Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jdrakeh" data-source="post: 4318333" data-attributes="member: 13892">It depends on the game (not the system, mind you, but the actual game) being played. For example, if I'm playing in a published D&amp;D adventure for any edition, probably not SWAT. Most published adventures are not deadly serious or even believable, which makes SWAT pointless, as it seems to produce no more or less combat 'wins' than simply running in through the front gate waving weapons in the air does. Likewise, in most published adventures, player combat tactics have little (if any) bearing on charcter death rate, resource expenditure, and so fourth. There's this crazy little clan of 'D&amp;D as reality simulator' fans who claim differently but, in more than fifteen years of playing D&amp;D, I've seen precious few published adventures wherein carefully planning combats makes a single bit of difference in the module as written. There are exceptions*, of course, and a DM can always add a lot of consequences for bad tactics that aren't present in the module (e.g., alerting other nearby enemies, etc). Which brings me to the when I do play SWAT. I play SWAT in heavily modified published adventures or homebrew adventures with a DM-applied emphasis on high mortality rates and limited healing or resurrection magic. Or, outside of D&amp;D, in systems that emphasize those realities by default. For instance, IME, approaching a HarnMaster combat or an Ars Magica combat like a standard D&amp;D combat (even with tactics), will typically end in a TPK if you let the dice fall where they may. *Several Paizo adventures in the Pathfinder series stick out in my mind, as do old AD&amp;D tournment modules (although those still had plenty of stuff that could never be circumvented as written, regardless of how clever the players were).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jdrakeh, post: 4318333, member: 13892"] It depends on the game (not the system, mind you, but the actual [I]game[/I]) being played. For example, if I'm playing in a published D&D adventure for any edition, probably not SWAT. [I]Most[/I] published adventures are not deadly serious or even believable, which makes SWAT pointless, as it seems to produce no more or less combat 'wins' than simply running in through the front gate waving weapons in the air does. Likewise, in most published adventures, player combat tactics have little (if any) bearing on charcter death rate, resource expenditure, and so fourth. There's this crazy little clan of 'D&D as reality simulator' fans who claim differently but, in more than fifteen years of playing D&D, I've seen precious few published adventures wherein carefully planning combats makes a single bit of difference in the module [i]as written[/i]. There are exceptions*, of course, and a DM can always add a lot of consequences for bad tactics that aren't present in the module (e.g., alerting other nearby enemies, etc). Which brings me to the when I [i]do[/i] play SWAT. I play SWAT in heavily modified published adventures or homebrew adventures with a DM-applied emphasis on high mortality rates and limited healing or resurrection magic. Or, outside of D&D, in systems that emphasize those realities by default. For instance, IME, approaching a HarnMaster combat or an Ars Magica combat like a standard D&D combat (even with tactics), will typically end in a TPK if you let the dice fall where they may. [size=1]*Several Paizo adventures in the Pathfinder series stick out in my mind, as do old AD&D tournment modules (although those still had plenty of stuff that could [I]never[/I] be circumvented as written, regardless of how clever the players were).[/size] [/QUOTE]

Verification