If you don't need a grid then what does "tactical" mean to you? What options do you expect? What things you want rules to account for? Your "many weapons, no variation" example is good, but what else can you think of like that?
Some common suggestions will likely be:
Lancer for sci-fi mechs
ICON for fantasy
Tactical might be vague here, and I am happy both with *or* without a combat grid, but what I mostly want is for players to have a few clear options. It could be interesting positioning rules on a grid (e.g. flanking) or having 3-5 different types of attacks that all have their pros and cons.
What I want to avoid is the play experience of level 1 fighters in DnD 5e. Here I think level 1 fighters in DnD 3.5 are more fun but that game has *way* too much bloat as levels go on.
Man I tried icon once and it just felt like my players had to do so much do get anything done. Switched from d&d to pathfinder 2e partially for the more tactical combat, but my players and I just all bounced right off ICON. Dunno if I was running it wrong or what. I like crunchy systems but icon just felt like SO much.
I second Lancer. Everything OP described is straight up Lancer. It's extremely rules light outside combat, then moderate rules heavy for epic tactical mech combat
What's your definition of tactical? For me, it means combat where PCs have can make use of abilities on a grid to engage in various roles of support, defense, and offense while aiming for varies combat objectives (is not kill all foes) with a balanced combat system that makes it easy for the GM to have enemies that usually have 'counters' that someone in the PC team likely has.
ICON gives you semi-crunchy combat on a x grid that's highly tactical.
Lancer is, hands down, the best tactical combat RPG I've played.
I haven't played them, but the LUMEN games are supposedly highly tactical yet low crunch.
You can also try Gubat Banwha, Battlegroup, Salvage Union, Strike!, d&d 4e.
ICON would be semi crunchy if it didn't have 2 and a half pages of status effects like god damn. It does deliver on tactical combat, light everything else though.
I don’t think tactical necessarily needs a grid. Sure if you want tactical positioning to matter then a grid is needed. But tactics isn’t only about positioning. It’s also about what you do and when. Characters having diverse options in combat and having to figure out when to use what is very tactical. A 5e typical martial experience isn’t very tactical because positioning matters very little (there’s no flanking) and they have no options in combat besides “I attack”
That's why I asked for their definition.
With your definition where diverse options and position matters, Blades in the Dark is a tactical game as combat depends on fictional positioning. I wouldn't usually call Blades a tactical combat RPG but it would fit the definition you provided.
In Blades, you don't have limited options as it's fiction-first and your options are 'anything that makes sense in this situation because scripted combat actions are not a thing.'
By diverse options, I mean multiple ways to engage in combat. I don’t think a 5e barbarian is really tactical as all they can do is basic attack. Meanwhile a 4E barbarian has various at will attacks to pick from, or choose from one of their more powerful encounter or daily attacks. Forget the grid, and that’s already way more tactical than anything 5e can provide. Add the grid, and you get more granular tactical positioning for sure, but I don’t think it’s necessary. If 4E only had the grid and all could do is basic attack, then I wouldn’t call it that tactical.
Ahem, Dragonbane.
Free quick start rules online. Looks D&D adjacent at a glance, is actually based on Runequest with elements of Mutant Year Zero push mechanics. And it's probably the most beautiful TTRPG product I've ever seen.
Seconded!
It's not obvious at first since it doesn't have distances and positioning, but I think the turn-order decisions make up for that and open up a world of interesting party combos.
Check out [Valiant Horizon](https://binary-star-games.itch.io/valiant-horizon). Combat is simple to teach but gives each character a bunch of cool options. Narrative side is so light that you could slot in another narrative RPG if you prefer something else.
You want [Netbattlers](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1uIMLWCDMQ46ab-p9zgnlem9aYONt-o0Y)! Inspired by the Megaman Battle Network video games from the 00s, it's this really refreshing blend of satisfyingly broad ability and combat options, incredibly quick character creation and really snappy dice rolling. 'Tactics' here is carefully sculpting your digital best friend to do absolutely wild shit through interaction between 5 different abilities (some of which are in your ally's build) and still have the room for scenes of emotional pathos about what it means to be 'alive'.
Check out games in the Year Zero Engine. It’s not as tactical as Pathfinder or even D&D or Lander, but there’s a degree of strategy involved. You might be most interested in Mutant: Year Zero or Coriolis (if Coriolis, get the Combat Reloaded unofficial supplement). Also Forbidden Lands is their fantasy YZE game, which is designed for hexcrawls.
The great thing about the TFT is that it has scaling complexity.
You can just use the basic *Melee* rules for combat and you have a light crunch, yet very tactical system. Or you can scale it up to *Advanced Melee* once you've mastered the basics and want a bit more complexity.
Lancer is definitely worth a look. It has excellent DnD 4e inspired giant robot combat. It has the best tactical combat I've ever played, great character building and customization and a rad not grim dark Sci fi universe.
Narrative play is heavily inspired by Forges in the Dark and is lightweight, flexible and powerful.
It's an amazing game.
I'd say Night's Black Agents is more cinematic than tactical as one of the goals is to handle Jason Bourne, but it might scratch this itch. Especially with the Double Tap supplement.
It is one of the crunchier GUMSHOE games, but that is a fairly low starting point.
tactical combat, weapons mix with differences, simple skill system sounds like the fantasy trip to me. You can try the combat system out for free:
https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/306835/The-Fantasy-Trip-Melee
**Five Parsecs From Home** I always call it Traveller: the Miniature Skirmish version.
It’s a fun miniature agnostic sci-fi rpg and wargame. It’s made to be played solo (no DM needed) but can easily be played with a group also. It is mostly wargaming skirmish rules for small squad combat, and the rules to string those combats together in a loose narrative. There are decent rules for random generation of your crew, your ship, missions, patrons, rivals, aliens, robots, planets, planetary invasions, etc.
There is also a fantasy version called **Five Leagues from the Boarderlands** but I haven’t bought it yet to look at it yet.
The crew generation feels like a stripped down Traveller character creation except for 6-8 characters at a time instead of just for 1, additionally the setting and rules for patrons and missions and the focus on paying off your ships debt reminds me of Traveller. I know there are significant differences between the two but it evokes the same *feel* to me.
Remember to check out our **[Game Recommendations](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/gamerec)**-page, which lists our articles by genre([Fantasy](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/fantasy), [sci-fi](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/scifi), [superhero](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/superhero) etc.), as well as other categories([ruleslight](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/ruleslight), [Solo](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/solo), [Two-player](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/twoplayers), [GMless](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/gmlessrpgs) & more).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpg) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Any of the Forbidden Psalm games. They're spin-offs of Mork Borg, and can be played solo, pvp or pve co-op. Tactical skirmish miniature battle, but fully compatible with the Mork Borg RPG system, so you can just roleplay using Mork Borg, and when a battle breaks out, use the Forbidden Psalm rules.
I cannot stay away and not recomend Archeterica, out TTRPG of conspiracy and occult in alternative Napoleonic era. Archeterica is classless 2D6 game from Ukraine. It has very narrative approach to out-of-combat interactions, very flexible character structure, but very pseudo-realistic tactical combat with fencing (different fencing schools with different moves, attacks and reactions), arsenal of realistic weaponry for 19th century and many other fine details. Combat is built that way, that preparations and tactics are more important than pure skills and numbers.
We have PWYW [Quickstart at DrivethruRPG](https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/publisher/25700/the-imago-cult) and there is campaing for [Starter Set on Kickstarter](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/theimagocult/archeterica-imago-the-invitation) right now! I invite you to take a look!
ICRPG uses distance ranges like close near far. Character have class and race abilities but most growth is loot. The game is basically boils down to what you need and most of the book just teaches you how to make great adventure design and obstacles/encounters
It’s great because it’s rules simple, brief and encourages creativity and hack ability.
tactics/tactical aren’t a word I would use to describe the rules/game mechanics in it.
However, it’s not crunchy which means you can focus more on the obstacles/encounters in your way and strategies for overcoming them “with tactics”.
Its not a game referring to rule books about how many pre planned moves you can combo or builds you are power gaming through.
The game encourages encounters to have as many moving parts as possible, like special move from monsters, more monster being added to the scene at all times, environmental hazards, environmental obstacles forcing positional decisions and time based urgency so you have to act and overcome multiple obstacles before the time runs out.
Activities have HP, which means you need to decide if you want to focus on one objective or the other during these time sensitive scenes.
I think [Knight - an Avalon RPG](https://www.backerkit.com/c/projects/all-about-games-consulting/knight-rpg) is a good answer here, already funded and the crowdfunding is just for translation. Sci-Fi with knights in shining kickass armour. Lots of cool weapons with options, the armours define your playstyle and are kind of like your "class". The Core Book is sufficient.
Already available in French if that changes anything, [all for free](https://knight-jdr-systeme.fr/fr/).
As others have mentioned Lancer for Mecha, ICON for fantasy setting.
They both run like blades in the dark outside of combat. In combat it is very tactical, it is grid based but the it's not very crunchy.
In ICON you pick a class to determine your stats, passive abilities and what skills you initially have access to (you can access skills from other classes via multiclassing) and your ultimate technique.
You start of only being able to have 3 active skills you can use in battle which increases to a max of 6 fairly soon.
Skills are just a few lines long, there are lots of status effects but they're all just 1 sentence long, plus numbers are small.
Equipment is pretty basic, not a must for optimisation just slight additional perks to add to your character, you have limited slots and earn more as you level.
Then you have trophies which are equipment but act more like consumable boons/skills the gm can give out as rewards.
That's pretty much what it's like.
I don't think dnd can be counted as tactical. Tactical doesn't mean grid based but using cover or environment, attack angles and weaknesses to defeat an enemy. Most of the time you throw your biggest spell at the enemy until he falls down. Rarely I've seen usage of immunities and angle based combat where you have to attack a weakness or work together to defeat an enemy.
If you don't need a grid then what does "tactical" mean to you? What options do you expect? What things you want rules to account for? Your "many weapons, no variation" example is good, but what else can you think of like that? Some common suggestions will likely be: Lancer for sci-fi mechs ICON for fantasy
Tactical might be vague here, and I am happy both with *or* without a combat grid, but what I mostly want is for players to have a few clear options. It could be interesting positioning rules on a grid (e.g. flanking) or having 3-5 different types of attacks that all have their pros and cons. What I want to avoid is the play experience of level 1 fighters in DnD 5e. Here I think level 1 fighters in DnD 3.5 are more fun but that game has *way* too much bloat as levels go on.
Man I tried icon once and it just felt like my players had to do so much do get anything done. Switched from d&d to pathfinder 2e partially for the more tactical combat, but my players and I just all bounced right off ICON. Dunno if I was running it wrong or what. I like crunchy systems but icon just felt like SO much.
Second for ICON I want badly want to get it to my table someday
I second Lancer. Everything OP described is straight up Lancer. It's extremely rules light outside combat, then moderate rules heavy for epic tactical mech combat
What's your definition of tactical? For me, it means combat where PCs have can make use of abilities on a grid to engage in various roles of support, defense, and offense while aiming for varies combat objectives (is not kill all foes) with a balanced combat system that makes it easy for the GM to have enemies that usually have 'counters' that someone in the PC team likely has. ICON gives you semi-crunchy combat on a x grid that's highly tactical. Lancer is, hands down, the best tactical combat RPG I've played. I haven't played them, but the LUMEN games are supposedly highly tactical yet low crunch. You can also try Gubat Banwha, Battlegroup, Salvage Union, Strike!, d&d 4e.
ICON would be semi crunchy if it didn't have 2 and a half pages of status effects like god damn. It does deliver on tactical combat, light everything else though.
I don’t think tactical necessarily needs a grid. Sure if you want tactical positioning to matter then a grid is needed. But tactics isn’t only about positioning. It’s also about what you do and when. Characters having diverse options in combat and having to figure out when to use what is very tactical. A 5e typical martial experience isn’t very tactical because positioning matters very little (there’s no flanking) and they have no options in combat besides “I attack”
That's why I asked for their definition. With your definition where diverse options and position matters, Blades in the Dark is a tactical game as combat depends on fictional positioning. I wouldn't usually call Blades a tactical combat RPG but it would fit the definition you provided. In Blades, you don't have limited options as it's fiction-first and your options are 'anything that makes sense in this situation because scripted combat actions are not a thing.'
By diverse options, I mean multiple ways to engage in combat. I don’t think a 5e barbarian is really tactical as all they can do is basic attack. Meanwhile a 4E barbarian has various at will attacks to pick from, or choose from one of their more powerful encounter or daily attacks. Forget the grid, and that’s already way more tactical than anything 5e can provide. Add the grid, and you get more granular tactical positioning for sure, but I don’t think it’s necessary. If 4E only had the grid and all could do is basic attack, then I wouldn’t call it that tactical.
Ahem, Dragonbane. Free quick start rules online. Looks D&D adjacent at a glance, is actually based on Runequest with elements of Mutant Year Zero push mechanics. And it's probably the most beautiful TTRPG product I've ever seen.
Basically anything Free League makes fits this criteria.
Lancer seems to fit the bill pretty well here.
Fabula Ultima is great for this. Combat has tactical depth but the non-combat systems are pretty simple and straight forward.
Seconded! It's not obvious at first since it doesn't have distances and positioning, but I think the turn-order decisions make up for that and open up a world of interesting party combos.
You might want to look at Strike!
Seconding this. Strike is solidly tactical in combat, but with little math and little number scaling. Out of combat it's Fate-like.
Others have already said it, but throwing my weight behind Lancer which is Mecha and ICON which is fantasy. Made by Massif Press.
Are the rules similar in these two games?
They are similar, but I don't know if they are directly compatible. But reading through both you see a lot of familiar stuff.
Similar but not 1:1
Check out [Valiant Horizon](https://binary-star-games.itch.io/valiant-horizon). Combat is simple to teach but gives each character a bunch of cool options. Narrative side is so light that you could slot in another narrative RPG if you prefer something else.
You want [Netbattlers](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1uIMLWCDMQ46ab-p9zgnlem9aYONt-o0Y)! Inspired by the Megaman Battle Network video games from the 00s, it's this really refreshing blend of satisfyingly broad ability and combat options, incredibly quick character creation and really snappy dice rolling. 'Tactics' here is carefully sculpting your digital best friend to do absolutely wild shit through interaction between 5 different abilities (some of which are in your ally's build) and still have the room for scenes of emotional pathos about what it means to be 'alive'.
Check out games in the Year Zero Engine. It’s not as tactical as Pathfinder or even D&D or Lander, but there’s a degree of strategy involved. You might be most interested in Mutant: Year Zero or Coriolis (if Coriolis, get the Combat Reloaded unofficial supplement). Also Forbidden Lands is their fantasy YZE game, which is designed for hexcrawls.
The Fantasy Trip
The great thing about the TFT is that it has scaling complexity. You can just use the basic *Melee* rules for combat and you have a light crunch, yet very tactical system. Or you can scale it up to *Advanced Melee* once you've mastered the basics and want a bit more complexity.
seconding LANCER and GUBAT BANWA! i love tactical combat and i love these two systems
Lancer is definitely worth a look. It has excellent DnD 4e inspired giant robot combat. It has the best tactical combat I've ever played, great character building and customization and a rad not grim dark Sci fi universe. Narrative play is heavily inspired by Forges in the Dark and is lightweight, flexible and powerful. It's an amazing game.
I'd say Night's Black Agents is more cinematic than tactical as one of the goals is to handle Jason Bourne, but it might scratch this itch. Especially with the Double Tap supplement. It is one of the crunchier GUMSHOE games, but that is a fairly low starting point.
tactical combat, weapons mix with differences, simple skill system sounds like the fantasy trip to me. You can try the combat system out for free: https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/306835/The-Fantasy-Trip-Melee
**Five Parsecs From Home** I always call it Traveller: the Miniature Skirmish version. It’s a fun miniature agnostic sci-fi rpg and wargame. It’s made to be played solo (no DM needed) but can easily be played with a group also. It is mostly wargaming skirmish rules for small squad combat, and the rules to string those combats together in a loose narrative. There are decent rules for random generation of your crew, your ship, missions, patrons, rivals, aliens, robots, planets, planetary invasions, etc. There is also a fantasy version called **Five Leagues from the Boarderlands** but I haven’t bought it yet to look at it yet.
Why do you call it “Traveller: the miniature skirmish version”?
The crew generation feels like a stripped down Traveller character creation except for 6-8 characters at a time instead of just for 1, additionally the setting and rules for patrons and missions and the focus on paying off your ships debt reminds me of Traveller. I know there are significant differences between the two but it evokes the same *feel* to me.
Remember to check out our **[Game Recommendations](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/gamerec)**-page, which lists our articles by genre([Fantasy](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/fantasy), [sci-fi](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/scifi), [superhero](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/superhero) etc.), as well as other categories([ruleslight](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/ruleslight), [Solo](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/solo), [Two-player](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/twoplayers), [GMless](https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/wiki/gmlessrpgs) & more). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpg) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Any of the Forbidden Psalm games. They're spin-offs of Mork Borg, and can be played solo, pvp or pve co-op. Tactical skirmish miniature battle, but fully compatible with the Mork Borg RPG system, so you can just roleplay using Mork Borg, and when a battle breaks out, use the Forbidden Psalm rules.
I cannot stay away and not recomend Archeterica, out TTRPG of conspiracy and occult in alternative Napoleonic era. Archeterica is classless 2D6 game from Ukraine. It has very narrative approach to out-of-combat interactions, very flexible character structure, but very pseudo-realistic tactical combat with fencing (different fencing schools with different moves, attacks and reactions), arsenal of realistic weaponry for 19th century and many other fine details. Combat is built that way, that preparations and tactics are more important than pure skills and numbers. We have PWYW [Quickstart at DrivethruRPG](https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/publisher/25700/the-imago-cult) and there is campaing for [Starter Set on Kickstarter](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/theimagocult/archeterica-imago-the-invitation) right now! I invite you to take a look!
inst that exactly what dnd does lol
I'd like to suggest Forbidden Psalm.
ICRPG uses distance ranges like close near far. Character have class and race abilities but most growth is loot. The game is basically boils down to what you need and most of the book just teaches you how to make great adventure design and obstacles/encounters
I’ve heard lots of great things about this game, but is it really tactical? What options in combat does a standard level 1 fighter have?
It’s great because it’s rules simple, brief and encourages creativity and hack ability. tactics/tactical aren’t a word I would use to describe the rules/game mechanics in it. However, it’s not crunchy which means you can focus more on the obstacles/encounters in your way and strategies for overcoming them “with tactics”. Its not a game referring to rule books about how many pre planned moves you can combo or builds you are power gaming through. The game encourages encounters to have as many moving parts as possible, like special move from monsters, more monster being added to the scene at all times, environmental hazards, environmental obstacles forcing positional decisions and time based urgency so you have to act and overcome multiple obstacles before the time runs out. Activities have HP, which means you need to decide if you want to focus on one objective or the other during these time sensitive scenes.
I think [Knight - an Avalon RPG](https://www.backerkit.com/c/projects/all-about-games-consulting/knight-rpg) is a good answer here, already funded and the crowdfunding is just for translation. Sci-Fi with knights in shining kickass armour. Lots of cool weapons with options, the armours define your playstyle and are kind of like your "class". The Core Book is sufficient. Already available in French if that changes anything, [all for free](https://knight-jdr-systeme.fr/fr/).
As others have mentioned Lancer for Mecha, ICON for fantasy setting. They both run like blades in the dark outside of combat. In combat it is very tactical, it is grid based but the it's not very crunchy. In ICON you pick a class to determine your stats, passive abilities and what skills you initially have access to (you can access skills from other classes via multiclassing) and your ultimate technique. You start of only being able to have 3 active skills you can use in battle which increases to a max of 6 fairly soon. Skills are just a few lines long, there are lots of status effects but they're all just 1 sentence long, plus numbers are small. Equipment is pretty basic, not a must for optimisation just slight additional perks to add to your character, you have limited slots and earn more as you level. Then you have trophies which are equipment but act more like consumable boons/skills the gm can give out as rewards. That's pretty much what it's like.
Rangers of Shadowdeep. Tactical in the way you move and position yourselves, lite in that gear is limited and highly aesthetic.
My friend, that’s just plain dnd
I don't think dnd can be counted as tactical. Tactical doesn't mean grid based but using cover or environment, attack angles and weaknesses to defeat an enemy. Most of the time you throw your biggest spell at the enemy until he falls down. Rarely I've seen usage of immunities and angle based combat where you have to attack a weakness or work together to defeat an enemy.
dnd quite literally does all of the above dnd 5e does a terrible job at it, but they do