Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6145898" data-attributes="member: 87792">I'm not saying that Combat as War doesn't exist.  I'm saying that that ridiculous monicker should be dropped.There is a legitimate difference between a strategic and a tactical focus.  Or between combat as a as a crucible and combat as the final resolution.  However.The dichotomy of Combat as War vs Combat as Sport is one of sneering and edition warring.  I'm only slightly exaggerating when I say it's an invocation of Manly Men With Balls of Steel vs namby pamby pantywaists who are just playing.  The terms are set up with the distinction that one group is inferior to the other - and I therefore consider it edition warring, intentional or not.  It is itself a sneering judgement on which side is better.I also consider the D&D as war (as opposed to a strategic game) to be a joke.  A very twisted joke when you look at the sort of war in which a small band of non-state sanctioned people attack the enemy on their home territory where they think they are safe and use very violent psychological warfare as well as asymmetric warfare.But I don't think there's anything wrong at all with a strategic focus to play.  I just object to the terms and their connotations.  Especially Combat as War, and doubly so as it relates to D&D.</blockquote>