[UPDATED] Here's Mike Mearls' New D&D 5E Initiative System

In his AMA yesterday, WotC's Mike Mearls frequently referenced his dislike for D&D's initiative system, and mentioned that he was using a new initiative system in his own games. He later briefly explained what that was: "Roll each round. D4 = ranged, d8 = melee, d12 = spell, d6 = anything else, +d8 to swap gear, +d8 for bonus action, low goes 1st. Oh, and +d6 to move and do something ... adds tension, speeds up resolution. So far in play has been faster and makes fights more intense." That's the short version; there's likely more to it. Mearls mentioned briefly that he might trial it in Unearthed Arcana at some point to see what sort of reaction it gets.

In his AMA, Mearls indicated it was cyclic initiative he didn't like ("Cyclical initiative - too predictable"), which the above doesn't address at all (it merely changes the die rolls). Presumably there's more to the system than that quick couple of sentences up there, and it sounds like initiative is rolled every round. So if your initiative is based on your action, presumably you declare your action before rolling initiative (as opposed to declaring your action when your initiative comes around).

_____

UPDATE: I asked Mearls a couple of quick questions. He commented that it "lets ranged guys shoot before melee closes, spellcasters need to be shielded". He also mentioned that he "tinkered with using your weapon's damage die as your roll, but too inflexible, not sure it's worth it".

How is this implemented in-game? "Roll each round, count starts again at 1. Requires end of turn stuff to swap to end of round, since it's not static. In play I've called out numbers - Any 1s, 2s, etc, then just letting every PC go once monsters are done". You announce your action at the beginning of the round; you only need to "commit to the action type - you're not picking specific targets or a specific spell, for instance."

Dexterity does NOT adjust INITIATIVE. Mearls comments that "Dex is already so good, i don't miss it".

So what's the main benefit of the system? "Big benefit is that it encourages group to make a plan, then implement it. Group sees issue of the round and acts around it. I also think it adds a nice flow to combat - each round is a sequence. Plan, resolve, act, encourages group cohesion. Resolution is also faster - each player knows what to do; you don't need to pick spells ahead of acting, but groups so far have planned them."

Picture from ThinkGeek
SaveSave
SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave
SaveSave
SaveSave
SaveSave​

 

[Connorsrpg]

I too (and I guess our group) have not enjoyed cyclic initiative, especially same order every round.

We love using a card system very similar to Savage Worlds for ALL our games. It adds a lot of uncertainty to combat, especailly when your next turn might be. We like that.

Anyhoo, for anyone interested, here's our Card Initiative for sev systems, inc: 5E, Cypher, Year Zero Engine (MYZ & Coriolis), and AGE!

http://connorscampaigns.wikidot.com/all-card-initiative

Another element it brings is we add Talents/Edges/Feats that 'trigger' on certain cards/suits/numbers/etc. This becomes a lot of fun if a PC can get multiple cards and then has to decide between going first OR triggering a power.

We have not found it slows things down, in fact often faster as the GM is freed from book-keeping - especially if you have a player handle the cards like we do.

 

[Lanefan]

In fact initiative matters so much I think it either deserves a complex treatment or the concept should be discarded entirely and it simply assumed that everything happening in a round takes the full round to happen, with interruptions being basically illegal to declare.

Caution: removing interruptions really makes my day if I'm a caster...

Lan-"there's a third option between complex-treatment and abandon-completely, that being simple-but-random, which I think is what Mearls is sort of going for"-efan

 

[PrimevalSeeker]

I like the idea of the weapon damage die contributing to initiative and i don't see how it would be too inflexible. It is almost like having weapon attack speed, where small weapons like daggers are faster than bulky two-handers.

This could be extended to spells, making low level (simpler spells) usually cast before high level (complex spells).

I agree with DEX not contributing to initiative, since it already is a strong stat. Maybe intellect can give a bonus (artificers and wizards have studied for so long and hard and they have cast each spell so many times, that they can do it faster compared to other magic users?) or maybe no stat should give a bonus, since initiative can be due to other sources other than being nimble or smart.

 

[canucksaram]

D&D 5E Initiative a la Mike Mearls (?)

Here's a way to implement Mearls' initiative system....

Each round you declare your general intentions (in order of lowest to highest Proficiency Bonus) before gathering dice to roll for initiative (lowest roll goes first).

• Declare general actions, in order of lowest to highest Proficiency Bonus
• For creatures, CR = PB (min. 1)
• If PB is tied, lowest DEX or WIS mod declares first (use worst trait)
  
• Gather initiative dice based on your declared actions

Action & Corresponding Initiative Die

• Ranged attack (if readied*): d4
• Ranged attack (unreadied): d6
• Melee attack: dX (X=damage die)
• Cast a spell: d12
• Move and/or “do something”: d6
• Supplementary actions:
  • Add movement to attack/spell: +d6
  • Allow possible use of a Bonus Action: +d8
  • Swap gear/equipment: +d8

​
*A crossbow can be kept readied indefinitely; longbow and short bow attacks have disadvantage if they are held readied for more than X no. of rounds, where X = the highest number on the weapon's damage die.

 

[The Old Crow]

Here's a way to implement Mearls' initiative system....

Each round you declare your general intentions (in order of lowest to highest Proficiency Bonus) before gathering dice to roll for initiative (lowest roll goes first).

• Declare general actions, in order of lowest to highest Proficiency Bonus
• For creatures, CR = PB (min. 1)
• If PB is tied, lowest DEX or WIS mod declares first (use worst trait)
  
• Gather initiative dice based on your declared actions

Action & Corresponding Initiative Die

• Ranged attack (if readied): d2
• Ranged attack (unreadied): d4 (bow); d10 (crossbow)
• Melee attack: dX (X=damage die)
• Cast a spell: d12
• Move and/or “do something”: d6
• Supplementary actions:
  • Add movement to attack/spell: +d6
  • Allow possible use of a Bonus Action: +d8
  • Swap gear/equipment: +d8

I like your idea of differentiating between a readied ranged attack and an unreadied one. Readied could just be the d4 initiative, though, and unreadied could go off of the damage die like other weapons.

 

[canucksaram]

[MENTION=6816423]The Old Crow[/MENTION]

Hmm....

How about d4 for a readied ranged attack a dX one shift lower than the damage die for an unreadied ranged attack?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I love initiative every round. But I hate how abilities that last for a single round interact with that. They are now either not effective at all, working normally or twice as effective, depending on your and your targets initiative results. If there is a solution I am immediately sold.

I am however thinking, that in the first round of combat, it may be possible to have a simultaneous announcement of actions. And modifiers for your actions.

Thinking about it for a few minutes maybe you can let the user choose if he wants a one round ability take effect immediately and end at the same round or delay the effect to the end of the round and have it last the next round. Maybe that could work.

 

[Uller]

I love initiative every round. But I hate how abilities that last for a single round interact with that. They are now either not effective at all, working normally or twice as effective, depending on your and your targets initiative results. If there is a solution I am immediately sold.

I am however thinking, that in the first round of combat, it max be possible to have a simultaneous announcement of actions. And modifiers for your actions.

What we do is if it is one round or ends at the end of a character's turn it lasts until the end of the next round.

Yes...sometimes that means spells get a little boost. But it is better than the alternative.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EN World mobile app

 

[ad_hoc]

I love initiative every round. But I hate how abilities that last for a single round interact with that. They are now either not effective at all, working normally or twice as effective, depending on your and your targets initiative results. If there is a solution I am immediately sold.

There are 2 main things that are affected by this if I recall correctly. Save Ends is fine as it triggers at the end of the enemy's turn.

1. Dodge Action - Have it take effect on initiative count 0. Basically, as soon as it is declared. Then it ends at the end of the round. The player still rolls initiative for everything else they're going to do on their turn.

2. Stunning Strike - This one is a bit trickier. It is worded in such a way that you cannot stun a creature in consecutive turns. It also means the creature is easier for allies to hit for a full round. What if it ended at the start of the creature's 2nd turn after being stunned or at the end of the next round whichever came sooner? You could also give the creature an initiative penalty on the following turn.

Examples: Monk wins initiative. Creature stunned loses action/move round 1. Round 2 creature takes initiative penalty allies get to attack including Monk while creature is still stunned. Creature gets turn and is no longer stunned.

Creature wins initiative. Round 2 loses action/move due to stun. End of Round 2 no longer stunned.

Alternatively the creature could be stunned for the following round, still taking actions this round. This is simpler but potentially jarring and not as fun. A delayed impact stun could still be cool.

 

[Corwin]

I find Declaring Actions Before Rolling Initiative to have a few issues and hiccups that annoy me. But there is one thing I've noticed from such a method that I really like. I've found it tamps down focus fire tactics to a degree. Groups battle each other more "naturally", IMX. The combatants tend to shy away from pre-declaring the ganging up on a single foe, lest it drops before their turn comes around, and they no longer have a valid target for their attack. This, to me at least, gives the combats a more cinematic feel for whatever reason. Which I very much enjoy.