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

 

[HammerMan]

Okay. I have to admit I'm a tad surprised that there's no appreciation or consideration of any kind of integrity of process that you care about in the games you play. I'm wondering why you advocated prep, then, though? What is prep providing to your play?

making it easier at the table, making sure that things feel real even when they aren't... it's just how I always did it.

Also, I would not recommend Blades in the Dark to you. It requires a very high degree of principled play and sticking tightly to the rules system to function.

so like no house rules?

You might better enjoy Fiasco, though, as there are barely any mechanics to deal with and it is pretty low prep as well.

I'm not sure I really would like barely any mechanics... but thanks I will look up both Blades in the Dark and Fiasco

 

[Thomas Shey]

So, I have this issue of categorization as "nothing but a sidekick". Much of the plot of Doctor Who is driven by the Companions.

It doesn't matter that they are. If you're going to use a game system for them, people are going to expect to be playing the ones who actually are doing something than talking to the right people and doing emotional support.

I think a d20 Modern style class system would be a reasonable approach for this game.

To the degree you consider the D20 Modern class system to serve any particular purpose being a class system.

 

[Ovinomancer]

making it easier at the table, making sure that things feel real even when they aren't... it's just how I always did it.

so like no house rules?

I'm not sure I really would like barely any mechanics... but thanks I will look up both Blades in the Dark and Fiasco

I'm confused. Why do you care about mechanics if they aren't going to be used in play in any meaningful way? If they're freely broken and/or ignored without affecting the enjoyment you get from the game, what exactly are they doing?

As for prep, you mean that prep is NOT available to just ignoring it whenever and having the same fun? So prep is expected to have some integrity in how it's applied to the game, unlike the game mechanics which can be freely broken/ignored?

 

[HammerMan]

I'm confused. Why do you care about mechanics if they aren't going to be used in play in any meaningful way? If they're freely broken and/or ignored without affecting the enjoyment you get from the game, what exactly are they doing?

I don't understand. We play D&D. we just don't care if someone decides they hit when they shouldn't or have a few extra hp here and there. Most of us don't do so all the time. I assume your table has little white lies too. Have you never declaired a hit on a miss, or a miss on a hit? have you never pulled a punch to not end a fight in an anticlimatic way?

It's not anarchy, its not sweeting the small stuff. Your stats, your Hp, your bonus to hit... those are the small things

As for prep, you mean that prep is NOT available to just ignoring it whenever and having the same fun?

sometimes the prep leads to fun, and sometimes you need to throw the prep out. Hence why earlier I pointed out that across many editions of many games I have most likly more UNUSED prep then hours worked in a year. If I wasn't willing to throw out what I preped how would that make sense?

So prep is expected to have some integrity in how it's applied to the game, unlike the game mechanics which can be freely broken/ignored?

I don't know what you mean by integrity. If I make the black dragon a CR 27 monster, and prep a high level area around him, and some kobolds that worship him a low level threat, and a cult of dragon sorcerers as a mid level threat... that helps me make the world. If my PCs some how stumble into the dragon's cave at level 4 I can do 1 of 2 things to keep the fun... 1 it isn't the dragon cave, the dragon cave is on the other part of the map now, or 2 that dragon the kobolds were talking about is now a cr 6 dragon...

Now I could 'play it as it lay' and tpk the 4th level party with my CR 27 dragon... but that ends the game so not really fun.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I don't understand. We play D&D. we just don't care if someone decides they hit when they shouldn't or have a few extra hp here and there. Most of us don't do so all the time. I assume your table has little white lies too. Have you never declaired a hit on a miss, or a miss on a hit? have you never pulled a punch to not end a fight in an anticlimatic way?

It's not anarchy, its not sweeting the small stuff. Your stats, your Hp, your bonus to hit... those are the small things

sometimes the prep leads to fun, and sometimes you need to throw the prep out. Hence why earlier I pointed out that across many editions of many games I have most likly more UNUSED prep then hours worked in a year. If I wasn't willing to throw out what I preped how would that make sense?

I don't know what you mean by integrity. If I make the black dragon a CR 27 monster, and prep a high level area around him, and some kobolds that worship him a low level threat, and a cult of dragon sorcerers as a mid level threat... that helps me make the world. If my PCs some how stumble into the dragon's cave at level 4 I can do 1 of 2 things to keep the fun... 1 it isn't the dragon cave, the dragon cave is on the other part of the map now, or 2 that dragon the kobolds were talking about is now a cr 6 dragon...

Now I could 'play it as it lay' and tpk the 4th level party with my CR 27 dragon... but that ends the game so not really fun.

Okay, I'm trying to reconcile this. Why can't the party at level four just declares all crits, never mark spell slots, overcast spells, and inflate their hit points so as to deal with the dragon? Or is there some inflection point where such things cross from white lies to more?

As for my experience, of course I've done those things. Then I changed my mind, and I don't do them anymore at all. I mostly play online these days and I make most everything open when I run D&D. Even in person games, I roll in the open, expect honesty, and overshare information.

 

[Mordhau]

I tend to feel the benefits of hiding information from the players such as DCs and making secret rolls are vastly overstated, while the benefits of having everything clear and allowing the players to make informed decisions to be underestimated.

I personally really wish game companies would stop selling GM screens. I can't think of any other situation where someone who is expected to lead an activity is encouraged to put up a physical barrier.

 

[tetrasodium]

I tend to feel the benefits of hiding information from the players such as DCs and making secret rolls are vastly overstated, while the benefits of having anything clear and and allowing the players to make informed decisions to be underestimated.

I personally really wish game companies would stop selling GM screens. I can't think of any other situation where someone who is expected to lead an activity is encouraged to put up a physical barrier.

I kind of agree but feel that the benefits of blind rolls can be enormous & wish that there were bluetooth/usb camera equipped dice cups or similar to facilitate them in meatspace. Blind rolls might not be useful in an early d&d some versions had the gm rolling player attack rolls instead of players manner but for skill rolls (stealth/knowledge/etc) it's huge.

 

[Malmuria]

When I DM dnd, especially 5e, I find that it's combat that takes the most mental energy. There's a lot to keep track of: turn order, hit points, lengthy stat blocks, discussing rules, looking up spells, conditions, etc. Combat is likely the part where a player will be unsure of a rule, requiring an explanation, or in which you need to parse some action to figure out how it affects the scene. For us modern gamers we can add onto that futzing with a vtt and a map and tokens.

Social/free play is much easier for me. True, I have to remember or invent NPCs, and inhabit them quickly (even if my NPCs are mostly one dimensional, and I don't do voices). But since I do homebrew I am usually the one who has invented the characters and their stories anyway. Even when doing a module, it's not more difficult than remembering the characters from a play or tv show.

Blades in the Dark is fairly intensive in terms of demanding GM attention. There are a lot of variables to bring into play at each moment, and requires really deft adjudication and clear framing. Comparatively speaking though, fights that happen in blades are not super complicated to run because they aren't a whole mini-game with special rules.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't understand. We play D&D. we just don't care if someone decides they hit when they shouldn't or have a few extra hp here and there. Most of us don't do so all the time. I assume your table has little white lies too. Have you never declaired a hit on a miss, or a miss on a hit? have you never pulled a punch to not end a fight in an anticlimatic way?

Cheating like that would earn a player a one way trip out of the game. We absolutely do care if a player cheats and hits when they shouldn't or adds hit points they don't have to their sheet.

It's not anarchy, its not sweeting the small stuff. Your stats, your Hp, your bonus to hit... those are the small things

Blatant cheating is not "small stuff."

 

[wizard71]

I would say that yes, D&D is 90% combat. If that were not the case then so many discussions about balance, martials vs casters and other such topics would not have gained traction in the forums. The Rogue is a classic example. Before it was about skills, disarming traps, picking pockets, etc. Now its about sneak attack and massive damage. The biggest complaint about the monk is how she does not dominate combat even though she is an excellent combatant. How the ranger has been a weak sauce class that took a long time to fix