Hello everyone!

I used to be an avid PbF (play by forum) RPG player with custom-made systems in the mid-00s, and combat was much more fun and creative than it usually is on paper systems.

The gameplay loop for 1v1 combat used to work like this:

• Both players have a sheet with the character's attributes and techniques.
• The first player declares what they do on their turn, including attack attempts. Attacks had a range of speed/strength/power/whatever values, but the attacker couldn't declare if the attack connected and how damaging it was (i.e "it couldn't be self-conclusive").
• The second player declares the outcome of the opponent's attacks, taking into account fairness and realism comparing their own attributes with the ones of their opponent to avoid overdoing with dodges or parries. There were no dice involved. Then they go on with their own attacks, avoiding once more being self-conclusive.
• After a fixed number of turns (and a stupid amount of days, in retrospect), a judge would evaluate if the exchange was fair, realistic, well-written, and deliberate on who the winner was. The winner has access to a last self-conclusive turn to end the fight.

Combat with multiple players used to work taking turns, and at the beginning of their turn players had to dodge/parry/endure all attacks they were targeted with.

The sick part about it was the number of tactical tomfooleries involved because you were encouraged to one-up your opponent with creative thinking and adapting to your opponent. It used to work significantly better as a system when characters were inherently meant to be clever fighters with a versatile "power system". I recently got acquainted with the term "Tactical Infinity" from the OSR-sphere of design (which means "applying strategies using the game world and critical/creative thinking rather than a fixed procedure on the games' rules"), and I think the two subjects might be related somehow.

Now, I still love both systems like the ones from Lancer/13th Age for the mechanical depth it offers, and narrative systems like the ones from Wushu RPG or the better half of PbtA games for the flashy and cinematic action sequence, but I found TTRPG generally lacking in the way I previously explained. I want to be able to say "since I've always followed my left jabs with right straights up till now, this left hook might take her by surprise", or "I cast my water prison sphere spell as a shield, even if it's not usually meant to, against his fire breath attack": in crunchier games, you're not allowed to; in narrative games, you're allowed to but there's not enough "granularity" to make your actions differs enough mechanically.

Do you think it makes sense? Have you seen games that work like that in tabletop? I needed to vent about this train of thought because I've been sitting on it for a while, but I'm looking for an outside perspective on this subject.