JiffyPopTart
Bree-Yark
I can't answer the questions you asked for another person, but answering for myself...OK, so I used the wrong terminology.
Got it. My point is around situations where a string of reactions are triggered by one action and-or other reactions to that one action. That string of reactions doesn't use initiative sequencing to determine order of resolution, it uses a LIFO structure (cynic not at all coincidentally /cynic) very similar to a M:tG "stack".
I've been trying to put forward the idea that better design for this string-of-reactions scenario would be FIFO.
How? Any way you like, and I'd be interested in hearing what you think might be wrong with it. It's not perfect by any means, and I'm open to ideas as to how it can be improved.
Not present, or handwaved away? If your players approach it as a game and just accept the rules as being what they are, that kinda handwaves away any problems or issues. But if you've got players who want to dig deeper into the rules and-or realism of it all (which is what I'm used to), then issues like this will inevitably rear their heads.
I don't have an issue with your houseruled initiative system. I also don't have an issue with the stock 5e initiative system.
I have no interest in revamping or replacing a 5e system I don't have any problems with.
I don't agree with you that your way is objectively better because I (and my table) aren't trying to make rules better fit reality as some sort of overarching group goal with 5e.
This brings me back to my example of tiny creature using shields much earlier in the thread. If I were to rank situations in order of how hard I have to suspend my disbelief to imagine rules matching narrative "Tiny shield deflects huge sledgehammer" is much higher on the list than "person counters a counterspell".
Neither situation reaches the level of "I can't run my game like this".