ccs
41st lv DM
Having played in a game where that was the initiative system the DM insisted upon, I can assure you that's exactly what happened.
D&D 5E Avoiding Initiative
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
Having played in a game where that was the initiative system the DM insisted upon, I can assure you that's exactly what happened.
MNblockhead
A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
I've recommendations to have initiative predetermined for all the encounters, which seems strange to me, because how do I know what all the encounters will be.
I've seen recommendations where the players stick to one initiative order, either rolled at the beginning of the session or the just select their order. But I feel being stuck going in the same order every combat would get old fast.
Lindybeige has a video trashing D&D initiative (though he's not a fan of the D&D system in general). He argues against basing initiative on dexterity. He argues that initiative is based on experience and skill, not how dextrous you are and suggests that your initiative shold increase with your level. But his biggest complaint is not the pause to roll inititiative or the manner initiative is determined, but rather he dislikes the whole concept of taking turns in combat. His beef with initiative is that it is unrealistic and it slows everything done. He wants initiative to be completely free form and uses Runequest as an example.
As much as I like his videos, I disagree with him here.
Lloyd (Lindeybeige's actual name) is envisioning this:
https://youtu.be/tOUksDJCijw?t=1629 (27:09 to, oh, about 29:12, but if you can stop watching, you are dead inside)
But that, of course, is not what is happening. Everything is happening fast but we are slowing down to fight-time. And Lloyd's alternative isn't satisfying for me. It is mostly narrative and up to the DM. You are taking things out of the hands of the players. In some games, like, oh, InSPECTREs, a highly narrative approach makes sense. There are radically different mechanics in that game to support that. Initiative is a simple concept that helps keep combat manageable.
And if you are going to attack the initiative system based on verisimilitude, is that really the place to start? How about falling damage, swimming in plate mail, and so forth. When I have played with DM who add lots of home rules to increase versimilitude, it always seemed to bog down the game and didn't really add to the fun.
As for creating a break in the game, right before combat, well, yes! I've always found it adds to the excitement. You are switching into combat mode. Rolling for initiative is a tradition and ritual in the game I cherish and I would be disappointed to have it taken out of the game.
As I DM, I have sped up the process by using the "initiative score" variant discussed in the DMG (Chapter 9, under Combat Options).
Players still roll and I may still roll for named NPCs and more power boss monsters. Since I started running Curse of Strahd, I went back to just tracking initiative on a piece of paper so having, say, all Zombies go at the same time in initiative order and not having to roll for them, speeds things up.
In my prior campaign, I used Hero Lab's tactical console, so rolling initiative for even a large number of creatures was simple. If you let it role for the players you can have new initiative order every round pretty easily. But I still found it more complex to have this zombie go, then that player, then a different zombie, etc., even with software help, then just having the zombies go together on same initiative order.
I've seen recommendations where the players stick to one initiative order, either rolled at the beginning of the session or the just select their order. But I feel being stuck going in the same order every combat would get old fast.
Lindybeige has a video trashing D&D initiative (though he's not a fan of the D&D system in general). He argues against basing initiative on dexterity. He argues that initiative is based on experience and skill, not how dextrous you are and suggests that your initiative shold increase with your level. But his biggest complaint is not the pause to roll inititiative or the manner initiative is determined, but rather he dislikes the whole concept of taking turns in combat. His beef with initiative is that it is unrealistic and it slows everything done. He wants initiative to be completely free form and uses Runequest as an example.
As much as I like his videos, I disagree with him here.
Lloyd (Lindeybeige's actual name) is envisioning this:
https://youtu.be/tOUksDJCijw?t=1629 (27:09 to, oh, about 29:12, but if you can stop watching, you are dead inside)
But that, of course, is not what is happening. Everything is happening fast but we are slowing down to fight-time. And Lloyd's alternative isn't satisfying for me. It is mostly narrative and up to the DM. You are taking things out of the hands of the players. In some games, like, oh, InSPECTREs, a highly narrative approach makes sense. There are radically different mechanics in that game to support that. Initiative is a simple concept that helps keep combat manageable.
And if you are going to attack the initiative system based on verisimilitude, is that really the place to start? How about falling damage, swimming in plate mail, and so forth. When I have played with DM who add lots of home rules to increase versimilitude, it always seemed to bog down the game and didn't really add to the fun.
As for creating a break in the game, right before combat, well, yes! I've always found it adds to the excitement. You are switching into combat mode. Rolling for initiative is a tradition and ritual in the game I cherish and I would be disappointed to have it taken out of the game.
As I DM, I have sped up the process by using the "initiative score" variant discussed in the DMG (Chapter 9, under Combat Options).
Players still roll and I may still roll for named NPCs and more power boss monsters. Since I started running Curse of Strahd, I went back to just tracking initiative on a piece of paper so having, say, all Zombies go at the same time in initiative order and not having to roll for them, speeds things up.
In my prior campaign, I used Hero Lab's tactical console, so rolling initiative for even a large number of creatures was simple. If you let it role for the players you can have new initiative order every round pretty easily. But I still found it more complex to have this zombie go, then that player, then a different zombie, etc., even with software help, then just having the zombies go together on same initiative order.
TheCosmicKid
Hero
Have not tried it yet, but I am toying with the idea of using a building a deck of cards to determine initiative. Cards have a natural advantage over dice in this context: by shuffling them, you immediately create an ordered list, without any number-sorting or ever having to resolve ties. So, and again I'm just spitballing here:
On the other hand, the traditional initiative ritual is meaningful for a lot of people. Hell, one of my own Signature DM MovesTM is to begin session one of a campaign with the words "Roll initiative". There's an effect there. And that would obviously be lost with a more "efficient" initiative system.
- Each participant in the combat gets a number of cards in the deck equal to 1 + their initiative modifier. Treat negative modifiers as positive for this purpose. (You'll see why.)
- At the beginning of each round, shuffle the deck.
- At the beginning of each turn, draw a card to pick a character. (After drawing a card, discard it until the next round.)
- A character with a positive initiative acts the first time any of their cards are drawn. If they've already acted this round, draw another card.
- A character with a negative initiative acts only when all of their cards are drawn. If they can't act yet, draw another card.
- At the risk of stating the obvious, a character with zero initiative acts when their single card is drawn.
- Once all characters have acted, start a new round.
On the other hand, the traditional initiative ritual is meaningful for a lot of people. Hell, one of my own Signature DM MovesTM is to begin session one of a campaign with the words "Roll initiative". There's an effect there. And that would obviously be lost with a more "efficient" initiative system.
Last edited:
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Mike Mearls had the same problem. So he did his new initiative system.
I wanted to try a hybrid solution. I won't roll for inititaive each turn. Instead I would ask everybody what they want to do and then have them roll with a modifier.
I wanted to try a hybrid solution. I won't roll for inititaive each turn. Instead I would ask everybody what they want to do and then have them roll with a modifier.
Imaculata
Hero
Another problem with Lloyd's idea, is that it becomes really easy to forget/skip a player or npc if you don't have a strict initiative order. At least when everyone rolls for initiative, I can go down that list, and make sure that everyone's had a turn.
Of course an alternative would be to simply determine if either the players or the enemies get to go first, and then first resolve group 1, and then group 2. But that could create all new problems. I haven't really thought it through that much.
Drawing cards for characters that have already acted, is also going to eat up a lot of time. Dice may just end up being faster, considering this issue.
Psikerlord#
Explorer
(1) Card deck initiative as has already been suggested.
(2) Players only roll (vs their Dex, roll equal or under). If they succeed, they go before the monsters. If they fail, they go after the monsters. If you want to differentiate bosses, they need to roll under half their Dex. Speeds things up because only players roll and they know if they've succeeded immediately. If two or more players go at the same time, they sort it out between themselves (keenest jumps in or best roll wins).
I am definitely a roll init every round guy - more randomness and danger.
(2) Players only roll (vs their Dex, roll equal or under). If they succeed, they go before the monsters. If they fail, they go after the monsters. If you want to differentiate bosses, they need to roll under half their Dex. Speeds things up because only players roll and they know if they've succeeded immediately. If two or more players go at the same time, they sort it out between themselves (keenest jumps in or best roll wins).
I am definitely a roll init every round guy - more randomness and danger.
ExploderWizard
Hero
In one campaign I am running (on hold right now but I will be starting it up again at some point) I have experimented with using cards. Someone on this board floated the idea a few years ago and I gave it a try. Each PC has a card and I made generic cards for NPC individuals and groups. I kept the cards generic such as "boss monster" "mook", etc. and added numbers as appropriate so that multiple groups could be represented in larger battles. For bonuses I include an extra card for each full +5 of initiative bonus. The character/monster in question gets to act when their first card is drawn. When their 2nd or later cards come up, they are discarded for that round. The cards are shuffled and initiative cards are drawn each round. Thats right, initiative order can change from round to round! Oh the chaos!
In between battles as play unfolds I can prepare the next enemy cards behind the screen. When the action starts I just quickly shuffle them into the PC stack and start drawing. No pause while everyone rolls initiative and no recording the numbers and sorting out an initiative order.
The downside is that small initiative bonus differences are ignored in exchange for speed of play. The trade off is well worth it to me.
In between battles as play unfolds I can prepare the next enemy cards behind the screen. When the action starts I just quickly shuffle them into the PC stack and start drawing. No pause while everyone rolls initiative and no recording the numbers and sorting out an initiative order.
The downside is that small initiative bonus differences are ignored in exchange for speed of play. The trade off is well worth it to me.
Similar Threads
D&D General
Why Combat is a Fail State - Blog and Thoughts
