Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="payn" data-source="post: 9036486" data-attributes="member: 90374">I was a little confused by the &quot;goal orientated&quot; play title. The article seems to discuss group tactics and strategy in play, which is fine, but I was thinking more long term goal orientation at first. By long term I was thinking the PCs engage factions, upset or maintain status quos, delve into political intrigue, etc... I have come to see game mechanics and play in terms of strategy and tactics. Most editions have both, but often lean in the direction of one or the other. Tactics are the decisions made in battle as a group often in the shape of class abilities. In order to win, the players must work together. Strategy starts before the battle in choosing the battle ground, the gear to be used, and any other advantage for the player and disadvantage for the enemy. One is more baked in and expected, the other is loose and ambiguous. To bring this back around to the OP, the goal orientation can be driven by the edition's mechanics. The more group tactics are necessary to survive, the more goal orientated the group will be. The casual approach seems to allow a bit of slack in group vs individual goal orientation mechanically. The GM can dial it up or down based on CR planning. YMMV.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="payn, post: 9036486, member: 90374"] I was a little confused by the "goal orientated" play title. The article seems to discuss group tactics and strategy in play, which is fine, but I was thinking more long term goal orientation at first. By long term I was thinking the PCs engage factions, upset or maintain status quos, delve into political intrigue, etc... I have come to see game mechanics and play in terms of strategy and tactics. Most editions have both, but often lean in the direction of one or the other. Tactics are the decisions made in battle as a group often in the shape of class abilities. In order to win, the players must work together. Strategy starts before the battle in choosing the battle ground, the gear to be used, and any other advantage for the player and disadvantage for the enemy. One is more baked in and expected, the other is loose and ambiguous. To bring this back around to the OP, the goal orientation can be driven by the edition's mechanics. The more group tactics are necessary to survive, the more goal orientated the group will be. The casual approach seems to allow a bit of slack in group vs individual goal orientation mechanically. The GM can dial it up or down based on CR planning. YMMV. [/QUOTE]

Verification