Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 4019192" data-attributes="member: 1645">People have also conflated grimness and realism.&nbsp; I don't think it's unrealistic at all to have a combat system where elite troops are truly elite, and where heroes can make a tremendous difference.If you look at the infamous Black Hawk Down scenario, the US Delta Force and Army Rangers guys might have been on the losing side, but the <a href="http://www.usafa.edu/isme/JSCOPE00/Kilner00.html" target="_blank">casualty ratio</a> was absurdly one-sided in their favor: 18 Americans down vs. 300-1000 Somalis down.&nbsp; Those are D&amp;D-party-vs-orc-horde numbers right there.What was the difference between the highly trained D-boys and the untrained Somalis?&nbsp; More hit points?&nbsp; No, the elite troops often went down with one shot.&nbsp; Better armor class?&nbsp; Well, the Americans did have some body armor, but it's not like they all took multiple glancing shots, where the armor paid off.&nbsp; Higher damage?&nbsp; The American troops were using smaller-caliber rifles that would do less damage in most games.The main difference, it seems, is that the Americans were professionals.&nbsp; They remained cool under fire, and they placed their shots.&nbsp; Non-pros do not do that.&nbsp; They shout insults and shoot bursts in the general direction of the enemy -- making sure that their friends see them shooting and looking tough.That's not at all how D&amp;D implements combat prowess, but the level of combat effectiveness, as I mentioned above, appears comparable to a D&amp;D party facing an orc horde.&nbsp; Interesting, isn't it?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mmadsen, post: 4019192, member: 1645"] People have also conflated [i]grimness[/i] and [i]realism[/i]. I don't think it's unrealistic at all to have a combat system where elite troops are truly elite, and where heroes can make a tremendous difference. If you look at the infamous [i]Black Hawk Down[/i] scenario, the US Delta Force and Army Rangers guys might have been on the losing side, but the [url=http://www.usafa.edu/isme/JSCOPE00/Kilner00.html]casualty ratio[/url] was absurdly one-sided in their favor: 18 Americans down vs. 300-1000 Somalis down. Those are D&D-party-vs-orc-horde numbers right there. What was the difference between the highly trained D-boys and the untrained Somalis? More hit points? No, the elite troops often went down with one shot. Better armor class? Well, the Americans did have some body armor, but it's not like they all took multiple glancing shots, where the armor paid off. Higher damage? The American troops were using smaller-caliber rifles that would do less damage in most games. The main difference, it seems, is that the Americans were professionals. They remained cool under fire, and they placed their shots. Non-pros do not do that. They shout insults and shoot bursts in the general direction of the enemy -- making sure that their friends see them shooting and looking tough. That's not at all how D&D implements combat prowess, but the level of combat effectiveness, as I mentioned above, appears comparable to a D&D party facing an orc horde. Interesting, isn't it? [/QUOTE]

Verification