Geron Raveneye
Explorer
BryonD said:But there is nothing to stop you from being in character and making character driven choices and then using the tactical side to play THAT out.
The question is, do the rules FORCE this, and I still am unwavered from my position that the answer is "no".
I disagree that the rules assume this. The combat rules are just that, tactical rules for simulating the physical result of actions. This works whether you are trying to be optimal or not. And again, that was true in all editions. Was it ok to get killed or "lose" the fight in 1E?
You MAY stop roleplaying if you CHOOSE to. But that is the players choice. And, IMO, if they make that choice then they are losing out on some of the fun.
I disagree that this has in the past or will in the future have the result you are predicting.
You know, this is kinda funny...if we take it a little further, we'll end up in a discussion about how much "free will" is actually free, and how unsubtle an influence actually has to be before we can say it "forces" a behaviour or a decision from somebody.

My point of view is simple: D&D is two games in one by now...one is the roleplaying side (which has only gotten more detailed and quantified with 3.x, not necessarily better though), and the other is the tactical mini-game, which has also gotten much more detailed and prevalent, rules-wise and effect-wise, with 3.x when I compare it to either Basic D&D or AD&D 2E (which I came from).
Now we can argue up and down that it is the personal choice of every player to stop roleplaying when the tactical mini part comes up, and that they could roleplay that as well. One might also argue that one could easily roleplay through a game of Heroquest, despite the fact that it's basically a tabletop mini game, or that one could roleplay the parts of the wizards while lobbing spells at each other in a game of Magic - The Gathering. All possible, and not that far off. But most people I know and met (yeah yeah, anecdotal evidence and all that...like I'm going to create a valid statistics about that.

And yes, the combat section of D&D 3.x especially has turned very much into a tabletop mini game, with very detailed accounts of what you can and cannot do, how to do it, what feats and abilities your character must have to do it, and with consequences built into those actions that are best portrayed by using a 5'x5' grid battlemat, minis and, if possible, wire shapes or cutouts for spell effects. Spells and abilities are mostly optimized for exactly those few combat rounds as well. And yes, I realize this can also be explained as trying to adequately portray the variables of fantasy battle...which is exactly what tabletop fantasy wargaming rules are there for. So the combat section of D&D simply is a tabletop mini game embedded in a roleplaying game. I'm not saying this is wrong, I'm not saying it should be different, I'm just saying that's the way I see it.
And many...not all, of course, but many...gamers will simply switch mental gears to mini-mode when that part of the game comes up. Does the rules force that to happen? How do you decide that? If you're at an empty intersection, with no car in sight, and the traffic lights go red, most people will stop, and wait for 2 minutes even if there's nothing to wait for. Nothing really stops you from driving on, nothing bad will happen if you do, and a few will probably do so, too, but the majority will stop. It's a habit. In normal traffic, if you don't stop at a traffic light, you cause accidents. If the context of normal traffic (and the bad consequences of not stopping) are removed, one would say people could ignore a lone traffic light. And yet, people stop.
Generalizing this is, of course, too dangerous, as behaviour is far more complex than that, but the basic principle seems to hold here, too. Gamers see a roleplaying game, they roleplay. You bring out a tabletop mini game, they play the mini game. Why? Because in the context of a normal tabletop game, roleplaying doesn't give you diddly squat, and isn't done. Taken out of the context of a normal tabletop game, one could ignore that, and continue roleplaying ones character while using minis. Yet it seems (as many stories here on ENWorld point to), that a lot of gamers switch gaming mode without thinking much about it.
So, I guess my question would be if a habit is "free will", or if it is some force on the behaviour of the gamer?
And how could D&D combat be modified to be less of a mini-game, while still retaining the functionality to keep combat varied and interesting.