Is D&D "about" combat?

Is D&D "about" combat?

  • Yes

    Votes: 101 48.1%
  • No

    Votes: 109 51.9%

But I think your criterion for "aboutness" are very strict (not irrationally strict or unreasonably strict, but very strict). A lot of other RPGs, stuck with needless combat rules and a lack of relationship mechanics, will come out as "about combat" only too - eg Runequest and Stormbringer and maybe C&S - and others will have no stakes built in at all - maybe Traveller.

I think that D&D, because of it's mainstream design tendencies - even in 4e - should be allowed to get away with being a bit vanilla.

<snipped for brevity>

Good stuff. I have used a pretty strict criteria in this instance but as I said earlier I happened to vote yes but it could go either way.

I agree that by the same criteria a lot of games - as you point out - would also be 'about' combat. Maybe that reflects the design paradigms of the time - for example, Marc Miller wrote that Traveller was written to be 'D&D in space'.

Interestingly, I think you raised Call of Cthulhu earlier in the thread and I think there's a case that the Sanity rules represents another 'stake' outside of life/death. Just that one extra mechanic takes CoC to a whole new place which would disappear if the game was simply a 'setting and flavour' rewrite of BRP.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Count me in on the “Yes” side of the equation.

From it’s tabletop-wargaming origins, through 1E and all the way to 4E, in my mind, the focus of the rules (and thus the game) has been on combat (“Killing things and Taking their stuff.”)

Not to say there isn’t other factors involved, of course, but I think D+D, as a brand, has always been combat-centric. (Personally, I actually prefer a more combat-light D+D campaign, but the majority of players I’ve met tend to want to “whip out the battlemat” at a moments notice.)
 

It's in the AD&D 1e PHB. Fighters get 7sp per person per month. M-U's get 5 sp per person per month.

In the Companion rules the question is answered in even more detailed form with the taxes depending on what resources are present in the holding. (Gold mines bring in more taxes than cow pastures.)

FWIW, there are some such rules in the original 1974 rules, too. The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures (Book 3 of the "three brown books") has a section on PC upkeep/support, and on baronies/domains. An "entry level" barony where the PC has cleared the wilderness territory for 20 miles around his stronghold will attract 2-8 villages of 100-400 inhabitants, each. The population of a barony brings in an annual tax revenue of 10 gp per person, and suggests that the referee also allow investments in the territory which can increase its population and revenue (which a list of possible areas for investment).

The rules are more like a starting point that a comprehensive system, but enough to get the ball rolling. (And one might say that a lot of the rules in original D&D are more like a starting point or guide for the referee, rather than a comprehensive and detailed system.)
 


Could it in fact be that Gary and Dave revealed what they intended the game to be about when they sat down and called it a roleplaying game, rather than a combat game?

Did they do so? I seem to recall that neither original D&D, D&D, nor BD&D ever mentioned the term "roleplaying game", and that Dragon magazine avoided it for a long time. It was "The Dungeons & Dragons game".
 

Did they do so? I seem to recall that neither original D&D, D&D, nor BD&D ever mentioned the term "roleplaying game", and that Dragon magazine avoided it for a long time. It was "The Dungeons & Dragons game".

The term was used in my AD&D 1st Edition Player's Handbook in the introduction. Mine is the 6th printing, January, 1980.

Player's Handbook by Gary Gygax said:
Swords & Sorcery best describes what this game is about, for those are the two key fantasy ingredients. ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS is a fantasy game of role playing which relies upon the imagination of participants, for it is certainly make-believe, yet it is so interesting, so challenging, so mind-unleashing that it comes near reality.
 

Did they do so? I seem to recall that neither original D&D, D&D, nor BD&D ever mentioned the term "roleplaying game", and that Dragon magazine avoided it for a long time. It was "The Dungeons & Dragons game".
When original D&D came out, it was still considered an outgrowth of wargaming, although it's apparent that they were kind of casting about for a proper way of describing it. In the forward to Men & Magic, Gygax described Arneson's Chainmail variant as a "medieval fantasy campaign game." He also said "Dungeons & Dragons's possibilities go far beyond any previous offerings anywhere!"

He went on to point out that (unlike a straight wargame like Chainmail), "…it is the campaign for which these rules are designed. It is relatively simple to set up a fantasy campaign, and better still, it will cost almost nothing. In fact you will not even need miniature figures…" And he said that "There should be no want of players, for there is unquestionably a fascination in this fantasy game -- evidenced even by those who could not by any stretch of the imagination be termed ardent wargamers.

It seems to me that original D&D was still tied to wargaming in the minds of its creators, but that they also saw it as a step away from a pure wargame, with a focus on an ongoing campaign and with individual characters and (especially) "measured progression" over time (for more on that, see Gary's article "On Dungeons & Dragons" in Best of the Dragon, Vol. 1), an appeal to non-wargamers, and possibilities that had not been seen before.
 
Last edited:

Here's the text of the article I mentioned in my previous post:

Gary Gygax On Dungeons & Dragons: Origins of the Game said:
GARY GYGAX ON DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
Origins of the Game

The most frequently asked question at seminars which I have given on DUNGEONS & DRAGONS is: "How did the game originate?". Because of the frequency of this question, and the involved nature of the reply required, I thought it a good idea to once again put it in writ- ing. The Forward in DUNGEONS & DRAGONS contains most of what follows, but I will go into greater detail here.

When the International Federation of Wargaming was at its peak, it contained many special interest groups. I founded one of these, the "Castle & Crusade Society". All members of this sub-group were interested in things medieval and I began publishing a magazine for them entitled Domesday Book. In an early issue, I drew up a map of the "Great Kingdon", Members of the society could then establish their holdings on the map, and we planned to sponsor campaign-type gaming at some point. Dave Arneson was a member of the C&C Society, and he established a barony, Blackmoor, to the northeast of the map, just above the Great Kingdom. He began a local medieval campaign for the Twin Cities gamers and used this area.

The medieval rules, CHAINMAIL (Gygax and Perren) were published in Domesday Book prior to publication by Guidon Games. Of course, they were in a less developed state, and were only for a 1:20 figure scale. Between the time they appeared in Domesday Book and their publication by Guidon Games, I revised and expanded the rules for 1:20 and added 1:1 scale games, jousting, and fantasy. Rob Kuntz and I had acquired a large number of 40mm figures, and many of them were so heroic looking that it seemed a good idea to play some games which would reflect the action of the great swords and sorcery yarns. So I devised such rules, and the Lake Geneva Tactical Studies Association proceeded to play-test them. When the whole appeared as CHAINMAIL, Dave began using the fantasy rules for his campaign, and he reported a number of these actions to the C&C Society by way of articles.

I thought that this usage was quite interesting, and a few months later when Dave came down to visit me we played a game of his amended CHAINMAIL fantasy campaign. Dave had taken the man-to-man and fantasy rules and modified them for his campaign. Players began as Heroes or Wizards. With sufficient success they could become Superheroes. In a similar fashion, Wizards could become more powerful. Additionally, he had added equipment for players to purchase and expanded the characters descriptions considerably — even adding several new monsters to the rather short CHAINMAIL line-up.

The idea of measured progression (experience points) and the addition of games taking place in a dungeon maze struck me as being very desireable. However, that did not really fit in the framework of CHAINMAIL. I asked Dave to please send me his rules additions, for I thought a whole new system should be developed, A few weeks after his visit I received 18 or so handwritten pages of rules and notes pertaining to his campaign, and I immediately began work on a brand new manuscript. "Greyhawk" campaign started — the first D&D campaign!

About three weeks later, I had some 100 typewritten pages, and we began serious playtesting in Lake Geneva, while copies were sent to the Twin Cities and to several other groups for comment. DUNGEONS & DRAGONS had been born. Its final form came over a year later and consisted of nearly 300 manuscript pages which I wrote during the wee hours of many a morning and on weekends.

The first D&D (as opposed to variant CHAINMAIL) dungeon adventurers were: Ernie Gygax, Don Kaye, Rob Kuntz and Terry Kuntz. They were soon joined by Don Arndt, Brian Blume, Tom Champeny, Bill Corey, Bob Dale, Mary Dale, Chip Mornard, Mike Mornard, and Tim Wilson. All of these gamers — as well as the other play-testers — contributed to the final form of the game.

There were then three character classes, with players beginning at first level (rather than as 4th level Hero-types or relatively powerful Wizards), and each level was given a heroic or otherwise descriptive name. The actions that they could follow were outlined. Spells were expanded. The list of monsters was broadened again, and a complete listing of magical items and treasures was given. The reaction to the manuscript was instant enthusiasm. DUNGEONS & DRAGONS differed considerably from Dave's "Blackmoor" campaign, just as the latter differed from CHAINMAIL: but, based on the reception given to the game by the others testing it, he had to agree that it was acceptable. Although D&D was not Dave's game system by any form or measure, he was given co-billing as author for his valuable idea kernels. He complained bitterly that the game wasn't right, but the other readers/play- ers loved it. In fact, the fellows playing the manuscript version were so enthusiastic that they demanded publication of the rules as soon as possible. Thus, D&D was released long before I was satisfied that it was actually ready. I am not sorry that we decided to publish then instead of later, even though I've often been taken to task about it since, and I hope all of you feel the same way too. You can, however, rest assured that work on a complete revision of the game is in progress, and I promise a far better product.
 
Last edited:

And here is Bob Bledsaw's Forward to Dave Arneson's First Fantasy Campaign. This was written in August of 1977:

Bob Bledsaw said:
It has been an especially satisfying experience to work with one of the giants of our hobby... Dave Arneson, the originator of the Dungeon Adventure concept. Much of the initial impetus of Fantasy Role Playing as it exists today is due to the dedication and work of this imaginative and creative personality. Dave has attempted to show the development and growth of his campaign as it was originally conceived…
 

I think the First Fantasy Campaign is quite illuminating, as far as the origins of D&D go, and how it was originally approached and played. The wargaming aspect is very apparent, but so is the focus on the ongoing campaign, character growth, and even the economic factors (like the aforementioned question of taxes from domains and such -- all of that is present in the First Fantasy Campaign, so it even predates D&D, proper.)

Arneson, in his introduction to First Fantasy Campaign, also draws a contrast between running the Blackmoor campaign and running a "conventional wargame" campaign. Even in the earliest days, the originators definitely saw that this was something different from a conventional wargame.
 

Remove ads

Top