Do you prefer TTRPG combat as war or as sport?

[Jhaelen]

My immediate reaction was 'neither'. But thankfuly Libramarian clarified the misconception that obfuscated what the heart of the matter is.

Anyway, I didn't vote, but probably 'War all the way!' would represent the option that is closest to the way I use combat in my games.
I like to use a 'healthy' mix of encounters, i.e. most are at the party's level or a bit harder, some are (more or less obviously) _a lot_ harder, and some are easy.

I prefer that combat exists as an option most of the time but not as a means to solve all challenges. I expect my players to be clever enough to figure out how to best approach a combat encounter,
and to retreat if necessary. For me it's like the Sun Tzu quote: "Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.". I.e. don't enter battles you cannot win; always make sure to get intel and be prepared to reduce risk as much as possible, so the outcome of the battle is certain (or as certain as you can make it).

 

[steenan]

The definitions are not clear enough for me to call my preferred style either CaW or CaS.

I dislike extensive planning. I like choices (both tactical and moral) made here and now, under the pressure of the situation. I definitely don't want to replace it with boring planning and then trivial execution. So, in this aspect, I definitely prefer Sport over War.

I want the combat to be interesting in itself. If it's not interesting, why should we waste table time for it? Resolve in a single roll and move on. If we are player through combat, it needs to be dramatic, tactical or both. So it seems another vote for CaS.

I don't want balanced difficulties. I definitely don't support the idea that combats should all look hard but in reality be biased to let players win. Some combats will be at party level, some will be much harder, some will be much simpler. I use systems in which it's easy to get yourself out of a combat that turned too hard - and I make sure players have to use this option sometimes. Sometimes you just lose. This one goes for CaW.

I want combat to have real consequences, but at the same time I don't want it to be lethal. I want players to feel consequences of their choices, successes and failures, but I don't want them removed from play by a dice roll. I see D&D as failing on both fronts here, as its combat system can kill PCs, but not leave them with any lasting consequences. I don't think my preferences map to the War vs Sport spectrum here.

Finally, I want the fiction of the combat to matter, but the rules to resolve it. Combat that is boardgame-like and the fiction is just window dressing is not very interesting to me. Combat that is decided mostly by GM judgement calls is not an acceptable system at all. So this preference also maps to neither War nor Sport, I think.