Crunchy RPGs without combat?

[weckar]

I've been looking to play a rules-heavy game without any combat... and have not been able to find any. Do any even really exist? Any genre would be welcome.

[Airk]

I've been looking to play a rules-heavy game without any combat... and have not been able to find any. Do any even really exist? Any genre would be welcome.

There's almost no such thing as a "game without any combat" because most games that eschew "combat systems" do so by aggregating them into some sort of generic "conflict" structure. And even if they didn't, there could still technically be combat in that game, even if there are no rules for it.

If you are interested in a crunchy game with absolutely no FOCUS on combat, consider checking out Chuubo's Marvelous Wish-Granting Engine.

[weckar]

What I meant was; most 'crunchy' games are so only when it comes to combat, or have a heavy focus on it.
In the same vein many rpgs don't have rules for things like wealth because it does not matter, surely there is a game that has no rules for combat because it does not matter?

[Fri]

There might be a miscommunication here.

What do you mean by "Combat" ? Physical alteration? People punching each others? Because if so, there's tons of rpgs with no focus on it.

But here people usually mean "conflict mechanic" as combat. And usually, that's the point of crunch. For example, an rpg might not have much rules for swordfighting, but lots of rule for debate, which is "social combat." does this what you mean by combat?

Or somethinig else? What exactly the example of the "crunch" that you want? Just example, so maybe people here can think of something else i nthat line. Kingdom building? Trading?


But anyway, not sure if you think it as crunchy, but Ryuutama is more focused on travelling, ala oregon trail, than combat.

[NichG]

Nobilis is the closest I know. It has a bunch of rules for various god-powers, rituals, weird stuff, etc, but the combat rules are basically - everyone is immune to each-others god powers, but if you really gotta fight someone you'd better arrange for an entirely non-miraculous mortal nuke to hit them, get them to injure themselves to power their abilities, or convince their imperator to take back their souls. Almost none of which are there actually rules for.

Nobilis isn't all that crunchy though. Somewhere halfway between FATE and World of Darkness.

[Aran nu tasar]

Something like Monsterhearts, maybe? But I wouldn't say it is all that crunchy. And it has rules for physical fights, it just focuses on emotional rather than physical violence.

You might what to check out Burning Wheel, as well. I haven't played it or read through in any depth, but from what I've heard it has very crunchy social mechanics. It's also got combat, but you might be interested in taking a look at its noncombat mechanics.

[Tinkerer]

Might I suggest that you change your initial request to "a rules heavy game without a focus on combat"? It may help clear up some of the confusion.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Exalted 3e (and presumably previous editions as well) has probably the crunchiest noncombat stuff I've seen-- crafting, lore, socializing, investigating, and so on and so forth all get huge swathes of unique rules and special abilities. Of course, combat does too, but you could certainly play a game without the combat skills if you so desired.

[Mechalich]

In the same vein many rpgs don't have rules for things like wealth because it does not matter, surely there is a game that has no rules for combat because it does not matter?

It is difficult to imagine a game wherein killing someone - which is one of the many purposes behind having combat - does not matter. Even in games where characters are unlikely to stay dead for any significant period of time like Eclipse Phase there will be situations where hacking off the head of an enemy will retain utility. Additionally, because combat has the potential to have such overwhelmingly serious consequences, ie. death, it is one area where rules are essential to reduce the appearance of GM fiat.

So there will certainly be games without a combat focus or even games wherein the PCs themselves never engage in combat - in Eclipse Phase it is probably more efficient to buy sentry bots to fight for you than to build characters who fight - with a lot of crunch, but combat rules are like fire extinguishers, you always need them around even if you never use them.

[Fri]

Another example is in system like Fate, you can easily have a game with no physical alteration at all. For example, a phoenix wright style campaign, where you play as a lawyer and fight in court. But unless you want to be actual lawyer, most likely the game will be set around social combat, where the system can be focused around, where you try to deplete your enemy's will and social relationship instead of constitution. I mean, you could not use the Fate mechanic, and just make it purely investigative and real life debating, but then what's the point of using the system at all ? It's like playing DnD but replacing all the combat system with actual swordfight.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Exalted 3e (and presumably previous editions as well) has probably the crunchiest noncombat stuff I've seen-- crafting, lore, socializing, investigating, and so on and so forth all get huge swathes of unique rules and special abilities. Of course, combat does too, but you could certainly play a game without the combat skills if you so desired.

Honestly the combat in 2nd ed was so borked that if you focused the game heavily on non combat things would go nicely and there are a bunch of cool non combat stuffs.

[meschlum]

Animonde probably falls in the obscure RPG category too, but has as a major feature that fighting is actually painful and traumatic for those who initiate (and witness) it. The conceit is a world where metal and other industry resources are rare, so animal power is used instead - and people learned to enter symbiotic relationships with the local (weird) fauna. Plus, a smattering of psychic powers, relationship rules, and late 80s RPG mechanics means there is a fair amount of crunch.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Honestly the combat in 2nd ed was so borked that if you focused the game heavily on non combat things would go nicely and there are a bunch of cool non combat stuffs.

Wasn't the 2e noncombat stuff also totally borked?

[ZamielVanWeber]

Wasn't the 2e noncombat stuff also totally borked?

Totally? No. I made it work long after perfect defenses had made combat degrade into an utter mess. 2nd Ed Exalted is still the second most daunting RPG system I have ever run though.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Totally? No. I made it work long after perfect defenses had made combat degrade into an utter mess. 2nd Ed Exalted is still the second most daunting RPG system I have ever run though.

Not going to argue with that one. Heck, 3e Exalted is about a hundred times more playable then 2e, and I absolutely loved the one campaign I played in, and I'd still have no idea how to run a game with it properly.

[JeenLeen]

Would you be happy with a game that is crunchy overall, and just ignoring the combat part?

In that case, Exalted (as some others have said) could work. Riddle of Steel can also work. Both have extensive and crunchy combat rules, but if your table just ignores those (either by not having physical combat or by using some simple homebrew system ported in), you could keep the crunchy part for non-combat and possibly have what you want.

In either of those, I could see (not necessarily recommend, but see) reducing combat to a simple roll or two, using stats+skill as a modifier. Then use narrative or social rules to determine what happens based on the result of the combat (e.g., dead, just unconscious, imprisoned, got away but hurt). That way the points put into stuff like Strength or Melee still matter--which I think is important so you can't just put all your points into social stuff and thus dominate everything--but you save all the actual crunch for social and other actions.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Not going to argue with that one. Heck, 3e Exalted is about a hundred times more playable then 2e, and I absolutely loved the one campaign I played in, and I'd still have no idea how to run a game with it properly.

The winner for absolutely daunting running is Continuum. I briefly pondered checking to see if it would qualify here as the most important form of combat in Continuum is more investigative and cerebral than punchy (although it can get punchy if you want) but honestly that game is INSANE. I have known people who suffered actual headaches trying to play it and running it is worse. Brilliant system otherwise though.

[Airk]

It is difficult to imagine a game wherein killing someone - which is one of the many purposes behind having combat - does not matter. Even in games where characters are unlikely to stay dead for any significant period of time like Eclipse Phase there will be situations where hacking off the head of an enemy will retain utility. Additionally, because combat has the potential to have such overwhelmingly serious consequences, ie. death, it is one area where rules are essential to reduce the appearance of GM fiat.

Oh! This sort of thing reminded me of the game that is totally this.

Freemarket.

It's a game about a post scarcity economy. It's a game where killing someone REALLY F-ing doesn't matter because they just drop down into a new body.

[Psyren]

Might I suggest that you change your initial request to "a rules heavy game without a focus on combat"? It may help clear up some of the confusion.

I read the title and immediately got this ask from it, so I'm not sure what everyone's difficulty is.

Unfortunately, games without combat bore me to tears so I have no good suggestions.

[Tinkerer]

I read the title and immediately got this ask from it, so I'm not sure what everyone's difficulty is.

Unfortunately, games without combat bore me to tears so I have no good suggestions.

Oh I got it fine from the title, it was just the first post specifically says "without any combat" (emphasis mine) which muddied the waters.

I would agree on Exalted 3rd ed though, that series was one of the first to get me interested in adding crunch to non-combat effects. As much as it embarrasses me to say I haven't played GURPS in about 20 years but I seem to recall it being extremely crunchy on occasion (although quite easy to break as well sooo).

[ZamielVanWeber]

I would agree on Exalted 3rd ed though, that series was one of the first to get me interested in adding crunch to non-combat effects. As much as it embarrasses me to say I haven't played GURPS in about 20 years but I seem to recall it being extremely crunchy on occasion (although quite easy to break as well sooo).

GURPS is insanely crunchy up front and a lot of work but once the character is created it is smooth sailing.

[Airk]

GURPS is insanely crunchy up front and a lot of work but once the character is created it is smooth sailing.

Well, unless you get into combat and actually use the rules as written. 1 second rounds, yay.

[Jay R]

..., surely there is a game that has no rules for combat because it does not matter?

As a thought experiment, what would a game be like in which the difference between which your character succeeding and continuing onward, or your character dying, would not matter?

[NichG]

As a thought experiment, what would a game be like in which the difference between which your character succeeding and continuing onward, or your character dying, would not matter?

Presumably a game in which you are unlikely to get into a situation where your life is in danger in the normal course of play. For example, there's a game about highschool cliques fighting over prom dates.

If I were making a game about, say, being a captain of industry or robber baron during the industrial revolution, it might be enough to say about combat something like: 'cops beat bodyguards beat rabble beats you'. On the other hand, I would probably want to go into a lot of detail about ownership and company takeovers and investment and so on.

[weckar]

If I were making a game about, say, being a captain of industry or robber baron during the industrial revolution, it might be enough to say about combat something like: 'cops beat bodyguards beat rabble beats you'. On the other hand, I would probably want to go into a lot of detail about ownership and company takeovers and investment and so on.

Does that game exist? It sounds rather amazing.

[NichG]

Does that game exist? It sounds rather amazing.

Sorry, not that I'm aware of.

[Drascin]

On phone, so I'll be a bit brief.

Recommending Exalted to someone who doesn't want combat strikes me as... misguided. It sort of has rules for noncombat stuff, but "stab it" is basically still assumed to be the default conflict resolution method, and combat rules are still the larger chunk of crunch.

I will echo the recommendation for Chuubo's Wish Granting Engine. The game has *very* specific rules, but it does not give much of a **** about combat, to the point immortality is considered a relatively minor power because honestly in a game about interpersonal drama and school/college life being absolutely unkillable is mostly useful for things like commuting to school quickly and cheaply by shoooting yourself out of a steampunk cannon.

[Incorrect]

Use any system you feel are crunchy enough, and don't have combat..

You could do Pathfinders Kindom Builder rules, to have a campaign as rulers of a kingdom. You never engage in combat yourself, and it is up to the GM if any other countries declare war. There could be a focus on solving disputes and expanding influence. The rules for buildings, products, events and so on, are quite crunchy.

[Airk]

Use any system you feel are crunchy enough, and don't have combat..

You could do Pathfinders Kindom Builder rules, to have a campaign as rulers of a kingdom. You never engage in combat yourself, and it is up to the GM if any other countries declare war. There could be a focus on solving disputes and expanding influence. The rules for buildings, products, events and so on, are quite crunchy.

Dubious idea. You'll end up with books and books and books and books full of stuff irrelevant to you game.

In fact, come to that, I would say that if you're not using ANY of the combat stuff, Pathfinder no longer qualifies as a crunchy game, because you're not using any of the crunchy bits, and all you're left with is "Roll a d20 and add modifiers for your skill check." :P

[noob]

Dubious idea. You'll end up with books and books and books and books full of stuff irrelevant to you game.

In fact, come to that, I would say that if you're not using ANY of the combat stuff, Pathfinder no longer qualifies as a crunchy game, because you're not using any of the crunchy bits, and all you're left with is "Roll a d20 and add modifiers for your skill check." :P

Pathfinder is still crunchy:now you do not fight but your wizard is making tons of wizard simulacrums for making a city for getting rich and then starts tracking tons of resources and making excel spreadsheets of the jobs of his simulacrums (such as the creation of magical items) and of the gold he have available and of his stocks of wares and of his insane contrived template stacked constructs that can fly through space and cast like level 9999 wizards and splits into two copies each time it takes damage(which he inflicts to other copies of himself through being a swarm thus creating an infinity of them in one turn).
And then he keeps looking through monster manuals for abilities that are awesome out of battle and abuse them through constructs.
Oh and all the wizard simulacrums he does not use for creating magic items have their prepared spell slots to manage and he have to track all the spells available to each of them.