We have a Steam curator now. You should be following it. https://store.steampowered.com/curator/44994899-RPGHQ/

Turn Systems

For all your tabletop & board game needs.
Bah! They don't even play at physical tabletops anymore.
Ignore Topic

Which type of turn system do you prefer?

---Structure---
1
3%
Traditional turn-based (IGOUGO)
5
16%
Reactive turn-based (turns, but many opportunities for non-active combatants to react off-turn)
3
10%
WeGo (all combatants choose actions simultaneously and secretly, then all actions are executed)
1
3%
Alternating phases (turns, but only actions of a matching type can be executed in each phase; ex: Movement -> Shooting -> Melee)
0
No votes
Ticks (turns, but actions take a certain number of ticks to complete, and combatants do not receive another turn until action completion)
1
3%
Segments (turns, but fast combatants get more turns per round)
1
3%
Anarchy (players take turns via verbal declaration and agreement)
0
No votes
Other (please specify)
0
No votes
---Grouping---
1
3%
Individual (each combatant acts on his own initiative)
7
23%
Type (all combatants of the same type act on the same initiative)
0
No votes
Team (all combatants on the same team act on the same initiative)
1
3%
Other (please specify)
0
No votes
---Ordering---
1
3%
Fixed (e.g. all players before all monsters, or each player in clockwise order)
0
No votes
Static (based on an attribute such as Speed)
3
10%
Deterministic (based on choice of maneuver or choice of maneuver + attribute)
3
10%
Random, rolled once (dice roll or dice roll + attribute)
0
No votes
Random, rolled every round (dice roll or dice roll + attribute)
2
6%
Alternating (e.g. ally, enemy, ally, enemy)
1
3%
Simultaneous (all actions are revealed and resolved simultaneously)
0
No votes
Other (please specify)
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 31

User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Turn Systems

Post by WhiteShark »

Vote for one Structure, one Grouping, and one Initiative.

For a few years now I've had a strong interest in WeGo systems for TTRPGs. This is the sort of system seen in most DRPGs: all combatants choose their actions in secret and then execute them simultaneously or in an order based on speed. There's a Street Fighter system published by White Wolf in the 90s that uses a WeGo system. I haven't gotten a chance to try it yet, but it looks very clever. Speed is determined by maneuver and attributes; the slowest combatant must begin his action first, but any combatant with higher speed may interrupt him to act first, and those who cut in may likewise be interrupted by combatants with even higher speed.

WeGo is also called phase-based, but I prefer calling it WeGo to distinguish it from the sort of system seen in wargames in which players alternate taking actions across a series of phases, usually something like Movement -> Shooting -> Melee. I don't have much experience with this form, but I think I recall reading that some older versions of D&D did it this way.

Traditional turn-based, of course, is the most common. I find it quite lacking in terms of interactivity. Some systems attempt to remedy this with lots of reactive abilities, such as D&D 4e. The skirmish game Infinity takes this even further: whenever the active player activates one of his units, all enemy units who can see the activated unit and haven't already reacted to something may take a single short action, such as moving, dodging, or shooting.

HERO divides each Turn into 12 one-second Segments. Each combatant can act once on a number of Segments determined by his Speed. Combatants with actions on the same Segment take their actions in order of Initiative. In short, speedy characters can take many more actions than slow characters. I don't think this really solves the interactivity issue, but I do think it's neat that it can reflect differences in speed more gradually than the typical system in which the ratio must immediately jump to 2:1. See the chart below.

Image

I can't remember which off the top of my head (maybe Storyteller systems), but I know some RPGs use Ticks: each type of action takes a different number of Ticks, so it's possible to start a long action and then whiff or get interrupted if the target acts before the action finishes. I don't know if any of them have a secrecy component as WeGo does.

I think I remember reading that Dungeon World, one of the innumerable Powered by the Apocalypse non-games, explicitly has no turn system. The players, with the GM's assistance, are expected to fall into a sort of natural rhythm, declaring actions when dramatically appropriate. Obviously, this doesn't work in a real game.

What's your favorite and why? What sort of game is supported best by each type?

If there's an important type I've missed, let me know and I'll edit the poll.
Last edited by WhiteShark on July 18th, 2025, 01:42, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
A Chinese opium den
Posts: 3044
Joined: Dec 6, '23

Geolocation

Post by A Chinese opium den »

I like the total player agency given by traditional turn based, its the most in control you can possibly be.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 46432
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Gender: Watermelon

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by rusty_shackleford »

Feng Shui attempts to simulate simultaneous turns with its shot counter. Which is curious because the game is nowhere close to simulationist.

Anyways everyone rolls initiative then every action taken adds to this number. Everyone at N goes, calculates their new timeslot based on how long their action takes, then the counter increments to the N+X where X would be the difference of the closest person's turn.

Or so as far as I remember anyways.
After seeing it I was curious how nobody else thought of it. It's rather simple.
Last edited by rusty_shackleford on July 17th, 2025, 08:36, edited 1 time in total.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Steam friend code: 40552640 https://steamcommunity.com/friends/add | email: [email protected]
Having trouble running an old Windows game?
Rusty's Stuff Collection
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

rusty_shackleford wrote: July 17th, 2025, 08:36
Feng Shui attempts to simulate simultaneous turns with its shot counter. Which is curious because the game is nowhere close to simulationist.

Anyways everyone rolls initiative then every action taken adds to this number. Everyone at N goes, calculates their new timeslot based on how long their action takes, then the counter increments to the N+X where X would be the difference of the closest person's turn.
It sounds like the difference between that and Ticks is that the action resolves instantly. Is that correct?
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 46432
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Gender: Watermelon

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by rusty_shackleford »

WhiteShark wrote: July 17th, 2025, 08:39
rusty_shackleford wrote: July 17th, 2025, 08:36
Feng Shui attempts to simulate simultaneous turns with its shot counter. Which is curious because the game is nowhere close to simulationist.

Anyways everyone rolls initiative then every action taken adds to this number. Everyone at N goes, calculates their new timeslot based on how long their action takes, then the counter increments to the N+X where X would be the difference of the closest person's turn.
It sounds like the difference between that and Ticks is that the action resolves instantly. Is that correct?
Don't know, never used the system. I just remembered reading about it.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Steam friend code: 40552640 https://steamcommunity.com/friends/add | email: [email protected]
Having trouble running an old Windows game?
Rusty's Stuff Collection
User avatar
Norfleet
Posts: 2851
Joined: Jun 3, '23

Geolocation

Post by Norfleet »

WhiteShark wrote: July 17th, 2025, 08:26
Speed is determined by maneuver and attributes; the slowest combatant must begin his action first, but any combatant with higher speed may interrupt him to act first, and those who cut in may likewise be interrupted by combatants with even higher speed.
This is an inversion of the classic generic "initiative to move" system, for sure. You see a lot of games that use that basic system, where having high initiative thus often becomes a disadvantage because you can't opt to NOT act immediately without forfeiting your entire turn, and if you move that character first, you'll out-move your teammates, get isolated, and be clobbered, so high initiative builds are functionally useless unless you build your entire team this way so that the entire team can move before enemies do. The flipside was the version in TOEE, where I could drag to reorder everyone to sync up as a unit at the cost of generally forfeiting initiative and allowing pretty much all enemies to move first...not that they could, because I hadn't yet disengaged cloak to attack, so they had no idea I was there.
User avatar
Kalarion
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 2255
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by Kalarion »

rusty_shackleford wrote: July 17th, 2025, 08:36
Feng Shui attempts to simulate simultaneous turns with its shot counter. Which is curious because the game is nowhere close to simulationist.

Anyways everyone rolls initiative then every action taken adds to this number. Everyone at N goes, calculates their new timeslot based on how long their action takes, then the counter increments to the N+X where X would be the difference of the closest person's turn.

Or so as far as I remember anyways.
After seeing it I was curious how nobody else thought of it. It's rather simple.
This made me think of OG Shadowrun.

Each turn counts down from 100. Players with the highest speed act first. If no player can act within the given count (say, 100), the count ticks down by 10. So, on count 100 any players with at least 91 speed may act, in the order of their speed stat.

Players may act on every tick down from there. So, a player with 91 speed may act on the 100 - 91 tick (but after a player with 93 speed), the 90 - 81 tick, the 80 - 71 tick, and so forth.

It was a fun system that allowed characters that specialized in speediness to be truly fast.
. wrote:
Kalarion did this a lot better you know.
User avatar
J1M
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 5214
Joined: Feb 15, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by J1M »

Can you add an option for "team turns"? Basically traditional but all of your units act and then all of the opponent's units act. Not sure if it has a popularized name.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

J1M wrote: July 17th, 2025, 13:53
Can you add an option for "team turns"? Basically traditional but all of your units act and then all of the opponent's units act. Not sure if it has a popularized name.
My thought when creating the options was to focus solely on the turn structure and not the initiative method, so I would file that under 'traditional'. The problem with including initiative types is that it would dramatically increase the number of poll options: traditional turn-based (static, individual), traditional turn-based (random, individual), traditional turn-based (random, individual, rerolled every round), traditional turn-based (static, teams), traditional turn-based (random, teams), traditional turn-based (alternating activations)...
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 46432
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Gender: Watermelon

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by rusty_shackleford »

I think reactivity can be added to any system and it's generally a good thing.

I'd like to see more attempts at simulating simultaneous turns. Give me a bit to get some coffee to expand
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Steam friend code: 40552640 https://steamcommunity.com/friends/add | email: [email protected]
Having trouble running an old Windows game?
Rusty's Stuff Collection
User avatar
J1M
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 5214
Joined: Feb 15, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by J1M »

WhiteShark wrote: July 17th, 2025, 23:03
J1M wrote: July 17th, 2025, 13:53
Can you add an option for "team turns"? Basically traditional but all of your units act and then all of the opponent's units act. Not sure if it has a popularized name.
My thought when creating the options was to focus solely on the turn structure and not the initiative method, so I would file that under 'traditional'. The problem with including initiative types is that it would dramatically increase the number of poll options: traditional turn-based (static, individual), traditional turn-based (random, individual), traditional turn-based (random, individual, rerolled every round), traditional turn-based (static, teams), traditional turn-based (random, teams), traditional turn-based (alternating activations)...
I see your point but consider it a meaningful and high impact change to traditional systems because it allows you to significantly more coordination when you can choose the order you use your units.

More significant than the introduction of reaction abilities, imo.
Last edited by J1M on July 17th, 2025, 23:52, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

J1M wrote: July 17th, 2025, 23:51
I see your point but consider it a meaningful and high impact change to traditional systems because it allows you to significantly more coordination when you can choose the order you use your units.

More significant than the introduction of reaction abilities, imo.
I guess I could add separate categories within the poll for initiative and give extra votes. How about something like this?

(turn-system options)
---Groupings---
Individual
Team
---Ordering---
Static
Deterministic
Random, rolled once
Random, rolled every round
Alternating activations

Anything else I should add?
User avatar
Tangerine
Posts: 3797
Joined: Dec 1, '24

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by Tangerine »

Where would Banner Saga's alternating individual per team fit in this? Not sure if it's the best way to describe it, but imagine you have 3 on team A and 1 on team B, it'd be: A1, B1, A2, B1, A3, B1, A1... It's a stupid system that nobody should have as their favorite, but it's an option.
Last edited by Tangerine on July 18th, 2025, 00:53, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

Tangerine wrote: July 18th, 2025, 00:14
Where would Banner Saga's alternating individual per team fit in this? Not sure if it's the best way to describe it, but imagine you have 3 on team A and 1 on team be, it'd be: A1, B1, A2, B1, A3, B1, A1... It's a stupid system that nobody should have as their favorite, but it's an option.
I'd call that traditional turn-based with alternating activations initiative. I guess I will have to add some initiative categories. I'll update the poll in a bit once I hear back from @J1M.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 46432
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Gender: Watermelon

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by rusty_shackleford »

Tangerine wrote: July 18th, 2025, 00:14
Where would Banner Saga's alternating individual per team fit in this? Not sure if it's the best way to describe it, but imagine you have 3 on team A and 1 on team be, it'd be: A1, B1, A2, B1, A3, B1, A1... It's a stupid system that nobody should have as their favorite, but it's an option.
If you'd be interested in something like Banner Saga but with a non-******** turn system, consider Ash of Gods
viewtopic.php?p=133968-ash-of-gods-rede ... me#p133968

other than the writing being a bit ESL, it's rather good.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Steam friend code: 40552640 https://steamcommunity.com/friends/add | email: [email protected]
Having trouble running an old Windows game?
Rusty's Stuff Collection
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 46432
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Gender: Watermelon

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by rusty_shackleford »

rusty_shackleford wrote: July 17th, 2025, 23:05
I'd like to see more attempts at simulating simultaneous turns. Give me a bit to get some coffee to expand
I wrote a much longer post and it ended up mostly being about cRPGs :oops:

There's just so few tabletop RPGs that try to do anything interesting with regards to turn-based combat beyond what has been standard since turn-based RPGs began.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Steam friend code: 40552640 https://steamcommunity.com/friends/add | email: [email protected]
Having trouble running an old Windows game?
Rusty's Stuff Collection
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 5675
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Geolocation

Post by ArcaneLurker »

I find whichever this one is to be the most interesting


Edit: I think the closest one is "ticks" except there's a timeline and actions take up a portion of time.
This makes the backwards & forwards more tactical, as it's more about being efficient with actions and stamina management.
There may be time for the player to react to the other person's move, depending on character speed, and the action.
A really fast character may be able to kill an opponent whilst they are mid strike.
A character could have two actions in a row, before the other character completes their action.
So "combatants do not receive another turn until action completion" this part wouldn't apply.
Last edited by ArcaneLurker on July 18th, 2025, 01:54, edited 2 times in total.
I apologize if my responses were not relevant to your needs. As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions, and I only provide responses based on the information provided to me.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 46432
Joined: Feb 2, '23
Gender: Watermelon

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by rusty_shackleford »

rusty_shackleford wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:33
There's just so few tabletop RPGs that try to do anything interesting with regards to turn-based combat beyond what has been standard since turn-based RPGs began.
Not quite true, I guess. RAW, DRPGs are much closer to AD&D combat than the goldbox games are.
As I've stated, there was a very odd decision to make combat less simulationist while making the rest of the game moreso.

I think it might have been perhaps because Gygax wanted combat to feel more chaotic, which is difficult when you have a map with minis on it.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Steam friend code: 40552640 https://steamcommunity.com/friends/add | email: [email protected]
Having trouble running an old Windows game?
Rusty's Stuff Collection
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

@A Chinese opium den, @TKVNC, @Unhelpful Contrarian, @J1M, @Tangerine, @Kalarion, @ArcaneLurker, I redid the poll options, so please cast your votes again.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

rusty_shackleford wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:33
rusty_shackleford wrote: July 17th, 2025, 23:05
I'd like to see more attempts at simulating simultaneous turns. Give me a bit to get some coffee to expand
I wrote a much longer post and it ended up mostly being about cRPGs :oops:

There's just so few tabletop RPGs that try to do anything interesting with regards to turn-based combat beyond what has been standard since turn-based RPGs began.
Feel free to post it anyway. Unless you were only talking about real time, there's probably an RPG somewhere that has some corresponding ideas.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

ArcaneLurker wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:36
I find whichever this one is to be the most interesting
This looks like a Tick structure: each action takes a certain amount of time to complete, and the combatant doesn't receive another turn until it does. Correct me if I'm wrong.
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 5675
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Geolocation

Post by ArcaneLurker »

WhiteShark wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:48
the combatant doesn't receive another turn until it does.
This part doesn't apply since it's purely based on how much time the action takes up, which is influenced by character speed.
There's no forced turn, just a continuous flow of actions completing, and once one is completed, you load your next action.

I'm not sure it would translate well into tabletop though, or even a party system.
Last edited by ArcaneLurker on July 18th, 2025, 02:02, edited 1 time in total.
I apologize if my responses were not relevant to your needs. As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions, and I only provide responses based on the information provided to me.
User avatar
Unhelpful Contrarian
Posts: 3187
Joined: Aug 24, '24

Geolocation

Post by Unhelpful Contrarian »

Prefer Traditional Turn Base Systems . Everything else is to gimmicky for my liking.
Last edited by Unhelpful Contrarian on July 18th, 2025, 01:59, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

ArcaneLurker wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:58
WhiteShark wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:48
the combatant doesn't receive another turn until it does.
This part doesn't apply since it's purely based on how much time the action takes up, which is influenced by character speed.
There's no forced turn, just a continuous flow of actions completing, and once one is completed, you load your next action.
Yeah, other than attribute influence, that's how Ticks work. I guess calling it a 'turn' may have been confusing. You pick an action, you have to wait as many ticks as it requires to complete, then you pick another action, and stuff can go wrong for you in between.
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 5675
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Geolocation

Post by ArcaneLurker »

WhiteShark wrote: July 18th, 2025, 02:02
ArcaneLurker wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:58
WhiteShark wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:48
the combatant doesn't receive another turn until it does.
This part doesn't apply since it's purely based on how much time the action takes up, which is influenced by character speed.
There's no forced turn, just a continuous flow of actions completing, and once one is completed, you load your next action.
Yeah, other than attribute influence, that's how Ticks work. I guess calling it a 'turn' may have been confusing. You pick an action, you have to wait as many ticks as it requires to complete, then you pick another action, and stuff can go wrong for you in between.
Have you tried it out in tabletop?

I watched a review about a turn-based game that used WeGo, and the criticisms stuck with me. Having to predict your opponent's move is interesting in theory, but in practice, it doesn't work out too well.
Last edited by ArcaneLurker on July 18th, 2025, 02:07, edited 1 time in total.
I apologize if my responses were not relevant to your needs. As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions, and I only provide responses based on the information provided to me.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

ArcaneLurker wrote: July 18th, 2025, 02:03
Have you tried it out in tabletop?
Technically yes, but all the games I've played in that used it were online games that evaporated almost instantly, so I don't have enough experience to say how well it works in practice. I believe they're used in Exalted and Scion, both published by White Wolf. Rusty mentioned that Feng Shui uses something similar above, but, if the actions resolve instantly, it's not quite the same.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Site Moderator
Posts: 5056
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by WhiteShark »

ArcaneLurker wrote: July 18th, 2025, 02:03
I watched a review about a turn-based game that used WeGo, and the criticisms stuck with me. Having to predict your opponent's move is interesting in theory, but in practice, it doesn't work out too well.
Which game was it? Do you have a link? There's a board game I really like called BattleCON that is supposed to be the board game equivalent of a fighting game. It uses a WeGo system, and I think it's excellent. I keep trying to find actual plays of tabletop RPGs with WeGo systems, such as the Street Fighter RPG mentioned in the OP, but, in every recording I've found, the group either uses some bizarre houserules or simply ignores it in favor of a conventional turn-based system.
User avatar
J1M
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 5214
Joined: Feb 15, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by J1M »

WhiteShark wrote: July 18th, 2025, 01:44
@A Chinese opium den, @TKVNC, @Unhelpful Contrarian, @J1M, @Tangerine, @Kalarion, @ArcaneLurker, I redid the poll options, so please cast your votes again.
Cool poll.
User avatar
Eyestabber
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 1101
Joined: Feb 4, '23

Geolocation

Adventurer's Guild

Post by Eyestabber »

"Street Fighter RPG"

Loved reading the manual back in the day, but never found anyone willing to play. The problem I saw with that system is that interruptions are just way too common and it can make for a frustrating experience. The way it works is If you choose to hit me with a fierce punch and I go for a jab, my action is resolved and yours is cancelled. Exactly like in the videogame, but I assume it can only happen X times until a human player at your table says "**** that ****" and moves on.

But yeah, I have huge curiosity in wego systems. Btw, that's how combat in endless space 2 works IIRC. You and your opponent make a choice at the same time then both fleets execute the chosen maneuver.
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 5675
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Geolocation

Post by ArcaneLurker »

WhiteShark wrote: July 18th, 2025, 02:12
ArcaneLurker wrote: July 18th, 2025, 02:03
I watched a review about a turn-based game that used WeGo, and the criticisms stuck with me. Having to predict your opponent's move is interesting in theory, but in practice, it doesn't work out too well.
Which game was it? Do you have a link? There's a board game I really like called BattleCON that is supposed to be the board game equivalent of a fighting game. It uses a WeGo system, and I think it's excellent. I keep trying to find actual plays of tabletop RPGs with WeGo systems, such as the Street Fighter RPG mentioned in the OP, but, in every recording I've found, the group either uses some bizarre houserules or simply ignores it in favor of a conventional turn-based system.
Ah, it wasn't a board game, it was isometric, similar to Final Fantasy Tactics, but I can't remember the name, and I probably won't ever. Searching for it doesn't come up with anything, I assume that's because "WeGo" isn't used to describe videogames, or wasn't ever used in association with that game despite it using the same mechanics.
I apologize if my responses were not relevant to your needs. As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions, and I only provide responses based on the information provided to me.