If you choose to stop roleplaying and treat combat as a skirmish mini-game then that is a choice you have made. Heck, you could toss out the role-playing completely and use the D&D combat system as a mini wargame and nothing more if you so selected.
But, that would be a choice. And individual selection, as I said, is purely a function of what goes on between the ears of the person making that selection.
You CAN choose to NOT roleplay D&D combat. That does not make it not a roleplaying game. You can choose TO roleplay Descent (or even Monopoly) and that does not make these games BE roleplaying games.
In my experience there is nothing to inhibit roleplaying during D&D combat. The players each have characters who, unlike, say Desecnt characters, have larger motivations and goals. Sometimes it doesn't matter. But frequently the players make much different choices during RP combat contained within a larger roleplaying campaign than they would in one where it is simply a matter of "winning" such as Descent or Warhammer. So their tactical actions are readily influenced by their roleplaying in ways that a non-roleplaying game lacks. Further, even non-tactical role play often continues throughout combat. Interparty relationships and exchanges persist. If these things are cast aside in your game, then I would suggest you are missing out.
Bottom line remains that nothing in a piece of plastic or between the covers of any D&D book has the slightest ability to prevent a dedicated player from roleplaying their experiences both in and out of combat. And that is not an IME comment. That is purely a rational observation. I'm not disputing that other people have different experience. I am disputing that it is rational to claim these alternate experiences result from the game itself, as opposed to the people playing it.
