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

 

[ShadowDenizen]

I'd say 90% is a bit high; I'd put closer to 75% overall? That's given the history of the game (which owes its genesis to tactical wargames), and the historical focus of the core ruleboooks on combat-related material.

The tide may be changing, though, with the massive influx of new & younger players, who may not have that history with the game. (Not that that is an entirely bad thing; I quite like the flexibility of "Wild Beyond the Witchlight"!)

My personal groups tend to edge closer to 60% combat? I know when I DM, I try to put out interesting challenges that can be overcome in multiple possible ways. (I also don't find combat particularly enjoyable to run, and prefer to focus on storytelling and interactive scenes.)

 

[Malmuria]

I feel like gold pieces would actually be a good way in modeling something like the medieval church’s attitude towards its congregation…

 

[hawkeyefan]

Coming at this topic from a different angle...

If someone were to say that Marvel Cinematic Universe films are "90 percent action scenes," but then Kevin Feige issued a statement about how he must be creating the Marvel movies wrong, both statements are essentially talking past each other.

One could easily rebuke the "90 percent criticism" by surveying films and trying to measure the relative length of screen time that actions take up in a superhero movie (e.g., Captain America: Winter Soldier, Spider-Man: Homecoming, Black Panther, Deadpool, etc.) or some other action movie (e.g., Rambo II, Predator, Die Hard, etc.). And it may be that after all is said and done that action scenes only take up 20-30 percent of the actual screen time. But would that person have rebuked the underlying point? Does statistically demonstrating that action sequences only consume ~20 percent of a given Marvel film's run time mean that it isn't an action film? I would say not. Many people are going to these action films to see the primary character or cast of characters throw down and kick butt. The exceptions to those expectations don’t disprove the trend.

However, it is also important to recognize that action movies - and one can see this in Marvel films well - use action-conflict as a source of drama. The stakes of conflict, both internal and external, are played out through action-based dramatic conflict. A viewer more or less expects that the climax of a Marvel film will involve the characters in a heated round or two of super-powered fisticuffs against the antagonist. The dramatic tension of these films build up towards action sequences that resolve that dramatic tension.

Likewise, Critical Role may have episodes that are light in combat and high in social drama or interactions but it still ends with a giant brawl against Thanos er… Vecna.

In D&D combat is an extension of roleplaying. Let me repeat myself. Combat in D&D is a valid expression and extension of dramatic roleplaying. However, at the end of the day, D&D is still a game about fantasy action-adventure.

I think this gets to two very relevant points that although they've come up at times, are largely ignored.

The first is that the "90% combat" was just a bit of hyperbole to make a point. Arguing about whether or not it actually is 90% or 68% or what have you is a bit pointless. It doesn't really address the criticism (if it even is a criticism and not just an observation).

Which leads to the second point.... which is that D&D largely revolves around combat. So much of what is done is either buildup to combat or done to avoid combat and so on. It's baked in, like it is with action movies. It's inherently a part of the game, and the majority of the game hooks back to it. It generally is the climax to which things are building, or it's the looming threat that gives everything context.

American football is about the action on the field. That's what the game is about. But if someone were to sit down and count the amount of time spent in huddle, and the amount of talking that the coaches and players do on the sidelines, to say nothing of the analysis that happens all week building up to a game, they can make the argument that "Well, there's more talking in football than there is running" and although technically they'd be right, it's not very relevant. It all comes back to the play on the field.

D&D is largely about fighting. I just don't know why that's somehow seen as a bad thing. That sums up my D&D game rather well, and I quite enjoy my D&D game. I doubt that it lacks any of the non-combat elements others are citing in their games. I don't know why people aren't embracing that element of D&D.

 

[Parmandur]

D&D is largely about fighting. I just don't know why that's somehow seen as a bad thing. That sums up my D&D game rather well, and I quite enjoy my D&D game. I doubt that it lacks any of the non-combat elements others are citing in their games. I don't know why people aren't embracing that element of D&D.

I mean, that really doesn't speak to my experience of the game? By that rubric, D&D is largely about drinking and exchanging sophomoric jokes with friends and family, not combat.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think this gets to two very relevant points that although they've come up at times, are largely ignored.

The first is that the "90% combat" was just a bit of hyperbole to make a point. Arguing about whether or not it actually is 90% or 68% or what have you is a bit pointless. It doesn't really address the criticism (if it even is a criticism and not just an observation).

Which leads to the second point.... which is that D&D largely revolves around combat. So much of what is done is either buildup to combat or done to avoid combat and so on. It's baked in, like it is with action movies. It's inherently a part of the game, and the majority of the game hooks back to it. It generally is the climax to which things are building, or it's the looming threat that gives everything context.

American football is about the action on the field. That's what the game is about. But if someone were to sit down and count the amount of time spent in huddle, and the amount of talking that the coaches and players do on the sidelines, to say nothing of the analysis that happens all week building up to a game, they can make the argument that "Well, there's more talking in football than there is running" and although technically they'd be right, it's not very relevant. It all comes back to the play on the field.

D&D is largely about fighting. I just don't know why that's somehow seen as a bad thing. That sums up my D&D game rather well, and I quite enjoy my D&D game. I doubt that it lacks any of the non-combat elements others are citing in their games. I don't know why people aren't embracing that element of D&D.

Well said. Love the example.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I mean, that really doesn't speak to my experience of the game? By that rubric, D&D is largely about drinking and exchanging sophomoric jokes with friends and family, not combat.

Sure, but that’s applicable to some extent to any social activity.

I mean, I live going to concerts. Sometimes, I’ll go to one where I’m not even all that interested in the performer, but am just there for the social element of hanging with friends and having some drinks and so on.

Doesn’t mean the concert isn’t about the music.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean, that really doesn't speak to my experience of the game? By that rubric, D&D is largely about drinking and exchanging sophomoric jokes with friends and family, not combat.

This.

And also, the claim was that D&D is predominantly about combat. Most of the arguments in support of that claim range from nonsensical to conclusions that don't follow from the premises. I mean, "My group mostly fights things" does not lead to "DnD is mostly about combat". It just leads to "some groups focus on combat in a game where each group chooses what to focus on, surprising no one."

Then you've got people conflating the original claim with arguments like "DnD is an action game where eventually you usually fight the BBEG in order to win", which is a different claim. That claims does not mean, even if true, that the game is mostly about combat. "Will usually include some amount of X" does not mean that chocolate flavoured baked goods are largely about vanilla.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Sure, but that’s applicable to some extent to any social activity.

I mean, I live going to concerts. Sometimes, I’ll go to one where I’m not even all that interested in the performer, but am just there for the social element of hanging with friends and having some drinks and so on.

Doesn’t mean the concert isn’t about the music.

The original thread is more like claiming that concerts are largely about dancing.

There are individual concerts where that is true, sure. But it isn't broadly true.

 

[CleverNickName]

In my experience it’s 100% combat.

At least, when the DM says, “Hey, pay attention! It’s your turn” and I look up from my phone we are always in combat. Every single time.

As a DM, I felt this in my soul.

 

[Jer]

As a DM, I felt this in my soul.

I've got a great group now but ... yeah, that hurt.