D&D 5E Concurrent initiative variant; Everybody declares/Everybody resolves [WAS Simultaneous Initiative]

[FormerlyHemlock]

Well, it says "at the end of each of its turns," so I guess that would mean at the end of the round, the target gets another saving throw to break out. Wait, that doesn't make much sense. I don't know if these concurrent turns can be systemically reconciled with all the content that assumes cyclic turns.

That oddity is orthogonal to the choice of initiative system. You can get the same effect under PHB initiative, if the Hold Person spell goes off on the target's own turn. E.g. he attacks, then moves towards another target so he can threaten them with opportunity attacks, which triggers someone's readied action to Hold Person anyone who approaches; bad guy fails his save but then gets another save at the end of his turn, so he didn't actually lose anything by his first failed save.

No matter what the initiative system, I'd just treat that as "at the end of each of its turns except the one where the spell is cast." I.e. you never get multiple saves on the same turn.

 

[robus]

[MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION]- I'm really liking what you and Ilbranteloth are proposing as I'm starting to hate the "combat swoosh" (as the AngryGM calls it) of rolling initiative. But a question occurs to me that I don't think has been discussed yet? How do you resolve multiattacks, lair effects and legendary actions?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Note: that I'm not completely happy with the interaction between concentration and initiative here. It's weird to me that Alice's Hold Person is immune to interruption despite her being stabbed while casting it. I am considering a more AD&D-like rule where being damaged as you're still casting a spell can also interrupt the spell, including if it's not a concentration spell.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Some random ideas on that, in no particular order:

• If you take damage before you finish casting a spell, you must make a concentration save or lose the spell.
• You lose the action, but not the spell slot.
• Or, you do lose the spell slot.
• Or, the spell misfires and something wild happens.
• Bonus action spells and reaction spells probably can't be interrupted.
• Maybe cantrips can't be interrupted?
• Maybe melee attack spells can't be interrupted?

No matter what the initiative system, I'd just treat that as "at the end of each of its turns except the one where the spell is cast." I.e. you never get multiple saves on the same turn.

That makes sense. I'll add that to my rules.

But a question occurs to me that I don't think has been discussed yet? How do you resolve multiattacks, lair effects and legendary actions?

IMO:

Lair effects: They still happen on Initiative 20 (or just at the start of the round, to make it simpler).
Multiattacks: The player says how they want to use them; same fudge factor as anything else.
Legendary Actions: They can happen whenever the DM wants them to.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

[MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION]- I'm really liking what you and Ilbranteloth are proposing as I'm starting to hate the "combat swoosh" (as the AngryGM calls it) of rolling initiative. But a question occurs to me that I don't think has been discussed yet? How do you resolve multiattacks, lair effects and legendary actions?

Oh, I forgot to mention that.

Multiattacks get resolved just like Extra Attacks--on your regular initiative.

Legendary Actions like a beholder's eye rays get declared up front and resolved on initiative counts successively -5, -10, and -15 ticks behind the main initiative count. So a dragon doing breath/tail/tail/tail might roll an 18 on initiative, which means that its tail slaps go off on 13, 8, and 3. (Again, you only roll these initiative when it matters--I wouldn't even compute the tail slap initiative unless the tail slap was important for deciding e.g. at what point the wizard lost concentration on his Otto's Irresistible Dance spell.)

Also, the creature can Delay any number of its Legendary actions. So the dragon could instead breath/Delay x3, if it wanted to wait to decide whether it would do a wing beat or a bunch of tail slaps.

Lair effects happen as normal, on initiative count 20, though I confess that I have never as yet even used a lair action onscreen. All the legendary creatures that have been encountered so far (liches, beholders, dragons) have been outside their lairs and playing offense, not defense. Liches use their lair actions to regain spell slots in between scry-and-die runs, but that's not something for which initiative is even relevant nor which has ever even happened outside of backstory.

 

[Markn]

Thanks Hemlock, that helps. I'm a little surprised that in practice fights aren't this complicated. This seems like a pretty routine example (at least with Hold Person). My campaigns tend to run up to 20th level and right now involve 6 players.

We make use of miniatures and grid and it also because of this reason I am looking for something that works in that environment.

I hope the conversation keeps going!

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Thanks Hemlock, that helps. I'm a little surprised that in practice fights aren't this complicated. This seems like a pretty routine example (at least with Hold Person). My campaigns tend to run up to 20th level and right now involve 6 players.

That's probably it. I run with 3-4 players, and they tend to resolve conditional actions by Delaying instead of declaring complicated contingencies. 6 is significantly more complicated, especially if one of those players is in love with complicated conditional actions.

With six players you might want to throttle back on the complexity of what you allow. Could go with GX.Sigma's suggestion of saying "that's too complicated" and just telling the player to Delay in this case.

 

[mellored]

"Move and swing" was a strategy with high risk and high reward (win initiative and swing, or lose initiative and whiff).

I disagree. High risk, but not high reward. Declaration/Resolution makes melee weaker since the enemy may not even be there.
With range, it much less likely to matter if the guy moves first or not. And 5e already slightly favors ranged.


Of course, you could fix it by making it high reward, with say... +half your proficiency to melee attacks or something.
But when you change an underlying rule, it's bound to affect balance.

 

[robus]

Oh, I forgot to mention that.

Multiattacks get resolved just like Extra Attacks--on your regular initiative.

Legendary Actions like a beholder's eye rays get declared up front and resolved on initiative counts successively -5, -10, and -15 ticks behind the main initiative count. So a dragon doing breath/tail/tail/tail might roll an 18 on initiative, which means that its tail slaps go off on 13, 8, and 3. (Again, you only roll these initiative when it matters--I wouldn't even compute the tail slap initiative unless the tail slap was important for deciding e.g. at what point the wizard lost concentration on his Otto's Irresistible Dance spell.)

Also, the creature can Delay any number of its Legendary actions. So the dragon could instead breath/Delay x3, if it wanted to wait to decide whether it would do a wing beat or a bunch of tail slaps.

Lair effects happen as normal, on initiative count 20, though I confess that I have never as yet even used a lair action onscreen. All the legendary creatures that have been encountered so far (liches, beholders, dragons) have been outside their lairs and playing offense, not defense. Liches use their lair actions to regain spell slots in between scry-and-die runs, but that's not something for which initiative is even relevant nor which has ever even happened outside of backstory.

Ok - that doesn't sound too bad. Hard to imagine how it'll play out. I'll run it past my group and see if they're game to try it out for a session.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I disagree. High risk, but not high reward.

To be clear, are you disagreeing with my point that declaration/resolution creates a risk/reward transaction that's not present in the core rules? Or are you just talking about the balance issues of melee vs ranged?

Declaration/Resolution makes melee weaker since the enemy may not even be there.
With range, it much less likely to matter if the guy moves first or not. And 5e already slightly favors ranged.

Good point. As I showed in my examples, this system actually does penalize ranged attacks a bit (if you declare a ranged attack, and then someone gets in front of you, you have to shoot with disadvantage), but not as much as melee attacks.

Since 5e does already favor ranged attacks, I've already been thinking of ways to nerf ranged weapons. I think this system might make it easier to bring in some nerfs:

• Much higher chance to hit things you weren't trying to hit
• You can't move and shoot in the same round
• Ranged attacks can be interrupted like spells

 

[mellored]

To be clear, are you disagreeing with my point that declaration/resolution creates a risk/reward transaction that's not present in the core rules? Or are you just talking about the balance issues of melee vs ranged?

Melee, and a warning about the many other balance changes that could come up.
Like booming blade trigger, start/end of turn things, concentration checks, or other such things.

Overall, I like the core idea of declaration/resolution better than cyclical initiative, but it's not without flaws. Especially when you're trying to just swap it into a system that was built on a different initiative style.