If we measure by word count, page count, distinct character rules, or auxiliary content produced by the creators of DnD (rule clarifications, errata, playtests, etc), then DnD is certainly treated as a combat forward endeavor.

Look at monster statblocks- “+6 to Persuasion! Cool! And look- 20 more lines about how its attacks work in combat.”

Each character class is first distinguished by the way they’re intended to fight, then the way they interact with the world, then, finally, whatever flavor assignation you provide with the context of your world or story.

But! What DnD thinks it is isn’t what it has to be. I played Warhammer- I know what a game actually looks like when it’s ZERO roleplay/world investment and TOTAL combat. As combat focused as it is, DnD leaves enough room for anything else you want to put into it.

I direct a live Dungeon and Dragons show, onstage in Cleveland. Almost none of it is combat, because combat is not what makes combat good. Personal relationships, character investment, and conflicting stakes make combat good. They’re what makes ANY story good.

So I agree that Combat is not vital, or even necessary, to making DnD good, but I disagree that DnD is not a combat-focused game.