Long time lurker, infrequent poster. First, a little background. The entire group I play with, including myself, started playing dungeons and dragons with 4th edition. Since then we've played a little 3.5 and pathfinder, but 4e is definitely my favorite edition and will always be my first love. for someone like me, 4e IS dungeons and dragons. i am currently lukewarm on next at best, but am willing to wait to see a finished product before making a final judgement. anyway, onto the question in the thread: what is the point of quick combat? this isnt inflammatory, its just something i want to generate some discussion on. one of the qualities many people seem to like about next is the combat is much more quick and efficient - you can have 5, 10, or 15 minutes combats easily, and "there is more time for roleplaying." my question is, what is the point of these combats? i'd much rather handwave a fight versus three kobold nobodies instead of taking the time to roll initiative, have everyone make a few basic attacks, no one wants to blow daily powers in these fights, have a few misses draw it out into a 3 or 4 round combat, have the monsters do a few hp worth of damage and have nothing significant come out of the fight. i guess i want a fight to be worth actually picking up the dice for. granted, i do think 4e combats could be more streamlined... anytime somebody tried to interrupt another persons interrupt i let out a big sigh. so i totally get trying to make a 90 minute fight a 60 minute fight, or a 60 minute fight a 30 minute fight. but in some next playtests i have literally asked what is the point of making me roll those two basic attacks - i like my combats to require tactical thinking and power/feature selection. maybe it comes from playing an edition where characters dont have the sword of damocles hanging over their head during every fight (which seems like how some of the early editions are portrayed at early levels). thoughts/preferences?