D&D 5E Would you play D&D if you knew there would be no combat?

[SkidAce]

Do you mean combat light, like rarely, or do you mean no combat?

I want all three pillars at some point in the game, so I wasn't sure where to vote.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Not gonna vote, because I think the OP muddies the question too much.

I’d be reluctant based on not knowing the group at all.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Using D&D to run a non-combat game is quite simply using the wrong tool for the job. It might still be a good game depending on the skill of the participants, but the system would do very little to support the game.

 

[cmad1977]

If I were looking to play D&D?
No.
If I were looking okay a horror game:
You could interest me.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I'd always be willing to give a game a try, at least, and see how it goes.

That being said, if the combat is really minimal, than I'd ask why are we playing D&D instead of using another system? Because that would likely be the more sensible way to go. D&D can be molded (or hammered) into a new shape when needed....but there's probably another game that was designed to deliver the desired experience that would be a better choice.

Not a knock on D&D, and like I said, I'd be willing to give it a try at the very least simply because I enjoy playing.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Why am I using D&D for a combat lite game given how much of the rules, the spell system, and the character sheet is all about combat? I'll happily play and run RPGs with no combat but D&D is a very strange choice for it.

That said I can see reasons to do so - for example someone at my table wants to try running a game for a one-shot and we all know D&D. System matters but system isn't everything. D&D (any edition) is a poor system for non-combat games, but that's not as important as the group and reason.

 

[Oofta]

I voted no assuming absolutely no combat whatsoever in an ongoing campaign. There would be no reason to play most of the classes or to ever level up.

For a one shot? A combat light game? Sure.

 

[Laurefindel]

I'm down for a combat-lite D&D campaign but without any combat whatsoever, I wouldn't play D&D. Not without knowing the DM and other players at any case.

It would make me question why that DM chose D&D over other, more suitable systems. I'm cool with bending/adapting/houseruling D&D to fit another genre, but there is a point where the advantages of sticking to D&D lose over exploring another game/ruleset.

 

[Charlaquin]

It wouldn’t be a hard no from me, but I would question why we were using D&D for this game instead of some other rule system. D&D’s design revolves heavily around combat, so it seems like an odd choice of system for a very combat-light campaign. Not to say that combat-light D&D can’t work. I’ve played in combat-light D&D campaigns that have been a lot of fun. I just think there are other game systems that are better suited to such campaigns.

 

[generic]

I voted no, because having combat is an integral part of my enjoyment of RPGs. You can run your campaign in any way you desire, but just playing D&D without combat would feel like rules-lite cooperative storytelling for me, personally.

It's a rock-hard no from me.