Cyclical Initiative: AN Explanation

[Deadguy]

Having joined a new D&D group last night, one with little experience of D&D since 1E days, we ran into the problem of explaining the cyclical initiative system. I tried to explain it, and I do understand it myself, but I flubbed it.

So can you kind people help me put together a really good explanation of what cyclical initiative is, and why it makes sense. Oh, and since it was a single event that brought the matter up, perhaps we can come up with a good explanation for why the guy who Delayed his action was Delayed every turn thereafter, so far as he was concerned - i.e. couldn't grasp why he'd slipped in the Initiative order.

Thanks.

 

[KarinsDad]

Circular initiative is like waiting for your turn to bat in baseball. Each person goes when their turn comes around (ignore innings).

Delaying is like, well delaying. You are using up time (i.e. turns of initiative) in order to gain a tactical advantage.

You can also explain delaying as you are giving up your current action to go EARLIER in initiative from now on in the future (although that is not truly accurate, it might appease your player a little).


The reasons circular initiative is so good are:

1) You do not waste time rolling initiative every round.
2) You can use shortcuts to keep the combat moving along quickly (we use 3x3 cards with PC and NPC names on them) and there is never confusion as to who goes next.
3) It is equally fair to all characters. If NPC 1 trips PC 2 at the end of round 5, NPC 1 does not get a lucky initiative roll on round 6, attack PC 2 again while PC 2 is still prone and get yet another Attack of Opportunity on PC 2 when he attempts to get back up. In a two character fight, initiative is typically 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2 (unless someone readies an action). It is never 1, 2, 2, 1 1, 2, 2, 1.

So, fast, simple, and fair.


Our group does not really use the concept of rounds except for durations. So, if a 3 round spell gets cast by the Wizard (on initiative 12), it gets decremented each time the Wizards initiative comes around, not each time an initiative of 12 comes around in a new round. Now, this can be a little confusing if the Wizard readies an action and moves his initiative, but as DM I just keep relative track of it with respect to other PC/NPC initiatives if necessary.

 

[nsruf]

And best of all, no bickering about

a) which actions can and cannot be declared in advance, or how specific you can/must be
b) what you can change abou your declared actions once it is your turn to actually act and everything has gone FUBAR

The cyclic initiative system ranks among the major improvements over the earlier editions in my book. I am not even sure I would be playing d20 so much if they had stuck with the old way of doing things.

And while ease of use is a purely metagame consideration (although an important one), I don't even see how the "old" system was more consistent or realistic. In fact, can someone please explain the way initiative worked in 2E to me, as I obviously never got it

 

[Marimmar]

With this kind of initiative system you determine once at the start of the battle when it's your turn to act. In the following rounds you always act when your initiative count comes up, thus reducing the number of die rolls and speeding up gameplay - determining initiative each round bogs down the game. It also allows for better use of tactics since combat becomes more predictable. Another advantage is that noone gets to act twice in a row because of a high roll in the first round and a low roll in the second round which could end up in pretty deadly situations, especially with rending monsters and spell casters. You always get to act once before your opponent can act again. As for delaing actions, you let time slip by, it's gone like sand running through your fingers. You either act quick or the time you wait can never be regained because all the other combatants won't wait just because you did.

A bit of advice here, the guy who delayed probably felt cheated because his initiative count dropped and he was reminded of that each round. I (as DM) prefer to make a list with the initiative order of all combatants and just read out the names of the player/monster who's turn it is. This removes the 'round-by-round' feeling to some extent and since new arrivals on the scene of a fight always have initiative the rolled numbers don't mean a thing after the DM put together his list and the guy feels more like he chose the initiative rank instead of losing them.

Hope that helps a bit.
~Marimmar

 

[nsruf]

A bit of advice here, the guy who delayed probably felt cheated because his initiative count dropped and he was reminded of that each round. I (as DM) prefer to make a list with the initiative order of all combatants and just read out the names of the player/monster who's turn it is.

Same here.

Once you realize that there is no "common" combat round that has any meaning, only people acting in a certain order over an over again, it makes perfect sense. The only time when a high initiative roll matters is in the first round (or surprise round).

 

[Li Shenron]

I believe 99% of table games use a "cyclic initiative", it's weird that your players are confused...

It's just like playing cards one after another, "round" the table. Except that one can move its chair past someone else to play later, but can never move it the other way to play earlier.

 

[AeroDm]

Perhaps an example would help your group.

Imagine that it takes 6 seconds for you to do anything. You and your three friends are attacking two goblins. In this world, you (A) begin quickest and act on second #1. Your friends B, C, and D act on seconds 2, 3, and 4. The goblins G1 and G2 act on seconds 5 and 6. Obviously the second you act on is representative of your initiative, or how fast you reacted.

Now because it takes you 6 seconds to act, A goes on 1, 7, 13, 19 and so on. B would go on 2, 8, 14, 20, and so on. However, combat would get clunky if we kept track of numbers, so instead we just keep track of orders.

If you decide to delay until second #3, you waste all the time of second #1 and #2 until 3 arrives. Note that it still takes you 6 seconds to act, so now you act on 3, 9, 15, 21, et al. Again, the numbers don't matter, so we only record the order. Because you _must_ spend 6 seconds acting, you can never "undelay."

You could, of course, delay even further and end up back at the top. If you were at #1, dealyed to #3 and acted, and then when your turn came up again at #9 you could dealy until #13 and be back on track with the #1's (1 + 6 + 6 =13). Not sure why anyone would do this, but just trying to give further examples as to how the system works.

 

[Ruined]

There's a free product out there that really helped me get a grasp on the cyclical initiative system, and sped it up considerably. Initiative cards by the Game Mechanics:

http://www.thegamemechanics.com/freebies/index.asp#universal

Of course, you can do the same with index cards, so I mix and match. I keep characters on these cards and quickly jot down disposable bad guys on index cards. Order them by initiative rolls, turn delayed combatants on their side and run through the stack. There's also a helpful End of Round card to help keep track of spell durations.

They've been invaluable in my 3.0/3.5 games.

 

[Deadguy]

A big thank you to everyone for shiming in on this point. I vastly prefer the Cyclical Initiative system (and really miss it when I am playing Shadowrun or Earthdawn), but since it is different to most other systems out there, I need to get the point across properly.

Marimmar I think you've hit the nail on the head with the Delay Action and why it sounded so harsh (his words were 'the stupidest role-playing system I've ever heard of'). And thanks too to the RuinedOne for pointing me in the direction of the cards for Initiative. I think I can easily sell the DM on using these, and doing away with the Initiative count altogether.

 

[RigaMortus]

but can never move it the other way to play earlier.

Isn't that what Refocus does?