Combat vs RP

I like the concept of RP, but man do some groups struggle to pull it off. I also (don't lynch me) think that combat should be an RP experience. That could be my love for certain systems where you get bonuses for good, accurate descriptions and not simply, "I roll. I hit. I do X damage."
- I think the "I move and attack" stuff can get boring, especially if it's slow. Like, if the players are speedy about it then you're basically playing a board game, and that's fine. I start to lose patience when you get the "can i move here? oh i can only move 30 feet. what about here? oh that will provoke. maybe if i cast misty step? oh i can't cast two leveled spells in a round. Can I hide first? Oh that takes my action? Sorry I usually play rogue. Uhhh I guess I just shoot them." mode.
  I also kind of really want to spend more time in systems where the talky parts have rules, too. D&D tends to be just "wing it' and "DM decides". If you're at the noble's ball and try to make a big speech to convince the duke to flee before your army attacks, there's not really a lot of structure there. It can be fine to just "talk it out, man", but that runs into the problem where my character on paper has CHA 20 but me in real life rocks a solid 10 CHA. Or the other case, where the fighter with 8 CHA has a salesguy for a player, and he punches well above his on-paper skills using his real life personality, where I'm sidelined.
  Honestly, just removing all the social skills from D&D would normalize the system.
  But there's also games like Fate, that handle social conflict and sword conflict with the same rules. Stab someone? Roll fight vs whatever they defend with. Stab someone with your words? Roll Cruelty vs their Composure. In either case, if your dice come out on top enough then they don't get to go on.
  I think some peopel who want more RP would hate this, since it gamifies it. But I'd rather have it than the aforementioned "real life sales guy hogs the spotlight" problem.
  
  It can be fine to just "talk it out, man", but that runs into the problem where my character on paper has CHA 20 but me in real life rocks a solid 10 CHA. Or the other case, where the fighter with 8 CHA has a salesguy for a player, and he punches well above his on-paper skills using his real life personality, where I'm sidelined.
  There is another. I've found that being (imo) charasmatic, and being a charasmatic character, means DMs just talk to me, rather than ever asking for any rolls. Sure, my argument is convincing, but I still want to use my numbers!
  
  Fate is probably my favorite system I've played. It's somehow got this magic that lets people really jump into scenes and their characters that other more crunchy systems don't.
- combat should be an RP experience.
  I agree with you.
  The Three Pillars of Adventure: Combat, Exploration, Social Interaction.
  These are ALL "RP" and they should all be performed in-character and creatively.
- I also (don’t lynch me) think that combat should be an RP experience. That could be my love for certain systems where you get bonuses for good, accurate descriptions and not simply, “I roll. I hit. I do X damage.”
  Combat should be a RP experience regardless of system. What you're describing is one where proactive roleplay is a mechanical system, and I'll be honest, as someone who's never entertained a career in the theatre, or as a pompous grim fiction writer with too many thesauruses lying around, fuck that god awful fucking noise. But the choice of what to do, and how you react after the roll should be informed by the fiction of the game and the fiction of the combat, and that is roleplay.
  The fact that much of the discourse around the games and resources available to players is focused on min/maxing number munchers is a social problem, not a system one.
  
  Fair enough, but I think as long as you don't let it extend to where players are trying to do things that they shouldn't with their actions, encouraging them to describe their character flicking a sword around the opponent's shield strap is encouraging them to engage with the scenario in a different way than just seeing stat numbers listed on a square.
  I also think that the reactions in combat are exactly what you should be after. I love seeing a player take the 'nontactical' move that isn't what they designed it to do (so a rushing charger kill everything in one hit character taking a shielding action).
- Just to add to your point: I love the idea, however I lived with a group of Exalted players that took it way too far, so my group is still gunshy on doing too much combat description. So some people have seen the extremes of RP in combat, so they pull back.
- This for sure. Some of the best roleplay can happen in combat, and I honestly love both. DMs can encourage this by awarding inspiration for good RP and crafting combat scenarios that allow players to express their characters. Some examples: Do you KO or kill the baddies? Do you go stealthy or charge in? Are they honorable combatants or do they pursue victory at any cost?
  Even if the players often make these decisions without considering characterization, the DM can reconteztualize them as character beats instead of meta-level decisions. Also, the classic of having players describe their own crits or killing blows can use this method as well.

Combat can be fun, but DnD in particular reeaaally drags sometimes. An excellent DM helps, but even Dimension 20 takes a full session for a big combat encounter, which is usually just exhausting IMO. I much prefer systems like PBTA that keep combat pretty breezy and improv-friendly.
- It isn't just D&D. I've picked up Cyberpunk RED recently - combat is more streamlined, but it can still drag.
  
  Yeah fair, most of the more granular systems go that way. I know Pathfinder fights can take a minute as well.
  
  Isn't that the one where getting hit forces you to roll to not go into shock? I expected it to go fast and deadly.
- Most ttrpgs are a roleplaying game glued to a strategy game and we flip flop between the games as we play. PBTA is a roleplaying game end to end. I love it with a group that enjoys roleplaying and doesn't care for strategy.
- D&D 4e was unpopular but honestly I loved how streamlined it made combat. I wish they hadn’t entirely done away with it when making 5e.
- B/X is good. When characters have d6 hp and it's instant death at 0 the combat becomes way more serious and tense.

My favorite group I have ever DMd for was at a convention, it was 2am, and nobody had ever met before except the two couples in the mix of 9. I just ran part of a campaign I was working on for a different group.
I barely had to interact with them for RP stuff unless it was to drive the plot, or play a character they convinced to join them.
It was great seeing a large muscular guy dressed like a Dwarven blacksmith role play a halfling, and the smallest person there was playing as a half-orc barbarian from the plains of icewind dale.
And of course since it was a convention, and some of them had LARP gear with them, a friendly competitive sword fight broke out during a rest and instead of rolling, they just went ahead and used foam swords and stepped away from the tables. And borrowed dialogue from the princess bride.
Most groups definitely prefer combat, and to be honest so do I unless I'm running the game. Maybe I just haven't played with the right group or character, or more likely I just suck at it. Either way...
I think everyone has "that one group" they wish they could play with forever and never have scheduling conflicts...

I have the math kind of autism so I prefer combat
- Thank god, I'm not alone lol I also prefer combat

This made me miss srgrafo's stuff on reddit. He's the artist who made the original. https://srgrafo.com/ i really like reading the white rooms.
- Me too
- he was a perv and I'm glad he's dead

this is why you don't have to just "i hit for 3 damage"
motherfucker i roll between the bandit's legs and slash at their ankles with my tetanus daggers, barely missing the tendons but slicing moderately deep, and they feel the grit from the pockmarked blades salt their fresh wounds for 3 damage
this has the side effect of encouraging the DM to keep the turn # snappy lol
- Personally I find adding a lot of flavor that has no mechanical impact kind of distracting and tiresome in a different way. Like, sure, it sounds cool you slashed their ankles or whatever, but if it doesn't do anything I need to discard that. I can't, in most systems, then be like "ok he just got stabbed in the leg he's off balance. I can take advantage of that!". It's just noise.
  Some people have been like "You just don't have any imagination!" but it's not that. It's that the flavor stuff is often actively not true, and it's tiresome to hold two separate world states in mind at the same time. One where the fighter just stabbed the guy in the hand and threw sand in his eyes, and the other where he hit for 5 damage and his hand + eyes are fine.
  (Contrast Fate, which explicitly encourages you to be creative about the scene, and lets you mechanically benefit as well.)
  
  This is one thing I love about DCC (among several), that warriors can attempt a mighty deed along with their attack to get extra effects, like slashing their ankles, throwing sand in their eyes, swinging from a chandelier or anything else. Then the GM decides what effect it has. It makes warriors a lot more bad-ass than just whack whack whack.
  
  Exactly this. Well said. I don't understand why people love the long meaningless descriptions. Does FATE narrative always match the mechanics like PBTA does?

I've played a lot of different rpgs, and I've noticed that combat drags the most in games that care the most about tactical combat. Interestingly, the game I've played that dragged the least in combat was GURPS, despite each round lasting for 1 second of game time. I think this is because the tight time window on your turn means you get to do exactly one thing on your turn, and if you are doing something intensive like casting a spell you might be spending several turns doing nothing but the occasional step or defense roll. Contrastingly, Shadowrun 5e had a 2 second turn, and combat slowed to a fucking crawl whenever someone wanted to do something more complex than moving and hitting due to the amount of dice being rolled and decision fatigue; we even banned grenades at one point because the chunky salsa technique was just too tempting to exploit.
- I haven't played a lot of other RPGs, but GURPS is one of my faves - I didn't realize the turns went quickly compared to other systems!
  Shadowrun can drag though - I felt guilty as a rigger unleashing my drones, didn't realize when I set them up I'd be monopolizing combat time the way I did...
  
  Quick grain of salt: when I say combat in GURPS goes faster than other systems, I'm only comparing it to other games that focus on tactical combat. The fastest combat I've seen was in Trail of Cthulhu, which paid so little attention to combat rules that your combat turn can be summarized as "roll 1d6 and pray"
  
  Shadowrun is amazing and is one of the top systems I hate combat in. Agonizing combat.

Inverted for me, but same level of intensity.
- I just love throwing dice.
  
  Click clack go the math rocks.
  
  the fireball dice?

I love Classic Deadlands.
Oh my God does combat drag like hell. Everyone can have multiple actions each round, up to five, and everyone draws from the same deck except the gm, so if you have a lot of people, you are drawing like half the deck each turn so chance for that black joker goes up.
But the setting? The roleplay??? Where's the heart eyes emoji. That shit is my jam. I miss you, Jewish Blessed trying to track down a golem he made. You were a good character.

I love DnD roleplay, it tickles my brain very well

I DMed a lot of shadowrun, and I really do love both of them equally. RP makes the world fun and meaningful, while combat gives it physicality, makes it real.
I miss it, if only I could afford to spend 10 hours on prep every week :<
- I'll expand this and say encounters. Sneaking past a patrol, disarming a trap, or charming a suspicious cook having a break at the service entrance... Those encounters often require some rp, but damn if there aren't stakes.

Come play World of Darkness, where that's the main focus!
- Imo WoD I feel gets the right balance of RP and streamlined combat with optional additional rules if they are needed. I'm also generally a firm believer in combat means all other forms of diplomacy has failed. I also love that no matter how strong you are, everyone has 7 points of health they can take (but there are ways of getting around that especially for mages)
  And for all the good and bad that the 5e splats that Paradox is putting out, the "3 rounds and call it" philosophy of combat is something I enjoy immensely.

I just want the story to move forward.
Also, having a combat in 2 rolls build tension for when you can, in fact, avoid the combat.

People will say this and still only play Dungeon Combat Game 5e rather than 1 of a thousand systems designed for exactly the type of player they are lmao

It goes the other way around for daddy.

this is exactly why I switched to pbta systems. the combat is role play!