That I can understand. I played Pathfinder and was annoyed by the chaos of RT combat. Got the turn-based mod then was annoyed by how long fights took -- they took sooo much longer. I have no good answer of what is the balance of those things but I feel like there should be solution in there somewhere.

Non-tactical turn-based combat can be much faster. For example, in Bard's Tale 1 you can kill 396 Berserkers in a reasonable amount of time, and most battles in such games could be expected to be under a minute.

For me, turn-based combat is the reason I play RPGs, as opposed to playing games of some other genre.

Was it tactical (where you move your characters on a grid, and enemies also move around similarly) or non-tactical (where positioning is abstracted away and you never (or rarely) instruct your characters to move)? That makes a big difference.

Pathfinder is a tactical game (positioning) as opposed to Might & Magic 1 where it's just a list of monsters in a box you have to chip HP down on. Position for Pathfinder matters for both RT or TB but obviously managing position in RT is more complicated when you're trying to line up a fireball or something.

If Roleplaying requires larping, then there are no subatomic particles by the same logic. On the other hand, D&D is a Chainmail supplement. Also, what is a fighter?

Trash mobs are bad, but worse the longer it takes to kill them. Worst problem of Wiz8.

Yeah, no one likes Knights of the Chalice, Jagged Alliance 2 (if Disco is rpg, so is this,) Icewind Dale, Wizardries, etc. Not to mention more exploration based games like Might & Magic and Elder Scrolls. But yeah, no one likes those games. Only Witcher 3 is good game. Also Wizardry 1 and Rogue hold up, just ask the Japanese.

Now, why OGL. Because there is always the question of rather create a unique system, or build based off of an existing one. D&D is free to use, so there. Also it has a following, and there was quite a drought after Bioware and Obsidian stopped working on Dandy games. Then OGL boom happened. I myself am most hyped for The Fellowship Saga. Not going to be as good as Wiz8, but demo seemed promising. But Solasta and Realms Beyond seem like they'll be fun too.

RTwP is more to make it easier to have a mostly realtime game with characters with a lot of abilities. I should play more Freedom Force, what a brilliant solution for pause for orders, especially when we look at M&M 6's turn-based button with fanfare and movement lock. Classical menu-based combat can have some movement, but nothing compared to tactical combat. Wiz8 provides an interesting mash-up by having positioning in its phased-based combat. Of course the less visual effects, and the more abstraction, the faster combat can be. This is why chess mode exists in some tactical rpgs. Sakura Dungeon takes classical blobber combat, but makes it a slog, by comparison, via too many slow effects. Thankfully, like many Japanese games, it does have an auto-combat option with sped-up effects, that I never used in my playthrough. Yeah, I'm kind of a filthy popamole casual.

I agree that this trailer is a bit too long.

Long but quite thorough imho what game is all about. And im very happy its coming (anyone know roughly when?). Some people are just too bloody fussy.

If they think 7 minutes is too long they aren't the target audience anyways.

Also like Drakensang and Drakensang: River of Time.

Is real-time combat dead going forward? Turn-based is fine and all, but when you go from game to game and it's all just turn-based, everything feels like an incredibly slow chore.

+1 from me.

Long time I don t see a decent ROG.
And no, the pillar series was indecent crap.

Finger crossed.

Is turn-based combat dead going forward? Real-time is find and all, but when you go from game to game and it's all just real-time, everything feels rushed and out of control.

(This is actually how I feel much of the time when it comes to WRPGs; it seems that, with rare exceptions, *everything* is real-time (or real-time with pause, which I think is actually worse (assuming the real-time isn't as bad as Ultima 7's implementation)).)

Anyway, the reason games may be slow isn't that they're turn based, but that they're bogged down either with tactical positioning (like this game is likely to be) or with long animations. Give me a non-tactical turn-based game with short animations, and you've just given me a fast-paced turn-based game, so those things do exist.

(As much as I complain about tactical combat slowing things down, I have put Fell Seal: Arbiter's Mark (without DLC) next on my play list, at least at the moment.)

RTwP I've found to be the worst of both worlds.

If you want a game with lots of abilities, either make it turn-based, or limit the number of abilities the player can take with them at any one time.

Classical menu-based (turn-based) combat, IMO, has a lot of untapped potential, and I really wish it would become popular in the indie game scene, preferablty with mechanics like an FF5-style job system or a SaGa-style growth system. It allows for fast combat while still giving the character plenty of strategic flexibility; the inability to move units around really isn't a big issue.

In fairness, you're talking about RPGs; however, I'm talking about combat (RPGs being a bonus). The tactical positioning nonsense and animations has nothing to do with what I'm saying, and I have no interest in the ability to pause during any sort of battle. If I was indeed worried about those things, then difficulty settings could just be lowered to nullify most issues.

I simply enjoy combat flowing in a consistent real time, demanding my increased heart rate, motor skills, and concentration. My comment would have popped up in another game with such things, but I just felt like chiming in this one's thread, so lucky me that my two cents caught your eye.

I also didn't notice some others were mentioning 'real-time vs turn-based' related stuff too so my bad, I don't read comments.

Why arent those here?

I think what you're looking for is an action game, not an RPG.