Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
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="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6195860" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>I'm rather at a loss for how this logically follows so hopefully you can tell me where I've gone wrong. By my way of thinking, the reasoning goes:</p><p></p><p>- In NFL football, if you are implementing a drive-blocking, iso run scheme, you hire and train large, powerful offensive linemen and apply their strength and leverage in the run game. Conversely, if you want to implement a zone-blocking scheme with backside cut blocks, pulling guards and reach blocks, you want more nimble, athletic linemen who work well in space.</p><p></p><p>- If you want to move a heavy object from here to there and you have no tech (either equipment or mental acuity), you get big and strong through training and move the object directly through force. Conversely, If you have the tech and mental acuity, you use rollers or a pully/winch system.</p><p></p><p>- If you want to paint a house, you apply time and physical exertion until the job is done. Conversely, if you want to paint a portrait, you learn the skill/trade and apply finesse.</p><p></p><p>- If you want to play a card game where force resolves the outcome, play War. Conversely, if you want to play a card game where finesse resolves the outcome, play Spades.</p><p></p><p>- If you want GM force in conflict resolution, circumvent mechanical resolution (either visibly by fiat or by creating illusory effectiveness of mechanical resolution and then ignore/fudge/override the results) and dictate an outcome. If you do not want GM force in conflict resolution, codify a resolution system (replete with synthesis of PC build resources and the conflict resolution framework), have players deploy resources to resolve task/conflict and stridently observe results.</p><p></p><p>I mean, the only way there is a congruency with respect to the application of "force" is if we zoom out the resolution dramatically and apply some extremely broad conceptual definition of "has mass, takes up space, therefore exerts force on its environment when interacting."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6195860, member: 6696971"] I'm rather at a loss for how this logically follows so hopefully you can tell me where I've gone wrong. By my way of thinking, the reasoning goes: - In NFL football, if you are implementing a drive-blocking, iso run scheme, you hire and train large, powerful offensive linemen and apply their strength and leverage in the run game. Conversely, if you want to implement a zone-blocking scheme with backside cut blocks, pulling guards and reach blocks, you want more nimble, athletic linemen who work well in space. - If you want to move a heavy object from here to there and you have no tech (either equipment or mental acuity), you get big and strong through training and move the object directly through force. Conversely, If you have the tech and mental acuity, you use rollers or a pully/winch system. - If you want to paint a house, you apply time and physical exertion until the job is done. Conversely, if you want to paint a portrait, you learn the skill/trade and apply finesse. - If you want to play a card game where force resolves the outcome, play War. Conversely, if you want to play a card game where finesse resolves the outcome, play Spades. - If you want GM force in conflict resolution, circumvent mechanical resolution (either visibly by fiat or by creating illusory effectiveness of mechanical resolution and then ignore/fudge/override the results) and dictate an outcome. If you do not want GM force in conflict resolution, codify a resolution system (replete with synthesis of PC build resources and the conflict resolution framework), have players deploy resources to resolve task/conflict and stridently observe results. I mean, the only way there is a congruency with respect to the application of "force" is if we zoom out the resolution dramatically and apply some extremely broad conceptual definition of "has mass, takes up space, therefore exerts force on its environment when interacting." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
Top