Do you play more for the story or the combat?

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Kamikaze Midget

Yep!

Where I might be a little weird is that I want the game to give me stories without me having to put things into the game to get them. Skill challenges have some balance issues that I'm not a fan of, but ditching a lot of "simulationist" aspects hurts my ability to pull a narrative out of a few dice rolls. 4e assumes I have a story all lined up and ready to tell and gets out of my way for it. I want more system than that, myself.

I'm a narrative DM who wants the game to tell me a story.

Like background staff hardcoded to PC abilities as in Runequest/Heroquest?

[Thanee]

Story (and character development (both kinds)), but combat is also fun and as such a close second.

A game with only combat and no story whatsoever would be pretty boring.
A game with only story would fare better, but would still be lacking something.

Bye
Thanee

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by diaglo

neither. i play for fun and escapism.

Yeah fan do you have more fan with the combat or with the story?

[Phaezen]

I voted story, with the caveat that at least part of the story includes killing things and taking thier stuff.

Phaezen

[evilgenius8000]

I chose story because that is what drives an adventure, and adventures are what D&D is all about. Combat and RP (which was suspiciously absent from the poll) are two things that come about because of the story.

[Piratecat]

I love whacking things and taking their stuff, and I have a deep and abiding love for treasure baths, but I'm about 60% story / 40% combat.

[Crazy Jerome]

Originally Posted by jdrakeh

For me, combat is usually part of the story (to wit, such epics as Beowulf, the Volsungasaga, The Illiad, etc all feature combat rather prominently but are no doubt stories all the same). If you're asking whether I prefer combat-intensive roleplay to non-combat-intensive roleplay, your question is worded poorly.

This. When I roleplay, I'm usually interested in heroic or epic fantasy, or (very) occasionally space opera or super heroes. It is rather hard to do the kind of stories I like without a large dose of combat being likely. If the players want and manage to cleverly avoid combat, I'm completely fine with that, even if it happens all of a 10 hour session. But the threat has to be there.

[pawsplay]

There are some situations in which I don't mind spending the session in talk, but I usually prefer a little action. There are some situations where I don't mind a little mindless violence, but I usually prefer a story behind it.

So I'm not wishy-washy. I'm emphatically about 80% for both.

[Darrin Drader]

Originally Posted by Piratecat

I'm about 60% story / 40% combat.

That's what I was going to say, but you seem to have beat me to it.

Sometimes there is something to be said for depopulating the monsters who have taken up residence in the local dungeon, but after doing that for several hours, it does get boring, particularly if the game moves so slow that you can really only fit in 4 combats per evening - and that's really a fault of 3E and 4E in my opinion. If the name of the game is dungeon clearing and killing as many bad guys as possible, give me C&C.

On the other hand, if the combats are fewer and farther between, then I think 3.5 plays really well. The number and variety of skills available make for a game where you can really sink your teeth into specific NPC encounters or non-combat challenges.

Ideally though, if I had to choose between a dungeon stomp or something with more roleplay, I'll take the roleplay any day of the week. I've had games where the characters don't draw their swords throughout the entire adventure. Instead they were interacting with people or sneaking around. Of course one adventure in particular comes to mind where they didn't draw their swords because their were too busy evading their enemies for much of the night.

My group has actually found that for straight dungeon crawls, we're really enjoying the game Descent, by FFG.

[Victim]

I picked combat. I like playing games - on nights when not everyone can make it, our group can still play video games, Arkham Horror, or other board games and still have a good time. And combat is the primary game playing element of DnD.

Story and campaign elements are good value adds, but I'll find those a little unsatisfying without the foundation of a solid game underneath.

[Shemeska]

Originally Posted by Mouseferatu

Combat in D&D is, to me, just one of many sorts of scenes and tools at the DM's disposal; it's a means, not an end unto itself.

What Ari said.

Combat is just (one of several) vehicles to advance and influence a campaign's story / plot.

[joethelawyer]

Originally Posted by Mouseferatu

Story (which includes, in addition to plot, role-playing, PC-to-PC and PC-to-NPC interaction, investigation, and figuring things out). I love a good fight in D&D, but I want it to advance the plot, not happen "just because."

Combat in D&D is, to me, just one of many sorts of scenes and tools at the DM's disposal; it's a means, not an end unto itself.

that's about the best representation of my viewpoint i've seen, and i didn't even write it!

[JeffB]

Originally Posted by JRRNeiklot

I didn't vote because there was no option for neither. The main thing that draws me to D&D is the exploration of a world, it's wilderness areas, dungeons, towns, etc. What lies over the next hill, etc. There must be some combat, and story plays a role, but I want to get out there and explore, find new things, explore new venues.

Agreed 100% and I should have mentioned this in my first post- D&D to ME has always been a game of exploration first and foremost, not combat (and from what I've read of Gary's & other "forefathers of D&D" original games, their games were the same). Combat is important, but it's not the focus.

I voted story, and in my mind, the exploration aspect is "story" more or less.

[Michael Silverbane]

Theoretically, my answer should be story... But combat is the primary manifestation of the conflict in the story... So... Combat, but with an eye towards the story at all times?

[Kamikaze Midget]

Originally Posted by xechnao

Like background staff hardcoded to PC abilities as in Runequest/Heroquest?

Yeah, I do eat that stuff up.

Originally Posted by Fallen Seraph

If stuff like Rituals either with same mechanics or simply same orientation in the game were prevalent throughout 4e that be more to your liking?

Yeah. I'm a fan of Rituals (and I'm glad they were removed from basically being "wizard and cleric only). When I saw the monster-based dragon rituals in the Draconomicon I let out a little giddy laughter.

Originally Posted by Cadfan

Can someone give me an example of something that would satisfy this: "I want rules for thwarting villains like 4e has rules for bashing goblins."

I assume its something other than a setting with pre existing conflicts. But beyond that I really don't get it.

One of the ways 4e nods toward this that I like is by having "encounter groups" and by talking about how certain monsters interact with others. That helps me create a narrative of why these things would go together.

One of the ways 2e and 3e helped was by giving me rules for random encounter charts, and basically saying "anyone who spends the night in the Deserts of Red Sand might have an encounter with something that lives thre! It might not be hostile...but maybe it is!" That was a huge help in adding local interest and flavor to a region. 2e's "rarity" rating was great, and the charts in the 3e DMG for habitat, terrain, and dungeon level were one of my best campaign-building resources. And the rules for demographics helped me estimate what a "local guard" could handle. NPC XP and NPC Classes, too.

All those little "simulationist touches" helped me figure out the context from which an enemy might rise.

This information would mostly be wasted on a DM who already had a story and just wanted a platform to tell it on. But I'm at my best when I'm spontaneous and let my players' tangents carry me.

For FFZ, I'm designing a "character-first" kind of story structure system. Your players choose archcetypes for their character. These archetypes have built-in conflicts (sort of like picking a Paladin in earlier editions ). You should expect to get challenged on them. The DM then has a menu of conflicts that can be used to generate scenarios: different character conflicts you have will generate NPC's, encounters, monsters, and scenes relevant to your character. Even treasures and powers will be affected by it. It ties these most directly to experience: every time your characters get their ideals challenged, they also gain a level. The DM also designs the main villain of the game from this skeleton of archetypes and conflicts, making sure it represents everything your characters are opposed to.

For instance...

FFZ Plot Generation Example

You've got four characters. One of them is a dragonborn fighter with the "Retainer" archetype (interested in preserving ancient orders or traditions that are nearly lost to time; main conflict: tradition vs. change). One of them is an eladrin wizard with the "Power-seeker" archetype (interested in enhancing their own might; main conflict: power vs. futility). One of them is a dwarf cleric with the "Chosen One" archetye (interested in fulfilling their destiny; main conflict: salvation vs. dissolution). One of them is a human rogue with the "Treasure Hunter" archetype (interested in winning a big score; main conflict: security vs. insecurity).

You now have four qualities for your villain: your villain represents Change, Futility, Dissolution, and Insecurity. These four words are pretty descriptive on their own: you can imagine the main villain as sort of a primordial force of destructive chaos, only kept barely at bay, always gnawing at the fringes of the characters' lives, threatening to break down what little they have and reduce them all to nothingness. His goal is to un-make everything, to dissolve tradition, to make all other powers powerless, to thwart all attempts at salvation, and to blast apart any semblance of security.

At the same time, you have four motives that lead directly into plots for a game session by using their opposites as conflicts: One wants to preserve the past (so obviously the past needs to be threatened -- perhaps his family is found out to be not really part of that old clan), one wants to be powerful (so obviously they need to be made to feel weak -- perhaps they fight an early battle with the villain that is un-winnable, and all they can do is flee his might), one wants to fulfill a destiny (so obviously that destiny needs to be questioned -- perhaps it comes at the price of the characters' eternal soul), one interested in the biggest source of gold they can find (so obviously that gold needs to lead to more problems than solutions -- perhaps raiding the dungeon is how they unleash the force of entropy in the first place).

The archetypes link up to gaining levels, so that when Jimmy's character (that dragonborn) faces one of his challenges (he finds out the family isn't part of the old clan, and he makes a choice about whether his character cares about that or not), a level is gained (for everyone)

The conflicts link up to encounters and "Big Choices," which are how PC's impact the ongoing plot. Encounters somehow sap their resources and risk killing them, the "Big Choices" help them shape the game as they go forward. So when Jimmy's character is facing that challenge, he's fighting (maybe he's fighting members of the true clan who have come to exterminate this false clan!), he's using skills (maybe they set up a test that he needs to pass), he's exploring (maybe their clan headquarters is in a distant land that the party must travel to), and he's making large decisions (do I talk to the High Lord of this new clan or do I just beat him up? do I liberate the slaves they keep, or do I play it diplomatic? do I care that these creatures are 'legitimate' or is it more important that I'm keeping true to the spirit of the bloodline and they're not?) that impact the game going forward, and, ultimately, discovering a connection to the villain (aha! the Villain was the one who dug these guys up and put them onto my family!).

That's all in one session.

That just came from his character creation giving the DM interesting things to do with his character.