D&D General Rerolling Initiative each Round

[Ruin Explorer]

No. Not for our group it doesn't. It actually speeds things up because it causes players to pay attention and be constantly thinking.

For any remotely typical group it inarguably slows things down. You may enjoy the benefits enough to ignore that (more chaos, as you say, which can be fun, albeit typically less tactical and more reactionary), but it is obviously a bit silly to pretend it doesn't. I can imagine a group where it it sped things up, but that would be a very distracted group who would be best served by mutually agreeing to either put their phones away or cut down on the table talk I suspect! And I'm kind of doubting your group has that bad of a problem.

Without random init, I have 2 players in my group that will solve the battle mathematically on turn one, if they chose too.

This is pretty funny. I do you enjoy that you believe this. It definitely isn't actually true because 5E is too swingy to predict on the level of granularity you're describing, and it would require entirely static and repeatably tactics from both the DM and players, but given you think this is true, it explains the rest of what you're saying.

 

[LordEntrails]

For any remotely typical group it inarguably slows things down. You may enjoy the benefits enough to ignore that (more chaos, as you say, which can be fun, albeit typically less tactical and more reactionary), but it is obviously a bit silly to pretend it doesn't. I can imagine a group where it it sped things up, but that would be a very distracted group who would be best served by mutually agreeing to either put their phones away or cut down on the table talk I suspect! And I'm kind of doubting your group has that bad of a problem.

This is pretty funny. I do you enjoy that you believe this. It definitely isn't actually true because 5E is too swingy to predict on the level of granularity you're describing, and it would require entirely static and repeatably tactics from both the DM and players, but given you think this is true, it explains the rest of what you're saying.

I love how you tell me what is true in my group. How the hell would you know anything about my group?

Please refrain from telling me anything about my group.

Now, to try to take something useful from your post...
Why does it matter if re-rolling init slows things down for a typical group? Well, that is one of the possible cons we are discussing. Some groups it slows down, sure, I acknowledge that. And SOME groups it speeds up play and adds other value. That too should be accepted. There are many tools that are available to help any group speed up or limit the impact of re-rolling init IF THEY CHOSE to do so.

Re-rolling init is a TOOL that some DMs and tables can chose to try. Their are pros and cons to doing so, and way to maximize the benefits and limits the cons. If you don't want to discuss how one might do that, then what value are you adding to the discussion?

 

[Reynard]

I am a little late, but I prefer to reroll every round AND give every combatant their own initiative score. This is much easier to manage on a VTT, of course, but I like the chaos that ensues when turn order changes every round for everyone. If I could find a way to also hide it, it would be even better.

 

[LordEntrails]

I am a little late, but I prefer to reroll every round AND give every combatant their own initiative score. This is much easier to manage on a VTT, of course, but I like the chaos that ensues when turn order changes every round for everyone. If I could find a way to also hide it, it would be even better.

I believe you sometimes use FG right? If so, just set the following options:

• Combat: Auto NPC Initiative: On
• Player: Show Turn Order: Off (or Friendly)
• Combat: Roll Init Each Round: On

Pretty sure that will get you what you want. But players will not know when in order their turn is going to come up (which is what you want right?)

 

[CreamCloud0]

I am a little late, but I prefer to reroll every round AND give every combatant their own initiative score. This is much easier to manage on a VTT, of course, but I like the chaos that ensues when turn order changes every round for everyone. If I could find a way to also hide it, it would be even better.

keep em on their toes!

 

[Reynard]

I believe you sometimes use FG right? If so, just set the following options:

• Combat: Auto NPC Initiative: On
• Player: Show Turn Order: Off (or Friendly)
• Combat: Roll Init Each Round: On

Pretty sure that will get you what you want. But players will not know when in order their turn is going to come up (which is what you want right?)

Yes. Cool. Thanks!

 

[payn]

If playing at the table I’d use a deck of cards instead. Shuffle flip one at a time.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I love how you tell me what is true in my group. How the hell would you know anything about my group?

When you post incredible and implausible anecdotes about how your players are Spock/Data-style geniuses who have have in your words "solved" D&D 5E (a particularly swing-y game and one where the player don't even automatically know the numbers or capabilities of their enemies, making such "solving" flatly impossible) to the point where they know the exact outcome of fights, that's obviously likely to very rightly attract a large degree of disbelief/skepticism. It's hardly reasonable to then declare such disbelief "off limits" to say, is it?

Why does it matter if re-rolling init slows things down for a typical group?

Because this is a thread about the ups and downs of re-rolling initiative.

And SOME groups it speeds up play

I don't think that's true. There's no reason to believe it's true. Anecdotes re: time aren't a reason because perception weighs so heavily on such things. If you want to advance a rational and logical argument as to how this would take place, be my guest. If you want to make a bland and unsupported claim that it "simply does", however, I think that should be treated with real skepticism.

Re-rolling init is a TOOL that some DMs and tables can chose to try. Their are pros and cons to doing so

And yet you asked why it mattered if it slowed down most groups? Odd. There are indeed pros and cons. You very keen to deny one of the obvious cons is a con though, which is confusing. If you read my post you'll see I'm not suggesting there aren't pros. But the cons are weighty, and unless you can explain, again rationally and logically, without resorting to "FOR US IT DOES!!!", how it "speeds up" play, I'm very unconvinced.

If you don't want to discuss how one might do that, then what value are you adding to the discussion?

I feel like you need to answer this question a lot more than I do!

 

[LordEntrails]

When you post incredible and implausible anecdotes about how your players are Spock/Data-style geniuses who have have in your words "solved" D&D 5E (a particularly swing-y game and one where the player don't even automatically know the numbers or capabilities of their enemies, making such "solving" flatly impossible) to the point where they know the exact outcome of fights, that's obviously likely to very rightly attract a large degree of disbelief/skepticism. It's hardly reasonable to then declare such disbelief "off limits" to say, is it?

It doesn't matter if you believe me or not. Personal disparagement is not acceptable on this forum. And whether you believe something is possible or not also doesn't matter. Because what I stated is true. You are the one equating it with solving D&D. To us, D&D is much more than combat. Probably because combat is pretty boring when you have the skills our table does. That you have never played at such a table is understandable. But denying the possibility of such a table existing among millions of tables playing D&D is arrogance that no one could do something you can't.

Because this is a thread about the ups and downs of re-rolling initiative.

Yeah, I already answered the question that I asked. You know? Lay out the question and then discuss it?

I don't think that's true. There's no reason to believe it's true. Anecdotes re: time aren't a reason because perception weighs so heavily on such things. If you want to advance a rational and logical argument as to how this would take place, be my guest. If you want to make a bland and unsupported claim that it "simply does", however, I think that should be treated with real skepticism.

Good for you that you don't believe it. You are wrong. I say it does. Prove me wrong or just attack me again, your choice. Or chose to engage where you have something useful to discuss.

And yet you asked why it mattered if it slowed down most groups? Odd. There are indeed pros and cons. You very keen to deny one of the obvious cons is a con though, which is confusing. If you read my post you'll see I'm not suggesting there aren't pros. But the cons are weighty, and unless you can explain, again rationally and logically, without resorting to "FOR US IT DOES!!!", how it "speeds up" play, I'm very unconvinced.

Sure, it speeds up play at our table because it keeps all players engaged constantly. Yes this is a thing because guess what? Not everyone plays the same way you do. We play virtually. And yes, when you play virtually it becomes a real thing to maintain player's attention for minutes on end when they have no reason to pay 100% attention. With re-rolling init, they have a reason to pay 100% attention. Therefore when their turn comes around they know what is going on. They have been thinking about it. They have been playing out the scenario real-time in their head.

Yes, there are other ways to address attention issues. This one works for us and give us lots of other benefits we enjoy.

Why are you so hell bent on proving me wrong? Why do you think it's acceptable for you to basically call me a liar? Can you not accept that other tables play differently than you do?

I feel like you need to answer this question a lot more than I do!

I've feel I've added to the discussion by discussing tools that help minimize the cons of this approach. By discussing how re-rolling init benefits are table. How we enjoy the chaotic feel it gives to combat.

You have added... what? Calling me out saying my table does not play the way it does. That my experience must be invalid or a lie because it doesn't match your experience? That I must be lying because you don't know people who can do what I say happens at my table?

What a small world you live in.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Good for you that you don't believe it. You are wrong. I say it does. Prove me wrong or just attack me again, your choice. Or chose to engage where you have something useful to discuss.

I already "proved you wrong" as you put it, re: initiative being "faster for some groups" without any qualifications as to the conditions under which that would be true.

Sure, it speeds up play at our table because it keeps all players engaged constantly. Yes this is a thing because guess what? Not everyone plays the same way you do. We play virtually. And yes, when you play virtually it becomes a real thing to maintain player's attention for minutes on end when they have no reason to pay 100% attention. With re-rolling init, they have a reason to pay 100% attention. Therefore when their turn comes around they know what is going on. They have been thinking about it. They have been playing out the scenario real-time in their head.

Yes, there are other ways to address attention issues. This one works for us and give us lots of other benefits we enjoy.

Why are you so hell bent on proving me wrong?

See, now we're extracting some useful information from you, rather than illogical claims seemingly based on anecdote. So to answer your question - I'm not "hell bent on proving you wrong" - I'm trying extract some useful information from you about why you think what you think.

So what we're seeing is a considerably narrower and more specific claim that what you previously made, and one that's more plausible. Specifically that:

A) If your players have really significant attention issues, like those some people have when playing online, then forcing people to make this roll and re-order initiative causes people to have to pay a bit more attention, and presumably then not just "wait for their go".

B) This isn't the only solution to that, nor by implication, necessarily the best one, merely one that works for you.

That's fine - that makes sense and is actually a useful bit of information.

Without random init, I have 2 players in my group that will solve the battle mathematically on turn one, if they chose too. They are that good at math and RPG tactics.

But denying the possibility of such a table existing among millions of tables playing D&D is arrogance that no one could do something you can't.

It's not really arrogant to disbelieve extremely wild claims - I'm not arrogant for thinking that my second cousin probably didn't actually see a werewolf that one time, sorry. Nor is it "disparagement" to disbelieve this. I'm not saying you're liar - I didn't suggest that, because I don't think it's the case - I think you've got an inflated and laughable opinion re: the capabilities of your players. Which is cute but silly rather than a malicious deception. And it's not a "millions of tables" statistical anomaly thing. "Millions of tables" things are like rolling straight 18s down the line on 3d6 chargen, or rolling 10 natural 20s in a row. Hell I've seen somewhat similar things. But D&D combat is flatly not possible to "solve mathematically on turn one" as you claim, because there is simply too much variance and because of information asymmetry.

Further, even if it was possible to "solve it mathematically on turn one", simply adding a few more instances of one specific variable (initiative position) to the dozens to hundreds of other variables wouldn't likely make it impossible to solve.