No, in general, it is always the case that solving a situation by avoiding combat gets you "less" of everything than engaging in combat, less XP, less loot, and even usually a "lesser" quest/story outcome. I personally think it should be the other way around, that finding a way to avoid combat should get the bigger return, but would be exceedingly happy to see the two approaches just being treated equivalently.
I'm definitely on board with this. Too many RPGs are way too combat-focussed for something that's supposed to be about role-playing, and I say that not only because I'm mostly rubbish at combat. There should certainly be more options to resolve most given quests than "kill it! Kill it to death!" and the rewards should ideally reflect aspects such as the appropriateness of a given approach (in terms of the quest itself, the nature of the PC, their relationship to the relevant NPCs, environment etc) and the effort spent on securing not just the best outcome but also the approach. Though that sounds potentially complicated I don't think it needs to be.
