OD&D [BX/OSE] Interleaved combat rounds

[kenada]

We just finished running a PF2 conversion of Winter’s Daughter, and now my group is going to be giving OSE a try soon. I was reading over the combat procedure, and it made me wonder how it would work if you interleaved the combat round. For example, a round might go like:

1. Declare spells and melee movement
2. Roll initiative (monsters beat PCs in this example)
3. Check monster morale
4. Monsters move
5. PCs move
6. Monsters make missile attacks
7. PCs make missile attacks
8. Monsters cast spells
9. PCs cast spells
10. Monsters make melee attacks
11. PCs make melee attacks

At first I thought this would disadvantage attackers, but then I remembered that you have to declare melee movement before knowing the initiative order, so the first side could still close on the second and prevent them from moving. This would make it possible for the second side to interrupt the first side’s casters with missile fire.

Has anyone tried this before? I’m not averse to just running combat as written, but it made me

 

[Marc_C]

You should try the system as written first. See how it goes. It feels like playing a war-game (Chainmail).

The way I play it is that I use side inititiative A then B. But when a character or monster activates he does move+attack immediately. Everyone moves+attacks on side A. Then every one moves+attack side B. The players decide in which order the characters activate. From what I read on several old school forums it is a very popular way of doing it.

 

[Ath'kethin]

You should try the system as written first. See how it goes. It feels like playing a war-game (Chainmail).

The way I play it is that I use side inititiative A then B. But when a character or monster activates he does move+attack immediately. Everyone moves+attacks on side A. Then every one moves+attack side B. The players decide in which order the characters activate. From what I read on several old school forums it is a very popular way of doing it.

This is how we play it too. It's simple and fast and it works.

+1 for try it as written first.

 

[Jack Daniel]

You can play it as-written and still interleaf the combat sequences whenever initiative turns up simultaneous for the round (which will happen one round in every six).

 

[kenada]

Thanks for the responses. I’ll stick to things as written.

 

[thirdkingdom]

Thanks for the responses. I’ll stick to things as written.

The one change I make is that we roll for initiative by side, but then I also apply PC modifiers to Dexterity. It's kind of a careful blend of side by side initiative versus personal rolls. Additionally, monsters are broken down by type; if the PCs encounter a group of orcs, their boss, and an orc shaman I'd make three rolls.

As pointed out above, actions can also happen simultaneously.

 

[Michael Linke]

Cs mov

We just finished running a PF2 conversion of Winter’s Daughter, and now my group is going to be giving OSE a try soon. I was reading over the combat procedure, and it made me wonder how it would work if you interleaved the combat round. For example, a round might go like:

1. Declare spells and melee movement
2. Roll initiative (monsters beat PCs in this example)
3. Check monster morale
4. Monsters move
5. PCs move
6. Monsters make missile attacks
7. PCs make missile attacks
8. Monsters cast spells
9. PCs cast spells
10. Monsters make melee attacks
11. PCs make melee attacks

At first I thought this would disadvantage attackers, but then I remembered that you have to declare melee movement before knowing the initiative order, so the first side could still close on the second and prevent them from moving. This would make it possible for the second side to interrupt the first side’s casters with missile fire.

Has anyone tried this before? I’m not averse to just running combat as written, but it made me

Can confirm from games like MESBG, that "moving first" is usually a disadvantage in a "everyone moves, then everyone fights" system.