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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is your way for doing 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="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7554354" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>thats all fantastic and i wish we had time for you to add five more paragraphs about how simple math works but the final nutshells are it would seem one of the three...</p><p></p><p>1 - It basically is a bunch'a math to reproduce the same results as the regular rules. (Does not seem to be what you are claiming.)</p><p>2 - It boils down the difference in character to more character having the same modifiers (less difference shown between characters) and so you give the dice more power and the character traits matter less.</p><p>3 - It boils down to create more differentiation between the characters (fewer have the same modifier) and so the character traits matter more.</p><p></p><p>Now, it seems to me that with all your math involved it comes out to #2 - 3 pt brackets of 5e modifiers (equivalent of six points of ability score) divide down to 1 meaning a lot less distinction between PCs and more of this just being a "die decides". </p><p></p><p>We tend to go the opposite way - favoring elements that make it more about the character traits than about the dice over ones that buff down the character traits to being more similar between characters.</p><p></p><p>But thats us.</p><p></p><p>I have played in games where the modifier was always just a single d6 and where "traits" boiled down to "just big stuff" so a lot of the small differences were not designed or desired in the mix - "don't sweat the small stuff" (DWSS) design - and while it was fun the one area it definitely showed some issues was in the degree of "mechanical" differentiation between the characters being a smidge lower than we liked - but then it was more narratively driven and things like "sequencing events" was not random at all.</p><p></p><p>My most recent concluded 5e campaign (18 months beginning to end) used "initiative by choice" - designed to remove random order altogether and empower choice not rolls.</p><p></p><p>Start of each combat the players were told to pick "first or last" and if we did not get a quick answer of "first" the answer would be last.</p><p></p><p>if they chose first, the one who did so went first. if several chimed in with first, they made a quick decision of which went first or they went to last. After that it was "one of mine, one of yours" repeating until the side with last was down to their "last guy" as that guy was held off for last. So if the numbers were uneven there might be a cluster of multiples from the more numerous at the near-end.</p><p></p><p>But each time "one of yours" came up you chose which one. So you go first and want your cleric to go later and your fighter to rush ahead while your rogue lets the fighter engage to get sneak - all good. But, same for the other side.</p><p></p><p>If you chose last, one of my guys goes and the same sequencing by choice went.</p><p></p><p>After the first turn, the order was set and carried from round to round (due to there being issues with changing sequence order and the turn-based timing all through 5e mechanics.)</p><p></p><p>It played out great and the players loved it (and at times hated it) for the freedom it gave them to actually *choose* their sequences and order and how it made that opening turn more like the opening of a tactical game with repercussions that carried all through the fight - driven by choices more than dice for order ever did.</p><p></p><p>So, for <strong>"streamlining play"</strong>, it removed all the dice rolling for turn order stuff and moved us immediately into "make meaningful choices" (to us that means "the fun stuff") right away. </p><p></p><p>I represented features that gave advantage on init and such by letting that player choose for his character his own "first" or "last" separate from the group decision. So, in theory, if the group chose first and they did too, the advantaged guy would go, then the party "first" then we went to the back-n-forth.</p><p></p><p>But thats how we normally tend to look for "what changes do we want to make" -<strong> do they put more spotlight and import on differences in characters, choices made or dice? </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p></p><p>We practically never (read this as "never but faulty memory") implement things that spotlight the dice more and the character differences and choices less. </p><p></p><p>When we want to save time in a mostly dice driven step - its usually by just removing the dice not changing around the dice and mods to create a different dice soup - especially if it makes more "ties" happen. <em>Why roll dice with a good chance to leave you at "ties"? You were at a tie before the roll, then you rolled and now you are at a new tie? Wasted time. </em></p><p><em></em></p><p>but again, thats just us.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7554354, member: 6919838"] thats all fantastic and i wish we had time for you to add five more paragraphs about how simple math works but the final nutshells are it would seem one of the three... 1 - It basically is a bunch'a math to reproduce the same results as the regular rules. (Does not seem to be what you are claiming.) 2 - It boils down the difference in character to more character having the same modifiers (less difference shown between characters) and so you give the dice more power and the character traits matter less. 3 - It boils down to create more differentiation between the characters (fewer have the same modifier) and so the character traits matter more. Now, it seems to me that with all your math involved it comes out to #2 - 3 pt brackets of 5e modifiers (equivalent of six points of ability score) divide down to 1 meaning a lot less distinction between PCs and more of this just being a "die decides". We tend to go the opposite way - favoring elements that make it more about the character traits than about the dice over ones that buff down the character traits to being more similar between characters. But thats us. I have played in games where the modifier was always just a single d6 and where "traits" boiled down to "just big stuff" so a lot of the small differences were not designed or desired in the mix - "don't sweat the small stuff" (DWSS) design - and while it was fun the one area it definitely showed some issues was in the degree of "mechanical" differentiation between the characters being a smidge lower than we liked - but then it was more narratively driven and things like "sequencing events" was not random at all. My most recent concluded 5e campaign (18 months beginning to end) used "initiative by choice" - designed to remove random order altogether and empower choice not rolls. Start of each combat the players were told to pick "first or last" and if we did not get a quick answer of "first" the answer would be last. if they chose first, the one who did so went first. if several chimed in with first, they made a quick decision of which went first or they went to last. After that it was "one of mine, one of yours" repeating until the side with last was down to their "last guy" as that guy was held off for last. So if the numbers were uneven there might be a cluster of multiples from the more numerous at the near-end. But each time "one of yours" came up you chose which one. So you go first and want your cleric to go later and your fighter to rush ahead while your rogue lets the fighter engage to get sneak - all good. But, same for the other side. If you chose last, one of my guys goes and the same sequencing by choice went. After the first turn, the order was set and carried from round to round (due to there being issues with changing sequence order and the turn-based timing all through 5e mechanics.) It played out great and the players loved it (and at times hated it) for the freedom it gave them to actually *choose* their sequences and order and how it made that opening turn more like the opening of a tactical game with repercussions that carried all through the fight - driven by choices more than dice for order ever did. So, for [B]"streamlining play"[/B], it removed all the dice rolling for turn order stuff and moved us immediately into "make meaningful choices" (to us that means "the fun stuff") right away. I represented features that gave advantage on init and such by letting that player choose for his character his own "first" or "last" separate from the group decision. So, in theory, if the group chose first and they did too, the advantaged guy would go, then the party "first" then we went to the back-n-forth. But thats how we normally tend to look for "what changes do we want to make" -[B] do they put more spotlight and import on differences in characters, choices made or dice? [/B] We practically never (read this as "never but faulty memory") implement things that spotlight the dice more and the character differences and choices less. When we want to save time in a mostly dice driven step - its usually by just removing the dice not changing around the dice and mods to create a different dice soup - especially if it makes more "ties" happen. [I]Why roll dice with a good chance to leave you at "ties"? You were at a tie before the roll, then you rolled and now you are at a new tie? Wasted time. [/I] but again, thats just us. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is your way for doing Initiative?
Top