D&D 5E [+] How can 5e best handle role playing outside of combat?

[Crimson Longinus]

This is not a point with content. Combat rules are in no way or form requred. The game's existence is not required. No rules for anything are "required" in a general sense.

They may well be necessary for some to achieve a particular goal or desired experience.

For your desired experience, they may not be required, which is great for you. But since you haven't defined what that goal/experience is, nobody can really tell if what you say is relevant to them.

The question was "can 5e handle roleplaying outside of combat?" The answer to that is that it obviously can. Whether it handles it in a way you'd personally prefer is another matter.

​

 

[R_J_K75]

I once gamed with a player who often stated, “ the rules define the fun.”

I am dumbfounded by the statement of said player, I don't even know where to begin to try and understand it. So if I turn to page 187 of the PHB its going to tell me when I can and cant have fun? Does page 187 say, "Fireball is an amazing spell, but its not one to cast if you want to have fun"?

 

[BrokenTwin]

I definitely wouldn't call 5E a rules-lite system. It's lighter than the previous two editions, and things like Shadowrun and GURPS, but it's also a LOT heavier than anything PbtA, Fate, or most OSR games provide. And definitely heavier than something like Dread.

To the point of the OP: nothing in 5E prevents you from roleplaying outside of combat. But the system also provides very little in the way of mechanical heft to the players' ability to influence the game outside of combat. The rules that are there are functional (for the most part), but not really great for those of us who want to create characters that mechanically focus on things other than combat. Whether or not you consider this a good thing comes down to taste. Things like Ideals, Flaws, and Bonds are very tacked on, which becomes doubly obvious when you see first how little they interact with the rest of the game and second just how many groups forget those fields even exist.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm still amazed after all that talk that people still confuse mechanical resolution of whatever (combat, skills, exploration, social interaction) with roleplaying (that definition is not universal, by the way, but it's a least wider than just participating in a roleplaying game, which is completely circular).

Because I think a definition of "roleplay" that defines as being "the part of the game that isn't mechanical" is necessarily limiting. I think of roleplay as "characterization", and its an interstitial part of the game; you can do it in a combat or social mechanic part of the game just as easily as you can during unbounded conversation between characters or NPCs.

 

[Bolares]

So to expand the original question, which was obviously not as clear as I thought it was. Then I was on a plane to Madrid so couldn’t clarify!



This was the quote that caught my attention. Is everything not-combat in 5e, filler until the next fight comes along as this poster seem to suggest.

Can you have a meaningful, enjoyable, challenging (not necessarily risk of death) session in D&D without inserting CR/level appropriate fights. If so, are there any specific techniques or rules you would use to do so?

If your answer is “yes, obviously” but you don’t want to talk about the how, the thread probably isn’t for you.

If your answer is “no, 5e can only ever be improv outside of combat” then the thread also probably also isn’t for you.

@vincegetorix gets if. Thanks for that list. I’ve never seen plot points before. It sounds like something that could take roleplaying encounters to a new level of engagement.

I think it heavelly depends on what you consider "meaningfull, enjoyable, challenging". I don't really like a heavy system for social interaction. I don't like to know that if a roll a X on this test I will get the result Y with the NPC, but I like there to be some parameters for how to do things. I like skill challenges from 4e, and think they translate well to 5e, and beyond using skills for sucesses I allor my players to spend spell slots (if they can explain how the spell would help in the challenge) to have successes.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I would slightly disagree with that. Even the combat rules are relatively lightweight. The bulk of the rules text is much more focused on the complexity of magic. If magic was done by simply making an Arcana or Religion check to create whatever effect was desired, then 5e might classify as "rules-light".

You're right. I made a mistake by conflating magic and combat. It's not the same thing, despite 5e having limited the number and power-level of non-combat spells, that were sometime universe-defining (if anyone can build a teleportation circle, it's safe to assume that they'll be common in metropolises, for example).

 

[TheSword]

I am dumbfounded by the statement of said player, I don't even know where to begin to try and understand it. So if I turn to page 187 of the PHB its going to tell me when I can and cant have fun? Does page 187 say, "Fireball is an amazing spell, but its not one to cast if you want to have fun"?

I am relatively sure said player says it to mean, knowing where you stand allows you to form reasonable expectations and making decisions based on those expectations is fun. Would you ever use water breathing to explore an underground city if the length of time it lasted was arbitrary or random?

Or to put it another way. If you have a set of rules, conditions and norms that take care of basic expectations, then you can concentrate on more interesting stuff. I think it was originally said by Monica from Friends

 

[R_J_K75]

Can you have a meaningful, enjoyable, challenging (not necessarily risk of death) session in D&D without inserting CR/level appropriate fights. If so, are there any specific techniques or rules you would use to do so?

Yes. I once ran a 2E session when I first started playing again after taking a break for a few years. A few of my friends and I were talking and realized that we had played in the past and decided to get a game together. Next day we got together, rolled up PCs and just starting playing. Because it'd had been awhile since I played let alone was a DM we played the entire session without rolling a single die, without any combat or conflict, and just roleplayed. No special rules necessary, in fact we didnt use any rules.

 

[TheSword]

By roleplaying I’m referring to everything outside the cut and thrust of tactical combat. Maybe that’s lazy. I can amend the OP and clarify if people have a better suggestion.

 

[TheSword]

Yes. I once ran a 2E session when I first started playing again after taking a break for a few years. A few of my friends and I were talking and realized that we had played in the past and decided to get a game together. Next day we got together, rolled up PCs and just starting playing. Because it'd had been awhile since I played let alone was a DM we played the entire session without rolling a single die, without any combat or conflict, and just roleplayed. No special rules necessary, in fact we didnt use any rules.

Did you use character abilities or was it you all talking? Would the game have proceeded exactly the same way without it being D&D? Can you put some meat on the bones?