I did a lot of reading on the Speed Factor DMG variant because I'm considering implementing it and because half my group played this way for years during the AD&D years. See also some
feedback from people who've used it and aren't just theorycrafting.
PROS:
*
Combat requires group strategy. Each round you coordinate as a group instead of every player acting as his/her own island.
*
Builds tension. In 5th, Fighter with 1 hit point attacks dragon because Fighter knows Cleric will go before Dragon in the next initiative round. He is action in omniscient fashion. This option is removed and tension is created because the Fighter doesn't know if the Cleric will get that Heal off first and has to plan accordingly.
*
Removes "analysis paralysis." This isn't my term, but it means your player's turn comes up, and they spend minutes agonizing over the optimal decision of casting the perfect spell, or using a wand, or drinking a potion. If you've played D&D long enough, you've seen this.
Cons:
*
Fear of losing an action. Founded and unfounded. It'd be a rare day your action is wasted if you coordinate with the group. In 2nd edition, played this way for years and don't recall it ever being an issue. But yeah, it's possible the enemy goes first, scatters, and your announced Fireball is less optimal than before. That's the
tension part above and the way AD&D worked, both ways. If your Wizard puts up a Wall of Fire, the Trolls who decided to Attack now have a tough choice: run through the wall or forfeit the attack and play it safe. In 5th, a player trapped behind the wall has more options than a Troll and might use an item, drink a potion, etc., in response to the Wall going up.
This is the major concern my caster players have raised. Personally, I'd consider changes:
* Attack action. If turn comes and need to switch weapon, penalize initiative for retrieving an item and allow it (e.g. mobile enemies get out of attack reach, so you need to use a javelin).
* Casting a Spell. Speed is based off the spell level. Let something else be cast using that slot (e.g. 4th level) if the player's strategy gets screwed over by a change in the battle. Of course, this defeats the purpose of strategy and avoiding analysis paralysis delays.
*
Slower Play. I've read that once players know their modifiers, play isn't slowed down. What you lose declaring each round you save in "analysis paralysis" of deciding what to do when your turn arrives. But, initially, you'd each need a "cheat sheet" card until it became second nature.
*
DM tracking. DMs unfamiliar with AD&D may have issues in large battles with deciding what each combatant is doing,
each round in advance. This can slow play and would require practice. You'd have to note the evil cleric is casting Inflict Wounds, the gnolls are shooting bows, and the fiend is trying to summon more of its kind. Also, the DM (or players) would have to track duration effects (e.g. till the end of your next turn) because these would be triggered by the Initiative number they activated on.
