#Different playstyles

You virtually say that you and the GM in question do not want to play the same type of game. The answer, as with so many things, is to talk to them. But the topic should be how to get into the same style of game.

If the GM is playing a mostly tactical game and expects most of the drama and fun to come in handling tactical situations, then trying anything else is going to be at best unfun for him and probably won't work well. Remember, if he has spent a lot of time planning a battle, balancing it against the party, possibly custom making maps, he is going to be invested in seeing that battle happen and understandably reluctant to a non-combat resolution. There is nothing wrong with a mostly tactical game, as long as everyone agrees that is what they are playing.

You seem to want either a wide open sandbox or at least a game with very light rails enforced invisibly, and you seem to want most of the action to come outside of combat. This is a valid style of play (and one I prefer), but it requires a GM who is good at improvising (not everyone is) and willing to set aside any set pieces he may have spent a lot of time planning. Not all GMs are even capable of playing this way (at least not until they have practice doing it). Even ones that can, may not find it fun.

#Finding Middle Ground, or not

So, the answer, depending on relevant situations may actually be for you not to be in that game when he is GMing. It sounds like you want a very different style than the GM is providing. He is not providing you fun, but shifting to accomodate your style may very well ruin the style of fun he enjoys.

Less extreme than that, you could both consider shifting some towards the middle ground. He may agree to hide the rails better and be ready to hand you information, and go out of his way to make some of it useful for the upcoming battle. But he may ask you in exchange to focus your solution finding to creative ways to prepare for the combat rather than really avoiding the combat he has invested time in preparing.

For some examples of that, think about Wizards in D&D. They shine best when they are facing an enemy with particular strengths and weaknesses, and have had time to prepare for those in their spell list. You could be the one to learn the information about what they need to prepare for. The Witcher in that series is similar. He is a powerhouse if he loads up with the right potions and oils and traps...but needs to have an idea of what he is facing ahead of time to do that. A savy player could spend a fair bit of the game time researching the creatures to know what to prepare for (or looking that info up online). Your character could be like that, researching how to prepare and then doing the preparation. Batman is also like this.

Different playstyles

You virtually say that you and the GM in question do not want to play the same type of game. The answer, as with so many things, is to talk to them. But the topic should be how to get into the same style of game.

If the GM is playing a mostly tactical game and expects most of the drama and fun to come in handling tactical situations, then trying anything else is going to be at best unfun for him and probably won't work well. Remember, if he has spent a lot of time planning a battle, balancing it against the party, possibly custom making maps, he is going to be invested in seeing that battle happen and understandably reluctant to a non-combat resolution. There is nothing wrong with a mostly tactical game, as long as everyone agrees that is what they are playing.

You seem to want either a wide open sandbox or at least a game with very light rails enforced invisibly, and you seem to want most of the action to come outside of combat. This is a valid style of play (and one I prefer), but it requires a GM who is good at improvising (not everyone is) and willing to set aside any set pieces he may have spent a lot of time planning. Not all GMs are even capable of playing this way (at least not until they have practice doing it). Even ones that can, may not find it fun.

Finding Middle Ground, or not

So, the answer, depending on relevant situations may actually be for you not to be in that game when he is GMing. It sounds like you want a very different style than the GM is providing. He is not providing you fun, but shifting to accomodate your style may very well ruin the style of fun he enjoys.

Less extreme than that, you could both consider shifting some towards the middle ground. He may agree to hide the rails better and be ready to hand you information, and go out of his way to make some of it useful for the upcoming battle. But he may ask you in exchange to focus your solution finding to creative ways to prepare for the combat rather than really avoiding the combat he has invested time in preparing.

For some examples of that, think about Wizards in D&D. They shine best when they are facing an enemy with particular strengths and weaknesses, and have had time to prepare for those in their spell list. You could be the one to learn the information about what they need to prepare for. The Witcher in that series is similar. He is a powerhouse if he loads up with the right potions and oils and traps...but needs to have an idea of what he is facing ahead of time to do that. A savy player could spend a fair bit of the game time researching the creatures to know what to prepare for (or looking that info up online). Your character could be like that, researching how to prepare and then doing the preparation. Batman is also like this.

Different playstyles

You virtually say that you and the GM in question do not want to play the same type of game. The answer, as with so many things, is to talk to them. But the topic should be how to get into the same style of game.

If the GM is playing a mostly tactical game and expects most of the drama and fun to come in handling tactical situations, then trying anything else is going to be at best unfun for him and probably won't work well. Remember, if he has spent a lot of time planning a battle, balancing it against the party, possibly custom making maps, he is going to be invested in seeing that battle happen and understandably reluctant to a non-combat resolution. There is nothing wrong with a mostly tactical game, as long as everyone agrees that is what they are playing.

You seem to want either a wide open sandbox or at least a game with very light rails enforced invisibly, and you seem to want most of the action to come outside of combat. This is a valid style of play (and one I prefer), but it requires a GM who is good at improvising (not everyone is) and willing to set aside any set pieces he may have spent a lot of time planning. Not all GMs are even capable of playing this way (at least not until they have practice doing it). Even ones that can, may not find it fun.

Finding Middle Ground, or not

So, the answer, depending on relevant situations may actually be for you not to be in that game when he is GMing. It sounds like you want a very different style than the GM is providing. He is not providing you fun, but shifting to accomodate your style may very well ruin the style of fun he enjoys.

Less extreme than that, you could both consider shifting some towards the middle ground. He may agree to hide the rails better and be ready to hand you information, and go out of his way to make some of it useful for the upcoming battle. But he may ask you in exchange to focus your solution finding to creative ways to prepare for the combat rather than really avoiding the combat he has invested time in preparing.

For some examples of that, think about Wizards in D&D. They shine best when they are facing an enemy with particular strengths and weaknesses, and have had time to prepare for those in their spell list. You could be the one to learn the information about what they need to prepare for. The Witcher in that series is similar. He is a powerhouse if he loads up with the right potions and oils and traps...but needs to have an idea of what he is facing ahead of time to do that. A savy player could spend a fair bit of the game time researching the creatures to know what to prepare for (or looking that info up online). Your character could be like that, researching how to prepare and then doing the preparation. Batman is also like this.

#Different playstyles

You virtually say that you and the GM in question do not want to play the same type of game. The answer, as with so many things, is to talk to them. But the topic should be how to get into the same style of game.

If the GM is playing a mostly tactical game and expects most of the drama and fun to come in handling tactical situations, then trying anything else is going to be at best unfun for him and probably won't work well. Remember, if he has spent a lot of time planning a battle, balancing it against the party, possibly custom making maps, he is going to be invested in seeing that battle happen and understandably reluctant to a non-combat resolution. There is nothing wrong with a mostly tactical game, as long as everyone agrees that is what they are playing.

You seem to want either a wide open sandbox or at least a game with very light rails enforced invisibly, and you seem to want most of the action to come outside of combat. This is a valid style of play (and one I prefer), but it requires a GM who is good at improvising (not everyone is) and willing to set aside any set pieces he may have spent a lot of time planning. Not all GMs are even capable of playing this way (at least not until they have practice doing it). Even ones that can, may not find it fun.

#Finding Middle Ground, or not

So, the answer, depending on relevant situations may actually be for you not to be in that game when he is GMing. It sounds like you want a very different style than the GM is providing. He is not providing you fun, but shifting to accomodate your style may very well ruin the style of fun he enjoys.

Less extreme than that, you could both consider shifting some towards the middle ground. He may agree to hide the rails better and be ready to hand you information, and go out of his way to make some of it useful for the upcoming battle. But he may ask you in exchange to focus your solution finding to creative ways to prepare for the combat rather than really avoiding the combat he has invested time in preparing.

For some examples of that, think about Wizards in D&D. They shine best when they are facing an enemy with particular strengths and weaknesses, and have had time to prepare for those in their spell list. You could be the one to learn the information about what they need to prepare for. The Witcher in that series is similar. He is a powerhouse if he loads up with the right potions and oils and traps...but needs to have an idea of what he is facing ahead of time to do that. A savy player could spend a fair bit of the game time researching the creatures to know what to prepare for (or looking that info up online). Your character could be like that, researching how to prepare and then doing the preparation. Batman is also like this.