Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Unearthed Arcana: "Greyhawk" Initiative
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7719593" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>This variant initiative system is actually a pretty complex change, so many facets make it difficult to judge... </p><p></p><p>I think the system is going to work as a whole. On the surface, it sounds like it largely favors ranged attackers and penalizes spellcasters, because of the obvious dice difference, however the truth is going to be more complicated than that.</p><p></p><p>A few things to consider or keep in mind:</p><p></p><p>- between the d4 and d10 there is an <em>average</em> difference of 3, significant but less than the equivalent bonus of advantage; let's make we sure we don't think that ranged attackers <em>always</em> go first</p><p></p><p>- Dex doesn't change your initiative; typically ranged attackers have higher Dex on average and thus higher initiative, so this might after all make it more acceptable that ranged attacks use the smallest init dice</p><p></p><p>- melee attacks will require a <em>move </em>action (+1d6 init) more often than spells and ranged attacks; in order not to risk losing the whole turn, melee attackers should probably always choose to take the move action, making them slower than spellcasters; if not sniping, ranged attackers and spellcasters will probably opt to not move so as to get better initiative, resulting in less mobile combat</p><p></p><p>- Mearls instead actually suggests everyone taking the <strong>move </strong>action, pretty much because if you don't take it and then something changes in the battle so that you can't do your declared action, at least you can move -> but if everyone always takes the move action, then it would actually be simpler to just <em>not </em>have it cost 1d6 but instead assume everyone anyway gets to move during their turn (and by the standard 5e rules, you can't give up the move in exchange for something else, as in 3e)</p><p></p><p>- <strong>disengage</strong> would be hard to use within this system, except for really running away: it won't be useful for getting away from an unexpected danger because you won't likely "prepare" it since it would mean to have no attack or spell</p><p></p><p>- <strong>cantrips</strong> are treated as spells, but attack cantrips are designed to be mostly equivalent to ranged attacks, should they get a lower init dice?</p><p></p><p>- it is kind of reminded that you are limited to choosing actions as with standard combat rules (i.e. max 1 move + 1 action), but how about swapping the weapons? does it replace the move, or can you do it <em>in addition to both</em> by adding an extra d6 to init? at first sight it sounds to me that the latter is the case, but in the example there is no move anyway so it's hard to tell</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7719593, member: 1465"] This variant initiative system is actually a pretty complex change, so many facets make it difficult to judge... I think the system is going to work as a whole. On the surface, it sounds like it largely favors ranged attackers and penalizes spellcasters, because of the obvious dice difference, however the truth is going to be more complicated than that. A few things to consider or keep in mind: - between the d4 and d10 there is an [I]average[/I] difference of 3, significant but less than the equivalent bonus of advantage; let's make we sure we don't think that ranged attackers [I]always[/I] go first - Dex doesn't change your initiative; typically ranged attackers have higher Dex on average and thus higher initiative, so this might after all make it more acceptable that ranged attacks use the smallest init dice - melee attacks will require a [I]move [/I]action (+1d6 init) more often than spells and ranged attacks; in order not to risk losing the whole turn, melee attackers should probably always choose to take the move action, making them slower than spellcasters; if not sniping, ranged attackers and spellcasters will probably opt to not move so as to get better initiative, resulting in less mobile combat - Mearls instead actually suggests everyone taking the [B]move [/B]action, pretty much because if you don't take it and then something changes in the battle so that you can't do your declared action, at least you can move -> but if everyone always takes the move action, then it would actually be simpler to just [I]not [/I]have it cost 1d6 but instead assume everyone anyway gets to move during their turn (and by the standard 5e rules, you can't give up the move in exchange for something else, as in 3e) - [B]disengage[/B] would be hard to use within this system, except for really running away: it won't be useful for getting away from an unexpected danger because you won't likely "prepare" it since it would mean to have no attack or spell - [B]cantrips[/B] are treated as spells, but attack cantrips are designed to be mostly equivalent to ranged attacks, should they get a lower init dice? - it is kind of reminded that you are limited to choosing actions as with standard combat rules (i.e. max 1 move + 1 action), but how about swapping the weapons? does it replace the move, or can you do it [I]in addition to both[/I] by adding an extra d6 to init? at first sight it sounds to me that the latter is the case, but in the example there is no move anyway so it's hard to tell [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Unearthed Arcana: "Greyhawk" Initiative
Top