PDA

View Full Version : Pure force over subtlety.



druid91
2011-05-31, 09:52 PM
So I was wondering who else usually goes for this tactic.

When confronted with a subtle opponent, insidious, political power... Etc. My usual response is either A. let my party members handle it. or B. Remove that power. He's a duke? Crush his duchy under a blizzard in the middle of the growing season.

IOW the response to subtle opponents is to not play their game and instead smash the board.

DragonOfUndeath
2011-05-31, 09:54 PM
Pure Force means getting enemies and lots of them
Those crops you stopped from growing? were a Tithe to a Warlord King who is now hunting you down.
If you had done it all subtle like they would never have known it was you and you are off the hook.

tahu88810
2011-05-31, 10:07 PM
It depends on my character. I've played wizards who would magically annihilate entire cities just because it was a faster way of reaching their target, and I've played Paladins who take part in political subterfuge (they found it difficult to do so, but it minimized casualties). It all depends.

druid91
2011-05-31, 10:08 PM
Pure Force means getting enemies and lots of them
Those crops you stopped from growing? were a Tithe to a Warlord King who is now hunting you down.
If you had done it all subtle like they would never have known it was you and you are off the hook.

"I'm not outnumbered I simply have a target rich environment." ~somebody whose name I can't recall at the moment.

The problem with that theory is it assumes you aren't capable of evading or simply incinerating/stabbing anyone they send.

Really it all comes down to whether or not you fear the response that they can give.

Hiro Protagonest
2011-05-31, 10:09 PM
It depends on my character. I've played wizards who would magically annihilate entire cities just because it was a faster way of reaching their target, and I've played Paladins who take part in political subterfuge (they found it difficult to do so, but it minimized casualties). It all depends.

Please say those wizards ended up in the lower planes when they died.

druid91
2011-05-31, 10:24 PM
Please say those wizards ended up in the lower planes when they died.

I was in a party that once destroyed a city, vindictively staying and crushing any attempts to save themselves from the falling rocks, and miles of snow in temperatures so cold standing outside was enough to deal lethal damage.

We did this not because the city was still a threat, but because it was A. Riedran, and B. had dared to attack and damage our Airship.

Tl;dr, destroyed a city in what amounts to a childish temper tantrum and didn't get so much as a bump towards evil.

rayne_dragon
2011-05-31, 10:29 PM
Pure force often has drawbacks that can make it undesireable. Kill the evil cultist who was masquerading as the most beloved townsfolk? Now everyone thinks you're a murderer and wants you dead.

I'm not saying pure force doesn't have it's place, just that relying on it excusively can land you in trouble (although maybe I just play too much Call of Cthulhu and survival horror type games). Better to have a whole bunch of tools that you use as appropriate for the situation than rely on one single methodology.

That said, I did have a wizard who was rather brute forcish. He was a sneaky character, fond of teleporting and subterfuge, but in a fight his favourite thing to do was blast as many people with the most destructive effects he could - he set more than a few rooms* on fire in his carreer. Plus there was the one room with spikes on the wall that he managed to use to wonderful effect.

* - this was a 4e character, so setting entire rooms on fire is more difficult than in previous editions.

Hiro Protagonest
2011-05-31, 10:33 PM
I was in a party that once destroyed a city, vindictively staying and crushing any attempts to save themselves from the falling rocks, and miles of snow in temperatures so cold standing outside was enough to deal lethal damage.

We did this not because the city was still a threat, but because it was A. Riedran, and B. had dared to attack and damage our Airship.

Tl;dr, destroyed a city in what amounts to a childish temper tantrum and didn't get so much as a bump towards evil.

If you destroyed a city because you threw a fit, that is unquestionably evil.

druid91
2011-05-31, 10:35 PM
Pure force often has drawbacks that can make it undesireable. Kill the evil cultist who was masquerading as the most beloved townsfolk? Now everyone thinks you're a murderer and wants you dead.

I'm not saying pure force doesn't have it's place, just that relying on it excusively can land you in trouble (although maybe I just play too much Call of Cthulhu and survival horror type games). Better to have a whole bunch of tools that you use as appropriate for the situation than rely on one single methodology.

That said, I did have a wizard who was rather brute forcish. He was a sneaky character, fond of teleporting and subterfuge, but in a fight his favourite thing to do was blast as many people with the most destructive effects he could - he set more than a few rooms* on fire in his carreer. Plus there was the one room with spikes on the wall that he managed to use to wonderful effect.

* - this was a 4e character, so setting entire rooms on fire is more difficult than in previous editions.

Well, I use trickery, it's just fairly obvious I'm doing something. Essentialy I tend to try and use the slow but inexorable style of fighting, it takes a while, and you know something's up. But stopping it is like trying to stop a flood with a hand towel.


If you destroyed a city because you threw a fit, that is unquestionably evil.

The entire party did. And they did attack us first, but we had already beaten their military forces when we decided to finish off the city..

Shade Kerrin
2011-05-31, 11:09 PM
The thing with ploughing through subtlety with force is, depending on the survival of the target and the attentiveness of future targets, it will work, the first couple of times.

After that, the evil/good plotter will take your directness into account for future plans.

tahu88810
2011-05-31, 11:22 PM
Please say those wizards ended up in the lower planes when they died.

Most of them did.
I had one who burned down a city just to draw a mob kingpin out of hiding so that he could...well...burn down another city, killing the kingpin in the inferno.
I had another who, with the help of the party, collapsed an entire castle, killing everyone inside. He was more neutral though, as he did take steps to try and make sure as many innocents were outside as possible (he did it on the night of a harvest festival, ensuring that the people inside were mostly combatants and his target...save for a few servants.).
I can't recall any who were "good", but that's because it's very hard to remain "good" when following an "ends justify the means" approach.

Ravens_cry
2011-05-31, 11:31 PM
"For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."
One of my favourite moments in 3.P was when sneaking, both by choosing an unguarded entry point, clever use of spells and magic items, rope and grappling hooks, and good old fashioned Stealth skill checks, the group subdued the Boss we were meant to fight while he was sleeping, alive. Sure, we could have simply bum-rushed him at the expected moment, with the front-line mêlée types in front, the ranger pouring arrows into him, and magical support from the magic users and cleric, probably succeeded too, but this, this was far more satisfying.

Alleran
2011-06-01, 04:18 AM
I've played both. One character was particularly fun. He'd normally be very subtle and sneaky about how and when and where he used his magic (he was a wizard).

That was until somebody decided to use the fact that he didn't have a Doomed Hometown and Dead Family as a plot hook, and kidnapped his sister. I had played this character as having a bit of a "don't touch my friends or family or you'll regret it" mindset. So when said sister was taken (by a lower-level antagonist who, the DM informed me, had a WIS stat lower than Belkar), my 19th level archmage geared up with all the battle spells he could muster, gated in all manner of extraplanar creatures, and then went on a rampage against the city-state holding his sister hostage (and the rest of the party helped).

It was quite fun to carve a bloody, ruinous path through the land towards it. You could draw a straight line from the edge of the "nation" to the central citadel, and it was littered with fire, death, corpses, and rubble. Pretty much nothing lived along that path. Sure, he could have just used scry-and-die tactics and abused teleportation, but he was making a point, and leaving a message (we weren't the highest level characters in the setting, but we were certainly the most powerful ones in that part of the world).

The antagonist found himself the guest of honour at a dinner party in the Abyss as punishment. He was the main course.

No, this wasn't an evil game. He was a TN/CN character. Oddly enough, the vast majority of my backstories now involve a doomed hometown and/or no family.

Killer Angel
2011-06-01, 04:37 AM
Please say those wizards ended up in the lower planes when they died.

Those wizards are often the stuff Liches are made of.


I'm not saying pure force doesn't have it's place

In D&D 3.5, that place is called "druid class". :smalltongue:

Zombimode
2011-06-01, 06:11 AM
So I was wondering who else usually goes for this tactic.

When confronted with a subtle opponent, insidious, political power... Etc. My usual response is either A. let my party members handle it. or B. Remove that power. He's a duke? Crush his duchy under a blizzard in the middle of the growing season.

IOW the response to subtle opponents is to not play their game and instead smash the board.

If this strategy works for you regulary, then your opponents are either morons, or your DM doesnt know to play a subtle character or doesnt like to impose bad consequences for the actions of the PCs.

One of the motivations for subtility is the difficulty in assessing the strenght and possibilities of your opponent. As others have mentioned this behaviour could backfire pretty badly.

Another problem are the social consequences of this sort of brutal behaviour.
Maybe YOU know someone is an imposter. That doesnt mean everybody else wont see you as a murderous hobo.
Maybe YOU think it is ok to kill a local lord because he made an insulting remark regarding your mother. That doesnt mean everybody else will agree on that.
And if your solution to the disagreement of other is to kill those too, well dont be suprised if you are shuned within the bounds of civilisation and/or hunted by authorities/adventurers/Inigo Montoya.


And your example with the city? C'mon, you are even trying to justify that? Dont. Welcome to the Dark Side :smalltongue:

manyslayer
2011-06-01, 07:35 AM
The thing with ploughing through subtlety with force is, depending on the survival of the target and the attentiveness of future targets, it will work, the first couple of times.

After that, the evil/good plotter will take your directness into account for future plans.

This was my thought. As a the big-bad, if a smack of force is your response, I'll set it up so that my enemies try something subtle on you. You break their stuff, make them focus on you, and I get to complete my ritual of icky nastiness.

Of course, my group tends to do subtle very well, right up to the point where a n anvil to the face is called for. We've even taken out major enemies by arranging for them to fight one another and then cleaning up the left-overs when we get a chance.

Greenish
2011-06-01, 08:27 PM
If subtlety works for you regulary, then your opponents are either morons, or your DM doesnt know to play a brutal character or doesnt like to impose bad consequences for the actions of the PCs.Funny how that seems equally valid when flipped on it's head.

Sometimes, applying enough force is the answer. I certainly don't mind playing characters prone to it. For what is best in life?

Cerlis
2011-06-01, 08:43 PM
Remember, direct pure force isnt synonymous with "Chaotic stupid".

a good example of someone who often uses direct pure force is the Lead in the Alexander the Great anime (I'm guessing the Anime isnt very historically accurate so i dont know if he truely had as much gaul as his character did in this cartoon).

I'm not sure if it was alexander who really did this, or if they just used that story for him in this show, but one of the things he did was solve that impossible knot (whatever its called) by slicing it in twane.

Solomon also solved a tricky problem through a direct and violent approach (just cus you use directness and force doesnt mean you have to finish the job)


the best part about subtlty is when you use brute force, and the best part of brute force is when you apply it within subtlty.




-----------------

I cant help but think of a horribly brutal and efficient and intelligent villian in a movie i saw once who was pretty charming and intelligent but when it came down to it, if you got directly in his way he would kill you without a second thought. Cant remember who though. Though now i think about it i'd say Sylar from Heroes kinda fits the bill.

He worked with and allied with many people when it suited him. But when it came down to it if you survived an encounter with him you where damned lucky.

Hiro Protagonest
2011-06-01, 08:46 PM
Remember, direct pure force isnt synonymous with "Chaotic stupid".

a good example of someone who often uses direct pure force is the Lead in the Alexander the Great anime (I'm guessing the Anime isnt very historically accurate so i dont know if he truely had as much gaul as his character did in this cartoon).

I'm not sure if it was alexander who really did this, or if they just used that story for him in this show, but one of the things he did was solve that impossible knot (whatever its called) by slicing it in twane.

Solomon also solved a tricky problem through a direct and violent approach (just cus you use directness and force doesnt mean you have to finish the job)


the best part about subtlty is when you use brute force, and the best part of brute force is when you apply it within subtlty.




-----------------

I cant help but think of a horribly brutal and efficient and intelligent villian in a movie i saw once who was pretty charming and intelligent but when it came down to it, if you got directly in his way he would kill you without a second thought. Cant remember who though. Though now i think about it i'd say Sylar from Heroes kinda fits the bill.

He worked with and allied with many people when it suited him. But when it came down to it if you survived an encounter with him you where damned lucky.

That Alexander the Great thing is historically accurate.

Greenish
2011-06-01, 08:49 PM
I'm not sure if it was alexander who really did this, or if they just used that story for him in this show, but one of the things he did was solve that impossible knot (whatever its called) by slicing it in twane.Cutting the Gordian knot. Yeah, that's attributed to him. Whether it actually happened is a different matter.

Cerlis
2011-06-02, 12:06 AM
yea he was constantly doing stuff like that in the show.

Enemy army overwhelming you? Make a suicidal death charge at their commander!

arguskos
2011-06-02, 01:36 AM
The sheer force perspective:
"CONAN! WHAT IS BEST IN LIFE?!"
"TO CRUSH YOUR ENEMIES, SEE THEM DRIVEN BEFORE YOU, AND HEAR THE LAMENTATIONS OF THEIR WOMEN!!"

My perspective:
"For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."
-Sun Tzu

Yeah, I don't mind a little brute force, but honestly, it is easier to kill someone by nuking their town than it is by slowly working up to them in a crowd, gaining their trust, luring them somewhere secluded on false pretenses, then stabbing them and disposing of the body in a clever, untraceable, fashion, and I am nothing if not a vainglorious bastard. I want to show off, dammit. Any old punk can blow up a tavern, after all. :smallwink:

Somebloke
2011-06-02, 02:30 AM
Since this is the website for Order of the Stick, I only thought that this speech would be appropriate:

Xykon: Hey you know what really gets under my skin? Proverbially, of course? A century of wizards looking down their damn noses at me. I know people think I'm stupid. Because I'm not a wizard. Because I get bored easily. Because I have no interest in strategy or tactics or contingency planning. But see, I've learned a lot over the years since I died. A lot more than I learned during my life. And now I see planning doesn't matter. Strategy doesn't matter. Only two things matter: Force in as great a concentration as you can manage, and style. And in a pinch, style can slide. In any battle, there's always a level of force against which no tactics can succeed. For example, all I need to do is keep smacking you with Energy Drains, and eventually you won't be able to cast any of your fancy spells at all. Because yes, I am a sorcerer — and this magic is in my bones, not cribbed-off "Magic for Dummies". And I can keep casting the same friggin' spell at you until you roll over and die. You can have your finely-tuned watch -- give me the sledgehammer to the face any day.

jseah
2011-06-02, 06:14 AM
In any battle, there's always a level of force against which no tactics can succeed. For example, all I need to do is keep smacking you with Energy Drains, and eventually you won't be able to cast any of your fancy spells at all.
Soooo doesn't work in 3.5e.

3.5 is about absolute counters and counter-counters. Often, you only need one... there is no level of force, you either have X thus and win, or you don't and die.

Jerthanis
2011-06-02, 06:18 AM
While the key to beating anyone better than you is to refuse to play the same game they want to play, the true Xanatos actually wants you to respond with force and is counting on it to further his own plans.

I think the only time I ever did something like this was when I was playing Mage: The Awakening. There was an unknown enemy doing a lot of very overt things through enough layers of proxies, Space magic, Mind magic, and mundane payoffs that we were completely baffled at uncovering the plot. Eventually what we did was just opened scrying windows toward every object, person, or thing with any kind of sympathy to one of the subjects of their Space magic. When someone scries you, the standard response is you scry them back so they know you can hit them back. However, we were counting on that, so we see the scry come up on our end and we promptly open a portal to that location, and sent through our Fate/Time guntoting badass to blow away everything on the other side. We weren't sure if we rooted out the entire conspiracy, but we found proof we got at least one of them and afterwards the attacks stopped... so at least partial victory using the brute force method.

Greenish
2011-06-02, 11:49 AM
Any old punk can blow up a tavern, after all. :smallwink:The trick is to keep doing it without getting crushed. That requires more force, naturally. :smalltongue:


While the key to beating anyone better than you is to refuse to play the same game they want to play, the true Xanatos actually wants you to respond with force and is counting on it to further his own plans.The true Xanatos (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/XanatosGambit) isn't counting on you doing something specific. :smallamused:

If you meant any old schemer, well, they might just as well be expecting you to go with subtlety, since that's the game they know.

Toofey
2011-06-02, 12:20 PM
So here's what my longest term PC, a CG Fighter Mage would say: "If either pure force or "subtlety" become your known method of action you've become predictable, and that's the biggest disadvantage you can saddle yourself with"

As a DM: Do whatever you have fun doing, if it starts screwing it up for everyone else compromise some.

The Glyphstone
2011-06-02, 12:20 PM
The trick is to keep doing it without getting crushed. That requires more force, naturally. :smalltongue:

The true Xanatos (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/XanatosGambit) isn't counting on you doing something specific. :smallamused:

If you meant any old schemer, well, they might just as well be expecting you to go with subtlety, since that's the game they know.

Indeed. Words.


Remember: It's only a Xanatos Gambit if all the outcomes benefit the mastermind in some way. It is not a shorthand for "any clever, complex, evil plan". You may want Evil Plan for that. Instances of this term in this wiki and in the 'Net in general that use "Xanatos Gambit" without the key quality of "all outcomes always benefit the mastermind" are WRONG.

Choco
2011-06-02, 12:44 PM
I like to play to the "If violence isn't solving all your problems, you just aren't using enough of it" line of thinking myself. That's not to say OPEN violence (AKA pure force), but when you combine subtlety with force you can accomplish a lot.

I derailed the DM's plot once by playing weak and then taunting his schemer BBEG into attacking me out in the open. The party proceeded to gank him and we legitimately were able to use the self defense excuse!

Or there are old school assassinations. Wait till your target is isolated and THEN use force take him out.

It also pays off to have party members with different strengths. One party member uses subtlety to maneuver a forceful one into a position where he can eliminate the enemy, and then another subtlety-focused member steals the enemy's identity.

But on the other hand, the above only applies to characters that don't have access to Mindrape. I find that spell solves all your problems.

LibraryOgre
2011-06-02, 03:28 PM
Pure Force means getting enemies and lots of them
Those crops you stopped from growing? were a Tithe to a Warlord King who is now hunting you down.
If you had done it all subtle like they would never have known it was you and you are off the hook.

Forget the warlord. The crops fed the families of thousands of people. Sure, only a small portion of the population is adventurers, but, well... when you sentence thousands of people to die of starvation, all of a sudden, YOU'RE the bad guy.

Yukitsu
2011-06-02, 04:08 PM
I like a combination. An in game example:

Me: I'm going to mass spam divinations to manipulate fate about 12 years down the line. There's going to be a minor conflict that will be resolved peacefully, but will require this guy's token presence at the conference. It just so happens, that every room but this one's going to be filled during the time, and it just so happens that he'll be in it.
DM: And then you're going to go blow him up?
Me: That's where a coincidental meteor strike is going to hit. The math is going to take a while, but I'm going to go put a banana peel near a hulking hurler once I've done the other set of divinations, and then start a misunderstanding between peoples that will be resolved 12 years from now.
DM: :smallfrown:

LibraryOgre
2011-06-02, 04:19 PM
I like a combination. An in game example:

Me: I'm going to mass spam divinations to manipulate fate about 12 years down the line. There's going to be a minor conflict that will be resolved peacefully, but will require this guy's token presence at the conference. It just so happens, that every room but this one's going to be filled during the time, and it just so happens that he'll be in it.
DM: And then you're going to go blow him up?
Me: That's where a coincidental meteor strike is going to hit. The math is going to take a while, but I'm going to go put a banana peel near a hulking hurler once I've done the other set of divinations, and then start a misunderstanding between peoples that will be resolved 12 years from now.
DM: :smallfrown:

Yep. This is when I shoot you. Your character might survive but you gotta die. :smallbiggrin:

Either that or I make you show me your math. You are NOT Hari Seldon. :smallbiggrin:

Sewercop
2011-06-02, 04:34 PM
I dont like to use force to win a battle when gaming. But when i do use force i have two strategies i follow.

1: Use so much force that whatever thats after me, be it a player,nation or monster would rather stay dead then try it again. ex: Say your pissed cause a king sets a bounty on your head... Set a bounty on his nation and claim it yourself. And claim it in the most crazy violent way possible.

or

2:Use what you need to win and not a single thing more. No gloating, no mockery. Just a clean efficient kill. Like on lower lvls colorspray then coup de grace. And smile a little.. just a little. Or turtle up, teleport away, scry and die and then go on to do whatever you was doing before that.

there are many more ways to do it, but i like to do it that way. If i need to use force. But i rather like to play more scheming.

Greenish
2011-06-02, 04:45 PM
Forget the warlord. The crops fed the families of thousands of people. Sure, only a small portion of the population is adventurers, but, well... when you sentence thousands of people to die of starvation, all of a sudden, YOU'RE the bad guy.*Evil laugh* :xykon:


Either that or I make you show me your math. You are NOT Hari Seldon. :smallbiggrin:Man, think of Hari Seldon as the DM. He'd be prepared for what you're going to do.

I'm not sure that's a good thing… :smalleek:

The Glyphstone
2011-06-02, 04:56 PM
*Evil laugh* :xykon:

Man, think of Hari Seldon as the DM. He'd be prepared for what you're going to do.

I'm not sure that's a good thing… :smalleek:

Better - Hari Seldon (Foundation), David Xanatos (Gargoyles), and Light (Death Note) as the players. Tzeentch is the DM.:smallbiggrin:

DragonOfUndeath
2011-06-02, 04:58 PM
Better - Hari Seldon (Foundation), David Xanatos (Gargoyles), and Light (Death Note) as the players. Tzeentch is the DM.:smallbiggrin:

*Subscribed*
*waits intently for awesomesauce flood*

Yanagi
2011-06-02, 05:05 PM
The direct approach is only as useful as the logic on where, when, and to what end it's applied. This is true on battlefields, in campaigns, even in man-a-mano fights. If you marshal a powerful action against a target that has low value to your opponent, you've achieved little. Worse you could be purposefully misdirected--like obscuring the Normandy invasion by misinforming about a Calais invasion.

In a social intrigue situation, the principle remains valid: if you can deceive your opponent as to your goals, he can unknowingly assist you in achieving them...driven by the belief he's hindering your cause. Better still, if you can misdirect opponents into conflict with one another: your causes advance as their resources deplete, and there's no indication that you've manufactured their downfall.

The NPC duke in the first post is engaging in intrigue and discomfitting your character/troop? You smash his duchy, and then...

...He collects the insurance policy on the buildings, cashes out his crop-commodity derivatives, and lobbies the king for a tax holiday and a chunk of discretionary reconstruction funds.

...Or maybe it wasn't his duchy in the first place: his credentials, titles, and even appearance are faked. And after you've dumped a bunch of high-level spells strafing a town, you're ambushed by a mercenary team he's put together, while another team steals all the magical items for your base.

...Or maybe you just gave his nation an excuse to go to war with whatever nation you happen to hail from and/or cool your heels in. Regardless that you have no standing in their governance...*and* a propagandic rallying point of "Remember the Duchy of ___!" useful for gulling the common folks paying and fighting the war, *and* for scaring local affiliated nations into making that war a coalition, *and* for excusing the massive genocidal purges he's going to conduct.

...Or he wanted to make absolutely sure your soul was sin-ripened enough to serve as an amuse-bouche to some Abyssal Lord, in return for which he gets two succubi, a hat that cures venereal diseases, and forty-nine photoluminescent grapefruits.

Sometimes the other guy don't view the conflict in the same terms; intriguing with you/against you could be a feint in something much larger...potentially something where you're not even the main focus, just a manipulable component.

So yeah.

Pisha
2011-06-02, 05:11 PM
The problem with not fearing retribution is that it means there's nothing in the game world that you consider a threat. And that means your GM isn't doing his job. (Although, the fact that you murdered an entire town and didn't suffer any alignment shift towards evil ALSO means your GM isn't doing his job, but I digress.)

In some cases, yes - you can gain advantage over a subtle planner by doing something direct and unexpected, therefore upsetting all his careful plots. It's even fun! However, people plot and plan for a reason, and that reason usually is that the sort of direct forceful action you're advocating would either a) not work, or b) backfire horribly. (Or in some cases, c) both.) (Also, it can often result in collateral damage. Many people consider hurting and/or killing innocent people to be a Bad Thing. Just sayin'.)

Now, I'm all about unconventional problem solving, and brute force is certainly on the table (especially when combined with the element of surprise.) But if, as your posts imply, your GM lets you run roughshod over the world, with no serious consequences or repercussions... then you're not playing a very realistic game. It may be a fun game, and if that's what floats your boat, rock on. But that doesn't mean it's a viable tactic in a more balanced campaign.

druid91
2011-06-02, 05:29 PM
The problem with not fearing retribution is that it means there's nothing in the game world that you consider a threat. And that means your GM isn't doing his job. (Although, the fact that you murdered an entire town and didn't suffer any alignment shift towards evil ALSO means your GM isn't doing his job, but I digress.)

In some cases, yes - you can gain advantage over a subtle planner by doing something direct and unexpected, therefore upsetting all his careful plots. It's even fun! However, people plot and plan for a reason, and that reason usually is that the sort of direct forceful action you're advocating would either a) not work, or b) backfire horribly. (Or in some cases, c) both.) (Also, it can often result in collateral damage. Many people consider hurting and/or killing innocent people to be a Bad Thing. Just sayin'.)

Now, I'm all about unconventional problem solving, and brute force is certainly on the table (especially when combined with the element of surprise.) But if, as your posts imply, your GM lets you run roughshod over the world, with no serious consequences or repercussions... then you're not playing a very realistic game. It may be a fun game, and if that's what floats your boat, rock on. But that doesn't mean it's a viable tactic in a more balanced campaign.

Oh it doesn't always work, it's just the strategy I default to. Sometimes I plot and scheme like any other PC.

Yukitsu
2011-06-02, 05:38 PM
Yep. This is when I shoot you. Your character might survive but you gotta die. :smallbiggrin:

Either that or I make you show me your math. You are NOT Hari Seldon. :smallbiggrin:

Man, this is going to be hard, since I'm lazy and lost the old numbers.

Now, do you want the long math, or the short math? I can find the initial velocity required for escape velocity at 2.4 km/s faster than earth (as in leaves the orbit with an excess 2.4 km/s) required to finish 13 orbital rotations on a longer ellipse in the time it takes for the earth to do 12 (and the initial time of year and day required for the correct angle), but I honestly don't want to have to deal with the equations relating to drag. Like, 99% percent of my astrophysics taught me either negligeable drag or no drag. (no I did not look up numbers, expect extreme rounding errors)

Edit: Actually, I think my DM has some wierd program to auto calculate this, since he took 2 more years of that course than me.

Philistine
2011-06-02, 06:32 PM
In some cases, yes - you can gain advantage over a subtle planner by doing something direct and unexpected, therefore upsetting all his careful plots. It's even fun! However, people plot and plan for a reason, and that reason usually is that the sort of direct forceful action you're advocating would either a) not work, or b) backfire horribly. (Or in some cases, c) both.) (Also, it can often result in collateral damage. Many people consider hurting and/or killing innocent people to be a Bad Thing. Just sayin'.)


You forgot about the cases where d) the plotters can't muster sufficient force to resolve the situation (but someone else in the setting very well might), and e) some people scheme because they just really enjoy scheming, even in cases where a direct approach would actually work better. If anything, e) is the most common in my experience - some people just cannot resist the temptation to show off how "smart" they are, even when it means the results they obtain are markedly inferior. See the "how not to ask for a ride" guy in John Cleese's How to Irritate People, or the character of Tommy Gavin in Rescue Me.

As for the thread topic in general: Note that "pure force" doesn't necessarily have to refer to physical force - it's just usually more hilarious when it does. Also, the inverse of
"In any battle, there's always a level of force against which no tactics can succeed." is also true: In any battle, there exists a minimum level level of force without which no tactics can succeed. Even in the "redirect your enemies so that they spend their resources on each other instead of you" scenario, you need enough force of your own to finish off whichever of them survives.

Greenish
2011-06-02, 07:34 PM
Better - Hari Seldon (Foundation), David Xanatos (Gargoyles), and Light (Death Note) as the players. Tzeentch is the DM.:smallbiggrin:Maybe a bit larger party (Tzeentch is a deity, after all, so he should be able to handle it), and add Locke Lamorra and Paul Atreides.

[Edit]: And while we're at it, how about John Usglass?

DragonOfUndeath
2011-06-02, 07:41 PM
Maybe a bit larger party (Tzeentch is a deity, after all, so he should be able to handle it), and add Locke Lamorra and Paul Atreides.

[Edit]: And while we're at it, how about John Usglass?

That would destroy the Universe from the Awesome Emanations

NNescio
2011-06-02, 08:10 PM
Maybe a bit larger party (Tzeentch is a deity, after all, so he should be able to handle it), and add Locke Lamorra and Paul Atreides.

[Edit]: And while we're at it, how about John Usglass?

Toss in Ursarkar E. Creed...

The Glyphstone
2011-06-02, 08:54 PM
Maybe a bit larger party (Tzeentch is a deity, after all, so he should be able to handle it), and add Locke Lamorra and Paul Atreides.

[Edit]: And while we're at it, how about John Usglass?

Leto might be a better choice than Paul, if what I read on the Xanatos Roulette page is correct. Dunno who John Usglass or Lock Lamorra are, or if they can match up to Seldon/Xanatos/Light/Creed (because Creed does need to be here).

arguskos
2011-06-02, 09:07 PM
Man, think of Hari Seldon as the DM. He'd be prepared for what you're going to do.

I'm not sure that's a good thing… :smalleek:
No he wouldn't. :smallannoyed: Psychohistory only works on MASSIVE scales, something like 107 or larger quantities of people, and cannot be used on individuals without massive +/- error chances. :smallyuk:

Now, if Gaia was the DM, **** would get real, and quickly.

Greenish
2011-06-02, 10:16 PM
Leto might be a better choice than Paul, if what I read on the Xanatos Roulette page is correct. Dunno who John Usglass or Lock Lamorra are, or if they can match up to Seldon/Xanatos/Light/Creed (because Creed does need to be here).Locke Lamorra (not his real name) is a master thief, magnificent bastard, the brains behind Gentlemen Bastards and a veteran practitioner of Indy Ploys from Lies of Locke Lamorra.

John Usglass, also known as the Raven King, is England's (and perhaps the world's) strongest wizard, and pretty much masterminded all the events of Jonathan Strange And Mr Norrell.


No he wouldn't. :smallannoyed: Psychohistory only works on MASSIVE scales, something like 107 or larger quantities of people, and cannot be used on individuals without massive +/- error chances. :smallyuk:So Seldon claimed, but his predictions on individuals proved to be remarkable accurate, if my memory serves. :smallamused:

arguskos
2011-06-02, 10:24 PM
So Seldon claimed, but his predictions on individuals proved to be remarkable accurate, if my memory serves. :smallamused:
Only twice (in my memory, at least from the core series of books) did he employ psychohistory on individuals. First, on Gal Dornick, and he personally admits that it was both unreliable and pointless, since he guessed Gal would be arrested anyways. Second, on the judge, and that was the result of years of fiddling about, and it was STILL said to be unreliable. :smalltongue:

/supernitpicky

Anyways, seeing Seldon as a player in that super-game would be glorious indeed. I'd get behind it.

Yukitsu
2011-06-02, 11:40 PM
I'm more a fan of the omnicient morality license sorts of dudes, probably because I like good guys over bad guys.

That aside, I'm getting flashbacks of the time I drew up a chart predicting future PC deaths based on past trends, and scored 4 of 6 hits (and missed 2 because the DM plot fiated them back to life). Gotta admit, it was easy given there were 6 of us, and I was simply predicting when idiot character #1 would kill us all.

Killer Angel
2011-06-03, 04:02 AM
Either that or I make you show me your math. You are NOT Hari Seldon. :smallbiggrin:

But the character IS. I'll roll for his INT to come up with the plan and the math supporting it. :smallcool:
You don't require the fighter's player to show how he swing a sword, right? You're clearly biased against smart characters! I've paid for that 26 Int! :smalltongue:


Dunno who John Usglass or Lock Lamorra are, or if they can match up to Seldon/Xanatos/Light/Creed (because Creed does need to be here).

Locke Lamora (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lies_of_Locke_Lamora). Trust us and read it. :smallwink:

LibraryOgre
2011-06-03, 10:13 AM
But the character IS. I'll roll for his INT to come up with the plan and the math supporting it. :smallcool:
You don't require the fighter's player to show how he swing a sword, right? You're clearly biased against smart characters! I've paid for that 26 Int! :smalltongue:

To an extent, no, I don't require the player to know how to swing a sword any more than I require a player to know how to cast a spell. However, I DO require that the fighter's player know tactics, or I penalize him by beating him with those same tactics he ignores. The character in question is wanting to set up a Rube Goldberg device of magic and social interaction that will have an impact more than a decade down the line. I see no difference between asking him "How's that going to work" and asking the fighter how he deploys the troops he's been given charge of, or asking the rogue where he's searching for traps.

faceroll
2011-06-03, 10:22 AM
If force isn't working, you're not using enough of it.

The Glyphstone
2011-06-03, 10:31 AM
If force isn't working, you're not using enough of it.

If force isn't working, switch to a different element.

Yukitsu
2011-06-03, 11:11 AM
To an extent, no, I don't require the player to know how to swing a sword any more than I require a player to know how to cast a spell. However, I DO require that the fighter's player know tactics, or I penalize him by beating him with those same tactics he ignores. The character in question is wanting to set up a Rube Goldberg device of magic and social interaction that will have an impact more than a decade down the line. I see no difference between asking him "How's that going to work" and asking the fighter how he deploys the troops he's been given charge of, or asking the rogue where he's searching for traps.

Oh, the social stuff. I thought you meant the rock. No, that nonsense I did with divination spam.

oxybe
2011-06-03, 11:54 AM
my current group generally favors subtlety. while we've had a few run-ins with the law, we're generally seen by the public as a force that's working for the good of the city. we used to try to do our work from the shadows but at this point we're kinda like the Justice League, only our base is hidden.

we don't use lethal force on any city official or those who are uninvolved, though anyone working against the city's well-being who fails to give up when given the chance kinda-sorta gets the short end of the murderstick.

but... sometimes you need to let your antagonists know that you aren't to be trifled with. you might be one of the more soft-spoken ones, but that's just because you know think before speaking and that it's better to not open your mouth when it's not required.

now, sometimes that involves taking off the thick, leather gloves you use to manipulate alchemical components, roll up your sleeves and let them know exactly who is the boss.

sometimes that involves carrying a clay golem in a portable hole and have it create new doorways and stairwells after breaking into your house.

one should make sure to not piss off the half-orc in any group.

especially one who's capable of casting level 5 spells and is a member in good standing of the city's merchant & craftsman guilds.

and woe to the poor, crazy bastards don't know the world of hurt they've got themselves into when they thought to kidnap his master... who he's long since surpassed in skill and power in addition to kidnap one of his good friends.


If force isn't working, you're not using enough of it.


the word you're looking for is "fire", not force... and if my group's antics when i was GMing them are any indication, there can never be enough fire.

then again, we're using the name of a PC, Perry, in place of "smash the surrounding area in search of what we need" thanks to his... unique method of disarming dungeons

EX:

Hey GM, i have the Golem "Perry" the floor since we don't know where the stairs are.

or

Hey GM, we don't know where we're supposed to go, so i have the Golem "Perry"... *rolls dice*... that wall.

note that i'm currently thinking about outfitting the golem with an adamantine tipped battering ram...

Greenish
2011-06-03, 12:06 PM
However, I DO require that the fighter's player know tactics, or I penalize him by beating him with those same tactics he ignores.



asking the fighter how he deploys the troops he's been given charge ofAs a side note, fighters are absolutely clueless when it comes to tactics, leading people or any of that stuff. :smallamused:

Hiro Protagonest
2011-06-03, 12:11 PM
As a side note, fighters are absolutely clueless when it comes to tactics, leading people or any of that stuff. :smallamused:

Yeah. They don't have knowledge (history), (geography), or (architecture and engineering) as class skills.

@oxybe

Give him the battering ram!

oxybe
2011-06-03, 12:51 PM
he'd have the ram, but pretty much immediately after i finished him we found ourselves knee-deep in an enemy area and the walls/floor have a break DC of like 35 so i've found it almost impossible to smash down the walls with the rather large golem.

now, the GM is houseruling that several good strong hits lower the break DC and it usually takes the golem 3 rounds of my astonishingly lucky rolls to break down the walls/floors.

i'm currently trying to think up ideas on how to equip this clay warrior into a dangerous bodyguard for the group, the battering ram being the first step

also: Golem+Portable hole. quite the fun combo.

"i go invisible and fly towards the nearest guard, where i place the portable hole" followed by "i have the golem reach outwards and grab the poor sap's ankle, dragging him into the hole" and finally "i roll up the hole..."

or

"i place the hole on the ceiling" followed by "and the golem bull rushes the floor..."

or

"i have the 1000 pounds, 8 ft tall man of clay squeeze through / block the 5ft square wide corridor" followed by "i use one of my 10 daily rounds of wall of fire acid". popping sounds and screams were heard.

or

"i ready an action to place the hole (containing the golem) whenever an enemy opens one of these doors" unfortunately, no one came.

i am finding many ways to use that golem. most of which are just mean. then again i have a 24 int and i'm feeling really pissed off right now.

LibraryOgre
2011-06-03, 08:51 PM
As a side note, fighters are absolutely clueless when it comes to tactics, leading people or any of that stuff. :smallamused:

Nonsense. At 9th level, they receive a body of fighting men and a lieutenant if they have a stronghold. In Dark Sun, that body of fighting men can get HUGE... minimum of 510 people at level 20, with an average closer to 1300.

Not everyone plays 3.5, after all, here in General Role-playing.

The Glyphstone
2011-06-03, 08:54 PM
Nonsense. At 9th level, they receive a body of fighting men and a lieutenant if they have a stronghold. In Dark Sun, that body of fighting men can get HUGE... minimum of 510 people at level 20, with an average closer to 1300.

Not everyone plays 3.5, after all, here in General Role-playing.

Wait, you can reach level 20 in Dark Sun?:smallconfused:

LibraryOgre
2011-06-03, 09:08 PM
Wait, you can reach level 20 in Dark Sun?:smallconfused:

In theory, the maximum level in 2e DS is 30.

Silverlich
2011-06-04, 05:56 AM
Better - Hari Seldon (Foundation), David Xanatos (Gargoyles), and Light (Death Note) as the players. Tzeentch is the DM.:smallbiggrin:

To get a party of four players, can we add Leto II?

The Glyphstone
2011-06-04, 08:51 AM
In theory, the maximum level in 2e DS is 30.

I didnt' realize anyone made it into the double digits before dying horribly and being eaten by cannibal halflings or something.


To get a party of four players, can we add Leto II?

Yeah, he was my first thought for a 4th player.

Greenish
2011-06-09, 02:32 AM
Nonsense. At 9th level, they receive a body of fighting men and a lieutenant if they have a stronghold.Just because you have men to command doesn't mean you'd know how to. :smallamused:

LibraryOgre
2011-06-09, 02:52 AM
Just because you have men to command doesn't mean you'd know how to. :smallamused:

Actually, they specifically DO. It's a class feature of fighters to lead men, and one that's explicitly spelled out in Dark Sun (where they gain mechanical bonuses in doing so).

Honest Tiefling
2011-06-09, 02:58 AM
I don't play Dark Sun, so I cannot speak for alternative fighter class features granted in 2nd edition. Heck, the closest I ever got to 2nd edition was Baldur's Gate II.

I prefer to walk softly and carry a big stick. CHA is often my dump stat of choice, so my PCs being crafty schemers manipulating others doesn't always make sense. I can see someone with high INT or WIS occasionally hitting upon a good idea or able to see an opportunity, but often without the tools to make it happen.

Incinerating towns on a whim is not the game I wanna play. If you enjoy it, that's good, but its just not my cup of tea. I rather try to convince the party face to get myself and any other..Physically/magically based problem solvers into a position where force can be used discreetly. Or try to chink at a large organization by removing one section at a time. I like using force, but I need a sense of challenge to get people into a position where force can be used.

absolmorph
2011-06-09, 03:47 AM
Pure force, when properly aimed, can be subtle.
For example, rather than smashing through the front wall and dropping everything inside, you could come through the window.

Or, more seriously, you can direct your force at the proper targets, such as the people important to your enemies (using the M.O. of one of your other enemies, of course).