RP *versus* combat? Not when I play

[Thasmodious]

While everyone seems to be on the subject of posting personal, long standing grievances about perceived attitudes in the gaming community, here's mine. I see discussions all the time along these lines:

With so much focus on combat rules, there is less RP in the game
With fewer combats overall, we can RP more
I don't like roll playing, I like role playing, so I prefer combat light systems
etc, etc, etc.

From all sides from the grognard to the modern gamer, there seems to be a perception that there are two activities during an RPG session - you are either in combat or you are roleplaying.

You can sit around and RP the Duke's boring dinner all night long, but I roleplay men (and women) of action and I don't cease playing my character when initiative is rolled. The game doesn't become a math exercise. I'm playing my character when I'm renting a room for the night or selling the metal armor we took off those orcs. And I'm playing my character when we're fighting those orcs - shouting out orders, telling an ally to watch his back, responding to tactical needs, shouting battle cries or for a fallen ally, cursing and taunting my enemies left and right... So are the people I game with.

You can't ask for a more intense situation in which to roleplay and really bring your character to life than in the middle of combat! If the night's session is one five hour fight, well, you've also just RP'ed for five straight hours. At least, you should have.

 

[kaomera]

You can't ask for a more intense situation in which to roleplay and really bring your character to life than in the middle of combat! If the night's session is one five hour fight, well, you've also just RP'ed for five straight hours. At least, you should have.

I agree, but I think what a lot of people are talking about is not specifically combat so much as the "tactical elements" of the game. Basically the game part of the RPG. And you should still be able to mix up the roleplay and the tactical elements, but it's hard for me, and it seem like a decent amount of others as well.

The issue is in part one of "immersion". Not so much immersion in RP maybe, but I know that when I'm trying to play out a tactical situation (such as combat) "well", ie: good strategy, winning; well, I get very immersed in the tactics. And that can seriously impact my ability to hold onto the fictional viewpoint that makes my roleplaying a lot better (IMO). It's just difficult for me to think of things in my character's terms, through his eyes, while at the same time pushing a little man about a vinyl mat with some squiggly marks on it...

Personally it's easier for me without the battlemat, but I think that the opposite is true for some others.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I agree that roleplaying and combat are not mutually exclusive, however, there are times when the longer a combat drags on the less the roleplaying seems to rear it head. That might be another reason people are starting to migrate back to the days of rules light combat. It was much easier to say you were stabbing the dragon with your spear when your mini position didn't make you take two full moves, a 5 foot step and avoid three AoEs just to do so.

Was combat less precise, yes, was it less fun, no and in some ways maybe more so. I think we all need to realize that generalizations are an imprecise way humans rationalize irrational or ephemeral thoughts.

For example -
Player A likes to talk in funny voices, with strange accents and possibly in a different language to portray his/her character and thinks this is serious role playing.
Player B thinks saying "I'm doing X" is serious role playing.

Player A feels that combat should be all but hand waived to get on to the next roleplaying hook.
Player B has brought his/her copies of Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" and Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" as light reading until a combat situation arises.

If Player A feels combat drags on for more than a few seconds he/she will most likely call it "roll playing"
If Player B isn't challenged on multiple levels of combat tactics during a combat he feels cheated out of his/her "roleplaying" experience.

Ultimately both will post on ENworld flaming the other for improper bad wrong fun....

I'm sure there is a balance in there somewhere, however most of us just don't want to see it. The fact is, we like what we like and if it doesn't meet our expectations, we gripe - welcome to the microwave/fast food world of broken expectations.

 

[Dannager]

I think what the OP is saying is that (like many of the other divides in the gaming community), one of those types of player tends to rail against the other's playstyle more often. Complaining about "roll playing" and the like happens far more often than complaining about roleplaying, even if both groups feel equally off-put by the other's playstyle.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Complaining about "roll playing" and the like happens far more often than complaining about roleplaying, even if both groups feel equally off-put by the other's playstyle.

That is untrue.

The balance shifts from site to site - that is true. Maybe even from subforum to subforum! But overall, there is a crapload of both.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I think the one good thing of these types of threads is affirming a particular style of play as valid (even if that style does not jive with your own). It reminds everyone that there is no "one true way to play" but a vibrant spectrum; and occasionally lots of good ideas to meld into your playstyle. So thanks to the OP for sharing.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Dannager]

I think the one good thing of these types of threads is affirming a particular style of play as valid (even if that style does not jive with your own). It reminds everyone that there is no "one true way to play" but a vibrant spectrum; and occasionally lots of good ideas to meld into your playstyle. So thanks to the OP for sharing.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

Agreed.

 

[S'mon]

There are lots of indications in the 4e books that players are supposed to roleplay during combat, shouting out battle oaths, evocatively describing their Powers, and suchlike. But newer players can struggle to do this while trying to master the complicated combat rules, and IME even experienced weaker/less imaginative players often refuse to roleplay during combat and simply treat is as an exercise in mechanical number crunching.

Personally I'm usually pretty much ok with players of martial-role PCs who simply declare "I Sly Flourish" and then determine the mechanical effects; with Martial attacks it's usually easy for the DM & other players to understand what's going on. But I really hate it when players of some obscure splatbook Arcane/Divine/etc class do the same, and no one else can visualise what's happening or why the monsters are taking X damage and being Dazed/Stunned/Marked etc.

Edit: Even with Martial powers there can be problems. My Thief's "Backstab" has a legacy name which poorly describes what's actually happening. Usually I'm not actually 'backstabbing' a monster, I'm "exploiting a temporary moment of vulnerability".

 

[triqui]

You can roleplay in combat, that for sure. There are even some roleplaying heavy, narrativistic focused, combat oriented games like Feng Shui.

However, in combat is easier to break inmersion and forget roleplaying and become metagamey (Ie: ie: "I hit him, 34 dmg, prone and dazed"). You can do it out of combat too (ie: "I try to convince him, roll diplomacy, got a 24"), but it happen less often.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Like so many arguments, I belive the contention here is one of terminology.


ABSOLUTELY you can roleplay in combat! Agreed.


I know I've been guilty of setting up this dichotomy (heck, I think I did it today). But when I say "too much combat, not enough roleply" I don't mean to say you can't or shouldn't roleplay in combat, indeed I think it is important to do so!

What I'm talking about are character based decision making and plot. While combat is an important plot point, it is the elements surrounding the combat that are even more important. What is the reason you are fighting? What will be the outcome for your group and the world at large if you succeed? If you fail? When I say, "not enough roleplaying and too much combat" I'm referring to combats that are meaningless (like random encounters) or have no real buildup (who is this BBEG again? aw well, I'll just roll initiative).

But, to the OP, you are absolutely right. RPing can be a great fun thing to do during combat.