Does Adventure Have To Involve Combat
I have recently been rereading The Hobbit and was struck by the way problem are solved as much with violence as they are with quick thinking, compassion, and riddles. There is also a fair share of fighting, Bilbo practically slays a whole colony of spiders on his own, but that isn't the only solution. Now I like a good fight scene but I think we fall back on them because they are easier to write. I have also read Piranesi recently and find this even more intriguing, because there is only one fight, if you could call it that, and the perspective character actively avoids it.
So, how do we write something engaging without violence? Both The Hobbit and Piranesi share one thing and that is intriguing worldbuilding. There are few moments in either book where I am not interested in the world. With Piranesi I was amazed by the vastness and how Susanna Clarke managed to make the halls seem so big, but also so unique. Similarly The Hobbit also has a big world, but Tolkien fills it with many small a varied encounters keeping the reader guessing and intrigued. Clarke, on the other hand, keeps our interest in the world by sharing the perspective character's knowledge of the world and how to survive in it with the reader.
Yet I don't think either of these worlds would be near as interesting or entertaining without their stories. I imagine a catalogue of each of the hall of the House from Piranesi would be a rather dry read, although may still be interesting in the perspective character's voice. I know people read the lorebooks for Tolkien, but the true works that everyone knows are The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. These are the masterpieces of fiction and without them people would care far less for this lore. So I think we can safely say, the world alone is not what makes a story interesting, but it will certainly help.
So what else do these books have?