to some specific criteria (usually combat related, but not always).

--flatline

flatline wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Eclipse wrote:You can compress that further and call them minxes instead

Now they want to be called "optimizers"

Well, that only makes sense. They are, after all, optimizing their character design according to some specific criteria (usually combat related, but not always).

--flatline

Trying to escape negative connotations that have been given to the minmax term, but can't escape that as people will just treat optimizing as a derogatory term (such as putting the word in quotes) instead of the neutral context word it is.

flatline wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Eclipse wrote:You can compress that further and call them minxes instead

Now they want to be called "optimizers"

Well, that only makes sense. They are, after all, optimizing their character design according to some specific criteria (usually combat related, but not always).

--flatline

Agreed.
"Min/maxers" never really made that much sense to me as a name.

Out of curiosity, when you design your character, don't you attempt to make choices that help the character be good at the things you want the character to be good at? Isn't that a normal part of character design?

Does that make you a "min/maxer" or "optimizer"?

--flatline

notafraid2die wrote:

flatline wrote:Out of curiosity, when you design your character, don't you attempt to make choices that help the character be good at the things you want the character to be good at? Isn't that a normal part of character design?

Does that make you a "min/maxer" or "optimizer"?

--flatline

Not necessarily the things I want the character to be good at, but the things that the character is supposed to be good at. For instance, I might want to have my character excel in combat, and be tempted to put that 22 I rolled in PS, but because my character is a Rogue Scholar, then I put that 22 in IQ and settle for a PS of 12. Not really what I want, but it works for the character.

Now I imagine a munchkin would wholeheartedly put that 22 into his PS and have a Rogue Scholar with a PS of 22 and an IQ of 12, and play him like a man-of-arms.

PS isn't all that important to many fighter types in Rifts though, so many are making use of power armor, robots, and vehicles so unless they were intently playing a brawny fighter sort they'd put it into IQ still (for the bonuses however slight to the piloting skills and other skills that make use of the percentile checks and IQ bonus) or PP to improve targeting. Plus it's not that implausible that someone could be a Rogue Scholar with a 12 IQ and 22 PS, after all he's got the intelligence requirement covered and he could have simply had a life where he had to be physically strong but wanted more and sought after more scholarly pursuits. Just a different angle of RP, it's not a given that one is putting stats as you suggested so they can be a disruptive influence.

Any which way you look a it munchkin is a subjective descriptive term, while its origins are important they usually bare no meaning on how a word is definied invidually, and usually not important in popular vernacular or natural languge, ultimately how you define it is what you matters.

As to your godling fellow...well if he didnt want to be noticed he should have built up a skill set of stealth and subtrifuge....mooks autimatically go for the biggest target because it is the easiet to hit! Now if that person was playing a master of stealth and sutblty i could see it being a big problem. But no one has a right to complain out of character about being picked on, in game and in real life this is just simpley how life works. People that cant handle it aren't "fit" and don't survive, basics of natural selection. Gotta handle pressure and roles thrusted onto you, cards delt to you that aren't optimal....usually this knowledge is what makes people INTO munchkins and optimizers and what have you! Plan for the unplanned or be hearty enough to handle it regardless is the motto. (With self titled munchkins/optimizers/etc)

All that really matters from a gm perspective is : are we having a good time? No? Well tough, life isn't fair figure out how to have a fun time now matter what is thrown at you!

this term can and does apply to GM's as well. now lets bash on munchkin GM's for a while. if your players have to roll a new character for every gaming session, you might be a munchkin GM. if you do not allow things in your world for game balance reasons but ambush the party with the entire coalition army, you might be a munchkin GM. if the only people that survive your adventures are GMPC's you might be a munchkin GM.

say652 wrote:this term can and does apply to GM's as well. now lets bash on munchkin GM's for a while. if your players have to roll a new character for every gaming session, you might be a munchkin GM. if you do not allow things in your world for game balance reasons but ambush the party with the entire coalition army, you might be a munchkin GM. if the only people that survive your adventures are GMPC's you might be a munchkin GM.

Try again...
You have described 3 very different types of GM.
And they dont even begin to cover all the types.
There is...
The Railroader (his story is it dont leave the train)
The Showoff (GMPC)
The Monty Haul (even the rats and fleas will drop a major Item)
The Scrooge (hope you got good starting gear cause thats all you will ever see)
The Capricious God (its this way cause I say so and consistency be damned)
The Sick Bastard (rape, mutilation, etc... all will happen to the PC)
The Competitor (its him against the players)
The By the Book (got a neat idea but it is not in a book? not gonna happen.)
The Radomizer (the Dice rule all)
The Wimp (nothing challenges the PCs; He fears getting a bad rep if he overestimates the party and gets a TPK)
The Nepotist (he has one or two favorite PCs and they never fail)
The Cheater (sometimes mistaken for the Capricious God or the Competitor... more a combination of the two)
The Waffler (can never make decision and stick to it. All it takes is one hint of a grumble from a single player and flip! Decision over turned)
The Missing (he is there at the table but its not him running the game its one of the PCs who has learned they can manipulate him)
The Killer (related to the competitor it is not a "win" unless it is a Total Party Kill).

maybe we need more preset adventures to avoid this. or a board game we could call it RIFTSquest. lol

And on the Player side we have...
The Role-player (amateur actor, or at least a repressed one But can be an asset in most games)
The Strategist (always has a plan based on the use of information [rules or in game] can be an asset in intrigue heavy games)
The Rules Lawyer (If its not in the books its not legal... Loves to show off his system mastery... great resource for rules arbitration)
The Optimizer (related to the RL but only in how the rules can be manipulated to give the character an advantage. Good for building niche characters)
The Envious Whiner ("his fighter has a higher PS than my Mage WAHHHH!" Can usually be shown that he is strong in his own right.)
The Manipulator (has found how to get his way through the manipulation of the GM. Usually requires the other players "converse" with him to cease the manipulations)
The Loon (does what ever will make things "interesting" even if it could mean his character dies)
The Hack and Slasher (Related to the Strategist and the Optimizer... combat is all this game is about. Best guy to have in a combat oriented game.)
The Power Gamer (takes the weakest character they can find and turns them into a force to be reckoned with. Is not interested in "optimizing" in the traditional sense just wants to see how much of a hero they can make that zero)
The Conceptualist (always has a new kewl character idea he wants to try out. Great source of inspiration for everyone at the table.)
The Munchkin (combines the worst aspects of all the others in to one single being bent on dominating the game and the GM and other players be damned... Will pitch a tantrum worthy of a two year old if stymied in any way... there are no redeeming qualities to this player type).

So we can sum it up with "Munchkin" is an insult. (period)

Regardless of 'origin' it is a term used to belittle or berate a player for whatever reason the speaker sees fit.

Hot Rod wrote:So we can sum it up with "Munchkin" is an insult. (period)

Regardless of 'origin' it is a term used to belittle or berate a player for whatever reason the speaker sees fit.

And one that shouldn't be in use on these forums.

Hot Rod wrote:So we can sum it up with "Munchkin" is an insult. (period)

Regardless of 'origin' it is a term used to belittle or berate a player for whatever reason the speaker sees fit.

Yup one used hobby wide.

Niji wrote:Any which way you look a it munchkin is a subjective descriptive term, while its origins are important they usually bare no meaning on how a word is definied invidually, and usually not important in popular vernacular or natural languge, ultimately how you define it is what you matters.

As to your godling fellow...well if he didnt want to be noticed he should have built up a skill set of stealth and subtrifuge....mooks autimatically go for the biggest target because it is the easiet to hit! Now if that person was playing a master of stealth and sutblty i could see it being a big problem. But no one has a right to complain out of character about being picked on, in game and in real life this is just simpley how life works. People that cant handle it aren't "fit" and don't survive, basics of natural selection. Gotta handle pressure and roles thrusted onto you, cards delt to you that aren't optimal....usually this knowledge is what makes people INTO munchkins and optimizers and what have you! Plan for the unplanned or be hearty enough to handle it regardless is the motto. (With self titled munchkins/optimizers/etc)

All that really matters from a gm perspective is : are we having a good time? No? Well tough, life isn't fair figure out how to have a fun time now matter what is thrown at you!

I agree with you entirely. His character, the Godling Gunfighter, used a lot of heavy weapons and armor. Then you have a light, highspeed cyborg (90 MDC, SPD of 200), a Tundra Ranger, and a Shifter. The borg is using high speed hit and run tactics, while the Tundra Ranger and Shifter have taken cover and are snapping off shots from there. The Godling would stand there, guns blazing, until a bunch of people started shooting at him. And then, instead of taking cover he would shout that he was being singled out and picked on. No, seriously. And that is one example.
The fun example was different. We had a critical miss system. If you rolled a 1, then you rerolled the d20 to see how bad it was. Each time he'd roll a 1, he'd usually roll less than 5 on the reroll, so something was supposed to happen. He never stopped complaining about my innovative methods. One time I had it where his e-clip wasn't properly seated and fell out (I've seen this happen). Another time a bit of grit got into his plasma cannon's trigger switch.
Finally I'd had enough and his favorite plasma cannon's emitter shattered. It was a pair of nat 1's. When he started shouting, demanding an explanation "for this BS", I said, "Your guys' rules are that something bad happens on a natural 1. Not my fault I'm playing by your house rules and you don't like it."

And no, that didn't shut him up.

wyrmraker wrote:

Niji wrote:Any which way you look a it munchkin is a subjective descriptive term, while its origins are important they usually bare no meaning on how a word is definied invidually, and usually not important in popular vernacular or natural languge, ultimately how you define it is what you matters.

As to your godling fellow...well if he didnt want to be noticed he should have built up a skill set of stealth and subtrifuge....mooks autimatically go for the biggest target because it is the easiet to hit! Now if that person was playing a master of stealth and sutblty i could see it being a big problem. But no one has a right to complain out of character about being picked on, in game and in real life this is just simpley how life works. People that cant handle it aren't "fit" and don't survive, basics of natural selection. Gotta handle pressure and roles thrusted onto you, cards delt to you that aren't optimal....usually this knowledge is what makes people INTO munchkins and optimizers and what have you! Plan for the unplanned or be hearty enough to handle it regardless is the motto. (With self titled munchkins/optimizers/etc)

All that really matters from a gm perspective is : are we having a good time? No? Well tough, life isn't fair figure out how to have a fun time now matter what is thrown at you!

I agree with you entirely. His character, the Godling Gunfighter, used a lot of heavy weapons and armor. Then you have a light, highspeed cyborg (90 MDC, SPD of 200), a Tundra Ranger, and a Shifter. The borg is using high speed hit and run tactics, while the Tundra Ranger and Shifter have taken cover and are snapping off shots from there. The Godling would stand there, guns blazing, until a bunch of people started shooting at him. And then, instead of taking cover he would shout that he was being singled out and picked on. No, seriously. And that is one example.
The fun example was different. We had a critical miss system. If you rolled a 1, then you rerolled the d20 to see how bad it was. Each time he'd roll a 1, he'd usually roll less than 5 on the reroll, so something was supposed to happen. He never stopped complaining about my innovative methods. One time I had it where his e-clip wasn't properly seated and fell out (I've seen this happen). Another time a bit of grit got into his plasma cannon's trigger switch.
Finally I'd had enough and his favorite plasma cannon's emitter shattered. It was a pair of nat 1's. When he started shouting, demanding an explanation "for this BS", I said, "Your guys' rules are that something bad happens on a natural 1. Not my fault I'm playing by your house rules and you don't like it."

And no, that didn't shut him up.

GM: "Wait, you're just going to stand out there exposed?"
Player: "I'm going to stand there and shoot my guns!"
GM: "Do you have another character already prepared or do you need to roll one up while we're playing?"

Nothing makes a player more careful like having to make a new character every playing session.

--flatline

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Hot Rod wrote:So we can sum it up with "Munchkin" is an insult. (period)

Regardless of 'origin' it is a term used to belittle or berate a player for whatever reason the speaker sees fit.

Yup one used hobby wide.

It's not just player-specific. "Munchkin" can be an adjective as well as a noun.
Classes, characters, equipment, spells, and even entire games can be considered to be "munchkin."

flatline wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:

Niji wrote:Any which way you look a it munchkin is a subjective descriptive term, while its origins are important they usually bare no meaning on how a word is definied invidually, and usually not important in popular vernacular or natural languge, ultimately how you define it is what you matters.

As to your godling fellow...well if he didnt want to be noticed he should have built up a skill set of stealth and subtrifuge....mooks autimatically go for the biggest target because it is the easiet to hit! Now if that person was playing a master of stealth and sutblty i could see it being a big problem. But no one has a right to complain out of character about being picked on, in game and in real life this is just simpley how life works. People that cant handle it aren't "fit" and don't survive, basics of natural selection. Gotta handle pressure and roles thrusted onto you, cards delt to you that aren't optimal....usually this knowledge is what makes people INTO munchkins and optimizers and what have you! Plan for the unplanned or be hearty enough to handle it regardless is the motto. (With self titled munchkins/optimizers/etc)

All that really matters from a gm perspective is : are we having a good time? No? Well tough, life isn't fair figure out how to have a fun time now matter what is thrown at you!

I agree with you entirely. His character, the Godling Gunfighter, used a lot of heavy weapons and armor. Then you have a light, highspeed cyborg (90 MDC, SPD of 200), a Tundra Ranger, and a Shifter. The borg is using high speed hit and run tactics, while the Tundra Ranger and Shifter have taken cover and are snapping off shots from there. The Godling would stand there, guns blazing, until a bunch of people started shooting at him. And then, instead of taking cover he would shout that he was being singled out and picked on. No, seriously. And that is one example.
The fun example was different. We had a critical miss system. If you rolled a 1, then you rerolled the d20 to see how bad it was. Each time he'd roll a 1, he'd usually roll less than 5 on the reroll, so something was supposed to happen. He never stopped complaining about my innovative methods. One time I had it where his e-clip wasn't properly seated and fell out (I've seen this happen). Another time a bit of grit got into his plasma cannon's trigger switch.
Finally I'd had enough and his favorite plasma cannon's emitter shattered. It was a pair of nat 1's. When he started shouting, demanding an explanation "for this BS", I said, "Your guys' rules are that something bad happens on a natural 1. Not my fault I'm playing by your house rules and you don't like it."

And no, that didn't shut him up.

GM: "Wait, you're just going to stand out there exposed?"
Player: "I'm going to stand there and shoot my guns!"
GM: "Do you have another character already prepared or do you need to roll one up while we're playing?"

Nothing makes a player more careful like having to make a new character every playing session.

--flatline

It was actually the in and out of game whining and shouting that bugged me. He seriously thought that he was right, and everyone else was out to get him. And it wasn't my house, I wasn't hosting game, so I couldn't kick him out.

He once complained, at length, in game, during combat, that I was out to get his character, that I was a killer GM singling him out. He had an amulet that granted him Impervious to Energy, and I had a tribe of bandits armed with automatic shotguns loaded with APRJ rounds. I got him to stop shouting at me long enough to prove that it was purely an economics things. He grudgingly accepted that as an answer, but only because he couldn't find a way to argue the point. But it still paused game for several minutes when it shouldn't have had to have been.

That guy was my primary example of pure munchkinism, and is the example by which I judge all other minchkinism to this day.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Wouldn't it be "Nuncher?"

We should force this meme.

Anyone who is interested in how to be a Munchkin, or more likely how to STOP a munchkin, needs to read The Munchkin's Guide to Power Gaming. It's available from Steve Jackson Games, and is an excellent tome of knowledge for figuring out what munchkins truly can do.

Is seems munchkins get upset being called a munchkin.

I started role-playing back in the 80s (88 I think?). Within the first year, I knew what Monty Haul meant, but I didn't hear Munchkin for a while. This is likely because I only played with the same group of friends, and never went to conventions or played in a broader circle until `92 or so. When I did hear the term, it was in some of Pondsmith's ramblings in Cyberpunk 2020 (something about a person only buying one cyber leg and trying to min-max that advantage to silly proportions). It was covered in a Rolemaster Companion as well (iirc) - the munchkin was defined (to paraphrase) as a player who would destroy the game.

Munchkins appear to me to be the kind of player who is not playing rpgs for the same reasons as the rest of the table. He or she is there to win, crush, dominate, distort plot and generally have a good time, regardless of the experience for the rest of the people at the table. Even the most loathsome power gamer or haughty immersive character actor isn't there to do what the munchkin is there to do.

Having played and quit CCGs, I can tell you they are a detriment to that hobby as well. I think the term "munchkin" could basically be replace by "jerk", and it would fit the modern usage.

flatline wrote:

Athos wrote:

Comrade Corsarius wrote:The powergamer used a home-brewed prestige class that he'd adapted from some 2nd ed adventure (usually a munchkin sign).
Therefore, one is a powergamer, the other a munchkin.

To me, they are both munchkins, one is just a little more subtle in showing his munchie-ness

I agree with this assessment. Creating your own class and not balancing it is the hallmark of a munchkin, not a power gamer. Nice of him to not rub it in the faces of the other players, though. Of all the kinds of munckins you could have in a game, he sounds pretty tolerable.

--flatline

Create your own uber class: Munchkin.
Play a canon uber class: Power Gamer.

wyrmraker wrote:Anyone who is interested in how to be a Munchkin, or more likely how to STOP a munchkin, needs to read The Munchkin's Guide to Power Gaming. It's available from Steve Jackson Games, and is an excellent tome of knowledge for figuring out what munchkins truly can do.

Sounds interesting.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:Is seems munchkins get upset being called a munchkin.

I imagine some non-munchkins may also. Kind of like how it's annoying if your'e seriously arguing and get called a troll.

Ninjabunny wrote:Munchkin is only insulting if you want it to be for me it just means two things over powered and/or deliberate game breaker.

How do you 'break' a game?

Isn't that some term other people use when they're throwing a hissy fit about another player being stronger than them?

I do rember when a friend of mine got the munchkin gide to power gaming. It is mostly writen for a D&D stand point and most of it does not work at all as writen. It is good for a laugh thou.