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

[Anoth]

When do we ever play Runequest?

Well in theory if we did would it be d&d? I am more a call of Cthulhu person myself, but I give a thumbs up to the Magic World setting and system that is a BRP rpg heavily based on Runequest. But the question still stands.

 

[generic]

Well in theory if we did would it be d&d? I am more a call of Cthulhu person myself, but I give a thumbs up to the Magic World setting and system that is a BRP rpg heavily based on Runequest. But the question still stands.

Under this analogy, would Agony be considered Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus?

 

[hawkeyefan]

when we play runequest are we also playing d&d?

Um....no.

I mean, I get it.....my game is tonight, and my wife asked me if the gang is coming by for D&D and I said yes, even though we're playing another game.

So yeah, it's a colloquial term for RPGing in general.

But it's also a specific game. I think in a discussion like this, we're talking to people in the know, and we can make the distinction from one game to the next.

 

[Lanefan]

Well if the actual class is contributing nothing than we are going in circles. Why not just play a rogue with the Soldier background?

Because an ex-soldier is far more likely to be a Fighter - strong and tough, rather than nimble and smart which are the hallmarks of a Rogue.

And the actual class is contributing something: background and flavour.

If you have a choice between A and B - and the difference is that B effectively covers everything that A covers but a also bit more - than of course the rational choice is B.

If the only consideration is pure numbers and mechanics, then yes. But if one goes beyond that and considers characterization, personality and background then it's not so cut and dried.

It's like if I have a character concept where my character is a crashed pilot from an intergalactic space ship. The GM agrees that the PC is fine but warns it will mostly be colour for me to play as he doesn't intend for the game to ever go into space or for modern technology to feature. It would then be a bit strange for me to ask him if instead of taking adventuring skills like Perception or Persuasion I could spend my skill picks on Piloting (intergalactic spacecraft) and Quantum Computer Engineering.

Even a somewhat silly example like this could be made to work if the DM co-operates: for example, what experiences have I had in space, while interacting with other strange cultures and lifeforms, that could help inform my actions and choices here?

And Piloting (spacecraft) could come in handy if I or the party ever find ourselves flying anywhere. Quantum Engineering I'd probably replace with Perception (something a pilot needs!), which could stand me in good stead in any situation.

 

[Lanefan]

For "non-mechanical freeform roleplaying" you do not need D&D.

No, you probably don't; but that's not my point.

My point is that it can be done within D&D and that doing so doesn't trample the system.

 

[Lanefan]

But then you’ve essentially removed the system from the equation. If it’s pure freeform RP with no mechanics, then it’s not really D&D at all. I don’t even know if it would even really be a game at all....sounds more like collaborative storytelling.

Not necessarily - the DM still puts the challenges, the players/PCs still have to overcome them; but those challenges involve exploration and-or stealth and-or diplomacy rather than combat.

So the question then becomes why not use a system where the mechanics support the desired gameplay experience?

What if there was a game that is to social encounters as D&D is to combat? Just as combat in D&D is supported by player choices for class and other features, which then grant them meaningful choices to make in combat, what if there was a game that worked that way for espionage and court diplomacy and intrigue?

Wouldn’t such a game then be likely to work better for a low-to-no combat game?

Yes, but why do I want to learn a whole new system when I've already got one that'll do?

Part of this stems from my long-held contention that D&D shouldn't have social mechanics, and that introducing them in 3e was a dreadful mistake. Social interaction in D&D should IMO be settled through roleplay, with mechanics either extremely minimal or absent altogether - which means that D&D already works just fine for a non-combat game.

You'd still use the D&D chassis to roll up the characters, to equip them, and so forth; and for the parts of the game where mechanics were still required e.g. exploration, stealth, etc.

 

[Tony Vargas]

My point is that it can be done within D&D and that doing so doesn't trample the system.

Free-form RPing, done in the context of a game with actual rules, doesn't trample the system, it merely abandons it, completely - typically, at the point said system proves useless or counter-productive. Later, when play returns to a context in which the system is functional, it can be taken up again, with no damage, and, hopefully, minimal loss of confidence.

 

[Anoth]

So what happens in said game when the thief decides to backstab the guard or someone.

 

[Anoth]

Not necessarily - the DM still puts the challenges, the players/PCs still have to overcome them; but those challenges involve exploration and-or stealth and-or diplomacy rather than combat.

Yes, but why do I want to learn a whole new system when I've already got one that'll do?

Part of this stems from my long-held contention that D&D shouldn't have social mechanics, and that introducing them in 3e was a dreadful mistake. Social interaction in D&D should IMO be settled through roleplay, with mechanics either extremely minimal or absent altogether - which means that D&D already works just fine for a non-combat game.

You'd still use the D&D chassis to roll up the characters, to equip them, and so forth; and for the parts of the game where mechanics were still required e.g. exploration, stealth, etc.

social mechanics were very much a part of pre 3.x. There were the reaction adjustment rules for charisma that worked very much like diplomacy in 3.x. And the morale rules were a better form of intimidation than what we currently have imho. I know because I still run a 2E game and use it. Same with Becmi.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I would play an rpg without combat, but not using the DnD rules. There's got to be a better system out there for whatever the gm is trying to do.