Handling "conversation initiative" in text chat games

For those of you who use text chat to run your game and conversations between the PCs and NPCs. One problem is dealing with chaos that a text chat interface introduces. In combat everybody gets a turn to act and things stay organized. During conversations with NPCs almost every party member has something to say and people start typing and posting their dialog at the same time, often before the GM or other players finish their own line, this leads to awkward situations where a PC asks about something that was answered one line above or says something that is no longer relevant. I'd be interested in getting some suggestions on how to handle "conversation initiative" so to say.

You could always utilize the Turn Tracker and (if using a 3.5 rule system) have initiatives for conversation be based off Chr rather than Dex.

We are actually playing Savage Worlds, but I had the same idea. In SW you deal players cards (normal playing cards) and the initiative is based on card value. I think I may deal initiative at the beginning of each conversation (once for each social situation) and players will act according to that initiative, while the NPC may speak freely.

I am not sure that this would solve the problem you were explaining. As I see it, it is not only a problem about who can chat first, but mostly about peoples chatting at the same time without knowing that someone else is doing the same (and the first answer to appear being the one of the player who hits return first).

Yes, that is precisely the problem. By having a sort of initiative I can make only one player talk at any time and have the rest wait for their turn. However this will make people get bored, I believe.

Boring, I don't know. But when nothing appears in the chat, it is difficult to know if the player whose turn it is to talk is waiting, folding or typing a long message. And so it is quite difficult for the next one to know if he can go on.

This is a tricky problem. I also use Text Chat for online role playing but right now I can't think a definite solution or suggestion. Now, I remember that OpenRPG handles something like this, I mean Turns, by displaying the name of the player character that was next to act with a different text format and color, followed by colon. That helped to clear the "chaos that a text chat interface introduces" , as Pawel K. is saying. Other virtual tabletop that I know let the GM to place a sort of "graphical line" --also a descriptive element for narration-- for demarcating what is happening in the text chat, dividing it with these special lines for handling turns, for instance, or for denoting the intention of any sort of meaningful change in the current flow of the text chat activity --for instance, stopping character chat because the GM is going to narrate something. There are even indicators --small icons that can be displayed in midst of the text chat box-- making players to "stop" talking without the GM needing to type it, unwillingly cluttering the chat flow even more . . . That works pretty well actually.

Boring, I don't know. But when nothing appears in the chat, it is difficult to know if the player whose turn it is to talk is waiting, folding or typing a long message. And so it is quite difficult for the next one to know if he can go on. There is an indication that somebody is typing, I saw it working the last (and first) time we played. Besides we use VoIP too, just not for roleplaying, so I may always nudge the player there. I wouldn't like it to get where I am constantly reminding them - "now is your turn", "ok, you can start typing", "do you have something to say?". This is a tricky problem. I also use Text Chat for online role playing but right now I can't think a definite solution or suggestion. What do YOU do? Have you not experienced a problem there? In our last session the PCs have arrived at a baron's manor and it was something like this: GM: It is getting late and the sun is setting, but despite the late hour the baron will see you in his study. Player 1: It's late, so he won't see us right now. We need to find a place to stay for the night. Player 2: We should look for a room somewhere. GM: HELLO! I said the baron will see you now! :-) Everyone's typing at the same time and whoever hits enter first gets his line out.

This is a tricky problem. I also use Text Chat for online role playing but right now I can't think a definite solution or suggestion. What do YOU do? Have you not experienced a problem there? In our last session the PCs have arrived at a baron's manor and it was something like this: GM: It is getting late and the sun is setting, but despite the late hour the baron will see you in his study. Player 1: It's late, so he won't see us right now. We need to find a place to stay for the night. Player 2: We should look for a room somewhere. GM: HELLO! I said the baron will see you now! :-) Everyone's typing at the same time and whoever hits enter first gets his line out. Yes, I've experienced the same problem. The indication of "The GM is typing..." isn't enough for many people . . . and in many cases all of them should stop typing or refraining from pushing Enter while the GM is typing . What I do? Currently I manage this "text box chaos" by having very few players, even just the GM and a single player, but a such approach isn't the idea of a virtual tabletop. Honestly, I'm waiting for the Roll20 Team's implementation of more Text Chat Box features, that have been requested in other threads. For instance, the use of a "stop" signal/icon inside the Text Chat Box (or something analogous to that) would have avoided the misunderstanding in your example, because by seeing that, the players just let the GM to finish what he's saying. Otherwise he must try to type all, more or less quickly, in a single paragraph before hitting Enter in order to not suffering inopportune interruptions in this or that "chunk" of his narration. All this would be fine if more people, instead just wanting to see Roll20 copying MapTool's features for maps, would want the same thing but also regarding Fantasy Grounds and its features for Text Chat, that are the most developed so far in the world of virtual tabletops. WebCam and voice is good, but for online role playing, I always prefer text. If I'm using a WebCam at all, I reserve WebCam and voice for out of character (and out of game) chat, pre-game clarifications and such things.

A good solution would be the real-time chat that was used in (the excellent but underused) Google Wave. When someone is typing, it not only shows their typing status, but even the content that they're entering...but it's not entered into the conversation as a final text until they hit enter. -- Pete.

Interesting. I tried Google Wave but barely can remember how it was. I think it was discontinued, but I'm not sure right now.

All this would be fine if more people, instead just wanting to see Roll20 copying MapTool's features for maps, would want the same thing but also regarding Fantasy Grounds and its features for Text Chat, that are the most developed so far in the world of virtual tabletops. Ah Axel, I don't think that they are exclusive of each others, more a question of priority (but we have already discussed it). Can you describe those features? I have never used this kind of things and I think that indeed, a better chat feature (if it is not too complicated to use) would be fine.

Right, not exclusive but mostly a matter of priority. For me it's important, though, since I play via Text Chat. Better chat features, like the ones Fantasy Grounds is using, are pretty easy to use. There is not a learning curve, nor weird syntax involved. I'll try to answer more detailedly later.

So, we played yesterday again. This time I decided to approach conversations in a manner similar to combat. When an important dialog started between the PCs and an NPC, I dealt all players a card and they acted on that initiative card. It worked pretty well, we did not have the situation from the last session with mixed dialog lines. :) I'm looking forward to using that technique again.