I want to GM a GURPS zombie game inspired by The Last of Us and I think it will go well because of that, but most zombie games focused on "survival", in the vein of TWD just sort of putter around aimlessly.

The thing about RPGs is that they're a singular event. People show up to DO something, even if that isn't thematically appropriate. But the premise of most zombie and post apoc games is a whole lot of nothing, and players will want to avoid the things that could happen. From a storytelling perspective I think the "survival" genre is great, it's one of the few ways other than POLITICS to drag players off a neverending battlefield, but it's not well suited to the traditional RPG format. So either the GM has to engineer a game with lots of conflict right in the players' faces, or the players hwve to know what they're getting into and be interested in it from the get go.

>>46284244
No, because zombies are boring as fuck. There's no variety or tactics, they're all the same and they all just run up to you and melee attack. They're stupid monsters for stupid people.

>>46284472
And what if you put a twist on them? More intelligent zombies, more of a variety, specific "controllers" directing them... There's options to overcome that.

>>46284650

They don't need a twist (not that special zombies are a bad thing). That Anon just doesn't get zombies.

Zombie games aren't just about zombies. They're just another flavor of post-apoc, except instead of something environmental (radiation, big waterless wastelands, whatever), the apocalypse is something you can fight. Instead of a big deadly zone with radiation markers all over it, you put zombies there. You can interact with them in different ways. You still get all the delicious goodness of dealing with other survivors, scavenging for resources, and generally rebuilding (or conquering) the world after it's ended, the zombies are just a subgenre within the larger genre of post apocalyptic games.

Alternately, I've found that Zombie games make for great one-shots. They pack a punch in high-lethality games where players know they only signed up for one session and aren't afraid to get gnawed to death dying heroically, and the GM can throw "fair, survivable challenges" out the window because there's no part 2 to this story. They get really crazy really quick.

What about a game set pre-apocalypse?
The players are people in various positions in the government try to stop it from ending the world.

The player's would have to handle more than just the zombies though such as public opinion on the outbreak or keep it secret if possible.

opinions?

>>46284244
Nah, makes more sense to play as Skeletons.

More pun material, you know?

>>46284244
Pretty sure everyone who was into RPGs in 2003-5 did the whole "lets make ourselves in a zombie apocalypse campaign!" thing.

>>46284244
Don't make the zombies the focus of the campaign, but the interaction between PCs and other NPCs, the rivalry between groups, the decadence of society.
TWD did it right in this. It's not the dead you should fear, but the living

Same problem as post apocalypse games. There isn't a whole lot to do other than wander around and fight a world of random encounters.