Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
[Very Long] Combat as Sport vs. Combat as War: a Key Difference in D&D Play Styles...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JonWake" data-source="post: 5809948" data-attributes="member: 95255"><p>One of the key features of a system that supports CaW play is the ability to get in over your head unexpectedly. I'm not going to shout about 'lethality', as that I think that's a straw man. There aren't too many games that are designed to be instantly lethal if a character gets in over their head. But let me define my terms.</p><p></p><p>Getting in over your head, or over committing, happens when a player's expectations of an encounter turns out to be untrue. This is typically, but not limited to, engaging with an enemy you're certain you've got the advantage and finding the tables turned either through bad luck or poor reconnaissance. What was certain in one round is now uncertain, the kobold you just cornered stabs you in the thigh and spews poison in your face. </p><p></p><p>It is the potential for this sudden turn of events that gives the players in CaW their jollies. Knowing that at any moment things can go pear-shaped, that their best laid plans might collapse with enemy contact is what keeps the players invested in stacking the deck. Because they know that even a stacked deck has a few jokers. </p><p></p><p>(I apologize for the metaphor.)</p><p></p><p>Balance, at least on an encounter to encounter basis, severely undermines this style of play. Balance is predicated on statistical predictability. It's based on equalizing the enemies against the protagonists so that a certain pattern of play emerges. Having a steady pattern allows players to make the most use of their tactical and system mastery, it keeps the flow of play moving along certain predictable vectors. </p><p></p><p>It's this very attribute of a balanced system that harms the CaW playstyle. When the players can see the gears under the hood, they can reliably predict their success level with any given encounter. A group of 1st level 4e characters will know that an ogre will be a lethal threat, a pair of kobolds a likely non-issue. In a true CaW game, the players must know that even a one-armed midget with palsy gets a lucky shot in now and again, and Goliath can be dropped with a sling stone on a good day. </p><p></p><p>This uncertainty, this 'swingyness', if you want to call it that, is essential to CaW play. </p><p></p><p>It's also completely unfair.</p><p></p><p>Intentionally so. There's no 'fairness' in a CaW game, there's only a line of consequence. As long as the thread of consequences follow logically from each other, the game is preserved.</p><p></p><p>NOTE: This lack of balance and fairness is not a bad thing. The value of this is entirely dependent on what you're looking for in a game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JonWake, post: 5809948, member: 95255"] One of the key features of a system that supports CaW play is the ability to get in over your head unexpectedly. I'm not going to shout about 'lethality', as that I think that's a straw man. There aren't too many games that are designed to be instantly lethal if a character gets in over their head. But let me define my terms. Getting in over your head, or over committing, happens when a player's expectations of an encounter turns out to be untrue. This is typically, but not limited to, engaging with an enemy you're certain you've got the advantage and finding the tables turned either through bad luck or poor reconnaissance. What was certain in one round is now uncertain, the kobold you just cornered stabs you in the thigh and spews poison in your face. It is the potential for this sudden turn of events that gives the players in CaW their jollies. Knowing that at any moment things can go pear-shaped, that their best laid plans might collapse with enemy contact is what keeps the players invested in stacking the deck. Because they know that even a stacked deck has a few jokers. (I apologize for the metaphor.) Balance, at least on an encounter to encounter basis, severely undermines this style of play. Balance is predicated on statistical predictability. It's based on equalizing the enemies against the protagonists so that a certain pattern of play emerges. Having a steady pattern allows players to make the most use of their tactical and system mastery, it keeps the flow of play moving along certain predictable vectors. It's this very attribute of a balanced system that harms the CaW playstyle. When the players can see the gears under the hood, they can reliably predict their success level with any given encounter. A group of 1st level 4e characters will know that an ogre will be a lethal threat, a pair of kobolds a likely non-issue. In a true CaW game, the players must know that even a one-armed midget with palsy gets a lucky shot in now and again, and Goliath can be dropped with a sling stone on a good day. This uncertainty, this 'swingyness', if you want to call it that, is essential to CaW play. It's also completely unfair. Intentionally so. There's no 'fairness' in a CaW game, there's only a line of consequence. As long as the thread of consequences follow logically from each other, the game is preserved. NOTE: This lack of balance and fairness is not a bad thing. The value of this is entirely dependent on what you're looking for in a game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
[Very Long] Combat as Sport vs. Combat as War: a Key Difference in D&D Play Styles...
Top