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

[GobHag]

This is an expansion of the definition then.

Because at no point was mechanical escalation and deflation during and between combats emphasized by anyone but me and another person.

IMO that isn't an important part, like how CaW is about the deadliness of combat and diegetically using the things in the world to reach one's goals while CaS is about 'pornography' and deliberate mechanical balancing

 

[Minigiant]

IMO that isn't an important part, like how CaW is about the deadliness of combat and diegetically using the things in the world to reach one's goals while CaS is about 'pornography' and deliberate mechanical balancing

To me it is.

Part of PW is how 2 forces, regardless of their power or balance, build up their fight beforehand and future fights within match to ensure excitement for the spots.

The fiery magic the kobolds and elemental cultists have in first few encounters build up to the fire breath of the red dragon at the dungeons bottom. It could be slugfest or a quick smash. But the fight is advertised and televised.

 

[Steady Vane]

I think the terminology is helpful because although systems might slant to one version out of the three, you can generally lean into the various modes to vary up combat between sessions.

Like, a grueling dungeon crawl, versus a one-fight-a-day spectacle about unwinding, versus a mechanical heavy battle with a foreshadowed gimmick against a boss or whatever.

One OSR pitfall is often assuming every combat must be the same, and 4e-type systems can fall into that trap as well.

Imo all are useful if you can accommodate them.

 

[Lanefan]

This.

And I am not saying this to just play devil's advocate, but I find "combat as theater" to be the same as "combat as war" and "combat as sport." Identical. To me there is no differentiation.

If CaT is the same as both CaW and CaS, as you state in the quote, that implies you see CaW and CaS as being the same.

They're not.

That said, in my mind CaT can certainly overlap both CaW and CaS (I noted this way upthread as well) and I also think CaT can be its own thing: a combat that exists in the fiction mostly so both the PCs and villains can say dramatic words, strike dramatic poses, and develop their characterizations through so doing. Hell, the actual combat in CaT doesn't even have to come to a final resolution...

Villain (winning the fight but nobody's anywhere near dead or dying yet): "I have blooded you. I have bested you. I have shown you for the pathetic creatures you are! I leave you now to wallow in the misery of your defeat! Oh, and rest assured that should we meet again the same result will follow, and worse!" (villain exits the scene by whatever available means he has)

 

[Umbran]

CaT to me feels more about making every scene theatrical.

Maybe accept that we can talk about a game as theater, or a narrative game, or somesuch, and we could also, separately, talk about just the combat portion as theater? Just a thought.

I mean, we talk about combat separately all the time otherwise, so it should be reasonable here, too.

 

[Umbran]

And I am not saying this to just play devil's advocate, but I find "combat as theater" to be the same as "combat as war" and "combat as sport." Identical. To me there is no differentiation.

That's hard to understand in the context of the OP.

Here are things with different modes of operation, different play (and perhaps design) goals, but you say they are the same. It seems like claiming that apples and oranges are really the same - they're just "fruit".

How do they fail to be different, in your mind?

 

[Steady Vane]

The way the different combat types are described are also kind of the way the editions are presumed to approach the game in general

 

[GobHag]

If CaT is the same as both CaW and CaS, as you state in the quote, that implies you see CaW and CaS as being the same.

They're not.

That said, in my mind CaT can certainly overlap both CaW and CaS (I noted this way upthread as well) and I also think CaT can be its own thing: a combat that exists in the fiction mostly so both the PCs and villains can say dramatic words, strike dramatic poses, and develop their characterizations through so doing. Hell, the actual combat in CaT doesn't even have to come to a final resolution...

Villain (winning the fight but nobody's anywhere near dead or dying yet): "I have blooded you. I have bested you. I have shown you for the pathetic creatures you are! I leave you now to wallow in the misery of your defeat! Oh, and rest assured that should we meet again the same result will follow, and worse!" (villain exits the scene by whatever available means he has)

I also believe that CaT can be something that's divorced from the fiction, while the term Combat as Performance is seen as negative I think it's more accurate; Combat exists solely so that you can push buttons and roll some damage, like putting dozens of fire weak enemies just so that the wizard who put 10 fire damage spell in it can feel good.

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe accept that we can talk about a game as theater, or a narrative game, or somesuch, and we could also, separately, talk about just the combat portion as theater? Just a thought.

I mean, we talk about combat separately all the time otherwise, so it should be reasonable here, too.

Combat as War:
The Hill Giant has a Greatclub and a Rock attack. If either hits a PC of level 3 or less, they will die. PCs should not let the Hill Giant get honest attacks against them. They should use Trickery, traps, and mental spells to avoid combat. Or draw the Hill Giant away from their Rocks and use ranged attacks from afar.

Combat as Sport:
The Hill Giant has a Greatclub and a Rock attack. It is CR 7 and designed to last 3-6 rounds with PCs of level 5-10. Hill Giants are brutes.. It has a ranged attack but has limited ammo and high physical stats so kiting and mental control spells are the base strategies. Classic tank and spank will result in high HP loss.

Combat as Theater:
The Hill Giant has a Greatclub and a Trash ball attack. The wad of trash displays its dirtiness. The greatclub displays the simple brutalty. Be sure to get both attacks off. Describe both attacks as wide wide swings and misses as clumsy. Let the attacks knockback to allow PCs to recover but put ledges to allow for dramatic deadly tosses over the edge.

Combat as Pro Wrestling:
The Hill Giant has a Greatclub, a Rock, and a Flex Muscle attack. It can easily slay a PC of level 3 or less, is scary to a PC of level 4-7, but is trivial if the party has PCs over level 8. Before the room, place bodies crushed by boulders around for Wisdom checks. Anyone who succeeds is immune to the Hill Giant's Flex Muscle attack. Hill Giants remember non-giants who best them in strength. So if they get bloodied after a failed Flex Muscle, they flee, swear revenge, and find a stronger ally or more giants.

Combat as Puzzle:
The Hill Giant has a Greatclub and a Rock attack. It has High damage and HP. It has low AC and saves. It has too much HP to take down in one turn. Meleeing it can lead to a death spiral.

 

[BenjaminPey]

You don't need to tweak the rules, go easy on the players or allow for receoveries or whatever to go full Combat as Theatre, IMO. It's a state of mind rather than a bending of the rules.