An interesting point by TonyRo, which would be an argument in favour of using a 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3/c4 e6 move order to provide more flexibility against D-pawn specials while reaching the QGD against c4 lines. But I'm going way off-topic.

Returning to the subject, playing a Pirc against D-pawn specials reminds me of the phrase 'the cure is worse than the disease', though that isn't really the case for someone who plays the Pirc regularly against 1.d4. But going into a Pirc does seem to reward White for his unambitious play - better to play the critical lines and force the opponent to play precisely to equalise, if possible. 

I'm confused as to the OP's insinuation that the D-Pawn Specials have long theory when compared to the sharp and unbalanced Pirc/Modern complex. The Austrian Attack in the Pirc/Modern together probably have as much theory in them as most of KID vs. D-Pawn Specials lines. 

Combine that with the fact that I'd much rather play against stuff like the Barry Attack or the Torre than the Austrian Attack in the Pirc, and you've got yourself an answer. I've found Dembo's book to be quite good for the D-Pawn Specials. A few nitpicks here or there, but I really like the chosen systems - she's always dynamic. 

I also get the OTB vibe that most D-Pawn Specials players (at least the lower-rated or less experienced ones) don't like playing against KID systems with ...d6, as opposed to 1...d5 systems, where they can use the e5-square as they please. This last thought deserves another thread entirely though.



EDIT  - 1000th post what! I was trying to time it to coincide with the pass-off of my book to editing, but alas, I likely jumped the gun by two weeks or so. 

Amen to that.  KID stands in fairly high regard; Pirc less so.  The d-pawn special people that I know quite willingly play against the Pirc.

The Dutch kills some D-pawn specials. 

Honestly I don't see why you would want to avoid the d-pawn specials. If your opponent wants to forfeit their first-move advantage on move two or three then I wouldn't stop them. The only danger arises if you don't understand the equal position you get out of the opening.

If I were thinking of palying the King's Indian Defence, what about studying the Picr/Modern in order to aovoid the long theory of d-Pawn Spacials? What are the pros and cons? In terms of load of work I think both need the same and I'd have another opening to expand my repertoire. I like the Pirc more than the Trompowsky and I think that answering d6/g6 to 1.d4 allows black to play f5 berfore Nf6 aganist London, Colle or Torre. Thanks for your comments.