Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Supporting the "Three Pillars" Combat, Exploration and Roleplay equally?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BobTheNob" data-source="post: 5891089" data-attributes="member: 82425"><p>This is bang on. Really. Couldnt be more correct. I myself would say that I more than once guilty of violating this, but I like to try and be conscious of it.</p><p></p><p>I would however add that the system does need to incentivise players to believe that the other pillars can be just as engaging as combat can be. Alot of the time, as DM and adventure designer, I was injecting non-combat scenarios in the vain hope that players would pick up on that and go with it. But lets face it, when players are looking as 4 page characters sheets crammed with combat mechanics and dynamics with a (less than) 1/4 page side-bar for skills to summarise everything the exploration/interaction side of the game has to offer, it was no surprise that players wanted to jump straight back into combat every time.</p><p></p><p>That is not to say my group is a bunch of combat nuts. We have played many games in the past when rules were "combat-light" and their approach was a mix of exploration/combat. Over time games grew by constantly evolving combat mechanics to the point where you pick up a book (as a player) and 90% of what it has to offer you is in the form of cool combat options with a disclaimer at the bottom saying you can opt out of these cool things for a skill bonus. Its no wonder the players want to use combat to resolve everything...that's the best thing the rules are offering.</p><p></p><p>In summary, I completely agree with your point. But the rules need to offer equal enticements in the exploration/interaction pillars to get players believing it would be just as much fun to play the explorer/interactive when putting a character together. If you dont, players will fall back to creating combat titans and the idea of the open adventure, as altruistic as it is, just becomes "lets do combat", because thats what people characters are designed to do.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BobTheNob, post: 5891089, member: 82425"] This is bang on. Really. Couldnt be more correct. I myself would say that I more than once guilty of violating this, but I like to try and be conscious of it. I would however add that the system does need to incentivise players to believe that the other pillars can be just as engaging as combat can be. Alot of the time, as DM and adventure designer, I was injecting non-combat scenarios in the vain hope that players would pick up on that and go with it. But lets face it, when players are looking as 4 page characters sheets crammed with combat mechanics and dynamics with a (less than) 1/4 page side-bar for skills to summarise everything the exploration/interaction side of the game has to offer, it was no surprise that players wanted to jump straight back into combat every time. That is not to say my group is a bunch of combat nuts. We have played many games in the past when rules were "combat-light" and their approach was a mix of exploration/combat. Over time games grew by constantly evolving combat mechanics to the point where you pick up a book (as a player) and 90% of what it has to offer you is in the form of cool combat options with a disclaimer at the bottom saying you can opt out of these cool things for a skill bonus. Its no wonder the players want to use combat to resolve everything...that's the best thing the rules are offering. In summary, I completely agree with your point. But the rules need to offer equal enticements in the exploration/interaction pillars to get players believing it would be just as much fun to play the explorer/interactive when putting a character together. If you dont, players will fall back to creating combat titans and the idea of the open adventure, as altruistic as it is, just becomes "lets do combat", because thats what people characters are designed to do. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Supporting the "Three Pillars" Combat, Exploration and Roleplay equally?
Top