Neonchameleon
Legend
It means that King Henry II considered himself a knight to some degree, and therefore stood to benefit from laws protecting them.
Nope. A knighthood is a title. Knights were people given knighthoods by either the king or a previous one.
I was just guessing as to what your eye-rolling remark meant. That's not what I meant at all. Why would you think I meant that?
Because you were saying that Combat as War people liked options. When you look at the AD&D fighter there aren't mechanical options. You can't even easily change your weapons. Which means that the AD&D fighter should be the exemplar of the class you hate the most. From which I can conclude that either
a: You think that CaW should only be undertaken by spellcasters
b: This isn't actually a consideration and CaW is just a battle flag.
I keep feeling that, when I describe CaW, you hear "breaking the rules to get away with stuff." Is that what you think?
More like "we want cheap curb stomps of the enemy and would yowl to high heaven if high level NPC mages were to take CaW seriously and start scrying for bands of adventurers and then sticking up wanted posters with rewards once they hit third level".
In an encounter based game, the players probably do not have the option or ability to collapse the dungeon with multiple rock to mud spells.
First 2E is an encounter based game. Read the DMG.
Second, in 4e I've certainly as the DM had a player create earth walls to seal the dungeon by creating walls of rock with rituals. This worked and was fun - and I was the DM.
And to make clear, I'm not arguing a preference here - I suspect I'd be frustrated by, and suck at, strongly CaW play. But I think the concept is useful, and should be able to be discussed without inferring an edition war bias.
The terms are loaded and one-sided. And the only game I've seen that had CAW being aimed at the PCs was Cyberpunk 2020. In AD&D the players are taking part in a game of padded sumo (1 minute to kill a goblin? Seriously?) and there are rules of engagement NPCs are expected to follow which is why 3rd level PCs don't find prices on their heads from being scryed, and 6th level don't get scried-and-fried if they aren't working for the bad guys.
CaW is a big game safari at best.
Again, you do not support your argument that a strawman is involved, or that the dichotomy is false. A lot of people thinks it describes the games they've played quite well. You're just asserting your dislike of the topic.
I do not have a strong style preference with regard to CaW. I've certainly played in that mode a lot. I just deny that there's only one other way to play.
I for one don't think there's only one way to play. I just find "war" a risible description of any form of D&D there has ever been. I cut my teeth on GURPS where you died to a single crossbow bolt.
Combat as Last Resort would be a decent description. It would also exclude AD&D and oD&D.
Combat as End and Combat as Means might be a bit better?
1. People have said that 4e is strongly dedicated to CaS in contrast to CaW. That does not mean that one is equivalent to the other. The existence of the phrase "Combat as Sport" is not intended as a slap at 4e. (Portions of the article do suggest the writer's distaste for 4e - that's not the same thing as the core topic of the article.)
Hearing that from fans of other D&D games is like an argument between American Football players and Soccer players about which is more of a sport.