What TTRPGs Excel At Not Having Combat?

[TwoSix]

WFRP is famous for being a game where folks will do anything to avoid getting in a fight. All the reasons I gave above explain why the game is very rich and detailed away from combat. The fact that it also does combat very well is kinda irrelevant.

“I want a system that doesn’t have combat” and “this system does have combat but you can ignore it” are two different things.

 

[TheSword]

“I want a system that doesn’t have combat” and “this system does have combat but you can ignore it” are two different things.

With all due respect that isn’t what was asked…

I thought I would ask about games that don't rely on action, especially combat, to be compelling.

Whether it is romance, mystery, horror, politics or just slice of life, what games do you think excel at being engaging and compelling in play without being focused on action adventure or combat?

Reynard is of course free to change his mind but he asked for dramatic decision based RPGs that didn’t rely on action or combat and I gave him one that is famous for it.

 

[zarionofarabel]

With all due respect that isn’t what was asked…

Reynard is of course free to change his mind but he asked for dramatic decision based RPGs that didn’t rely on action or combat and I gave him one that is famous for it.

Yeah, it seems the parameters changed.

That's why I gave the suggestion that I did about how any system that has a halfway decently robust non-combat skill system can very easily be used to run long term engaging campaigns. As long as the GM is presenting conflicts that are not combat oriented. I also gave few examples of systems that have rules for combat, that like the WFRP example, are known for producing games that are not combat oriented. If the OP only wants games that have NO RULES for combat that should have been included in OP.

 

[TheSword]

Yeah, it seems the parameters changed.

That's why I gave the suggestion that I did about how any system that has a halfway decently robust non-combat skill system can very easily be used to run long term engaging campaigns. As long as the GM is presenting conflicts that are not combat oriented. I also gave few examples of systems that have rules for combat, that like the WFRP example, are known for producing games that are not combat oriented. If the OP only wants games that have NO RULES for combat that should have been included in OP.

I mean even on page 6 of posts he said…

I think he wants a game that doesn't have combat at all, and if it exists, it is a quickly resolved non-tactical experience.

So even the existence of combat wasn’t discounted provided it was quick and non-tactical. Presumably decision based.

 

[jian]

I think it depends what you mean, and the elements are setting and system.

If the setting and campaign style (such as games based on TV dramas or Regency romances) are such that people don’t get into fights, then you won’t get into fights - but if there aren’t mechanics to do other things, then you’ll just have sessions without dice rolling. Which is absolutely fine, but you can do this with literally any game system. You could technically run a Jane Austen game with D&D 4E and while it’s fun to work out what Elizabeth Bennet’s race and class might be (dwarf bard, for my money) you’ll never actually use the rules.

If you want to run a setting where combat comes up rarely then it might be helpful to have rules for non-combat things. The best game here for my money is some version of Cortex Dramatic, such as Smallville, where it’s very easy to run non-combat conflicts (such as arguments or intrigue) in the system. Another one would be Prime Time Adventures, if anyone still remembers that.

 

[zarionofarabel]

If you really wanted you could play a 5e game without any combat. It does have a skill list that is comprised of only non-combat skills. While not a very robust list, there are 18 skills, which is 6 more than the average YZE game. Just because a game has rules for combat doesn't mean those rules need to be engaged to run a campaign. Perhaps the onus for whether or not a successful non-combat campaign can be had lies more with the players and GM than the system being used.

Also, the answer is Burning Wheel, cause the "tactical" combat engine is complicated, and the system includes an option to resolve combat with a single roll.

 

[TheSword]

A bit more detail on Power Behind the Throne…

In the April 1990 edition of Dragon(Issue 156), Ken Rolston called this "an exceptional example of the diplomatic style of fantasy role-play gaming (a style singularly suited for sophisticated urban adventuring) with complex plotting, impenetrable intrigues, and cleverly drawn NPC characterizations."

Just so you know it isn’t just me making it up.

Worth also remembering that I’m also recommending it, not only because it fits the original brief but because I think Reynard would enjoy running it and his friend would enjoy playing it. It’s not a murder mystery and it’s definitely not a romance.

If nothing else no doubt this adventure could be converted to any number of different systems. So worth folks who are looking for non-combat pre-written adventures checking out.

 

[zarionofarabel]

The best game here for my money is some version of Cortex Dramatic, such as Smallville, where it’s very easy to run non-combat conflicts (such as arguments or intrigue) in the system.

Oh yeah! Totally forgot about Smallville, that's a great suggestion!

 

[Parmandur]

Unfortunately, it dies seem the better Cortex implementations are out of print, if I am not mistaken.

I know Cortex had been bought by D&D Beyond, or rather Fandom, before WotC bought them out. Whatever happened to the ownership there?

 

[Kannik]

I know Cortex had been bought by D&D Beyond, or rather Fandom, before WotC bought them out. Whatever happened to the ownership there?

It was then bought by Direwolf who have done very little with it, unfortunately (understatement). So it's kind of in limbo insofar as new material or official games built with it other than Tales of Xadia. :/