Is D&D "about" combat?

[Sadrik]

D&D is about getting together with friends and creating a story around characters and have combat too. But combat only hell no.

 

[Dannager]

D&D is about getting together with friends and creating a story around characters and have combat too. But combat only hell no.

Am I the only one that believes that answers like the above don't come anywhere near actually answering the question posed?

~ your adversarial attitude is pretty close to getting you booted from the thread though - Plane Sailing, Admin ~

 

[billd91]

If you spend 3/4 of your pagecount devoted to how to kill stuff and what stuff you can kill and the only way to advance in your game is to kill stuff (or at the very least, mostly kill stuff and take its loot) it's not a huge stretch to say that your game is about killing stuff.

Otherwise, you are basically saying that the dev's are completely wasting everyone's time on stuff that is not being used all the time.

There's a reason there's no weather rules in Monopoly for example.

Except that nowhere near 3/4 of the page count is devoted to how to kill stuff.

The problem I see people having is inferring one thing from a few pieces of data when other conclusions can be supported as well. Why should there be so much time devoted to combat compared to, say, interpersonal interactions? Because the former requires more structure to be fair than the latter. Devoting more time and effort to one set of rules could mean that it takes more effort to structure it and communicate that structure rather than be the core of what the game is about. Page count does not equal primacy in the purpose of the game.

 

[M.L. Martin]

My kneejerk, semi-serious answer?

D&D nowadays (whether it be OSR, 3E/Pathfinder, or 4E) is about the Triumph of Brute Force and Cynicism.

 

[billd91]

Ah, but there's the rub.

You ask Person A: "Is D&D about combat?"

They respond: "No, D&D isn't about any one thing - it's about combat, roleplaying, exploration, etc."

You ask that same Person A: "Is D&D about roleplaying?"

They respond: "Yes."

This is illustrative. We now know that Person A defends against the claim that D&D is about combat by saying D&D is about lots of things (including roleplaying and combat). But when presented with the question of whether or not it's about roleplaying, suddenly it is about roleplaying, and the other aspects of the game they made a point of including earlier receive no mention.

In other words, when the first question is posed, Person A appears to give primacy to nothing, considering many different aspects of the game to share the spotlight, as it were. When the second question is posed, Person A appears to give primacy to roleplaying. This indicates one of two things: either Person A's opinion on what D&D is about changes based on the question asked (they have no well-formed idea of what D&D is about), or Person A tries to make a "single-minded" position (such as D&D being about combat) look short-sighted while simultaneously adhering to a view that is very similar to the one they criticize (hypocrisy).

In order for Person A to have a consistent position, they would have to respond to both questions with "No," or they would have to respond to the first question with "No, D&D is about roleplaying," and the second question with "Yes."

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that anyone in particular here follows the above pattern. I'm merely wondering at whether or not any of the poll's respondents fit this pattern.

Rather than looking for hypocrisy under every rock, you could consider the alternative idea that multiple definitions of role play are being used, and even refined as the question changes. I can't speak for Mearls and his quote as provided in this thread, but we can't really infer exactly what he means and what the scope of role play is in the quote. Is it truly on the same level as exploration and combat, separate activities that probably exist on the same level without primacy? Should we take that to mean the interpersonal interactions that occur outside of combat and exploration? Or does it mean the overall activity of playing a character which could be through combat and exploration, while exploration and combat, in the quote, refer to just the rules-driven, tactical aspects of those activities?

Frankly, trying to pin any of those down without further context is a pain. It's even worse when you try to follow up with further refining questions to find that the person you're interviewing is refining their own definitions as the initial questions make them think more about their responses.

Ultimately, I don't see a major contradiction between saying the game isn't primary about combat, putting it in a set of things the game is about, including role playing, and then coming down on the idea that the game is primarily about role playing, in other words, playing the role of a specific character. You can do that while exploring, fighting, or doing nothing but sitting around yapping on while role playing your character.

I suppose we could try to write up a glossary explaining the difference between different sorts of role playing (like Advanced Squad Leader defines two different kinds of adjacent), but I don't think it's really worth it.

 

[billd91]

Am I the only one that believes that answers like the above don't come anywhere near actually answering the question posed?

I dunno. It may be the most important element of all - the idea of getting together to have fun rather than the concept of playing it (or defining it) wrong.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

D&D is about getting together with friends and creating a story around characters and have combat too. But combat only hell no.

Am I the only one that believes that answers like the above don't come anywhere near actually answering the question posed?

Am I the only person on this board getting a little tired of your "Us" and "Them", "Me" and "They" waffle?

I mean seriously, if you need someone to interpret Sadrik's response:
Thread Poll: Is D&D "About" Combat? Yes/No?
Sadrik: NO! I don't think D&D is about combat.
Herremann: Hmmm, interesting. So that kind of makes me wonder: what do you think D&D is about then?
Sadrik: I think D&D is about getting together with friends and creating a story around characters... and have combat too.
Herremann: Hey that's cool. Thanks for the extra insight into what you are thinking; now I understand where you are coming from.

Was it that bad a response that it was worth calling out? As if you are the "Is D&D about Combat?"-thread-police. As if to respond to this thread, you have to negotiate the Dannager filter machine as to why your opinion is wrong? Seriously not cool!

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[WheresMyD20]

D&D is about adventure. Combat, however, is the most common byproduct of adventuring.

 

[Dannager]

The problem I see people having is inferring one thing from a few pieces of data when other conclusions can be supported as well. Why should there be so much time devoted to combat compared to, say, interpersonal interactions? Because the former requires more structure to be fair than the latter.

This.

Is.

Dead.

Wrong.

There is nothing about the abstraction of combat versus the abstraction of interpersonal interactions (of which combat is a subset, mind you) that necessitates combat requiring more rules than, say, debate. In fact, if we look at another instance of rules - let's say, the National Parliamentary Debate Association rules - we find plenty of rules for interpersonal interactions and (gasp!) none for combat.

Similarly, I can cite dozens of examples of games where combat is resolved in a brisk fashion with perhaps a handful of rolls and relatively few rules.

The belief that combat requires all these rules is totally false. The reality is that combat in D&D was designed to be rules-heavy because people like combat in D&D to be nuanced and flexible, because it represents the most consistently "meaty" part of the game for your average group.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

You don't believe that it's potentially illuminating to discuss why people may have the knee-jerk reactions that they do to this question?

Because, I mean, I do. In fact, I think it's downright fascinating.

Sure it's fascinating... but not on a gaming board prone ot edition warring between a bunch of armchair psychologists. It's discussion that is, imho, better had over beers. Specifically, lots of beers. And possibly aspirin.

So, hypothetically, what would your knee-jerk reaction be to the question of "Is D&D about roleplaying?"

Well, no. D&D is not about roleplaying. D&D is roleplaying. Everyone knows that MM&MD, "Monster Manuals & Mountain Dew", is the premier roleplaying game about roleplaying.

To the question you meant to ask, my knee-jerk reaction would be "Yes", and I'd go on to say that the combat elements of D&D are a subset of the total game. Just like the skills resolution, and the magic mechanics, and the RP guidance, and so on.

Combat, in other words, is one (fairly significant) aspect, of this particular rpg. That I've played numerous entire sessions with no combat tells me the game is not "about" combat. Likewise, the fact that I've played entire sessions focused entirely on combat that didn't actually advance the story tell me again that the game is not "about" combat.

The game is "about" the world and PCs' story that the combat and all the other conflicts and challenges are embedded in.