D&D General Combat as War vs. Sport and a Missing Third Mode

[prabe]

There's a third factor to these:

CaW - DM is completely neutral and impartial as to whether the players win or lose
CaS - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the players win, but only uses that thumb if necessary
CaT - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the combat is entertaining (and the players win), and uses that thumb often
CaPW - there is no scale, the outcome - as with pro wrestling - is pre-scripted by the DM

I can agree that Combat as Sport has different priorities than Combat as War, but there's nothing inherent to the idea of "fair challenge" that means the GM is going to "make sure the players win." Combat as Theater--especially if kayfabe is a real comparison--might have the outcomes pre-scripted, but I'm not sure there's anything inherent in "making it a spectacle" or "making it fit into the story" that mandates that.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

I think Sport and Theater are two different categories, with different broad goals.

The major difference is that the players can affect the outcome of a sport, they're, well, players, but the players of a "theatrical" D&D game aren't players in the narrative; they're the audience.

In games as a sport, you can lose and the narrative has to deal with that. In games as theater, chances are if you lose, the DM has to get things back on track to the larger narrative; like I think the first combat encounter of the first Dimension 20 game went really poorly and a bunch of characters died that Bleem didn't anticipate, so he had to pull in some NPCs to revive them because they're paying a cast of professional comedians to be here, they've got contracts!

 

[prabe]

The major difference is that the players can affect the outcome of a sport, they're, well, players, but the players of a "theatrical" D&D game aren't players in the narrative; they're the audience.

In games as a sport, you can lose and the narrative has to deal with that. In games as theater, chances are if you lose, the DM has to get things back on track to the larger narrative; like I think the first combat encounter of the first Dimension 20 game went really poorly and a bunch of characters died that Bleem didn't anticipate, so he had to pull in some NPCs to revive them because they're paying a cast of professional comedians to be here, they've got contracts!

I'm not really arguing with your point that if there's a game, losing has to be a possibility, but you can have a big set-piece thing specifically set up to give the PCs some specific opportunities, things to let them show off some, while still leaving losing--due to bad choices and/or bad luck--on the table. My own thinking that combats should move the emergent story along, or at least change the larger situation, isn't exactly the same as Combat as Theater (as discussed) but that's OK, and not really my point.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes, Pro Wrestling has kayfabe - the fiction isn't limited to the combat. But for the combat scene, they are asking how to make it compelling character and drama. The combat is Combat as Theatre.

This aligns with our games - because our games aren't limited to combat. We want our combat to pair up well with how we are running the rest of the game. So, you choose War, Sport, or Theater to match your combat with your overall goals.

When the first comment says:

* Combat as War: asymmetric, player-driven, where preparation, avoidance, and clever tactics matter more than balance.
* Combat as Sport: balanced encounters, challenge ratings, tactical puzzle-solving, and fair challenges designed for engagement within a defined ruleset.

Im saying Combat as Pro Wresting would be: linked "fair" encounters, momentum based. victory based on both feeding of external strategic choice and character based exciting performance

There's a third factor to these:

CaW - DM is completely neutral and impartial as to whether the players win or lose
CaS - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the players win, but only uses that thumb if necessary
CaT - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the combat is entertaining (and the players win), and uses that thumb often
CaPW - there is no scale, the outcome - as with pro wrestling - is pre-scripted by the DM

I think that is part of it but not all.


In CaPW, The monsters are the Heels. The players characters are yhe Faces. The Heels might take loses but nothing is permanent until the final match. And the DM has penciled in the monsters to win. Its up to the Players to be entertaining enough and provide different tactics and shows to sway the Booker to make the Faces win.

Mechanics like escalation meters and dice pools and saved up rolls display this. Summoning and self revival items are common items. "Per day" and items with charges are also stables.

The idea is that you are delving into the liar of a dragon, giant, or lich. You cant gimmick your way down with War tactics. And the fights are not fair like a Sport. You gotta handle the kobold minions or the dark magic low blow or the teleport away or whatever cheaty cheat the final boss uses.

You know that Ric Flair is gonna call the rest of the 4 Horsemen or Evolution to flank you. The challenge is how you stop 3 more guys guaranteeing that unfair fight.

 

[Tigris]

There's a third factor to these:

CaW - DM is completely neutral and impartial as to whether the players win or lose
CaS - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the players win, but only uses that thumb if necessary
CaT - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the combat is entertaining (and the players win), and uses that thumb often
CaPW - there is no scale, the outcome - as with pro wrestling - is pre-scripted by the DM

What? CaW the DM is neutral? Like how? The DM is the one who decides if the players win or not, unlike in CaS where the rule decide that. If the GM allows you farthing the werewolf to death because its a good idea, then it goes, meanwhile in CaS this does not go because there is no rule for it.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

I'm not really arguing with your point that if there's a game, losing has to be a possibility, but you can have a big set-piece thing specifically set up to give the PCs some specific opportunities, things to let them show off some, while still leaving losing--due to bad choices and/or bad luck--on the table. My own thinking that combats should move the emergent story along, or at least change the larger situation, isn't exactly the same as Combat as Theater (as discussed) but that's OK, and not really my point.

My brother in Kayfabe, you're describing pro wrestling.

EDIT: RIP I realize I'm not the first person to introduce that analogy here

 

[payn]

There's a third factor to these:

CaW - DM is completely neutral and impartial as to whether the players win or lose
CaS - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the players win, but only uses that thumb if necessary
CaT - DM has a thumb on the scale to make sure the combat is entertaining (and the players win), and uses that thumb often
CaPW - there is no scale, the outcome - as with pro wrestling - is pre-scripted by the DM

Funny how you preference is the only one without the GMs thumb on the scale…

What? CaW the DM is neutral? Like how? The DM is the one who decides if the players win or not, unlike in CaS where the rule decide that. If the GM allows you farthing the werewolf to death because its a good idea, then it goes, meanwhile in CaS this does not go because there is no rule for it.

…and now I have whiplash.

One thing is certain in any philosophy the GM can put their thumb in the scale. It’s generally frowned upon on any of them. They all seek fairness but it’s applied in different ways.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Reading the discussion here’s how i would state my own definition and understanding of the terms being used:

Combat as War: combat is essentially a fail state, the objective is to survive, use whatever methods available to take out the other side as efficiently as possible, play smart or loose.

Combat as Sport: combat is a puzzle, figuring out how to win is typically more your concern than how to survive, playing the fight is itself part of the entertainment.

Combat as Theatre: combat is a scene background, the opponents exist more as actors to play out a scene or as props to facilitate or initiate circumstances for character exploration, survival is typically of very little concern.

 

[Lanefan]

What? CaW the DM is neutral? Like how? The DM is the one who decides if the players win or not, unlike in CaS where the rule decide that. If the GM allows you farthing the werewolf to death because its a good idea, then it goes, meanwhile in CaS this does not go because there is no rule for it.

I see CaW as being completely rules-bound for both players and DM, while in CaS the DM can bend the rules in order to make sure the players win. CaT can overlap with both.

The DM decides the encounter in CaW, but once that encounter begins - if not before! - it's on the players to find a way to win; and if they don't or can't then they have to find an exit strategy where at least some of the PCs survive. The DM isn't going to change the monsters' hit points or abilities etc. on the fly just because the PCs are in over their heads, where s/he would in CaS.

CaPW is a different thing entirely, where not just the outcome but some of the steps in achieving that outcome are pre-scripted either by the DM, the players, or both acting together. I suspect this is a very rare type of combat, but in theory it can and probably does exist somewhere.

 

[Lanefan]

Reading the discussion here’s how i would state my own definition and understanding of the terms being used:

Combat as War: combat is essentially a fail state, the objective is to survive, use whatever methods available to take out the other side as efficiently as possible, play smart or loose.

Combat as Sport: combat is a puzzle, figuring out how to win is typically more your concern than how to survive, playing the fight is itself part of the entertainment.

Combat as Theatre: combat is a scene background, the opponents exist more as actors to play out a scene or as props to facilitate or initiate circumstances for character exploration, survival is typically of very little concern.

Good except the end bit needs clarification. In CaT survival is typically of very little concern because it is assumed the PCs will survive, much like in a movie; as opposed to being of very little concern because nobody cares if the PCs live or die.

Another possible and very brief summary might be:

CaW - not heroic
CaS - heroic
CaT - uber-heroic.