Briefly, I’d like to say that I think there’s still value to an unbroken, uninterruptible turn structure in an RPG, depending on what you’re going for with it. While it’s certainly useful in its own way to have a game without a turn sequence, and the idea of “spotlight” in RPGs is kind of dubious, I thought about why I wanted a turn sequence in my game, rather than bucking it as a lot of indie games have been doing lately. I also tried to think about it outside the box of “the bad player who runs over others in a turn-less game” because I try very much not to look at “bad player” arguments. My philosophy is that I write games where I assume and impart upon the group that they should be friends, talk things over, and should look after each other and cooperate – I don’t like to write mechanics that exist solely to punish the theoretical “bad player.”
1) It’s easier to play online: Turnless games and games with interruptible turns behave weirdly in a medium near and dear to me – play-by-post roleplaying. Playing D&D 4e in PBP is kind of a nightmare because of all the times that another person at the game is needed for input. You move, and someone can interrupt with an Opportunity Attack; you attack, and someone can interrupt with a power or you might need someone else to resolve your roll because of a lack of information; you give other players actions and then they resolve them on your turn, necessitating that they appear and post before you can continue. There’s a lot of places where you could potentially require the input of others – and that’s more posts in your way.
What I want from Uttarakuru is for everyone to have a turn, and for everyone to expect to resolve that turn alone. This means a turn structure, but equally important is open information. Important target values can’t hide behind a screen. Everyone should know off the bat what their targets are and what the consequences of their actions could be.
2) It’s more neatly organized: I’m a neat freak in RPGs. I ran my own Dungeon World mini-game for some IM friends the other day. I essentially asked for a turn structure on that because everyone started talking at once and I found it hard to follow. I love Dungeon World. I love The Conversation. But even when I play Dungeon World, rather than DM, I’m a bit demure – I still sort of “wait my turn” so to speak. I find a lot of comfort in sequence, and I’m pretty poor at doing things outside of a chronological order. I like to think of RPG turns as pieces of a story that all fit together as a puzzle. I want to bring that kind of neatness and organization to Uttarakuru. Scenes and Turns are each broken up into simple steps you can easily digest.
3) It’s easier to plan ahead: I’ve seen a lot of general stigma to “planning” things in RPGs. Listening to the RPG blogosphere there seem to be few things more vocally reviled than the GM who hunches over books and “plots things out” and comes to the game with encounters and story and other things in mind. I don’t accept that though, because I think this planning is still very useful as a guide or inspiration – a skeleton around which flesh can be arranged. When you have a turn order and a certain expectation that scenes may contain “rounds,” and that in turn those scenes themselves will make up units of an adventure, you can more easily generate material ahead of time, as well key your material to specific parts of that structure. You have a more comfortable environment to plot out. Not everyone is good at improvising, but I think planning and structure can be a great tool to help you become a good improviser. You can start on that road by learning to prepare material but also coming to the table knowing you will change that material and add to it as it suits the player’s actions and decisions.
It also helps the players plan. If you know when you’re expected to act next and who is probably going to act before you, you can figure out your action. If it’s a free-for-all, plenty of players I know would end up paralyzed by indecision because they couldn’t figure out the best time to act.
True, play by post is a completely different monster than most games. Especially when you have some people that can’t check the game while they are at work and others that can sit at their computer all day.
One possible solution I’ve seen to complex systems like 4e is to post intentions and options. In additon to what you’ve planned, you post what your character’s intent is with these actions. This can be in character or out of character, depending on if the game encourages people to post private thoughts. You also give some guidelines on when you’d use your interrupt powers and options. All the PC’s who have initiative in a group post. i.e. the first monster goes at initiative 17, all players before this post at once. Then the DM incorporates all of their posts in with the monster’s actions. Then the next group of PC’s goes.
An example: Estaviel is going to cross the room to attack the Shaman in the back with walking wounded. If Bognard has pulled the Shaman close enough, Estaviel will get between the Shaman and the door. He wants to engage him and keep him from escaping with the book. The hobgoblins are just obstacles to this, and the slower fighters can engage them. He’ll risk AoO’s if there’s no other choice, but he’s willing to be acrobatic if that will avoid them. If the hobgoblins attack, he’ll take it, but he’ll use his second chance if the Shaman uses a spell on him.
With this, the DM has a good idea of not just what they are doing, but why. Sometimes they’ll need clarification, but a lot less than the standard model. Sometimes there will be a misunderstanding and they’ll use a power when the player wouldn’t or vice versa. We explain this in-game as the confusion of the moment. Out of game, it’s the cost for speeding up combat by a lot.