D&D 5E Is D&D 90% Combat?

In response to Cubicle 7’s announcement that their next Doctor Who role playing game would be powered by D&D 5E, there was a vehement (and in some places toxic) backlash on social media. While that backlash has several dimensions, one element of it is a claim that D&D is mainly about combat.

Head of D&D Ray Winninger disagreed (with snark!), tweeting "Woke up this morning to Twitter assuring me that [D&D] is "ninety percent combat." I must be playing (and designing) it wrong." WotC's Dan Dillon also said "So guess we're gonna recall all those Wild Beyond the Witchlight books and rework them into combat slogs, yeah? Since we did it wrong."

So, is D&D 90% combat?



And in other news, attacking C7 designers for making games is not OK.

D&D 5E - Doctors & Daleks - Cubicle 7 Brings Doctor Who to D&D 5E

Cubicle 7 -- makers of the official Doctor Who roleplaying game -- has announced that the Doctor will officially be coming to 5E soon under the name Doctors and Daleks. There are no dates or details yet, over than that the Doctors and Daleks Player's Guide will launch 'soon'. A NEW COMPANION...

www.enworld.org

 

[Smackpixi]

This game came out 8 years ago. Why is this still a subject of discussion?

 

[cbwjm]

IMO. Much better than otherwise since it's using the 5e system.

Maybe, though it might just be that fans of doctor who aren't really in the market to play a game in the universe. I think some settings work best as a show rather than an RPG, but who knows. I don't even know how well the unique system sold.

 

[Umbran]

No, you clearly haven't.

Mod Note:
You are making this personal. Please stop doing that.

 

[Malmuria]

In the 5e PHB, the basic rules for combat (pp. 189-198) are only moderately longer and more detailed than the basic rules for exploration and social interaction (pp. 181-187)*. What you get for combat is a structure for taking turns, rules for movement, and a menu of actions. Some of the menu have sub-menu options (for attacks and casting a spell). Exploration rules could/should also have procedures for turns, movement, and a menu of actions. Social interaction sort of has a menu in the form of Cha skills. Let's say you played 5e without classes (and thus without magic); combat would not be that much more involved than any other phase of the game.

When you add the classes back in, now you have a ton of ways for (mechanically) expressing your character, most of which are done in combat. (fwiw, I don't think it's the predictability/agency so much as it is the chance for expression. there's arguably less agency in combat, since your actions are already so defined). Similarly, the way, say, a beholder conveys its beholder-ness at the table is not just through being described as a being with many tentacle eyes, but using the powers associated with those eyes.

* I suppose you could add the rules for casting a spell to the former, but then the rules around ability checks might go into the latter

 

[doctorbadwolf]

CR is a filmed, edited audio-visual experience, most likely scripted to a certain point by people who are now ACTORS, ie people paid to provide entertainment. If CR wouldn't have multiple contributors/outlets, like official DnD supplements, comics, podcasts, etc.. I'd believe you.

Oh for goodness sake. LOL

Nah. The only thing supporting your supposition is just basic cynicism.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
This thread has had a lot of taking personal jabs at each other and a lot of insulting and presumptuous gatekeeping. Since we didn't have enough hands on deck to babysit this thread, some of it has slipped by for a while.

Consider this the general warning - continue in that mode only if you really want to be ejected from the discussion.

 

[Umbran]

Someone a few pages back used "Critical Role" as an example of 'typical' game play.
Believe that, and I've got some swampland in Florida or a Bridge in New York for you.

CR is a filmed, edited audio-visual experience

Have you ever watched it? The play happens in two long continuous takes, with a break in the middle. There's no cutting or editing of the play action happening.

 

[billd91]

I have to admit, I've always found it baffling that people seem to be almost proud of the fact that they play D&D and don't feature a lot of combat. Earlier in this thread, we saw claims of a single combat in three sessions and things like that.

Why on earth would you play D&D if that's your jam? In a game where the numbers are reversed - say 10% combat, 90% out of combat, you're basically ejecting three quarters of the game. You're not using most spells, most character abilities, and most of the rules. And, for that 90% out of combat, the rules are so basic that you might as well be free forming.

What are people doing to have that kind of ratio using D&D?

Because despite claims to the contrary, D&D isn't all just about combat? If it were, it wouldn't have evolved past Chainmail. Yet it has always had the conceit to be more than just combat.
Combat may be a significant facet of D&D, like it is in many action movies, but it's not the only thing it does or that we can do with it. Like in action movies, there's room for story development through exposition, conversation (role playing), joking around, action sequences that don't involve combat, drama, and even romance.

 

[FrogReaver]

Have you ever watched it? The play happens in two long continuous takes, with a break in the middle. There's no cutting or editing of the play action happening.

Interesting. I had always presumed it was more curated from an editing standpoint than that. *Never have watched it.

 

[FrogReaver]

Maybe, though it might just be that fans of doctor who aren't really in the market to play a game in the universe. I think some settings work best as a show rather than an RPG, but who knows. I don't even know how well the unique system sold.

Maybe. I think even if you had no Doctor Who fans buy it, you would still get some D&D 5e fans to pick it up and at least incorporate some ideas from it into their D&D games and maybe even try it out. We shall see I guess.