Best Initiative System?

[erleni]

To be honest, I've only ever used one system for initiative: the one I learned while playing the Moldvay red box rules. I see no reason to change it.

Why? (It's a serious question).

 

[ren1999]

I think initiative should not be based on wisdom or we'll end up with monsters who have high wisdom but shouldn't.

Everybody rolls initiative and the DM passes out numbers to the players determining the turn order while keeping numbers for the monsters.

A rogue can stealth or sneak attack a monster with a lower initiative the first round.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The whole declarative idea is something I've seen on message boards but which never made any sense to me. Even when we played 2e, it seems like we basically used cyclical intiative, which in retrospect was a houserule.

The stop-motion aspect of initiative is a little weird, but it's better that having to try and predict the future or having everyone talking all at once.

 

[delericho]

I definitely prefer 3e-style cyclic initiative.

Isn't the initiative system for 1e insanely difficult to figure out, in the RAW?

Heh. I read the 1st Edition DMG for the first time last year, read the section on initiative carefully three times, and still couldn't make it out. The clarity that 2nd Edition gave to this aspect of the system was most definitely an improvement.

 

[steenan]

The cyclic initiative is simple and I think it fits D&DN design goals.

But if it was to change, I'd suggest a radical idea: get rid of initiative entirely.
What I mean is:
1. Everybody declares their actions. Declarations can be changed until everybody is satisfied with theirs.
2. Everybody rolls for their action.
3. Actions are performed from highest to lowers roll result. Actions that are no longer valid at the point of their resolution are ignored.

This way, your roll decides the success of your action - and it includes the timing. No need to separate initiative from action itself.

 

[billd91]

Cyclical is very easy and works well for short duration stuff like single-round stun effects like the stunning fist but rolling each round has its advantages too, like fostering better balance between casters and non-casters.

It's a toss-up as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Grazzt]

I prefer the declare your actions + roll every round like in pre-3.x editions. Adds to the chaos of combat.

 

[CleverNickName]

Why? (It's a serious question).

I'm not sure...old habit, maybe? Or maybe it isn't really that big of a deal for us. It all boils down to just deciding who gets to go first, after all. So we just roll dice to set the order, and keep that order for the rest of combat. Some people like it a little more detailed (or complicated) than that, and that's cool, but this works for us.

 

[Li Shenron]

I prefer cyclical initiative, but I'd be interested in trying also a system where you count upwards in terms of segments and each type of action (or weapon, or spells...) has a cost, so that if your turn is at 20 and you attack with a sword (costs +10) your next turn will be at 30 but if you attack with a bow (costs +15) your next turn will be at 35 and so on.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Personally, I'd like the AD&D system back with the caveat that it goes from high to low. I say this for a few reasons. First, it's a bit more love for the d10. The d20 doesn't have to be used for everything. Second, I like the feeling of a countdown (10, 9, 8...). Third, I like the simplicity of it all.

Granted, the +4 bonus an 18 Dex gives to initiative really throws the math for a loop, which is why I guess they went with the d20 to begin with.

Oh, well. I can dream.