How do you run a more combat-light campaign? Mystery, political

>>52013670

And you do know how to make murderhoboing compelling for a group of players? The question doesn't even make sense. What makes something gripping is usually the plot or character interaction, not whether the obstacles are primarily "Kill dis shit" or are something else.

>>52013670
any kind of campaign is enjoyable so long as it has two key elements
>choices to be made
>risk
basically there needs to be something at stake which there's a chance of actually losing and the players need to be in the position of making decisions which will affect whether or not it is

so long as you've got both of those, you're good

>>52013670
I find systems with higher lethality and quicker combat helps to make fights a consequence/last resort that encourages finding other solutions. If, when combats result, people get seriously hurt and it takes a long time to heal back up, players will stop seeing it as the immediate solution to all problems. This is especially true if you stat enemies based on their relative position and role, and not around being a balanced, challenging fight for your players. Sure, some fights should be balanced and challenging if the players are facing off against their equals, but they don't always do. Sometimes you are a lot better than the mob bosses' mooks, because, well, theyre mooks. And sometimes the mob boss has access to a swarm of well-armed and highly trained hitmen that outnumber you significantly, and trying to fight them head on isn't going to work. If you build potential (keyword) combats that way, players will be more willing to pick up your hooks for intrigue and mystery.

Once they start doing that, really reward them for it. This is the other side of the "this threat is really to big for us to just charge in on" coin. Don't just let intrigue and non-combat solutions ease the difficulty of combats, or allow you to dodge them but not much else. Make them really effective. Instead of fighting your way through the palace guard, you shadowed and spied on them until you negotiated a deal with the corrupt captain, who ensured the loyal guards were patrolling out on the grounds while the ones backing you were in the treasury. Your players will really enjoy the feeling of walking in to take the mcguffin they needed from some hated henchman, and instead of slogging through an encounter with a bunch of guards while the treasurer shoots them with lightning bolts, they wipe the smug look off his face when his own guards turn against him, you take the macguffin at your leisure and leave your foe locked inside the treasury to starve.

pick a system that supports/rewards it

GUMSHOE is built around an investigative process, and gives the GM rules/ways to build a campaign around that.

Blades in the Dark, if you run mostly social/stealth/occult scores, could be this.

Burning Wheel has the single most developed 'social combat' mechanic, and works well for defining goals and consequences in social/intrigue environments.

>>52016607
to expand on this, you want to do

1) force your players to define things about their characters beleifs and goals

2) force your players to develop relationships with each other and with NPCs (not necessarily positive ones)

3) use 1&2 to put pressure on your PCs and force them to react to things in the world.

4) use player failures to drive the story forwards in a different direction, not to simply stall. A player failing to pick a locked door might have the guards walk past just as the door opens, rather than simply breaking all his lockpicks. This is even more important in a low-violence campaign, as the default solution to problems (escalation to violence) is more difficult.

Make sure the players are constantly pulled forwards by their characters' beliefs and goals, and constantly pushed forwards by having to deal with circumstance and challenges.