And did you enjoy it?
Yes, political intrigue, social skills, ect
This has happened for me twice in the last year, since my wife and I took up Pathfinder.
One was a PFS session that was an absolute nightmare and one of the worst experiences I've had, to date.
The other was a very enjoyable home-game RotRL session that was a hilarious fun-filled romp and really set the tone for how our group's characters have interacted, ever since.
|
Yes and yes. My group recently had two sessions in a row with no combat due to a combination of scouting and political maneuvering. To be fair, this was in preparation for a major battle (with dozens of NPCs on both sides), but still.
When it come be properly done, I actually prefer a bit more non-combat than combat as it tends to be more immersive. In combat, your character's personality (mostly) goes by the wayside in favor of survival. Outside of combat there are many more opportunities to develop and show your character's personality. On the flip side, sometimes you are having a rough week and just need to smash some s#!%.
Yes, several times. One time we had a six hour or so session and only opened the dice box one time to roll a Diplomacy check; the rest of it was just interaction with NPCs around town. And yes, I think it's fun. Personally, combat is the least interesting part of an RPG to me.
|
Not in an adventure path but in most other situations.
When GMing my group trys to have at least 1 encounter but it can be avoided (accidently or on purpose). Sometimes we have lots too, depending on the situation.
Edit: we tend to game for only 3-4 hours at a time.
Edit2: home brews tend to not be railroaded and allows for unexpected turns of events based on PC actions.
Yes, and somewhat. We're playing the council of thieves module and
|
|
In game, quite often since there are days we just travel without bandit raids.
At a table, not that I can remember. At some point we generally end up fighting something or another. There have been long stretches where we avoided combats rather than actually fighting things, but I don't remember it lasting for a full session.
|
|
Yes, and it can actually be very entertaining.
Usually our groups are a GM/DM + 3 more
so no one really hogs all the time. Just developing the characters personalities and seeing where they go, it makes characters more endearing to players and not just a set of numbers. Working to incorporate characters back stories, families and relatives, things that they wrote into their stories really makes people like their characters especially if you draw pictures of the PC's and NPC's. People love to see things in the "flesh" so to speak, having a picture, plus embelleshing their back story with plots and drama sometimes creating mini/ side quests helps the campaign overall.
|
Yep! Usually between adventure scenarios and/or when time passes in-game, but I found it helps to ground the characters better with the world and npcs we interact with. Some really memorable story moments come out of it, and also is a good way to occasionally mix in some mini-game cards or dice for stakes at the character's favorite establishments!
|
After about 2 & 1/2 hours, I told the DM that if there was no combat in the next hour, I was gone. He told me it would not be that long. He did not specify he meant no combat at all would happen. The game ended with a cliff hanger of noticing a bunch of raiders were encroaching on our camp. I asked why not do the fight then? He said he had not prepped the stats for the combat. I felt robbed of my time and disgusted with the game night. I made it clear that if anyone in our group ever did that again, I would never waste my time in any campaign with a GM who wanted to do that again. He defended with how he thought it would be interesting to have a game without a combat as a change of pace. We were not deep and heavy role players acting it up as much as possible. He tried this with the wrong group.
I have been satisfied with as few as one substantial combat or two short ones but I still do not ever again want to do a whole game without some combat. I outright tell DM my expectations and ask for feedback before accepting an invite for years now.
I had a 14 hour game session once in a game run by someone who barely even knew how combat worked. Combat was irregular in that game and often sessions did not include any, and when they did it was not setup using any type of CR system or anything.
Probably the most memorable game I have ever been in.
|
|
After about 2 & 1/2 hours, I told the DM that if there was no combat in the next hour, I was gone. He told me it would not be that long. He did not specify he meant no combat at all would happen. The game ended with a cliff hanger of noticing a bunch of raiders were encroaching on our camp. I asked why not do the fight then? He said he had not prepped the stats for the combat. I felt robbed of my time and disgusted with the game night. I made it clear that if anyone in our group ever did that again, I would never waste my time in any campaign with a GM who wanted to do that again. He defended with how he thought it would be interesting to have a game without a combat as a change of pace. We were not deep and heavy role players acting it up as much as possible. He tried this with the wrong group.
I have been satisfied with as few as one substantial combat or two short ones but I still do not ever again want to do a whole game without some combat. I outright tell DM my expectations and ask for feedback before accepting an invite for years now.
Wow. Remind me not to invite you to any of the games I'm in (PF or otherwise). In some campaigns the non-combat sessions are more common than the combat ones.
This is, of course, a matter of play-style, but if I might hazard a guess: The DM may have been trying to get people to try other play-styles to switch things up. Unfortunately, you have to do this with a new campaign so that players can design their characters around that assumption rather than what I (presume) happened to you in which you designed on the assumption of combat-heavy and got no action.
Then again, if the DM made it clear that social stuff would be needed and you chose not to take any, then it's basically your fault for excluding yourself.
So many judgments to pass, so little time...
TL;DR - The campaign should (if possible) involve everyone in each session for at least a minor role. However, as a player, it's a bad idea to assume there will not be non-combat sessions, so you should take *something* that's useful and fun for such sessions, even if it's just a colorful personality.
|
|
Yes, I have spent an entire day of gaming with no combat. Yes, I enjoyed it.
I like my combat, but some campaigns I know are narrative and plot heavy. The plot is resolved through investigation, negotiations, conspiracy planning, running away, and role-playing.
One of my regular night DMs likes a plot+narrative style more than combat. As an aside, she decided to take a break and we are going through the World's Largest Dungeon. Combat is not her thing, and we're very likely going to stop the dungeon crawl soon. It's been 5 weeks ;)
Never. It wouldn't work for us at all.
Yep, and yep.
I've also had sessions where the combat was so minor, or over so quick, that it felt like a full session of RP.
Yes, and depends on why.
Yes and yes. In fact, it happens relatively often from the sounds of other posts in this thread.
Probably, though none spring to mind at the moment. We've definitely had a few with only a couple quick combats that were filled with exploration, political intrigue, etc.
Yes. Recently for an intrigue-heavy interlude between chapters 2 and 3 of Kingmaker - the PCs ventured into Brevoy to help Lander Lebeda claim his position as head of House Lebeda. I think the whole group enjoyed it.
And back when I ran Rise of the Runelords (converting to 4E and modifying each chapter to encompass 5 levels of play so the path ran from L1-30), the PCs went an entire level without a single combat.
I may have. Or may not. I really don't remember and don't care. I like both combat and non-combat. As a GM I generally plan for at least one combat encounter per session just because there's always at least one member of the group who starts to lose interest if he/she isn't able to beat up something.
Never played an entire ''day'' (as in 24 hours non-stop gaming) of Pathfinder, but we had a few sessions without fight, and a few sessions that consisted monstly of one big fight. Both can be enjoyable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
LOL. We've gone 3 sessions without a fight. The players absolutely love it. In a shameless plug, you can read about their exploits here.
Our group is 'older' (every player is 40+), so roleplaying is a lot more fun than combat for most.
LOL. We've gone 3 sessions without a fight. The players absolutely love it. In a shameless plug, you can read about their exploits here.
Our group is 'older' (every player is 40+), so roleplaying is a lot more fun than combat for most.
My group is mostly over 50, but if I went three sessions without combat, they probably wouldn't show up for the fourth...
I have had good and bad no combat sessions and have GMed a couple of good and bad no combat sessions myself.
The game I have the most regrets about was a troop style session for Vampire..... I had a meeting where the leader PC leader of a rebellion against the prince was trying to gain the support of the other factions in the city... I got the other players to play the roles of the faction leaders and gave them goals and things they wanted out of supporting the PC as well as giving them enemies amongst the other leaders. It was the PCs job to schmooze and negotiate the other PCs.
I didn't take enough time to explain to the players how it was going to work, and didnt do enough prep to give them a solid background and it fizzled miserably.
And did you enjoy it?
Literally countless times over the last 30 years or so. And yes I enjoy it. Character and story are easily as important as combat with the people I normally game with.
Combat is a means, not an end unto itself. It can be exciting and fun obviously but it is not the only reason to play or the sum of the game.
I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable the role playing part of the game is. The more varied and diverse their characters (and the GM's NPC's and their portrayals) the more fun you have out of combat.
And did you enjoy it?Countless times over my gaming career. And yes I enjoy it. Character and story are easily as important as combat with the people I normally game with.
Combat is a means not an end unto itself.
I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable to role playing part of the game is.
Interesting, I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable the combat part of the game is.
Odd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep yep, it happens once in a while, with some of my groups enjoying it more than others.
My most recent would be in Rise of the Runelords. The party finally realized they needed to sit down and tell the truth about their individual backstories if they were ever going to be proper allies. The dramatic tension of that session was excellent, and not a single die even touched the table. The entire session consisted of talking, but it was pretty darn awesome how PCs managed to link their backstories, or make their individual histories comparable in ways that their allies could feel connections to.
...And just as NobodysHome did, have a shameless plug to my campaign right here.
And did you enjoy it?Literally countless times over the last 30 years or so. And yes I enjoy it. Character and story are easily as important as combat with the people I normally game with.
Yeah, me too. That's why I find it odd people are so happy playing a game with no combat. To me that would be as bad as a game with only combat. I prefer a balanced mix - exploration/combat/negotiation...too much of anything in a session and it starts to become a grind to me.
|
|
I don't tend to play for whole days, just 4 hour sessions, but with that caveat...
In Pathfinder, no, as I only play PF for PFS which pretty much always have combat.
In RPGs in general, yep! In Shadowrun whole sessions can involve investigation, legwork, schmoozinh and infiltration - hopefully if all goes to plan (and sometimes it did!) you don't need to draw your gun.
Most recently it happened in the D&D 4E Eberron campaign I was running, though I could see one player wasn't happy about it, everyone one else was. It could have happened again but I could see the player getting frustrated again so I threw in an unplanned encounter with a couple of dire wolves or something at the end of the session.
And did you enjoy it?Countless times over my gaming career. And yes I enjoy it. Character and story are easily as important as combat with the people I normally game with.
Combat is a means not an end unto itself.
I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable to role playing part of the game is.
Interesting, I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable the combat part of the game is.
Odd.
YOU GOT YOUR CHOCOLATE IN MY PEANUT BUTTER!
NO, YOU GOT YOUR PEANUT BUTTER ON MY CHOCOLATE!NO, I-
Wait a minute
The moral of this story is that such a combination is incredibly delicious
unless you are allergic to peanuts
or combat
or roleplaying
ugh my head hurts
And did you enjoy it?Countless times over my gaming career. And yes I enjoy it. Character and story are easily as important as combat with the people I normally game with.
Combat is a means not an end unto itself.
I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable to role playing part of the game is.
Interesting, I find the more creative the people you game with are, the more enjoyable the combat part of the game is.
Odd.
Don't get me wrong. I love me some combat. My current group plays about once every 2-3 weeks on Saturdays from about noon till ~2 AM, usualy 14 hour sessions. Generally we have a good combat in there somewhere but sometimes it is all RP and interaction/clue following, etc. And sometimes we have 50+ ROUND mega combats that take an entire weekend to finish.
I just meant that if the interactions during RP is interesting enough and exciting enough then the NON combat parts of the game don't bore you. If your RP AND combat portions are fun then you start not to care so much which fun part your playing.
I just meant that if the interactions during RP is interesting enough and exciting enough then the NON combat parts of the game don't bore you. If your RP AND combat portions are fun then you start not to care so much which fun part your playing.
And I was just making the observation that creativity just helps the game in general.
If all party members get involved they can be fun. We've had some sessions without any combat and they can be fun if there is enough action to go around. If the non-combat action focuses on 1 or 2 PCs (we have 5-6 typically) then the others get bored and distracted and the session is a loss overall.
We've also had sessions without any combat (or dice rolling of any kind) that were laborious, boring, and frustrating. Those tended to be due to lack of prep on the GM's part.
So I'm not against them as long as there is something to keep everyone's interest. That can be a very tall task, though. I try to always have a combat or two (or three) planned when I run, but that's not to say the PC's encounter them during the session, however. *grin*
|
A number of times actually, and usually it was fun. Once in a while the odd accounting day happens where we wasted a ton of time with very mundane details of economics but we don't have to get into fights every game to have fun.
Some times combat actually ruins things too if you've got a great RP vibe going. :/
We had a no combat session in my last campaign, 2 of the pc's were twin brothers and it was their birthday. The town had a little celebration, pot-luck and the stable master put on his locally famous horse show with obstacle course events. Event winners won a riding horse and the brothers were also gifted with horses. Gifts were exchanged. Good times and no combat were had.