D&D 5E Combat as war, sport, or ??

[GMforPowergamers]

I mean, you can, but the gameplay will mostly be discussion broken up by skill checks and ritual use. And a lot of people do seem to prefer that mode of play!

you can even run 4e theater of the mind...

 

[Neonchameleon]

As ever I find the Combat as War/Combat as Sport dichotomy hilarious - or rather the self-aggrandizement of the players who think that their version of D&D has something to do with war.

I started my gaming in the 90s - the TSR era. But I didn't start with D&D and I started at probably the only point in history where D&D wasn't the most popular game for newbies (the White Wolf games were). And at the time D&D was where you went for superhero hack & slash and for good reason.

Far from "combat as war" D&D was the game for consequence free combat. There are no death spirals in D&D; you are at full capability at 1hp. There are no long term injuries in D&D; even at the worst hit points are recovered on a timescale about that of marathon runners recovering fatigue. An arrow to the knee isn't a retirement injury. The PCs are all super-tough and most of them will be able to tank a crossbow bolt with no ill effect. And even death can be reversed. Using magic is pretty much entirely reliable and spells don't fail. And they seldom cost anything except the opportunity cost of not using a different spell. And nothing really weakens you except a few undead and a few spellcasters.

Meanwhile I started on GURPS and WFRP, with WoD mixed in there. Games where weapons could one shot you. Where even if you won you might well be seriously hurt and bleeding out. And one of the huge improvements WFRP 2e made over 1e was that magic could blow up in your face.

D&D is not and has never been "combat as war". And the people claim their D&D is just look silly, like paintballers claiming to be warriors or fans of The Boys claiming that The Boys is a realistic show when compared to the MCU. Possibly The Boys is realistic compared to the MCU - but it is still a superhero show with characters who can fly under their own power. There's nothing wrong with enjoying superhero shows - but there is something wrong with pretending that your superhero show is realistic and using it to sneer at people who embrace the tropes that are woven throughout yours. And there's nothing wrong with larger than life characters in an RPG who are expected to win (but don't always) through their standard techniques and who take almost no long term consequences, but please stop pretending that that's war.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As ever I find the Combat as War/Combat as Sport dichotomy hilarious - or rather the self-aggrandizement of the players who think that their version of D&D has something to do with war.

I started my gaming in the 90s - the TSR era. But I didn't start with D&D and I started at probably the only point in history where D&D wasn't the most popular game for newbies (the White Wolf games were). And at the time D&D was where you went for superhero hack & slash and for good reason.

Far from "combat as war" D&D was the game for consequence free combat. There are no death spirals in D&D; you are at full capability at 1hp. There are no long term injuries in D&D; even at the worst hit points are recovered on a timescale about that of marathon runners recovering fatigue. An arrow to the knee isn't a retirement injury. The PCs are all super-tough and most of them will be able to tank a crossbow bolt with no ill effect. And even death can be reversed. Using magic is pretty much entirely reliable and spells don't fail. And they seldom cost anything except the opportunity cost of not using a different spell. And nothing really weakens you except a few undead and a few spellcasters.

Meanwhile I started on GURPS and WFRP, with WoD mixed in there. Games where weapons could one shot you. Where even if you won you might well be seriously hurt and bleeding out. And one of the huge improvements WFRP 2e made over 1e was that magic could blow up in your face.

D&D is not and has never been "combat as war". And the people claim their D&D is just look silly, like paintballers claiming to be warriors or fans of The Boys claiming that The Boys is a realistic show when compared to the MCU. Possibly The Boys is realistic compared to the MCU - but it is still a superhero show with characters who can fly under their own power. There's nothing wrong with enjoying superhero shows - but there is something wrong with pretending that your superhero show is realistic and using it to sneer at people who embrace the tropes that are woven throughout yours. And there's nothing wrong with larger than life characters in an RPG who are expected to win (but don't always) through their standard techniques and who take almost no long term consequences, but please stop pretending that that's war.

There's nothing wrong with it, no, but its not the only way to play, and throwing everything out the window the instant something exists thst couldn't in the real world, insinuating that fantasy is black and white instead of a spectrum, is not the way I want to play.

 

[Neonchameleon]

There's nothing wrong with it, no, but its not the only way to play, and throwing everything out the window the instant something exists thst couldn't in the real world, insinuating that fantasy is black and white instead of a spectrum, is not the way I want to play.

I never said it was the only way to play. Indeed my point is that D&D is far from the only way to play. And I never said the playstyle was bad. I said that it was risible to call it "Combat as War".

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Far from "combat as war" D&D was the game for consequence free combat. There are no death spirals in D&D; you are at full capability at 1hp. There are no long term injuries in D&D; even at the worst hit points are recovered on a timescale about that of marathon runners recovering fatigue. An arrow to the knee isn't a retirement injury. The PCs are all super-tough and most of them will be able to tank a crossbow bolt with no ill effect. And even death can be reversed. Using magic is pretty much entirely reliable and spells don't fail. And they seldom cost anything except the opportunity cost of not using a different spell. And nothing really weakens you except a few undead and a few spellcasters.

yup... my 7th level barbarian got hit in a critical way by the bite of a HUGE red dragon, and was fine. Later that same day he got hit critically by the giant's axxe... still a okay with no problem doing any skill he did before.

heck depending on how you read the rules my 12th level wizard can reach his hand into lava...

D&D is not and has never been "combat as war". And the people claim their D&D is just look silly, like paintballers claiming to be warriors or fans of The Boys claiming that The Boys is a realistic show when compared to the MCU. Possibly The Boys is realistic compared to the MCU - but it is still a superhero show with characters who can fly under their own power. There's nothing wrong with enjoying superhero shows - but there is something wrong with pretending that your superhero show is realistic and using it to sneer at people who embrace the tropes that are woven throughout yours. And there's nothing wrong with larger than life characters in an RPG who are expected to win (but don't always) through their standard techniques and who take almost no long term consequences, but please stop pretending that that's war.

yeah the word more does a lot of heavy lifting...

 

[Micah Sweet]

I never said it was the only way to play. Indeed my point is that D&D is far from the only way to play. And I never said the playstyle was bad. I said that it was risible to call it "Combat as War".

My objective was to the idea that. "It's all fantasy, so it doesn't matter and you can do what you want". THAT is one way to play. If that's not what you're saying I take it back.

 

[Neonchameleon]

My objective was to the idea that. "It's all fantasy, so it doesn't matter and you can do what you want". THAT is one way to play. If that's not what you're saying I take it back.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the claims that any form of D&D is "Combat as War" are ridiculous. Different fantasies can and should be allowed. But oD&D is only remotely gritty when put on a pure D&D spectrum but is highly artificial, protected, and one-sided compared to most RPGs I've played.

 

[overgeeked]

My objective was to the idea that. "It's all fantasy, so it doesn't matter and you can do what you want". THAT is one way to play. If that's not what you're saying I take it back.

To me, it's the attempts at verisimilitude that make the fantasy pop more. If it's all fantasy, all the time, it becomes meaningless. Without the contrast of verisimilitude it just degenerates into nonsense.

And I think it's called combat as war because the origins of the hobby are from wargames and that the participants, the characters, behave in a manner more akin to how belligerents in war behave. Not that it's in any way "real war." That's a strawman.

 

[payn]

To me, it's the attempts at verisimilitude that make the fantasy pop more. It's it's all fantasy, all the time, it becomes meaningless. Without the contrast of verisimilitude it just degenerates into nonsense.

And I think it's called combat as war because the origins of the hobby are from wargames and that the participants, the characters, behave in a manner more akin to how belligerents in war behave. Not that it's in any way "real war." That's a strawman.

Close enough, but yes, folks cant seem to understand the concept in any way but literal.

 

[Neonchameleon]

To me, it's the attempts at verisimilitude that make the fantasy pop more. It's it's all fantasy, all the time, it becomes meaningless. Without the contrast of verisimilitude it just degenerates into nonsense.

And I think it's called combat as war because the origins of the hobby are from wargames and that the participants, the characters, behave in a manner more akin to how belligerents in war behave. Not that it's in any way "real war." That's a strawman.

I find it telling that the attempts at versimilitude always in D&D stop short of anything that would represent the downsides of war other than giving the player the immense hardship of getting a new character to play. In WFRP my characters get injured. In Blades in the Dark characters get more and more traumatised until they retire. D&D it's pretty much pure power-and-progression fantasy where you don't even really get hurt.

And there's a distinct "We are manly men doing war and thus look down on those people just doing non-serious sport" issue in the framing. As befits it as terms from the anti-4e whaaargabl it dates back to. (And it's already been checked it doesn't date back earlier).