Initiative options?

[BluejayJunior]

My DM likes to use popcorn initiative a lot. I love that system.
Basically, everyone rolls initiative at the beginning of each round. The person with the highest goes first, but then picks which of their allies goes next. The DM also rolls a die after each player's turn to see if the initiative switches to the monsters.
For us, it keeps us all engaged and actually seems to go faster most of the time. You're rolling each round, but you only care about the highest initiative, so there isn't any bookkeeping.
There can be some weird interactions with some spell durations, like Shield lasting almost 2 full rounds. But usually it doesn't matter. And we don't really care about those things or try to game it at all.
We switch between that and normal initiative, depending on the encounter. Not sure how my DM decided which to use.

 

[Horwath]

As table top RPGs cannot be real-time, current initiative is maybe the best out of a bad situation.

Turn based combat is mandatory in this kind of games and single determination of order for whole battle speeds thing up as combas is already dead slow.

We had some 6player games and fight of 5-6 rounds can take more than 2hrs with all of brainstorming and DM explanations of situations of round per round.

If we would add chaotic element of different initiative that combat would be 3hrs long easy.

 

[miggyG777]

Hello, I was researching the same question and I stumbled upon this excellent idea:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...verybody-resolves-WAS-Simultaneous-Initiative

I wonder why this is not in the top resources for 5e post. I tested it on my table and it was a huge success, this really feels how D&D was meant to be played. No more "you entered the combat minigame please stand by for your turn" but a seamless experience.

Hope this helps.

 

[FXR]

Hi all,

I was thinking about Initiative a lot lately. Does anyone have any variant so it isn't just "I go, you go, I go, you go"?

Even rolling each round, it is still basically always I get a turn then you and alternates. My group is looking for something more dynamic and purposeful.

Any thoughts?

I use the standard rule but with the Following minor adjustements:

1. The initiative of a creature can change during the combat.

1.1. A creature's initiative raises by 2 when:
i) its attack roll is a critical hit ;
ii) it uses its inspiration (except if it uses it for the initiative roll) ;
iii) its reduces the hp of another creature to 0.

1.2. A creature's initiative lowers by 2 when:
i) its attack roll misses by a margin of 5+ ;
ii) it fails a saving throw other than one roll to end a condition ;
iii) it suffers massive damage (see DMG) ;
iv) it falls prone.


2. When a creature takes its action (not a bonus action or a reaction) to cast a spell other than a cantrip takes effect later in the round. For instance, a wizard with initiative 12 casts a fireball (a lvl 3 spell). The spell will take effect on initiative count 9. If the caster suffers damage between the casting and the effet, he must succeed on a Concentration check or the spell will fizzle.

 

[Bacon Bits]

For a number of sessions we tried something different. We adapted the initiative system from, of all things, Star Wars Imperial Assault. Our goal was to have something that made combat feel more tactical and that meant that we didn't have to roll for initiative.

The PCs always go first unless the DM rules otherwise.

As a group, the PCs select which PC goes first and that PC acts.

After that, the DM selects one NPC, and that character acts.

After that, the PCs select who goes next, excluding anybody who already acted.

Then the DM does the same with his remaining NPCs.

Play continues back and forth like that until every character has acted. When there's an uneven number of characters, the side with the extra characters just finishes all their actions. Neither side can delay; you either act when you have the opportunity or you waste your turn doing nothing or dodging.


The system works perfectly fine. The hardest part is tracking who has already acted.

I know what you're thinking: "OMG, what about initiative bonuses?!" They go away and you forget that they existed. They're not that important to the game. Are we really worried about screwing over the high Dex characters in 5e? The only class that really loses out is Barbarian. Assassin potentially gets a lot better. Technically, Champion's Remarkable Athlete gets a lot worse, too, because the initiative bonus is 90% of what the ability does, but it was already a terrible ability.

We didn't stop using it for any particular reason. We started a new campaign with a different person as the DM and he uses a mobile app that has a combat tracker built in, so we went back to standard initiative.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You could go with the old-school method: Each round, declare your action, then roll initiative. Actions are resolved in initiative order.

It adds a lot of excitement to the initiative roll, and it discourages "clockwork planning" where the PCs orchestrate an elaborate sequence of actions based on a known initiative order. On the down side, it makes things more chaotic, and it doesn't mesh particularly well with 5E's mechanics, which are designed around cyclical initiative. My group tried it briefly and didn't like it, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work for you.

That's what we were doing for a while, but it just slows things down too much.

As table top RPGs cannot be real-time, current initiative is maybe the best out of a bad situation.

Turn based combat is mandatory in this kind of games and single determination of order for whole battle speeds thing up as combas is already dead slow.

We had some 6player games and fight of 5-6 rounds can take more than 2hrs with all of brainstorming and DM explanations of situations of round per round.

If we would add chaotic element of different initiative that combat would be 3hrs long easy.

Yep, in really big battles we can spent 2-3 hours just resolving combat. It can be exciting to a point but then after a while it is tedious, especially with characters nearly always doing the same action over and over.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Hello, I was researching the same question and I stumbled upon this excellent idea:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...verybody-resolves-WAS-Simultaneous-Initiative

I wonder why this is not in the top resources for 5e post. I tested it on my table and it was a huge success, this really feels how D&D was meant to be played. No more "you entered the combat minigame please stand by for your turn" but a seamless experience.

Hope this helps.

Well, I just spent a couple hours reading through this. It is an interesting idea, but not for me personally. I have an idea from the Greyhawk system but it would place a lot of the responsibility on us players, which could be a good thing. I'll post more about it later when I have time.

 

[miggyG777]

Well, I just spent a couple hours reading through this. It is an interesting idea, but not for me personally. I have an idea from the Greyhawk system but it would place a lot of the responsibility on us players, which could be a good thing. I'll post more about it later when I have time.

I see what you mean. I tried Greyhawk initiative too, however I found it was broken in some regards, for instance bonus actions were punished too hard. So I created my own version of the Greyhawk initiative which worked very well (I called it Prismatic Initiative). The principle stays the same, you declare actions before the round starts and then roll dice based on that decision. Lower initiatives go first.

This does however slightly affect the balancing of the game, which is why I referred you to the approach that was linked above by Hemlock. What he achieves is essentially the same, just without using speed-factors or spell disruption and therefore it is less intrusive on game balance.

On the other hand, factoring in speed and spell disruption opens up a new level of strategy / tactics on the table. And getting rid of DEX for initiative in my opinion is not a bad thing, so is slightly nerfing spellcasters.

One thing to keep in mind is, that you will have to roll plenty of additional dice this way, which can be a good or a bad thing depending on your players.


I attached my spin on the Greyhawk Initiative, maybe this is interesting to you.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I see what you mean. I tried Greyhawk initiative too, however I found it was broken in some regards, for instance bonus actions were punished too hard. So I created my own version of the Greyhawk initiative which worked very well (I called it Prismatic Initiative). The principle stays the same, you declare actions before the round starts and then roll dice based on that decision. Lower initiatives go first.

This does however slightly affect the balancing of the game which is why I referred you to the approach that was linked above by Hemlock. What he achieves is essentially the same just without using speed-factors or spell disruption and therefore it is less intrusive on game balance.

On the other hand, factoring in speed and spell disruption opens up a new level of strategy / tactics on the table. And getting rid of DEX for initiative in my opinion is not a bad thing, so is slightly nerfing spellcasters.


Here is the overview of the initiative rules that I used on my (5e) table:

https://imgur.com/2jKlALY

Maybe this is more appropriate for you.

That is very similar to what I have started doing. I'll give you a quick example:

Example: Suppose a 6th level fighter, with a shortsword drawn, does the following:

Draw a weapon: Draw a dagger as a second weapon (+1)
Move: move 15 feet to engage this target (+d6), 15 feet of movement remains
Attack: using Extra Attack feature, makes two attacks with shortsword (rolls 2 d6’s, one for each)
Move: after killing his target, he moves 15 feet towards the next opponent, who is 25 feet away (+d6)
Bonus Action: throws dagger in off-hand as bonus action towards next oppoent (+d4)

Suppose the player rolls a 3 for the first move (d6), a 2 and a 5 for the two attacks (d6 twice), a 4 for the second move (d6), and a 1 for the bonus action (d4). He has a Dex 18 so can choose to apply his +4 bonus once to a single roll, lowering the result by 4. He chooses his second shortsword attack when he rolls it, reducing it to only 1 (the minimum).

1: (0+1) Draws dagger
4: (1+3) Moves 15 feet to engage target
5: (4+1) A shortsword attack
6: (4+2) A shortsword attack
10: (6+4) Moves 15 feet towards next target
11: (10+1) Throws dagger at next target (he is only 10 feet away at this point)

Notice the two shortsword attacks are resolved on 4+ the separate die rolls. You don’t add the second die roll to the first. If you roll the same number on both die, the attacks occur on the same count.

Other party member and opponents actions are inter-mixed with the fighter’s actions. He doesn't get to do it all “at once.”

Since the player keeps track of it, when they finish one action, they declare and roll initiative for the next action. Once they have used all possible actions (action, move, bonus action, and reaction), they are done.

I know without all the rules for the system, it might not makes a lot of sense, but until I finish everything I don't want to post it all.

 

[miggyG777]

I like this but at the same time I think that you will add quite a bit of overhead to the game by discretizing actions this way. I can see it work with the right players but don't forget that you, as a DM, also have to keep track of all your NPCs. Imagine a large battle. In any case, if you ever test it out, let me know how it played out.