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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5816568" data-attributes="member: 53980">Thanks to the OP for an insightful new aspect by which to examine game design and player preferences. It certainly explains certain disagreements I've had with others in the past.I'd say I'm primarily a CaS style DM/ player.Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy CaW play occasionally. I find that when limited, it certainly does add a nice sense of variety. However, I do not enjoy constant CaW play.I felt very constrained in the 2e/3e days because, despite wanting to play in a CaS style game, I tended to feel like the system forced me to play CaW. I wanted to play the brave and honorable knight, but that type of play tended to get one killed. Dungeon doors, for example, were typically approached as though we were a bomb squad on high alert. Getting killed randomly by an unexpected trap was something no one was eager for.We still do the occasional bit of CaW in 4e. A while ago, instead of charging into a heavily defended fortress, we instead challenged the leader to a duel for control of the fort. He set the terms of the duel (2 v 2) and that we'd be eaten if we lost (they were cannibals). We won (though it was quite a tough fight), and though we missed out on some xp and treasure, we attained our goal with arguably greater ease. That's the kind of CaW I enjoy. We didn't make the final conflict anticlimactic, but we did cut away a good amount of interim content. Our hard fought duel was far more fun than dropping a roof on the leader's head would have been.I like CaS because, with a tactically minded DM, it can be extremely challenging. A CaS DM, in 4e, can legitimately do his best to kill the PCs in every fight. He doesn't have to hold back at all. You get a pretty consistent experience regardless of whether Bob or Joe runs the game, assuming they have relatively similar tactical acumen. For those who've said that CaS is easy, that's silly. You can make CaS as easy or as difficult as the group prefers. If you exceed that preference, of course, you'll most likely encourage a CaW style of play.CaW, on the other hand, is quite subjective. Joe might let me use kegs of oil to blow up a bridge. Bob, on the other hand, might rule that all I do is light a fire on the bridge, because oil isn't explosive. Even if they both believe that oil is explosive, Joe might feel that 2 kegs is enough, while Bob thinks 200 kegs is more realistic.I guess a good way of putting it is that (for me) CaS is like Knightmare Chess, while CaW is more akin to Apples to Apples. I enjoy both games, but I prefer my D&D to be CaW optional or CaW lite.Don't get me wrong, I comprehend that plenty of people enjoy CaW and I'm not saying that any of you are wrong to do so. I'm simply another voice trying to lend insight into why some of us prefer CaS.</blockquote>

Verification