D&D 5E Solving the problem of initiative.

[pdzoch]

I believe the specific issue being discussed is the "turn" concept. Everything stops, Barbarian does stuff, Everything stops, Fighter does stuff, Everything stops, etc. OP wants a more fluid handling of the order, I think, with the turns essentially intermingled into one mess of a combat, as it should rightly be.

o.k. I see. I've seen one DM use a narrative combat style where all the players sort of narrated what they were doing at the same time. The group was used to that style so they did not talk over each other much. I think it would work better with a theater of the mind style game. The DM only had one primary monster (there may have then one or two other minions in the mix), so I suppose it was easy for him to keep track of everything.

I'm not sure that is in my skill set, especially as I often have large encounters with many monsters. There is some artificiality to the set turn sequence, but it helps keep track of everything.

For a while, I did employ a "advantage" or "+2 bonus" for players who immediately began their turn when it was their turn to keep the game moving.

I think I'd be happy with ONLY the minor pause between characters in a turn. I always have one player in EVERY turn who seems to have wondered off for a bathroom break, a snack run, phone call, tend to a child or pet, etc.

 

[Mercule]

Can it even be solved?

Specifically I'm talking about the "STOP!", wait for a beat, "Hammer time!" phenomena that initiative turns create. I understand why it's this way, but lately I've been wracking my tiny brain for ways to make it better. Rolling initiative every turn is so tedious and time consuming. Rolling group initiative doesn't work either. Side initiative seems to take the worst aspects of every system and combine them together. I'm genuinely at a loss as to what could be done to improve the situation. I'm even willing to entertain changing the nature of initiative itself to an entirely new sub-system.

About the only thing that's I've felt wasn't too bad was limiting everyone to only one thing per turn instead of action + move + bonus action + item interaction. Even that has issues though. The other thing I've thought of is opposed initiative. That being you only roll when you look to oppose someone else or if you're opposed in some way. So you want to sneak away during a fight? OK, done. But if someone is hunting for you in the melee while you're trying to sneak away? Now it's a contest between two opposed entities.

I don't know, it's all very mathy and complex and hurting my brain. Anyone else got any better ideas?

The core system for 5E is pretty straightforward.

At the start of combat, everyone rolls a d20 and adds their dexterity modifier. A very, very limited set of folks (Bards, some Ranger variants) get an additional modifier. Groups of like mooks roll once for the whole group. High roll goes first; ties are resolved by DMO (generally, dexterity, but I use proximity to enemy in the rare case it comes up). Count down. When you hit zero, loop back to the top. Repeat as long as necessary. There is no way to delay your action or otherwise change the order of initiative, once it's determined. After the roll, you could actually just write down the names of each combatant/group, in order, on a sheet of paper.

If you're looking for "doesn't hurt my brain", that's pretty good. You might be able to adopt the Savage Worlds system, though.

If you want more "realism" or granularity or some other criterion that isn't ease of use, then you get something more complex. There are a ton of variants available and there are lots of folks on these boards who would probably be willing to help you tweak things to meet your desires. We need to know what your goals are, though.

So, what, specifically, bugs you about the initiative system? I can't tell whether rolling every turn is an attempt to "fix" the RAW or a misreading of RAW. Are you going for ease of use? Is a bigger concern having the tidy boxes of actions? What's your biggest beef?

 

[Lanliss]

o.k. I see. I've seen one DM use a narrative combat style where all the players sort of narrated what they were doing at the same time. The group was used to that style so they did not talk over each other much. I think it would work better with a theater of the mind style game. The DM only had one primary monster (there may have then one or two other minions in the mix), so I suppose it was easy for him to keep track of everything.

I'm not sure that is in my skill set, especially as I often have large encounters with many monsters. There is some artificiality to the set turn sequence, but it helps keep track of everything.

For a while, I did employ a "advantage" or "+2 bonus" for players who immediately began their turn when it was their turn to keep the game moving.

I think I'd be happy with ONLY the minor pause between characters in a turn. I always have one player in EVERY turn who seems to have wondered off for a bathroom break, a snack run, phone call, tend to a child or pet, etc.

Of course, it is only a problem for those who think it is a problem. I personally agree with OP, but never really gave the issue much thought until today. I will be trying to construct more solid rules to my idea, will have them up eventually.

 

[Lanliss]

The core system for 5E is pretty straightforward.

At the start of combat, everyone rolls a d20 and adds their dexterity modifier. A very, very limited set of folks (Bards, some Ranger variants) get an additional modifier. Groups of like mooks roll once for the whole group. High roll goes first; ties are resolved by DMO (generally, dexterity, but I use proximity to enemy in the rare case it comes up). Count down. When you hit zero, loop back to the top. Repeat as long as necessary. There is no way to delay your action or otherwise change the order of initiative, once it's determined. After the roll, you could actually just write down the names of each combatant/group, in order, on a sheet of paper.

If you're looking for "doesn't hurt my brain", that's pretty good. You might be able to adopt the Savage Worlds system, though.

If you want more "realism" or granularity or some other criterion that isn't ease of use, then you get something more complex. There are a ton of variants available and there are lots of folks on these boards who would probably be willing to help you tweak things to meet your desires. We need to know what your goals are, though.

So, what, specifically, bugs you about the initiative system? I can't tell whether rolling every turn is an attempt to "fix" the RAW or a misreading of RAW. Are you going for ease of use? Is a bigger concern having the tidy boxes of actions? What's your biggest beef?

Minor technicality, rolling every turn is not a misreading of RAW, it is a variant initiative style in the DMG.

 

[jasper]

o.k. ......

I think I'd be happy with ONLY the minor pause between characters in a turn. I always have one player in EVERY turn who seems to have wondered off for a bathroom break, a snack run, phone call, tend to a child or pet, etc.

First you start with a taser. If a person not ready on their init tase them. (note may cause puddles under the ones need to go).
Second you upgrade to shock collars. This real fun if the person is holding baby.
Third shock under wear. Will cause puddles and some people enjoy the shock......

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

Can it even be solved?

Specifically I'm talking about the "STOP!", wait for a beat, "Hammer time!" phenomena that initiative turns create. I understand why it's this way, but lately I've been wracking my tiny brain for ways to make it better. Rolling initiative every turn is so tedious and time consuming. Rolling group initiative doesn't work either. Side initiative seems to take the worst aspects of every system and combine them together. I'm genuinely at a loss as to what could be done to improve the situation. I'm even willing to entertain changing the nature of initiative itself to an entirely new sub-system.

About the only thing that's I've felt wasn't too bad was limiting everyone to only one thing per turn instead of action + move + bonus action + item interaction. Even that has issues though. The other thing I've thought of is opposed initiative. That being you only roll when you look to oppose someone else or if you're opposed in some way. So you want to sneak away during a fight? OK, done. But if someone is hunting for you in the melee while you're trying to sneak away? Now it's a contest between two opposed entities.

I don't know, it's all very mathy and complex and hurting my brain. Anyone else got any better ideas?

you could move to a system with a declaration phase and a action phase like WOD and ADnD 2nd has.
Where tle lowest in the initative order declares his intended action first, so the people declaring later can react to the actions declared by characters slower then them.

Disadvantage of this is that you can invalidate actions by characters slower then you, making high initiative even more important.

 

[Lanliss]

you could move to a system with a declaration phase and a action phase like WOD and ADnD 2nd has.
Where tle lowest in the initative order declares his intended action first, so the people declaring later can react to the actions declared by characters slower then them.

Disadvantage of this is that you can invalidate actions by characters slower then you, making high initiative even more important.

I thought of using a system similar to this, except the Declaration phase would be Int based, to show off the strategy capabilities. The smarter, and more tactically capable you are, the more info you get to plan your turn. Then the Resolution would be handled with Dex initiative.

 

[77IM]

Make it easier to interrupt turns, to keep people on their toes. This way you keep the simplicity of turn-based initiative, but gain the fluidity you seek when it's important rather than all the dang time.

Example:

Hold. On your turn, you can hold your action, your movement, your bonus action, or any combination. Later, on someone else's turn, you can act. You can even interrupt their turn, if you beat them at a contest of initiative checks. If you fail the contest, you act at the end of their turn (and you can't go back on Hold). (This replaces Ready and is basically stolen whole-cloth from Savage Worlds.)

Interject. As a reaction, you can take any single action. If you succeed at a contest of initiative checks against the creature you are reacting to, you can even interrupt their turn. If you fail the contest, you act at the end of their turn (and you can't go on Hold). Regardless of the contest results, on your next turn, you can't take any actions or move.
​

This kind of thing WILL make your game more complicated since everyone must be "on alert" at all times for the possibility of interrupting another creature's turn. But it introduces flexibility into the turn system without abandoning turns altogether.

 

[Morrus]

Rolling initiative every turn is so tedious and time consuming.

Don't roll every turn. Roll once at the start of the combat and cycle round.

 

[AntiStateQuixote]

you could move to a system with a declaration phase and a action phase like WOD and ADnD 2nd has.
Where tle lowest in the initative order declares his intended action first, so the people declaring later can react to the actions declared by characters slower then them.

Disadvantage of this is that you can invalidate actions by characters slower then you, making high initiative even more important.

Our group does a variation of this.

Every round:

0. Basic description of the situation (repeated at the start of each round if we're doing TotM combat - about 40% of the time for us)
1. All players and the DM declare general actions: attack with weapon, cast a spell, use an item, etc.
2. Roll individual initiative
3. Take turns as in PHB but you must use your action to do what you declared OR you can change to dodge, dash, or disengage. You may also "ready" the action you declared in step 1. If you have bonus action options use them as you wish.
4. Rinse-repeat

There's still the stop-action camera of individual turns, but by having to declare your action at the start of the round it eliminates a lot of "best possible action" hemming-and-hawing that used to happen at the table.

The additional step of declaring actions and rolling initiative each round has become second nature to us and I think there's little (if any) difference in combat time. The time spent declaring actions, rolling, and then counting down the initiative is made up by the fact that players rarely spend more than 10 - 15 seconds doing the action they declared at the start of the round.