I do believe that explains D&D completly

[Narf the Mouse]

Kill things, take their stuff, get more powerfull, kill more things.

[Thunderhowl]

Ultimately, any game can be reduced to that. It's the roleplaying and the player interaction that makes them fun.

[Narf the Mouse]

True. D&D encourages it to an extent other games don't, however.

[JmcV]

hm...

I have met a lot of hack and slash type peoples that play d&d. however, the group that Alina and I currently play in is a much more roleplay focused group. I think it more comes down to gamer maturity. I don't necessarily think that there's anything wrong with "let's just go hit things!!', but it's more the sort of thing I expect from people who haven't been gaming for very long. When I first started playing d&d it was all about the smashy smashy. But as time passed and I played in more and more games, the smashy just got, well, kinda repetitive and even a little boring. I mean, don't get me wrong, there are some pretty epic combat sequences that are pretty darn fun, and it's always satisfying to roll that critical hit on a x3 multiplier wielding a 2 hander with 10 points of power attack and a +24 strength. nobody doesn't like that!!! But with this group I find that the character interactions are sooo much more important. Well, that and advancing the plot, which doesn't always involve slaughter.

I guess, though, the fact that everyone in our tabletop group are also really avid Theatre LARPers (including the GM) would likely contribute to the fact that we roleplay a lot in our tabletop sessions. hehe ^^

[Narf the Mouse]

True. On the other hand, I know of no other game that has four books full of monsters. And the default assumption throughout every book is that the default adventure is going out to squish those monsters.

[Khayankh]

NO!NO!NO!
<stops screaming, takes deep calming breaths>
D&D is not as hack&slash as other games. Maybe I'm just clueless, but I normally play comptuer games and D&D is far less violent than anything except for games like the Sims and Barbie in Corporate Fairyworld Twelve (or whateve the newest one's called...or that other game my little sister likes, Hello Kitty Happy Party Pals...I am amused by the rampant cuteness of Hello Kitty Happy Party Pals.) I have never played any other table-top game, and I don't know D&D all that well, but that is because I am young and inexperienced. D&D offers options other than 'kill stuff,' like Sleep and Charm Person and Diplomacy checks and Turning Undead and stuff. And unlike Hello Kitty Happy Party Pals, it also offers ways of killing stuff (instead of having the cruelest possible in-game action be not inviting someone to one of your parties. And in order to achieve high scores, you must invite EVERYONE to parties eventually. Sometimes I wish real life were more like Hello Kitty Happy Party Pals, and everyone was running around baking 'goodies' and giving them to everyone else...'if more people valued cheer and good food over gold and treasure, this would be a merrier world')
Sorry, I rambled a little, and kind of strayed off topic...there was a point in there somewhere...

[Xaq]

Well, sure, if you're comparing it to video games, but I think the point was that D&D is very combat heavy compared to other tabletop roleplaying games.

[Thunderhowl]

True. On the other hand, I know of no other game that has four books full of monsters. And the default assumption throughout every book is that the default adventure is going out to squish those monsters.

HackMaster.
Heh.

GURPS and Rifts/Palladium are also accused of being combat heavy as well. I prefer to think of 4+ books of foes to battle as sweet wonderous variety!

I mean really, who wants to kill generic mooks all the time? Boring!
Give me a Gelatinous Cube or a Hydra, or a Roper any day! Huzzah!

[Tom the Fanboy]

I wouldn't call GURPS combat heavy because it is Generic. It's not BUILT for any specific type of game.

Rifts is powergaming but there's lots you can do in the system. Heck, one of the biggest Experience bonuses come from AVOIDING unneccesary violence.

Hackmaster is of course the most combat heavey, but it actually a parody of D&D..... so....

D&D's experience system is based around Challenge Rating. The CR is usually that of the critter you kill, excuse me "defeat". There's only a couple of other things that they give you a CR for to calculate exp. Everything else is up to the DM. So system-wise it is actually built for combat (the fatbeards will recall its original design as a miniatures game). Sure you have plenty of options for thwarting monsters other than outright killing them but when you look at the monsters they're throwing out there you're not going to get many chance to use them.

[Narf the Mouse]

Hey, I never said it was a bad thing.

[JmcV]

d&d gives you a lot of ways to resolve combat...but if there's no combat, there's no d&d. there are tabletop games where you get XP for character development and interactions, and accomplishing missions where there was never any intention of killing something or being involved in "combat" and if combat does occur, you're more likely to be docked XP than awarded it. this is why d&d is usually referred to as a combat heavy game.

to be fair, combat heavy is not the same thing as hack and slash. if you've got a good crew, chances are you will resolve a lot of conflict through diplomacy, or charming spells, or attempts at seduction, stealth, deception, bluffing, etc. but the point is, if your bluff check fails, the guards will aggro you, and then you'll kill them and get the same XP as if you had successfully bluffed. getting xp for character development, plot resolution etc. is of course up to the GM, but there's nothing in the d&d rulebook that says such a thing HAS to be done, whereas there are systems where there are rules for plot or character based xp.