gamegrene.com

Go ahead, admit it. In the very back of your gaming binder, in some dark corner of your closet, there hides a character sheet for a half-drow, half-dragon demilich fighter/mage/assassin who keeps the Tarrasque as a lap dog. Or if you're a WoD player, don't think you can just pretend no one ever saw that 5th-gen Awakened Cappadocian Abomination whose driving goal was to diablerize Caine. There's no use hiding the fact that you were, at one time, a total power gamer (I know that I was). It's kind of like the chicken pox - we all get the munchkinism disease at some point in childhood, but after that we're immune.

However, people with any claim to sanity don't look down their nose at people who have the chicken pox the way we Real Roleplayers disdain munchkinism. Sit around a table with any gamers from any system and you're going to hear the word "munchkin" thrown around in any number of derogatory ways. Joe Gamer is the world's biggest munchkin. Only munchkins play in the Council of Wyrms setting. Protean is a munchkin Discipline. But when I listen to some of the things my fellow gamers revile as "munchkin," it makes me wonder if maybe we haven't taken the war against munchkinism a little too far.

Before we proceed, it would be a good idea to define what munchkinism really is. To me, a munchkin is a gamer whose primary goal is to gain levels and "kewl powerz," not to tell a good story or develop their character. To accomplish this, quite often they will cheat, through fudging dice rolls or character creation processes or using player knowledge. They are frequently neonate players who know all the rules inside and out and try to argue the DM and the other players into submission. It's all well and good that people are cracking down on dedicated rules lawyers and metagamers who only game so they can make Cthulhu grovel at their feet. But unfortunately, many of the secondary characteristics of munchkins have taken on such a negative connotation that any player who displays them is automatically labeled a power gamer, no matter what.

I first had this thought when I realized that in some circles, "munchkin" has been taken to mean any character who is physically powerful and good in combat. Have a stat or two that's at 16 or even (gasp!) 17? You're a munchkin. Took physical attributes as your primary category? You're such a munchkin it's not even funny. Decked out with cyberware, particularly bone lacing, wired reflexes, or skillwires? You, my friend, are a munchkin. (You'll find this in too many places and shapes to list; poke around the Net and keep your ears open around fellow gamers, and I think you'll be surprised.) It's true that most munchkins are absurdly good at combat; however, this does not mean that any player with a character built for combat is automatically a munchkin.

Any way you slice it, combat is a part of gaming. In most campaigns there's going to be some point where the characters have to resort to violence, and when that happens you're just going to hope you have a fighter or two backing you up. Saying that all combat-oriented characters are automatically munchkinesque is like saying any campaign that has a battle is overpowered. In a good game, there should be a place for "lovers and fighters" alike, and they should all have equally well-developed personalities. It's only when a character focuses so much on fightin' and killin' that the player forgets to give her an interesting back-story that things start to go downhill.

The most dangerous assumption of all, though, is that all-powerful characters are munchkinesque. Once again, it's true that munchkin characters are ridiculously overpowered. But there's a difference between illegitimately obtained munchkin power and the kind of skill that comes from experience and good roleplaying. I've heard of Real Roleplayer GMs getting angry at players for using experience to raise their skills to very high levels. I've even heard people say that XP should be done away with because good roleplaying is its own reward. But if that happens, doesn't roleplaying lose a bit of its charm? I always get a cool little thrill out of finally getting enough XP to go up another level or buy that really cool Gift, and I don't understand why people would want that to take that away. Characters shouldn't stay 1st-level forever; they're constantly changing and growing, and their primary skills should improve as a result. People who play intelligently over a long period of time should have access to "kewl powerz" as an extra perk, in addition to the satisfaction they'll get from good gaming. Because let's face it, playing powerful characters is a lot more fun than being stuck as a wussy little newbie for all time, and there's nothing wrong with wanting to improve.

Now that I've defined what munchkinism isn't, what do you do when you run into the real thing? Most gamers experience this at one time or another, and most of them seem to deal with it by resorting to the ostrich syndrome: stick your head in the ground because if you can't see it, it isn't there. That is, when most groups run into a munchkin they make no effort to confront or change him - they kick him out, or never allow him into their sessions in the first place, in the hopes that he'll either leave them alone or recover on his own eventually. In most cases, this works perfectly well, and the munchkin gets over his twinkish tendencies and ceases to be a problem - that is, until another shows up to take its place. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that you have a munchkin in your group and can't get rid of him so easily. Maybe he's the close friend, sibling, or significant other of another group member, or maybe you're a particularly altruistic group and (gasp!) want to reform him. In that case, how do you keep his delight in wanton destruction from ruining the entire game?

In my experience, nothing good can come from the GM or the other players trying to force the munchkin's interests to change doesn't work very well. Although many munchkins eventually do reform and become decent roleplayers, not allowing them to get to that point of their own accord will only discourage them from making any progress at all. Instead, the GM needs to exercise some subtlety and constantly reward and encourage roleplaying that doesn't involve fighting and killing. Most munchkin characters are exceedingly specialized, often in combat, so forcing the party to do things that don't revolve around that one skill will, in turn, force the munchkin to branch out and confront areas of roleplaying he'd never considered before.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the best way to counteract munchkinism is through the actions of the GM. A friend of mine illustrates this with an interesting story: "In my days of running a campaign (with extremely mixed results), I was driven to distraction and talked my roommate's ear off after the offending party left each session. Finally, the roomie (a good friend and much more accomplished GM than I ever will be) told me it was MY fault! Imagine the horror! What was this jerk talking about? As usual, he was more right than I gave him credit for. Yes, the munchkin was a combat hound. Yes, he could do nothing useful unless it involved martial arts. And I LET him get away with it. I didn't consistently reward the other players for having well-rounded characters with actual background stories. I had a number of encounters prepared for each session, but it was easier to let him get away with just bluffing through the non combat stuff than to call him on the carpet. If he didn't see negative consequences from being a munchkin, why should he stop? He was getting exactly what he wanted from the sessions."

Thus, it would seem to me that a substantial portion of the battle to prevent munchkinism is the sole province of the GM. I refer to this as the "Is your GM a cracksmoker?" principle, because, quite frankly, some GMs would have to be baked 24/7 to approve some of the stuff that gets under their radar. Anyone with half a brain in their head would realize that a first-level fighter with strength 18 and dexterity 17, elven chain mail, and a +5 bastard sword is going to seriously unbalance a campaign. After all, Rule Number One: The GM is always right. And there's no rule that says you have to accept every character a player throws at you. Who's going to keep those munchkin tendencies on a short leash if you don't?

If this has been at all interesting to you, you might want to check out Dru Pagliasotti's article "http://roleplaygames.about.com/games/roleplaygames/library/weekly/aa0509... " target="_blank">In Defense Of Munchkinism," which deals with many similar themes. If nothing else, the next time you find yourself looking down your nose at a so-called "munchkin," think back on your own little bouts with this relatively harmless disease and try to decide whether it's really life- or campaign-threatening. If not, sit back, enjoy the show, and hope the Munchkin Who's Not will pull you and the other characters out of trouble every now and then. Who knows how it might help you in the future?