Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5627542" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think there are (at least) two ways of thinking about combat. in a mainstream fantasy RPG like D&D. One way is thinking of combat as a means to an end - say, killing things as a way to get their stuff.Another way is to see combat as a particularly engaging expression of confict, and therefore a compelling site of conflict resolution. (It probably goes against board rules to canvass the full range of reasons why some of us would see combat this way - but as well as problematic political reasons, there might be the desire to capture or share the aesthetic of Arthurian legend, of superhero comics, etc.)The second approach to combat ticks the box of not being about killing things and taking their stuff. But it still makes combat balance important.I think that 4e is a good system for this second approach. I don't think it's such a good system for the first approach, because levelling in 4e, and getting items, isn't really a reward (despite the chapter heading in the DMG) - it's an inherent part of PC building.If I wanted to play a "kill thing to take their stuff" game, I think that AD&D (if I was being serious) or even Tunnels and Trolls (if I was being lighthearted) might be a better vehicle than 4e. Maybe 3E also - I don't know it well enough to have such a strong view about it. Or even Rolemaster, if I was prepared to have high PC turnover at the lower levels.Which is not to say that AD&D is suited only for killing things and taking their stuff. But loot in AD&D really is a type of reward for the players, I think, in a way that it is not in 4e.</blockquote>

Verification