Roleplaying Vs Combat: How do you weight them?

[The Ghost]

Roleplaying is what we do anytime we sit down at the table - combat is just one aspect of roleplaying.

There are two questions I see in your original post. 1. How much combat takes place in your adventures? 2. How deep is the roleplaying in your adventures?

Well, I believe that the game is about overcoming challenges; combat is just one means you can use to overcome the challenge. It really comes down to the players and what they want from the game. As a DM I always try to build the encounter so they have multiple ways of overcoming it. More often than not combat is the solution.

As far as the depth of roleplaying goes - I have two games I play in, the first is a pretty light beer-and-pretzels game. The other is a much heavier game where morals are grey and motivations are subtle and differ from player to player. There are lots of debates between players, in character, about the world they inhabit. Both games pretty much have the same amount of combat and non-combat situations. One is light the other heavy.

 

[Umbran]

Having detailed rules on combat does not a combat-focused game make.

True, which is why I didn't say the game was combat focused. I merely said that the rules tend to channel decisions during combat.

If anyone has a good argument against that proposition, I'd be happy to hear it.

 

[BryonD]

To me it would be better to say "conflict resolution vs. roleplaying" rather than combat vs. roleplaying, with combat simply being a specific (though certainly highly common) kind of conflict resolution.

With that tweak, I not only see them as not in conflict, you really cant have one without the other.

You could play DDM or Warhammer FB or any of hundreds of other minis battle games with putting yourself "inside" any of the combatants. But I think any reasonable person would agree that isn't what is generally understood as a rolepaying game.

Likewise, you and a friend could pretend to be a pair of elves sitting around commenting on cloud shapes or any other topic with no conflict whatsoever. Clearly this is roleplaying, but I'd argue it isn't a "game" but rather just an activity. "Roleplaying game" requires both "roleplaying" and "game" to be complete. And even if talking about clouds meets your standard of "game", I believe the again "reasonable" person would agree you have no need for a book from any publisher to achieve this. So it really is not relevant.

A roleplaying game is all about being inside the head of someone who is different than you, exists in a different environment than you do, or both and then having a solid, consistent mechanical system for modeling how that character is impacted by their environment and has impact upon their environment.

Why the characters acts and how that interaction resolves are both integral.

 

[PHBWil]

I prefer investigations and puzzles over straight combat. It isn't that I don't like combat, but I like my battles to have significance, and I find I am that too many battles takes away from this. An adventure that involves mystery, exploration, research, sneaking around that culminates in a big final battle is much more my taste.

By significant, I guessing that you prefer combat as a major plot device? For example, when you cornered a murderous villain your PC has been tracking and the villain doesn't want to go easily. Combat in this case would be a suitable action?

When the Universe puts up a big sign pointing the direction to success, following that path doesn't say a whole lot about who you are.

This is true combat doesn't always add to the characters worth in the game. A character that is totally inept when it comes to armed combat could potentially be a life saver when combat is the worst possible things. So then what would you say combat can add?

I prefer RPGs that make armed conflict just one possible extension of roleplaying. For me, I don't see combat vs. roleplaying as such a black/white clean cut duo like others have posted above me. I believe that combat should be an option (albeit a somewhat risky one, perhaps even a 'last resort') for my character (or NPC even) but in the end equally viable to any other option I could have used such as attempting stealth and deception, investigative skills, diplomacy, etc.
During a game either as a GM or player I want to present or be presented with the freedom to choose my course of action through roleplaying. Whether or not the situation 'devolves' into armed conflict the game should not require the players or GM to 'switch modes' and start speaking with numbers and game mechanics only, just like if a character chose to creep in the shadows to avoid being detected wouldn't be forced to speak only in game mechanics.

I agree, a GM going into metagame mode is not only distracting but at times can be annoying. What do you do, how do you feel in situations where it seems as if the GM has forced you one way or the other?

I'm going to just let you all know that my RPing experience comes from the old FASA games, D&D3.5 and 4e, Star Wars (whatever it was before the Saga Edition), StarCraft, and a little bit of Warhmmer Fantasy Roleplay. I know I may not be as experienced with different systems as many others on this board and I thank you all for the answers I'm getting, and hope they keep coming.

My last little question for this post focuses on D&D4e. In my readings (okay so I lurk there a lot) on the Gleemax forums, there seems to be at times a very vocal set that says you can't roleplay in 4th edition. The argument seems to be focused around the shear amount of combat powers and feats, and that their are no "rules" for RPing in the Player's Handbook but that combat is well defined within this core book. And while this is true about the core book you look at some of the adventures for the system, let's think of Keep on the Shadowfell for this question, and there are reasons/motivations for combat given in the adventures. Even the beginning scene in KotS, where you fight Kobolds on the road to a town you've never been to, has an underlying hidden agenda they may not be defined but as time goes on we know why these creatures are trying to stop our PCs. Does this combat have merit given that there is an underlying drive in stopping the PCs? Or is this combat for the sake of combat because this is a dungeon crawl and there should be something to fight in every room? Would KotS have the same feeling if there was less combat but it was more significant to the plot?

 

[Woas]

I agree, a GM going into metagame mode is not only distracting but at times can be annoying. What do you do, how do you feel in situations where it seems as if the GM has forced you one way or the other?

Could you give an example of when a GM forces you between roleplay and combat? (That is what you meant by "one way or the other" yes?)

 

[PHBWil]

Could you give an example of when a GM forces you between roleplay and combat? (That is what you meant by "one way or the other" yes?)

Yes by "one way or the other" I meant to force roleplay or combat. Keeping in mind that there is always roleplay in combat here is an example, we will use ProfessorPain for our purposes. He likes investigation and puzzles over combat. So put yourself in ProfessorPain's shoes for a moment. You have been tracking a murderer for some time, piecing together clues, and you think you finally have enough information to predict where the villain will be next. You set bait for him/her thinking you can capture the person using wits rather than pure strength and the rest of the players do so also. You are all pretty confident with the plan. But, no matter what you do the GM pushes for a confrontation and the drawing of blood between the PCs and this villain. Maybe he keeps slipping away until finally you draw sword and then the GM has the villain fight you. For the purposes of the GM's story fighting is the only way, and the GM is forcing you to fight when you as players want to resolve it differently.

Let's look at it another way too, from the opposite perspective. You might possibly want to take revenge on this murder and kill him (getting into a combat situation to do so), passing judgment in your own way.

What do you do when the GM forces roleplay or combat, and takes away that sense of choice of using a character's persona or skills for the sake of his/her story rather than letting the player's action push the story forward when they all might agree this is what they want done?

 

[Crothian]

What do you do when the GM forces roleplay or combat, and takes away that sense of choice of using a character's persona or skills for the sake of his/her story rather than letting the player's action push the story forward when they all might agree this is what they want done?

Get a better GM or talk to the one I have and see if I can show him that he is trying to force the players to do what he wants and taking away their freedom of controlling their own characters.

 

[Woas]

I don't really see the situation as roleplay vs. combat. After setting up the plan to capture the masked villain in this scenario, the GM having the villain fight back is just added roleplay. "You'll never take me alive! Have at thee!" Given the scenario at hand (and I realize it's just an on the fly scenario) the players should probably have some idea of what they are getting into. If the target is a murderer, then they players and characters know the target is likely to be hostile when confronted...

Now, setting aside any "bad GM" issues (assuming the GM isn't a rookie or on a power trip to 'kill characters', etc), the GM in this scenario has thrown a metagame Scissor ("you may have found my secret plan, but you'll have to trump this last trick I have up my sleeve"). The player's have to roleplay and think of a way to throw a metagame Rock (get him alive, or subdue him without killing) and deal with it - obviously the GM is presenting the enemy as dangerous and someone/thing who is willing to risk his/her life in armed conflict. It is the player's choice to meet that threat head on by whatever means they feel necessary which is all part of roleplaying.

I'll give an example from a recent game I was running, because it's actually very similar to the one you present. The short of it is that the player characters are all bounty hunters and do their legwork to figure out who the bounty is... where he's going... what;s his history... much like the example scenario of the characters (and players) doing the detective. The villain doesn't want to be caught and willing to risk his life to escape. So after the detective work the players finally find the bounty. I know as the GM that they want to take him alive so to throw them a final loop, I make the bounty unwilling to go alive and pull a gun and wave it around threateningly. I've done exactly what you describe, forced the players into combat. It's the bounty's final 'trump' or scissors to the characters legwork or paper. So the players have to figure out (and roleplay) how to overcome this last challenge and throw a rock.
In reality I'm not doing it to force them into combat and out of roleplaying. The players could do any number of things: a) Talk him down through intimidation/persuasion, b) use nonlethal force but risk one of the player characters getting shot, c) lose the bounty payment and turn all their info to the local police to deal with it, d) figure out who his friends/loved ones are and put pressure on them to reign him in... and so forth. Above all though they need to still roleplay!

So in essence like I said earlier I don't really believe a GM can necessarily force combat OR roleplaying, short of having 'bad GM' issues. If bad GM issues are the case, say the GM stops the game mid-stream and bluntly declare to the group, "listen despite all the past work and any future decision by the characters, I really just want to have combat and kill a character ok?" Then well, I guess I'd find a new game!

 

[PHBWil]

Honestly, I'm getting the exact answers I thought I would for asking such a loaded question in the first place. Thanks all for the answers so far.

I've have a few more questions, and please feel free to weigh in on the first still. How does combat usually work into your games? How much "roleplaying" is involved when combat is going on? Which I mean how much do you stay in character? Are there times when it is acceptable to go OOC and metagame during combat in your games, times when the abstract storytelling is over shadowed by the mechanical?

Roleplaying is what we do anytime we sit down at the table - combat is just one aspect of roleplaying.

There are two questions I see in your original post. 1. How much combat takes place in your adventures? 2. How deep is the roleplaying in your adventures?

Well, I believe that the game is about overcoming challenges; combat is just one means you can use to overcome the challenge. It really comes down to the players and what they want from the game. As a DM I always try to build the encounter so they have multiple ways of overcoming it. More often than not combat is the solution.

As far as the depth of roleplaying goes - I have two games I play in, the first is a pretty light beer-and-pretzels game. The other is a much heavier game where morals are grey and motivations are subtle and differ from player to player. There are lots of debates between players, in character, about the world they inhabit. Both games pretty much have the same amount of combat and non-combat situations. One is light the other heavy.

So for both your groups time in combat and time spent "roleplaying" where it is more about the abstract storytelling than the mechanical part of the system you play both surface in the same amounts between your light and heavy RP groups. Is there any difference between the groups in concern to when and how combat comes up? I'm guessing your pretzel and beer group is more likely to actaully talk mechanics during combat rather than stay in character.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

The thing to remember is, just because D&D is very combat based doesn't mean other games are. UA has a section devoted entirely to telling you how to avoid combat, and not in mechanical terms. WHFR is similar to UA in that combat is so damn deadly that you want to do it as little as possible. WoD games can have a lot or an astonishingly little amount of combat.