D&D 5E Is D&D 90% Combat?

In response to Cubicle 7’s announcement that their next Doctor Who role playing game would be powered by D&D 5E, there was a vehement (and in some places toxic) backlash on social media. While that backlash has several dimensions, one element of it is a claim that D&D is mainly about combat.

Head of D&D Ray Winninger disagreed (with snark!), tweeting "Woke up this morning to Twitter assuring me that [D&D] is "ninety percent combat." I must be playing (and designing) it wrong." WotC's Dan Dillon also said "So guess we're gonna recall all those Wild Beyond the Witchlight books and rework them into combat slogs, yeah? Since we did it wrong."

So, is D&D 90% combat?



And in other news, attacking C7 designers for making games is not OK.

D&D 5E - Doctors & Daleks - Cubicle 7 Brings Doctor Who to D&D 5E

Cubicle 7 -- makers of the official Doctor Who roleplaying game -- has announced that the Doctor will officially be coming to 5E soon under the name Doctors and Daleks. There are no dates or details yet, over than that the Doctors and Daleks Player's Guide will launch 'soon'. A NEW COMPANION...

www.enworld.org

 

[Ovinomancer]

then what do YOU think it means to be able to swing from 30% to 90% if NOT the ease of doing both (and I think most of those systems are better at non combat)

Um... it means that in one session I do 30% combat, and in another session I do 90% combat. I've already stated before that the incredibly low bar put out by many advocates in this thread that non-combat can be easily accomplished in 5e via freeplay and GM Says also applies to other games -- you don't even need to be playing a specific RPG to do freeplay and Bob Says.

yes it was... there is no mathmatical facts you can bring... so what WE (my group, your group, other peoples groups) can only messure how acceptable it is...

The point of a game being able to go between 30% combat and 90% combat is that you like it? Or I like it?

I can go as detailed as you want... but this is a D&D board on a mostly D&D site in a D&D thread... so I was just generalizing. Each system could have it's own thread (and again I only named a few) with pro cons

I'm asking for what system cannot adjust combat %, especially if the method for non-combat is as low a bar as freeplay (ie ignoring system) and GM Says (ie, system is GM). If you have one, why can it not? This isn't separate thread levels of pros and cons -- it's a pretty straightfoward question.

And I'm asking it because the claim that D&D's ability to go from 30% to 90% combat is a factor in it's popularity doesn't seem at all supported unless we can definitively say it's a rare enough trait to have an impact. My argument is that it's a dirt common trait and only has anything to do with popularity in the fact that D&D does not dictate a specific % -- ie, it doesn't suck in this manner and not sucking is a factor in popularity (things that suck tend not to be popular). D&D doesn't suck in this regard, so it's not a detriment.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Well, are you talking about the gaming community, or the actual mainstream in pop culture? If the latter, it's just D&D.

Cthulhu is pretty mainstream. Ideas about Vampires programulated by VtES are pretty mainstream.

What's your point, though -- are you attempting to construct an argument where mainstream only applies to D&D so that... what? What does this accomplish?

 

[HammerMan]

Um... it means that in one session I do 30% combat, and in another session I do 90% combat. I've already stated before that the incredibly low bar put out by many advocates in this thread that non-combat can be easily accomplished in 5e via freeplay and GM Says also applies to other games -- you don't even need to be playing a specific RPG to do freeplay and Bob Says.

well we already have a miss understanding... because you are talking session and I am talking yearish campaigns.

I can run or play a campaign with minimal hassle that is 90% combat... infact I would say that is close to a default D&D game.
I can run or play a campaign with almost no combat (most likely even less then 30%) with slightly more hassle/house rules then the above but not much.

I think that WotC thinks it is closer to 60% combat and 30% exploration and 10% social for the pillars based on things I have read/seen.

in my experience most Modern tables run closer to 33/33/33 then most game 20 years ago... but still the default is almost always leaning toward combat.

The point of a game being able to go between 30% combat and 90% combat is that you like it? Or I like it?

the point is do the rules and the system allow (with minimal or better yet no tweeking/houserules) have 2 campagins run useing that same system and have one be 90% combat and the other being 30% or less combat... and I have found over MANY years of looking that D&D has the most swing (maybe TORG can beat that, and if it were a tad bit more generic I might even try)

I'm asking for what system cannot adjust combat %, especially if the method for non-combat

and I provided examples... a 90% combat Word of Darkness mortal game is a VERY short campaign... infact I would even say vampire mage and G*word fall into that... but you could do it in Werewolf with a bit of luck. However all of them EXCEL at out of combat things.

I have to find my book so I can give the name (card game listed above) just can not run 90% combat.

is as low a bar as freeplay (ie ignoring system) and GM Says (ie, system is GM). If you have one, why can it not?

is it possible for me to take 6 weeks and break open a system and or just ignore the system and do anything... but we are talking about the systems.

This isn't separate thread levels of pros and cons -- it's a pretty straightfoward question.

And I'm asking it because the claim that D&D's ability to go from 30% to 90% combat is a factor in it's popularity doesn't seem at all supported unless we can definitively say it's a rare enough trait to have an impact.

okay then YOU pick out systems you find doing so as easy or easier... I have given you a short list to start with.

My argument is that it's a dirt common trait and only has anything to do with popularity in the fact that D&D does not dictate a specific % -- ie, it doesn't suck in this manner and not sucking is a factor in popularity (things that suck tend not to be popular). D&D doesn't suck in this regard, so it's not a detriment.

and yet I can give you plenty of reasons why a 90% campaign (not session) of combat would just not work in WoD without HEAVY house rules or HEAVY character turn over.

 

[HammerMan]

Cthulhu is pretty mainstream. Ideas about Vampires programulated by VtES are pretty mainstream.

What's your point, though -- are you attempting to construct an argument where mainstream only applies to D&D so that... what? What does this accomplish?

I will put forth the argument (with only my own experences) that if I tell 10 people who do not play TTRPGs I play shadow run, or I play Torg, or even I play Call of Cthulu they will have to ask what it is... and 7 out of 10 times the end result will be them asking "like Dungeons and Dragons?"

 

[Ovinomancer]

well we already have a miss understanding... because you are talking session and I am talking yearish campaigns.

I can run or play a campaign with minimal hassle that is 90% combat... infact I would say that is close to a default D&D game.
I can run or play a campaign with almost no combat (most likely even less then 30%) with slightly more hassle/house rules then the above but not much.

I think that WotC thinks it is closer to 60% combat and 30% exploration and 10% social for the pillars based on things I have read/seen.

in my experience most Modern tables run closer to 33/33/33 then most game 20 years ago... but still the default is almost always leaning toward combat.

the point is do the rules and the system allow (with minimal or better yet no tweeking/houserules) have 2 campagins run useing that same system and have one be 90% combat and the other being 30% or less combat... and I have found over MANY years of looking that D&D has the most swing (maybe TORG can beat that, and if it were a tad bit more generic I might even try)

and I provided examples... a 90% combat Word of Darkness mortal game is a VERY short campaign... infact I would even say vampire mage and G*word fall into that... but you could do it in Werewolf with a bit of luck. However all of them EXCEL at out of combat things.

I have to find my book so I can give the name (card game listed above) just can not run 90% combat.


is it possible for me to take 6 weeks and break open a system and or just ignore the system and do anything... but we are talking about the systems.

okay then YOU pick out systems you find doing so as easy or easier... I have given you a short list to start with.

and yet I can give you plenty of reasons why a 90% campaign (not session) of combat would just not work in WoD without HEAVY house rules or HEAVY character turn over.

The reason I keep seeing D&D listed as being able to swing at all is that people just ignore any systems in D&D that they don't want and replace it with freeplay and GM Says. And, if that's the bar then every game has this option. There's nothing special about D&D.

Frankly, I get a bit confused when D&D gets hailed as this great game because you can just play pretend and ignore it when you want to. I get you're staying in the genre/tropes of D&D, but that's genre/tropes, not the actual game.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I will put forth the argument (with only my own experences) that if I tell 10 people who do not play TTRPGs I play shadow run, or I play Torg, or even I play Call of Cthulu they will have to ask what it is... and 7 out of 10 times the end result will be them asking "like Dungeons and Dragons?"

Okay. Do I offer a counter assertion, like "I bet it's only 5 of 10" or what? I'm not clear on how assertions work to make points -- can you just say what you think should be right and hope the other person takes that as true? I mean, I think that, given most people, the answer might be "you mean like World of Warcraft?"

 

[HammerMan]

The reason I keep seeing D&D listed as being able to swing at all is that people just ignore any systems in D&D that they don't want and replace it with freeplay and GM Says. And, if that's the bar then every game has this option. There's nothing special about D&D.

D&D has rules for exploration and social encounters I don't understand why you think it doesn't. they are not as big as the combat rules, and lord knows that I would kill for better/more of them... but in general just keeping to PHB/DMG/MM you can run a mostly no combat game raw... fighters would stink in those games, and caster supremacy (in that case bard and warlock most likely but maybe cleric too) would kick it and GOD knows I want that fixed... but it still runs on the base d20 system

Frankly, I get a bit confused when D&D gets hailed as this great game because you can just play pretend and ignore it when you want to.

I however never said that... I was compairing system to system (Shadow run WoD GURPS D&D CoC TORG Rifts Savage worlds/deadlands to name a few)

I get you're staying in the genre/tropes of D&D, but that's genre/tropes, not the actual game.

I mean if that is all you need GURPS should be king

 

[Ovinomancer]

D&D has rules for exploration and social encounters I don't understand why you think it doesn't. they are not as big as the combat rules, and lord knows that I would kill for better/more of them... but in general just keeping to PHB/DMG/MM you can run a mostly no combat game raw... fighters would stink in those games, and caster supremacy (in that case bard and warlock most likely but maybe cleric too) would kick it and GOD knows I want that fixed... but it still runs on the base d20 system

D&D rules here have been discussed throughout the thread -- I'm the one that keeps bringing up the social interaction rules in the DMG that it seems almost no one actually uses! No one has ever said that D&D has no rules, but it's a very long stretch from no rules to having rules that actually support a game. Whenever these arguments are actually made it turns out there's a good bit of houserules lurking in the background or the play is just freeplay with some GM Says. So "has rules" is a very long way from "actually supports this kind of play." I mean, as you note any such game will be dominated by the spells that were designed so that players could push the skip button on that kind of play!

I however never said that... I was compairing system to system (Shadow run WoD GURPS D&D CoC TORG Rifts Savage worlds/deadlands to name a few)

I mean if that is all you need GURPS should be king

GURPS actually mechanizes everything. There's a difference between a game that has rules to simulate a genre and freeplay that just does a genre. That difference is actually a large part of the point of the thread.

 

[HammerMan]

D&D rules here have been discussed throughout the thread -- I'm the one that keeps bringing up the social interaction rules in the DMG that it seems almost no one actually uses! No one has ever said that D&D has no rules,

I do...

but it's a very long stretch from no rules to having rules that actually support a game.

go read the new Strixhaven book, and the Wild Beyond the Witchlight both can be run within rules (some new) and have 0 combats

Whenever these arguments are actually made it turns out there's a good bit of houserules lurking in the background or the play is just freeplay with some GM Says. So "has rules" is a very long way from "actually supports this kind of play." I mean, as you note any such game will be dominated by the spells that were designed so that players could push the skip button on that kind of play!

those spells are still rules, and I rarely see them used to skip whole sections... but I mean if we are talking spells ending challanges, I have seen a well placed fireball end a fight before it even starts in every edition I have played (2e, 3e, 3.5, PF,4e, 5e)

GURPS actually mechanizes everything. There's a difference between a game that has rules to simulate a genre and freeplay that just does a genre. That difference is actually a large part of the point of the thread.

so when I roll to search the desk. When I roll to talk to the guard to get word to the queen. When I roll to put together an improvised explosive so my artificer can cause a cave in and cut off the drow from coming back this way... when I take a tent and roll to make it into a kite, then cast reduce on the halfling npc put him on side kite and convince him to let me fly him up to the window... then remeind the DM I actually had fly preped and just did it for giggles...

 

[Micah Sweet]

Okay. Do I offer a counter assertion, like "I bet it's only 5 of 10" or what? I'm not clear on how assertions work to make points -- can you just say what you think should be right and hope the other person takes that as true? I mean, I think that, given most people, the answer might be "you mean like World of Warcraft?"

Do you disagree then? Do you not think all other RPGs are virtually unknown outside of the community?