Apparantly, the suspense of the die roll to see whether each actor is too incompetent to hit the target in front of them is terribly exciting for DnD players.
Nice mischaracterisation. Implying that rolling dice is all DnD players are thrilled about. Never tried to understand the system itself?
Actually, I was simply parroting what some other DnD players have claimed on the Larian forums ( not you, clearly ) - that die rolls provide suspense, and that this is a good thing. I was being ironic/sarcastic, but I apologise if you felt slighted; it was an inadequate attempt at humour on my part.
DnD is a system for table top gaming where players interact with one another through the actions of the characters they are role playing. When one character interacts with another, whether it's played by a player or by the DM, the resolution has to be resolved by the dice, or it will descend into chaos. If interactions at the table aren't resolved by the dice, you'll more often than not get the following:
John says, "My barbarian slaps Peter's character in the face with the back of his hand and knocks out two of his teeth."
And Peter says, "No, your character missed and tripped over his chair and knocks out three of his teeth. And while he's on the ground, I step on his head and knock him out."
John says, "No, my barbarian is nimble and won't trip over a chair. He grabs that chair and smashes it over your head."
And so on. Each player will refuse to accept that events will play out as the other player says it. This is where the dice come in.
Things don't happen just because you wish it. Just because your fighter raised his sword to strike down a goblin doesn't mean the goblin would just stand there like a block of wood and take that blow. He'll dodge it, parry it with his sword, block it with his shield, or angle his body such that the blow is glanced off his armour. Your character doesn't get to strike the goblin simply because you wished it. Characters react to their surroundings. They aren't target dummies.
DnD players are just mature enough to understand that there are a lot of uncertainties in battle. You will never know how the altercation will end from the moment you raised your sword. So the players let the dice determine the outcome.
As I mentioned in a converstion flow above, I am old enough to have played the original game in the 1970s. Back then, it was genuinely different from the tabletop wargaming it grew out of, and in a way, exciting.
As a completely new concept, DnD was a mix of good and bad ideas. Other games like "Empire of the Petal Throne", or "Runequest" came up with alternative systems that also contained good and bad ideas; but it was a really niche and nerdy market at the time, so DnD with first-mover advantage has stayed the course best.
The DnD system has, over the years, managed to lose the illogical Thac0, and finally updated the magic system in 5e to something more sensible, but, unfortunately, it still has questionable representation of the very basic ideas of combat.
I assume players in the tabletop world still accept it ( although it was heavily criticised, even in the 1970s ), but the DnD notion that increasing armor weight makes you more difficult to hit while not mitigating damage at all, is highly abstract and lacks reason ( and I won't even get started on the notion of the "saving throw" in a computer game ).
When presenting that sort of DnD combat concept in a computer game, you are always likely to get a lot of people who dislike the illogical and random nature of abstract tabletop rules in a medium that can do a more convincing job.
Not that all computer games actually do provide good mechanics, of course, but the mechanics usually make more sense within the computer game medium. It's not even an argument that there should be no randomness, just that it should exist only where it makes sense, and that it is not actively visible where it doesn't need to be.
The basic difference is between players wanting a more fluid computer game, and those wanting a facsimile of the tabletop experience. You, I assume, want a facsimile of the tabletop expeience, but that seems a long way short of being a majority opinion.
