Pure force over subtlety.

[druid91]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

"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]

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]

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".

[Zombimode]

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

[manyslayer]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

yea he was constantly doing stuff like that in the show.

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

[arguskos]

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.

[Somebloke]

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]

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]

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]

Any old punk can blow up a tavern, after all.

The trick is to keep doing it without getting crushed. That requires more force, naturally.

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 isn't counting on you doing something specific.

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]

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]

The trick is to keep doing it without getting crushed. That requires more force, naturally.

The true Xanatos isn't counting on you doing something specific.

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]

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]

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.