Expanding D&D adventures past mere combat

[Mark CMG]

Expanding D&D adventures past mere combat

-

One of my contentions is that we need to think about what are the elements that go into a good non-combat-based game. We need to explain how to construct adventures that bring the game out of being merely one combat after another.

I think for a lot of people the game isn't segmented into combat and roleplaying, but rather it is all interwoven. When you separate combat from roleplaying, IMO, it presents the two as if there needs to be a choice between them.

 

[S'mon]

There's always the Ignore List, Cutter...

 

[Eridanis]

Back to the topic please, folks.

Quasqueton: If you had an email address in your profile, I would say this privately, but you do not. Please lay off the wounding sarcasm. You have good points to make in many threads, but the way you attack in your posts is sometimes too much. Please think about how you say something before you say it. This is a rule everyone at ENworld must follow, including you.

Please email me privately with any questions.

 

[Tonguez]

I've got a radical suggestion - dump the DM!

Seriously if you have a good 'experienced' group you can turn a game into an interactive story creation experience where all player intiate, expand and resolve encounters in a world of there own creation.

 

[diaglo]

I think for a lot of people the game isn't segmented into combat and roleplaying, but rather it is all interwoven. When you separate combat from roleplaying, IMO, it presents the two as if there needs to be a choice between them.

or vice versa.

people forget you can talk in combat.

combat doesn't have to end with someone getting killed.

 

[Kid Socrates]

I homebrew, so I don't use published adventures, so I can't remark too much on them. I have found that my players enjoy the noncombat encounters a lot, so I try to run more of them.

They require a lot more work -- my session write-ups for combat sessions tend to be about two pages long, with stats taking up at least half of it. Noncombat ones have been anywhere from 4 to 12 pages, depending on length and complexity.

I actually build some of those encounters based off of what I learned while playing Torment.

They talk to Bob. Bob says that he doesn't know what happened to Zin, but that Zin left the city a month ago by himself. Sense Motive DC 15 reveals he's lying, but the only other thing he knows is that he left with the innkeeper Bryn, but Bryn came back two weeks later with a nasty shoulder wound. He cautions them against asking too many questions.

Takes a bit more work than putting down BAB +9, 1d8+3, and means I've got a ton more to keep track of, but I enjoy it.

I think a key is to make sure there's a reward for it, something that appeals to the players. Maybe figuring out who murdered the governor will grant them a pick from the city's armory. Negotiating for safe travel across the Badlands for the Merchant Guild will get them the Third Piece of the Lost Amulet of Arak'Alar. Just knowing what happened may not be enough, and I don't think there are players who don't like getting things.

(edited to cut out first part, was writing it when the mod posted -- nothing to see here, not relevant, move along...)

 

[Quasqueton]

Please lay off the wounding sarcasm.

Oh for the love of.... "Wounding sarcasm"? "Wounding"? You have *got* to be kidding me. "Sarcasm", yeah, it was; to point out absurdity. It's a common, and not impolite, way of responding to absurd statements. Happens on this forum all day long.

But oh well. Sure, I'll leave it lay.

"All the best to you, Sir! "

Quasqueton

 

[Mystery Man]

I have found that my players enjoy the noncombat encounters a lot, so I try to run more of them.

They require a lot more work -- my session write-ups for combat sessions tend to be about two pages long, with stats taking up at least half of it. Noncombat ones have been anywhere from 4 to 12 pages, depending on length and complexity.

I'm cutting out your soapbox reply on video games, and replying to what I agree with.

It takes a lot of work to design and good combat. The time it takes to put the stats together is huge compared to the time it takes to resolve it. You can spend 2 hours putting together a combat encounter the PC's can take apart in 3 minutes.

Non-combat encounters are exactly the opposite. They take minutes to prepare for and hours to resolve, if the DM is engaging enough, and the players are interested. This also, can't be taught.

 

[Patman21967]

D&D has always featured combat heavily, but I do think 3e suffers from the designers' obsession with combat mechanics above everything else. "Balance" is always defined in terms of combat, for instance. The combat rules are so detailed that combat takes up the vast bulk of a typical game session. I like combat but I wish 3e combat didn't take so long, 3e often feels like a miniatures wargame with a bit of roleplay to link the fights. The big problem with this is that in an RPG unlike a wargame, one side always has to win or the game ends, yet without the possibility of either side winning lengthy battles get real boring.

Hear Hear....my thoughts 100%...It is aggravating at times.

 

[Kid Socrates]

I'm cutting out your soapbox reply on video games, and replying to what I agree with.

No problem -- I cut that part out, actually, didn't realize a moderator chimed in on it, and it was off-topic, so my error there.

It takes a lot of work to design and good combat. The time it takes to put the stats together is huge compared to the time it takes to resolve it. You can spend 2 hours putting together a combat encounter the PC's can take apart in 3 minutes.

Non-combat encounters are exactly the opposite. They take minutes to prepare for and hours to resolve, if the DM is engaging enough, and the players are interested. This also, can't be taught.

That's interesting to me, because I've found it goes the other way for me. I'm a bit more freeform with combat -- I get the stats in order and a basic guideline, but it'll take me maybe 30 minutes, more if I have to look up an ability or two. I eyeball a lot of it, because my players aren't going to start breaking the math down beyond "Okay, his AC is 25! C'mon, 14, d20, don't let me down..."

However, to get a good noncombat, conversation-heavy session ready, I do a lot more work, coming up with what the NPCs know, what they'll say, what they won't say, how they will react to such and such, what they think of the PCs, how honest they are, and all that for each one, takes me far longer than setting up a combat. It also makes for a long session, which is very, very nice.

How do you have the noncombat planning go so quickly? That would save me a -ton- of time.

-Matt