How would you do a campaign without combat?

By playing a system that has emphasis in non-combat interactions. D&D is definitely not one of them.

Throw them into the Tomb of Horrors. OK, there's combat at the end after a long slog of misery and numerous mean and unfair deaths.

In my experience combat only occurs when the players refuse to lose a conflict. Or you have a demon bear attack them, but that's up to you.

so, run tomb of horrors, replace the lich fight with a chest containing a note that says "the real treasure is the bonds of friendship you have forged with your companions"

This. There's combat in my WoD campaign maybe every five sessions and I continually chastise myself for letting it get that out of hand.

This is mean enough to be in-character for Acerak.

Fighting him is entirely optional, since the skull only reacts if someone's stupid enough to touch it.

Where did you find players willing to play anything with little or no combat? I've tried a couple of times with different players and it never goes well.

A mystery?

Just look Law & Order. There are fucktons of episodes with no fighting.

1) You gotta know the group and have them be down for it.

2) You gotta make sure there is interesting stuff for them to do (and the system allows for them to do that stuff easily)

...

Alternatively, play a system like 5E where the encounters wind up taking so long that the players prefer not fighting. I like running it still but it's a pretty glaring flaw.

It has jewels all over it, not touching it would be stupid.

>5th grade

Dogs in the vineyard

I gm a campaign thats over two years long. It has one combat about every 2-3 sessions. Most of the time these combats are just one person being ambushed and quickly taken care of or something like that.

When avoiding combat is a thing chases become a thing because someone is always running away.

>be me
>be adventurer
>finally made it to the end of the tomb of horrors
>should have just turned the fuck around when we figured out the entrance
>seriously, what the fuck.
>Now Alia, Bjorn and Vicelianuouscankder are all dead
>I'm the only one who made it
>the treasure better be fucking worth it
>open up chest
>see note
>try not to cry

Fifth and Fourth Graders love fighting. Though that might just be my experience, and with all the asbestos and adderall, I can't say it was entirely well adjusted.

>5e
>system where 5-8 encounters between long rests is the standard
good joke senpai.

Interesting roleplay, chase scenes, exploration, political intrigue, solving mysteries, puzzles, stealth.

Plenty of movies, books and video games get by without solving every conflict with violence. Take notes from them.

By playing as pedobait characters in rural Japan

Jewels in the Tomb of Horrors have, at that point, brought nothing but bad things upon the party, as well as anything else they've gotten their grubby little hands on. Touching anything at that point would be stupid.

I'd probably start up some Shadowrun

The players will never want to do combat once they slog through it

Exalted. 2E's combat was so bad, there was usually a strong incentive to avoid it. Also, PC Solars generally trounce mortals, so you can actually go "Okay, the Dawn caste kills everyone. What now."

What are you fucking smoking? WOD is combat-full. Ok, it has combat 99% of the time, but I guess 1% of the time MAID is a serious game.
Even the more investigative scenarioes feature a very real possibility of ghost being a little more than pranksters.

A rule of thumb is that if the fighting is a third (or more) of the lenght of the rules proper, the game is well, about fighting.

On the other hand there are tons of game that are either without fighting completely (Kagematsu) or that have "fighting" as simply another conflict resolution, without granularity in the rules that underline the centrality of that type of conflict.

Mouse Guard is the shit yo. Check it out.

The 17' fall off the tree never forget, the absolute madman nearly got to the tree top.

This is true
>Playing 5e
>Everything when it comes to rules is utter fucking crap

>Mouse Guard

>no combat

yeah, DitV is designed so that things escalate to violence, instead of going there immediately.

>ctrl+f 'MonsterHeats'
>only one result
If you want a game around social drama it's one of the best choices, I'd recommend giving it a go (if nothing else your GM will probably learn a thing or two about creating character drama)

It's called Cthulhu and all you do is run away.

You can avoid combat if you want mate. Territory politics instead of territory battle. Unless you're a shit dm who can only use combat as a means of progression.

Yeah, no.

Read the fucking comics.

Dudes of Legends supplement was written specifically to make fun of you and your retarded "superheroes with fangs" playstyle.

It's not retarded: it's how the game is meant to be. If they didn't want combat to be the focus, half of the adventures AT LEAST wouldn't feature combat, neither the game would have that emphasis on combat.

Unless they are retarded, which is pretty much totally possible and even plausible. I mean, it's supposedly a game about muh ethical choices, but Morality is what it is.

I'd suggest using Undying.

>any real WOD game
>what is Werewolf
>what is Hunter

Not that Vampire and Mage are exactly violence-free either

The characters are scholars, artists, travelers, philosophers, priests, and so on.

You gain experience by gaining life experience and accomplishing goals related to your character's profession and life goals such as writing a book or converting others. The plot hook is that there's a wonderful festival that everyone goes to across the country.

>

So basically the party is Henry in Otoyomegatari.

I'd play that.