Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 5520313" data-attributes="member: 43283">Broadly speaking, you're going to have to look outside of D&D and the usual suspects at the game store to find it. You look to the small press/indy games, and you look to people that are coring out chunks of their favorite rpg and replacing the system.The thing is, you're also not going to generally find those people here. Or even at rpg.net.And the reason is quite simple: their anomalies. 30 years of rpgs and 80%+ of gamers refuse to put down their dice and do some sort of dice-less rpg.RPGs are primarily designed and sold to one group of people: rpg players. There's hardly anything out there really geared to bringing new people into the hobby. Instead, the industry pumps out material to cater to the already existing market and basically hopes that their customers will bring in (recruit) more customers.Want some strategic combat in your rpg? Try rock-paper-scissors. Or "Attack - throw - Block/Dodge". For example the rules from "Yomi" a card fighting game. Here's the rules:<a href="http://www.sirlin.net/yomi/rules" target="_blank">http://www.sirlin.net/yomi/rules</a>Here's more about the card game:<a href="http://www.sirlingames.com/collections/yomi" target="_blank">Sirlin Games - Yomi</a>Does it look like D&D? Nope. Could you use this for an rpg combat system? Yup.Honestly, the title of this thread kind of annoys me. "People hate on longer battle times in strategic RPG's" please... this is the _staple_ of the rpg industry. What's the number one rpg? D&D. And what is it? An rpg with a strong focus on miniature/tactical combat. I've got news for you: you're already getting what you want and it's not likely to change against you.The complaint strikes me as being kinda like a rich person saying, "I'm tired of people hating on me for being rich; having all this money is really a problem".People that want shorter combats? They have to modify the rules. People that want things "simpler"? They have to modify the rules. People that want to modify the rules? They have to convince people to accept "houserules" and not play "Rules As Written".This would have been a much more positive question to ask without the antagonistic title.I'd love to provide an answer, but I'm not really sure how to answer your question. You're basically talking about D&D, but saying "strategic rpgs"; you seem to have already made the assumption that the only interesting thing about strategy in rpgs is combat (which is not the same as conflict), but then you comment about the lack of evolution in adventure design (which is really rooted in competative tournament D&D games).Could you sort of break this down better for me? Maybe I'm just stupid today, but you seem to have some things all sorta mixed willy-nilly and it's hard for me to parse them in light of your aggressive post title.</blockquote>

Verification