What is your campaign balance? Combat vs Social?

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

How much social do you think a campaign needs so that players who make balanced characters are happy and pure combat monsters are gimped enough to feel like they shoehorned their character by their choices?

If you want pure combat monsters to feel that way, strive for at least 35-40% role-playing. Even the well-balanced characters can still participate in a fight well enough, depending on what they are fighting, but the pure combat monster will feel pretty useless in the social game without having any "social graces", shall we say.

I lean a bit more towards the combat side, but right now most of my players are completely new to RPGs so aren't comfortable getting into character yet. I am hoping for a 50/50 split eventually, as I must admit, I like the math.

 

[Shiroiken]

First of all, I object to the omission of the exploration pillar, because that is often an integral part of my campaign.

The question requires a level of clarification: in game or out of game? Combat tends to dominate the largest amount of real time, especially given that even 3-4 rounds of combat (24 seconds in game) often takes 15-20 minutes. Converse this to exploration, where half an hour of game time might take only 5 minutes. Social interaction is the only one that seems to take an equal amount of real time.

It also depends a lot on the adventure and how many sessions it takes. An investigation adventure, for example, usually starts with a lot of social, some exploration, and little combat, but ends with little social, and a lot of combat. A dungeon crawl is gonna have a lot of exploration and combat, but not much social. You can also have some purely social adventures (maybe with a single combat, and no real exploration).

Overall, I try to spend about 50% combat real time, followed by 30% exploration, and 20% social. In game time, I usually spend about 75% in exploration, 20% social, and 5% combat. Value of importance is such that exploration is probably highest (perception, investigation, survival, various tools) followed by combat. Social is such that while 1-2 characters might be able to avoid putting resources into it, it's not something that most players ignore.

 

[Nevvur]

At my table, we continue role playing socially during combat, so I'm not sure how to answer this question. I didn't realize we were supposed to keep the two separate, sorry!

 

[Oofta]

It depends greatly on the campaign, where it's at in the overall story arc and the group. I don't really pay a lot of attention, but I'd say combat is slightly less than half the game most of the time with the other time spent on exploration, problem solving, planning and social activities. I generally have at least some combat in a game, but I rarely do anything that would resemble the traditional dungeon crawl.

I guess for me, if I wanted constant combat I'd play a video game. Or a previous edition of the game that shall go unmentioned because I don't want to start edition wars and others are free to love an edition I burned out on.

 

[Rhenny]

Social interaction is almost entirely up to my players. In design, I try to give the players opportunity to interact with NPCs and monsters and almost any situation can involve socializing with chances to avoid combat if that’s what the players want to try.

My best sessions happen when I allow for exploration/social interaction/ combat at almost any moment.

Personally, I like games that have an equal balance of all three, but if pcs are in a villian’s stronghold or temple and they’ve already killed or are known to kill, the balance tips toward combat. On average, I’d say the group I DM will gravitate to 50% combat and 25% each for exploration and social interaction.

 

[Old One Eye]

My games tend to roughly break down as:

25% combat planning
25% combat resolution
25% exploration
25% social

 

[Draegn]

My group can and will often play through an entire session without combat. In part due to combat being extremely deadly and my use of very slow healing unless magic is applied. My players try to negotiate prior to a combat. Half of their primary characters are arcane casters and prefer bluffing with illusions and charm. However, they can be quite the vagabond psychopaths when they desire.

In fairness I would say that exploration and social interactions comprise seventy percent of game time. With the other thirty being combative whether direct or indirect.

 

[NiClerigo]

I love social interaction, mystery and intrigue, and my players seem to like that style as a change of pace/style from other games they have. Most of the time, role-playing takes 95% of my sessions -combat 5%, at most

 

[77IM]

40% Combat
10% Social
50% Players dicking around while I wonder when somebody is going to want to actually go on an adventure

 

[Maxperson]

I start by fully admitting I hate characters that are uber optimized. Yes everyone is allowed to play any way they want, but I dislike when players do pure character optimization for combat. I find it very one dimensional and it turns DnD for a ROLE Playing Game to a combat board game. If that is how you want to play then just go buy a bunch of WH40K minis and play a pure math and combat game.

This brings me to my question. How do you balance your campaign? If your campaign is just a massive dungeon crawl then being 100% combat is the way to go, but a role play game should have balance. So how should a standard game be balanced? 50% combat 50% social interaction? Do you favor one over the other?

How much social do you think a campaign needs so that players who make balanced characters are happy and pure combat monsters are gimped enough to feel like they shoehorned their character by their choices?

I shoot for 50/50 or 40(combat)/60(social), but circumstances often change that. Some sessions in bad areas are almost entirely combat. Other sessions where there are a lot of interactions the players and NPCs need to do will be entirely social.