Is it time to cut the war game roots of role-playing?

[Acquaintance]

There are two points you argue here:
1. You can't play a VRPG with friends.
2. VRPGs will be invalidated some day by advancing technology.

To point 2 I simply say "DOSBox". There are enough games and programs for modern OSs that people will want to play that, even without any attempts at compatability made by GOG, Valve, etc, you'll still be able to play some form of a game you loved in 20-30 years. The odds of being able to find some way to play D:OS with your grandkids are at least as high as the odds of being able to find your old RPG books.

I hope it'll work that well. It'd suck if many of the amazing games we have today dissapear due to something like windows Microsoft deciding to not allow such things. But I prefer to be on the safe side; physical media is more resistant to the touch of time. It's very difficult to predict what will happen in the future tech market. Plus, I'm certain my descendents won't go through my steam library, same as I haven't listened to my parents' LPs. Hiding a rulebook somewhere curious relativs would find it seems a safer method of exposure. But I'm with you on combat not being very good in TTRPGs, so this is a moot point.

Point 1 is both factually incorrect and would be irrelevant if it was. Believe it or not, there are plenty of local co-op games still on the market—including ones focused on combat like D&D! Obviously, you can't play every game with friends, but that doesn't mean that video gaming as a whole doesn't support that kind of play. More importantly, though, most RPGs are utter failures at producing that kind of camaraderie-ey experience when compared to games designed for that kind of thing. Cards Against Humanity (and Apples to Apples, of course) is probably the archetypical example of the "social game" which has proved itself more than capable of filling that niche. Whenever I play, I share laughs and groans with my friends and family far more than when at the gaming table.

I had completely forgotten about Co-op games! Really, I was only thinking about multiplayer. They really are underrepresented though. I wish game devs would realize that there might indeed be a market for a TV-based roleplaying game. But I don't know of any such games.

And I do think it really is a different experience to be analog; maybe I'm just a romantic in this manner.

Moreover, in my experience combat is the worst part of an RPG for that kind of camaraderie. Sometimes you come up with neat strategies, but I've found that nearly all TRPG combat boils down to executing the same general tactics in new situations...with those tactics usually not even focusing on teamwork beyond "meat shields go in front to keep them from reaching our squishy guys". In my experience, combat usually works at least as well (and much, much quicker) if people focus on what they're going to do next turn and then pay just enough attention to make sure nothing critical changes, as they do if they treat it as a social experience. The game actively discourages using combat as a social experience if you're engaged in it!

Thinking back to the fights I've been in I can nothing but agree with the lack of camraderie. Characters don't really develop in battle, most likely because the only characteristics they call upon are their physical stats and combat abilities. Never have any player at my tables roleplayed in combat; the stakes are too high. I understand that games like The Riddle of Steel, where your ability to fight is enchanced by your beliefs and motivations, might help with that particular problem.

As for tactics, my thoughts is that it has something to do with the limiting nature of a battle grid. It might allow for detailed movement to have an accurate measure of ground covered, but without giving fear, perception and cover prominence in the combat system tactical choices will be very limited. Maybe it can be said that the recent editions of D&D have in this respect moved quite far from their wargame origins.