iserith
Magic Wordsmith
Not quite sure what you mean, but, if I'm following you, then yes, 5e combat is very much not the goal:approach method.
Except that players describe what they want to do in combat, the same as in any other area of the game. Per the rules on "How to Play": "This pattern [the play loop] holds whether the adventurers are cautiously exploring a ruin, talking to a devious prince, or locked in mortal combat against a mighty dragon." Combat is more structured in that the players and DM take turns choosing and resolving actions. But otherwise players describing what they want to do and the DM deciding if a check is appropriate applies to all three pillars of the game. The rules are very clear on this (whether you follow them or not).
In practice, it's common for people to just assume an attack roll will follow the declaration of the goal and approach since the DM is instructed by the DMG to "call for an attack roll when a character tries to hit a creature or an object with an attack, especially when the attack could be foiled by the target's armor or shield or by another object providing cover." But it's still the DM's call.
Honestly, I didn't really think that that was a very good defense of goal:approach methodology.
No defense is necessary. The rules say what they say. If a group doesn't like those rules, they're free to change them.